FYI: If you want to dial back risk while maintaining exposure to the stock market, consider the $5 billion Jensen Quality Growth fund (ticker: JENSX ). During the stock market’s last collapse, in 2008, the fund fell 29% while the average large-cap growth fund tumbled more than 40%. Over the past three years, the fund has returned 12% annually, edging out the Standard & Poor’s 500 and beating 84% of large-growth fund peers. The fund has been on a tear more recently, returning 10.8% year-to-date, beating the S&P 500’s 7.3% gain while outperforming 99% of its large-growth fund peers.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.barrons.com/articles/todays-top-5-stock-picks-fund-beating-99-of-peers-1469009156#printMode
M* Snapshot JENSX:
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/JENSX/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot JENSX:
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/Fund/JENSX
JENSX Is Ranked #13 In The (LCG) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
http://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/large-growth/jensen-quality-growth-fund/jensx

FYI: Fund managers are holding cash at the highest levels in almost 15 years. That could be a bullish signal.
Regards,
Ted
http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2016/07/19/cash-is-king-and-thats-good-for-the-rally/

Hi Junkster,
Thank you reading my post and contributing to the discussion.
I was not immediately aware of the roughly 2 decade market timeframe starting in 1958 that you referenced in your reply. At that referenced date, I had only started investing a couple of years earlier. But my information shortfall was easily rectified.
I simply went to the Internet and linked to the New York University Stern school annual returns listing. Here is the Link to that nice data summary:
http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/New_Home_Page/datafile/histretSP.html
Given the source, I presume this data package is accurate. I am not overwhelmed by the 10-year T. Bond returns over stocks even for that excellent period for the bond issues. The 10-year bonds did outperform stocks in 8 years of those 20-year annual periods. Even in that carefully selected timeframe, I doubt that the bond cumulative returns exceeded stock performance (I did not do the cumulative calculation).
But the Stern school did do both the arithmetic and geometric averages for the respectable 1966 to 2015 timeframes. From my perspective, that's a very meaningful period. For that extended time period the S&P 500 delivered 11.01% and 9.60% annual arithmetic and geometric returns, respectively. During that same period, 10-year T. Bonds produced 7.12% and 4.82% arithmetic and geometric annual returns, respectively.
Stocks win because they are risky and they generate returns both from dividends and price appreciation. It is certainly true that stock dividends have been contributing less to that total return than they did in the past. But the total return is what is most meaningful to me, and I suspect to many other investors.
This is not to say that fixed income is not a major portion of my portfolio. It is. Even at an age in excess of 80, I still have a 60/40 portfolio mix. Portfolios benefit from the diversification with low correlation coefficients between these two asset classes.
That portfolio split might be a tiny bit misleading since my wife and I both have social security and company retirement annual incomes. I count those as part of my fixed income segment since they are pretty secure with small incremental annual pluses. So the active portion of my portfolio is very heavily weighted in Equity and Balanced mutual funds.
Many thanks once again, and many good hopes for your portfolio management style. There are many ways to win at this game. Unfortunately there are many more ways to lose.
Best Wishes.

Interesting find on 50/50 of RPG/RPV out performing RPS but I suspect that they might be temporary and the next 5 or 10 years could be different. CAPE is a good find as welI, I don't own it but I do own DSEEX and am very happy with that fund. I also do like SPHD, the results so far have been excellent. I just wish it was Schwab ETF One-Source.

Why not go the traditional pension route? Not only don't I trust state pension/investment boards (or their political masters)
[and]
More pathetic, the clowns running many of these funds/programs are suckered by the allure of hedge funds, private equity, and other costly black boxes that eat up their returns after expenses and fees ...

Let's be clear here. Public, private - doesn't matter. It's not a matter of devious politicians. Private companies use the same hedge funds, private equity, and other costly black boxes, albeit in different mixes. While they tend to allocate less to alts than public pensions, they still invest significantly, and they allocate more to hedge funds than do public pensions.

Deutsche Bank’s [December 2015] survey data [] showed that ... Public pension funds had a median 29% allocation to alternatives and 7% to hedge funds; private pension funds, 17% and 10%, respectively; and sovereign wealth funds, 13% and 5%.

http://www.pionline.com/article/20160223/ONLINE/160229965/pension-funds-globally-increased-hedge-fund-allocations-in-2015-8212-survey
All of that was nevertheless peanuts compared with endowments and foundations, which allocated 48% to alts and 23% to hedge funds (ibid.)
Performance? Here too, politics doesn't seem to be what matters. From Private Pension Plans, Even at Big Companies, May Be UnderFunded Floyd Norris, NYTimes (2012):

The companies in the Standard & Poor’s 500 collectively reported that at the end of their most recent fiscal years, their pension plans had obligations of $1.68 trillion and assets of just $1.32 trillion. The difference of $355 billion was the largest ever, S.& P. said in a report.
Of the 500 companies, 338 have defined-benefit pension plans, and only 18 are fully funded. ...
The main cause of the underfunding at many companies does not appear to be a failure to make contributions to the plans. Instead, it reflects the fact that investment markets have not performed well for a sustained period.
...
Virtually all pension funds had assumed returns would be better, leaving them underfunded when their investments failed to perform as expected.

Finally, consider that companies often raided their private pension plans to inflate their profits.

in the 1990s corporations used a variety of accounting techniques, tax incentives, and other forms of manipulation to syphon money from pension plans and serve corporate purposes. [E.E. Shultz] provides an example called the “accounting effect,” where a company could reduce benefits by hundreds of millions of dollars and record the change as a profit. This practice benefited corporate executives, who were compensated by reaching certain profit targets, and shareholders, but in many cases workers and retirees, subjected to this deception and fraud, were cheated out of retirement income.

https://www.wmich.edu/hhs/newsletters_journals/jssw_institutional/individual_subscribers/39.4.Zurlo.pdf
As Norris stated, the problems now are due largely to many years of poor market performance - which affected your DC returns just as it affected DB plan (public or private) returns.
As a footnote, I gather that Vanguard would be counted among the so called "clowns". It created VASFX (alts) for pensions, endowments, foundations, and to use in its managed payout fund (VPGDX) - in some ways the closest thing Vanguard has as the retail level to a pension.

For years my husband had a Fidelity 457 plan. It was cheap if we wanted it to be. It allowed a large array of choices of Fidelity funds and had a brokerage window. We did fine with it. Now the plan is being moved to Voya with no information forthcoming on the plan and only the promise that it's better, just trust us. It appears there will no longer be cost sharing outside of a few core funds and that all fees outside this core will fall 100% on the employee. This happened out of the blue and we were notified with 2 months to decide if we will allow our money to be moved to the Voya Vacuum or we will roll it over and risk the loss of legal protection that might ensue. The employees had no choice in this and, of course, they are saying Obama made them do it with new fiduciary regulations. One current employee said that Voya might send "advisors" to roam the halls giving advice. I had that once in the University of Texas system. A type A guy seemed to think that getting people to churn their investments was a full time job. When I left the system, he seemed to think the best advice was to roll it all into a VALIC money market.

Hi Guys,
Indeed CALPERS has had a rough year. But that's not extraordinary. It's more the rule than the exception. Over the last 20 years, that agency has underperformed the equity markets in just about that entire timeframe.
As an investment agency CALPERS is a disaster. Why? They spend almost 50 million dollars each year in fees and hire about 275 "expert" consultant and advisor teams. It's certainly not that they aggressively pursue and deploy active managers. They do and have for years without outdistancing a poor man's portfolio.
There's a significant lesson embedded in those disappointing outcomes. It's not easy to even match the marketplace when attempting to add some Alpha. Even very smart guys with a deep bench are not often up to that challenge. An alternate strategy is obvious. Warren Buffett advocates it for his surviving family members.
Best Wishes.

PRLAX: over the past 5 years, still DOWN over -8%. If you bought into it in this past January, you're very happy!
ODPVY (Morningstar:) + 65% YTD.

http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/74119/#Comment_74119

SFGIX. Over one-fifth in Latin America, now. Also, over one-fifth in "Europe," which includes the Middle East. Still 56% in Asia.
PRLAX: over the past 5 years, still DOWN over -8%. If you bought into it in this past January, you're very happy!
ODPVY (Morningstar:) + 65% YTD.

As a university faculty member in an east coast university system, after 7 years, I'm still glad I elected the 403(b) option at TIAA CREF versus the state pension ... the entire account is parked in the very low-cost and high-quality AF WaMu R-6.
Why not go the traditional pension route? Not only don't I trust state pension/investment boards (or their political masters), but if 'my' investments are going to gain or lose money, as a fairly knowledgeable/competent investor I want to be the one responsible for it happening.

PRBLX, though all-equity, is pretty defensive, imho. Only dropped 22% in '08 and has bounced back from each 'panic drop' in the years since. (I own it)

"...An independent report from Wilshire Associates in Santa Monica, a CalPERS consultant, warned that forward-looking assumptions are quite low but cautioned CalPERS against taking chances to try to regain ground. “While the reduced portfolio return expectation vs. three years ago could encourage additional risk-taking in an attempt to maintain a higher expected return, such action would seem contrary to the committee’s long-term plans for portfolio de-risking,” it said."

FYI: Latin American mutual funds are making beautiful music this year after lagging the broad U.S. stock markets for much of the past 10 years.
Funds tracking stocks in Olympics-host-to-be Brazil, as well as in Mexico and other Latin American countries, are up 31.05% on average so far this year, going into Friday, according to Lipper Inc. That's attracting a very thorough look-see from investors who are seeking gains in the diversified portion of the portfolios
Regards,
Ted
http://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/mutual-funds/latin-american-stocks-are-hot-hot-hot-but-can-it-last/

Recently started a position in HDS, a spinoff from Home Depot a couple of years ago. Started the position the day after Brexit when everything was down, its all domestic, so thought it was a good entry point. Most likely will be a trading stock, but we'll see how it works out.

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
July 14, 2016
Dear WEALTHTRACK Subscriber,
For inspiration and levity I occasionally turn to Lewis Carroll’s classic,
Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland. As I survey the still unfolding saga of Brexit, spreading negative interest rates around the world and the unsettling political scene in Europe and the U.S. two quotes seem particularly apt. As the Cheshire Cat told Alice about Wonderland: “We’re all mad here.” And as Alice opined: “it would be so nice if something made sense for a change.”
This week’s guests are trying to make sense of highly unusual and in some cases unprecedented developments. One of those is Brexit. After decades of opting into the European Union, albeit on some of its own terms such as keeping the pound sterling as its currency, the United Kingdom opted out. A pressing question is will Britain be the lone exception, or the first of many to do so?
A recent Pew Research poll found the EU was unpopular among substantial numbers of citizens in many countries. 71% of Greeks view the EU unfavorably, 61% of the French do, 49% of Spaniards and 48% of Germans agree.
Since the financial crisis there has been talk of Grexit, Greece’s possible exit from the Eurozone. The latest candidate is Italy with “Quitaly” envisioned as its struggling banking industry reels under pressure from EU regulators.
Then there is the impact of the unprecedented easing policies of central banks in major developed countries. On this week’s program, we’ll show you a chart from Evercore ISI that tells the story of the “Incredible Balance Sheet Expansion” of the big three. Since 2009, the Federal Reserve, European Central Bank and Bank of Japan balance sheets have increased a cumulative +$8 trillion! Among other things, this helps explain why bond yields have plunged. The yield on the benchmark U.S. Treasury 10-year note has hit new lows in recent weeks, while yields on German and Japanese bonds are trading below zero in negative territory.
In the week after the Brexit vote, Evercore ISI counted 18 more easing moves by central banks. How do these developments affect global economies and markets?
On this week’s WEALTHTRACK, we will hear the views of two experienced global investors. Nicholas Sargen, Chief Economist and Investment Strategist at Fort Washington Investment Advisors, the asset management arm of Western & Southern Financial Group will join us for a rare television interview. Sargen holds a PhD in Economics, and has been international economist, global money manager and Chief Investment Officer for several major financial firms as well as an official at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
We’ll also be joined by William Wilby, in a WEALTHTRACK television exclusive. One of our Great Investors, now a private investor actively managing his own retirement account, Wilby was the Portfolio Manager of the award winning Oppenheimer Global Fund which was ranked number one in its category for the 12 years he ran it. A graduate of West Point, Wilby has a PhD in International Monetary Economics and has held various international finance and investment positions at several top financial institutions, including the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
Both Sargen and Wilby believe the Brexit effect is far from over. I asked them why it is still so significant.
If you miss the show on Public Television this week, you can watch it at your convenience on our website. You’ll also find web exclusive EXTRA interviews with Sargen and Wilby about investing in the 21st century.
Thank you for watching. Have a great weekend and make the week ahead a profitable and a productive one.
Best Regards,
Consuelo
http://wealthtrack.com/
.

         



I don't think new taxable investors should buy this year(The 17+$ distribution iin june could be followed up by large distribution in Dec (we just don't know) but starting next year a new investment could work out
I do think a focused fund is the best chance to out perform in the large cap category.For those interested, this months Money has an aricle on Sequoia , Fairholme and FPA Crescent ;all funds with a great long term record and poor short term record.Like David they are most enthusiastic about FPA Crescent but I think unlike David least enthusiastic about Fairholme except for vey long term investors (20+ years) About Fairholme they noted that the fund invested in Sears in 2005 and has not sold its position.

Under the topic of: "Buying, Selling & Pondering" here is what I have been doing along with my thinking.
At these richly priced stock valuations I'm thinking of selling down more of my equities as they advance upward to new 52 week highs. This strategy is perhaps not for everyone; but, it is one I have followed for a good number of years with good success and one I learned from my late father and follows a buy low sell high theme.
Currently, my overall asset allocation for my master portfolio is 25% cash, 25% bonds, 30% domestic equity, 15% foreign equity and 5% other assets as of my most recent Morningstar Instant Xray analysis. In addition, within equities, I have been overweight the traditional defensive sectors of healthcare, consumer staples, utilities along with communication services and real estate. Combined these sectors account for better than one half of my portfolio's sector weightings and puts them well overweight to their sector weightings found in the S&P 500 Index. Year-to-date my portfolio has performed well with a total return of better than seven percent, 7%, (including cash) plus a little trading activity (buying during pullbacks and then rebalancing after the rebound) has enhanced my portfolio's performance. In addition, since I have stayed invested along my asset allocation guide lines, utlizing some adpative allocation strategies, I have enjoyed the income benefit that my portfolio provides.
In compairson, the Lipper Balanced Index has returned through the same reporting period 5.1%.
I wish all ... "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet

Thanks to each of you for sharing your strategies. I always learn a great deal from the wonderful members of this board... thanks so much for the detailed posts... You also help me hold in check some of my animal instincts...

Bought long treasuries ( TLT ) on Friday near close to hold for 3rd quarter. During neutral / high risk years, favorable bond market setup during 3rd quarters has led to statistically significant positive outcomes. seekingalpha.com/instablog/1109542-market-map/4897108-market-map-allocates-long-bond

Under the topic of: "Buying, Selling & Pondering" here is what I have been doing along with my thinking.
At these richly priced stock valuations I'm thinking of selling down more of my equities as they advance upward to new 52 week highs. This strategy is perhaps not for everyone; but, it is one I have followed for a good number of years with good success and one I learned from my late father and follows a buy low sell high theme.
Currently, my overall asset allocation for my master portfolio is 25% cash, 25% bonds, 30% domestic equity, 15% foreign equity and 5% other assets as of my most recent Morningstar Instant Xray analysis. In addition, within equities, I have been overweight the traditional defensive sectors of healthcare, consumer staples, utilities along with communication services and real estate. Combined these sectors account for better than one half of my portfolio's sector weightings and puts them well overweight to their sector weightings found in the S&P 500 Index. Year-to-date my portfolio has performed well with a total return of better than seven percent, 7%, (including cash) plus a little trading activity (buying during pullbacks and then rebalancing after the rebound) has enhanced my portfolio's performance. In addition, since I have stayed invested along my asset allocation guide lines, utlizing some adpative allocatin strategies, I have enjoyed the income benefit that my portfolio provides.
In compairson, the Lipper Balanced Index has returned through the same reporting period 5.1%.
I wish all ... "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet

Good job Old_Skeet.
And nice post.
Always good to read your posts.

@teapot.

1) Does every category use the same top % as Owl fund threshold line?

If I understand your question, yes. MFO return ratings are relative to peers, so done for each category. MFO risk ratings are relative to overall US market (SP500). Here is link to definitions.

2) For miraculous search, can you enhance it to allow multi-category/type search (similar to what Fidelity research mutual fund screen offers)?

On the premium site, you can search up to 25 categories simultaneously, along with some 50 other parameters. Here is link to MultiSearch parameter list.
We decided a while back to maintain the search tools on main site in current form and put all recommendations received from David and MFO community into the premium search tools site.

3) Is it possible to display those measurement (e.g, Ulcer, Martin) for the same time period for all funds? You already have those numbers. What I would like to see is for age group of 5 years, the result will also include those funds over five years but will only calculate for the past 5 years not the life period of funds. So it is easy to compare between lines in the same period.

On the premium site, you have 21 selectable evaluation periods (lifetime, 20, 10, 5, 3, and 1 year, plus full, down, and up market cycles) for all risk and performance metrics to enable the direct comparisons you describe. Here is link to display metrics.
We will be adding even more evaluation periods to the premium site, but intend to leave the main site search tools in legacy form.

4) How about offering premium member on a quarter basis or a free 14 days trial?

Ultimately that is up to David. From my perspective, I think we provide enough insight into all that is available on the premium site through a myriad of screens shots on the welcome page (see lower right corner), periodic descriptions of new features in the monthly commentaries, and selected results on the discussion board. Enough to make a donation decision. Here is link to David's invitation letter when we launched the premium site last December after several months of beta testing.
Hope that helps.
Thanks again teapot.
c