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

Does anyone know of a website that tracks the percentage of qualified Vs. non qualified dividends that are paid out for OEFs or ETFs? I noticed that it's not exactly easy to find. As someone who invests for income as a major part of my objective, the difference between taxes on qualified dividends vs. non qualified can make a big difference over several years.

@Charles
Thank you for your explanation.
1) Does every category use the same top % as Owl fund threshold line?
2) For miraculous search, can you enhance it to allow multi-category/type search (similar to what Fidelity research mutual fund screen offers)?
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.
4) How about offering premium member on a quarter basis or a free 14 days trial?
Thanks.

I think that you have to balance the risk of a capital loss with income for that time frame and goal.
The only one in that group that make sense to me it PONDX. You get a 7.33% return. So if it were to decline 15% over 2 years you would break even - a low risk occurrence. The the others return is so low that with even a minor decline you would lose money.
You might look at DSL, PREMX, to add to the mix wit PONDX.

Several markets including the S&P and U.S. Treasuries now sit at all-time highs. So I guess this disproves the bearish sentiments voiced in recent months by many on this board, in the press and among investment advisors. Proof-positive that forecasting doesn't work. But I'd not be so quick to judge. I'm somewhat agnostic on the whole issue. But I'll acknowledge that it's fun to gloat when you find yourself on the winning side of an argument - however short-lived.
Often missing from critical discussions of forecasting is reference to the multiple methods and approaches used. Rather than attacking the general concept, it might be better if folks looked at the wide variety of techniques utilized. It is perhaps a disservice to those who dare voice their market timing schemes without addressing the specifics of how they attempt to do so. To that end I've linked a Wikipedia article addressing the topic in greater detail. At the end of my sermon I've attempted to list many of the forecasting techniques mentioned in that article. You'll find that several different techniques have been mentioned favorably by MFO participants over the years.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forecasting
I agree that over very long time horizons, Bogle's reversion to the mean holds true. Since our life-spans and levels of patience don't always coincide nicely with those long time frames, I see some logic in investors attempting to forcast nearer-term movements - however imperfect it may seem. In effect: some are willing to forgoe some of Mr. Market's anticipated long-term returns for what they see as lower near-term volatity and a higher level of comfort.
Summary of forecasting methods - From Wikipedia (edited)
Qualitative method
Quantitate method
Average approach
Naïve approach
Drift method
Seasonal naïve approach
Time series methods
- Moving average
- Weighted moving average
- Kalman filtering
- Exponential smoothing
- Autoregressive moving average (ARMA)
- Autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA)
- Seasonal ARIMA or SARIMA
- Extrapolation
- Linear prediction
- Trend estimation
- Growth curve (statistics)
Regression Analysis
Autoregressive moving average
Judgmental methods
- Composite forecasts
- Cooke's method
- Delphi method
- Forecast by analogy
- Scenario building
- Statistical surveys
- Technology forecasting
Artificial intelligence methods
Artificial neural networks
Group method of data handling
Support vector machines
Data mining
Machine Learning
Pattern Recognition
Seasonality
Cyclical behavior
Point is: I think it a bit unfair to lump all forecasting approaches together under one umbrella in considering their validity or their desirability for various types of investors.

@teapot.
Ha! You and lots of other investors in commodities and EM these last few years.
GO distinctions are based on a fund's relative risk-adjusted return within category. So, the category can perform badly, like commodities and EM have done last few years ... indeed among the most hated funds, but individual funds can still get high marks.
BRCNX and JOEMX have both delivered top quintile performance the past 3 and 5 year periods in their respective categories.
Here is screenshot from premium site for BRCNX, showing strong relative performance during tough periods of absolute performance:

Hope that helps.
Very much appreciate the feedback/suggestions. If you have any other issues/questions, do not hesitate to post/contact us.
Thanks again.
c

Hi Catch,
Thanks for your interesting perspective. I agree that each investor gets to choose his own poison, although sometimes well meaning and well paid financial advisors intentionally usurp that responsibility. Regardless, investors are responsible for their decisions either made by themselves or some paid consultant.
I have had a dear and long-term relationship with one such advisor. I suspect we remain on friendly terms because I don’t invest through him, and I rarely accept his market pronouncements without careful due diligence.
The man is a flake. He is far too overconfident of his own knowledge base and the market’s projected direction. I suspect that he doesn’t keep score of his forecasts, but I informally do and its not pretty. He does play an aggressive tennis game, but, once again, he consistently overplays his perceived skill level. No surprise there.
It seems like every time one of his market forecasts goes haywire (quite often), he adds another parameter to his market prediction model. Not unexpectedly, the revised model reproduces the database with improved fidelity; that is, until the next market scoring period. If enough parameters are added, a near perfect match is likely.
Well, over several years, my friend’s market model has grown from about a 6 parameter model to perhaps a 15 parameter model. Yes, it does a better prediction today when contrasted to yesterday, but I suspect yet another revision will be implemented in the near future. If the number of open parameters are increased to exactly match the number of data points, a perfect reproduction (not a prediction) of the data set will happen.
Each of us has our own way of making a projection. As a general rule, the simpler the model, the more likely it will prove to be the better in terms of its robustness and longevity. Jack Bogle makes that precise point in many of his books.
But overall, precise market forecasting is a fool’s game. On an annual basis, returns are almost completely random in character. Adding parameters might make us more comfortable investors (a feeling of control), but they will not make us any wealthier than an Index-based plan. That might be a sad judgment, but it is fundamentally true except for a few very rare individuals.
I agree with Junkster. Everyone can control their money management with discipline, but forecasting the markets is an impossible task.
Best Wishes to All.

Two quick notes:
On Ms. Geritz: I've reached out to her, but haven't heard back. Nonetheless, I'm pretty comfortable inferring what she's up to. Her LinkedIn profile adds "portfolio manager" for two charitable organizations, both beginning in 2016. 2016 marks her 10th anniversary at Wasatch and she was praised for "working tirelessly" in her years there. I could imagine someone in her position being quite well-off but feeling a bit drained. Changed directions to use her skills to benefit poor people around the world might well have been mightily appealing.
On Driehaus: DRFRX now shows $250,000 minimums at TD as elsewhere. I'm told that the lower minimum might have been a data entry error. That said, TD maintains an opening for prospective investors. TD continues to list the AIP initial minimum for the fund at $100. I have no opinion, positive or negative, about the fund. I really haven't read enough to earn one. But if I were predisposed to want in, I might try to very, very quietly open up an account and see if it sticks. Occasionally investors get bounced when such errors are discovered, occasionally advisors simply shrug, close the gate and leave those who are in, in.
For what interest any of that holds,
David

Hi @Junkster,
If I was as good as you are at picking the movement of certain asset classes that trend to have good upward market movement and potential I'd probally be more of a trader as you are. However, the way I've made good money is to put money to work when stock valuations are low and then, over time, sell some off as the market advances with stock becoming overbought. This is the primary reason that I am sitting on a sizeable sum on cash within my portfolio. When stocks have bcome fully and richely priced as they are today I've learned to buy during pullbacks and then rebalance reducing my allocation to equities as they advance and recover. Just about all of my long term investment positions have produced positive returns for me through the years; and, if my largest holding FKINX went to zero on it's nav I'd still have made money because the amount of income distributions I've collected from it through the years.
Althouh, I don't like seeing negative years in the markets they do happen with several five to ten percent pullbacks usually happening each year. One of the things that gives me staying power is the income my portfolio generates as it is more than enough to statisfy my needs and I believe over time the markets will recover plus this provides me an opportunity to do a little buying when the pullbacks come and as the markets recover sell some off (buy low, sell high). Indeed not rocket science, just a strategy.
I sincerely appreciate hearing about the success of others and what they are doing from time-to-time ... you especially. I know you have a good following and I also enjoy reading your post. I sincerely wish you good investing & trading during these difficult markets. Know though, sometimes, fast money has been known to push asset valuations skyward just to sell down these assets and watch the sky fall leaving some in their wake.
Take care ... and, keep posting.

Hi @Junkster
Yup...........several years ago we held about 65% junk for a long time frame. Currently, we hold 52% of total in investment grade bonds (gov't. and corp.) No junk at this time.
YTD to date, today:
--- IEF = +9%
--- HYG = +9.3%
--- LQD = >11%
--- EDV = >30%
--- ZROZ = >31%
'Course, there have been a few time frames since the market melt when most bonds and equity move up together for awhile.
After this initial bump and grind since the BREXIT, equity and bonds traveling similar return rate paths. One and I may find this interesting, almost too interesting.
I expect money traveling in many directions the remainder of this year, looking for the overbought to buy some oversold.
Tis a lot of hot cash still roaming about looking for a bit of value, even if for a week or two.
I believe "bumpy ride" has arrived for a stay.
Regards,
Catch

Not a lot of excitement considering the S&P and Dow are at/or whispers from all time highs. That is always a good sign. Junk bonds at all time highs 4 of the past 5 days and completely ignoring the rout in oil this week. Advancing volume over declining volume one of the best of the year today. Poor junk bonds, they get no respect. Yet since the turn of the new century have beaten the revered VBINX and VFINX. And I don't mean that sarcastically as I believe nearly all investors would be better off in the latter two funds. Instead it seems most investors are more fixated constructing the "perfect" diversified portfolio than accumulating wealth. Some can't seem to shake the fear of another 2008. Witness the long thread about......... which are under water the past 3 and 5 years. I realize I am a short term trader who will not tolerate losses, but still, how does holding funds that are under water 5 years running add to one's retirement nest egg??

They are more momentum driven than most shops and use behavioral analysis as well which has worked quite well over the years.... The frontier strategy focuses on growth inflection points. Essentially, when a company has a positive trend change in growth potential or an expected growth trajectory emerges, they purchase. They then let the market price it up (first other investors underestimate the growth potential and the price rises, then overconfidence hits the market which accelerates the momentum). Once this occurs, Driehaus exits the position. Soon after (in theory) the stock price falls.

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
WEALTHTRACK Subscriber,
Turmoil, volatility and uncertainty have long been considered enemies of stock markets. They certainly proved that once again in the days immediately following Brexit on June 23rd, when British voters passed a referendum to exit the European Union. For a few trading sessions investors fled stocks and other assets perceived to be risky and flocked to traditional safe havens such as gold, long-maturity U.S. Treasury bonds and debt of other countries considered to be of high credit quality, including Germany, France and Japan.
According to bond rating firm Fitch, sovereign debt with below zero yields increased by $1.3 trillion in the month of June to a total of $11.7 trillion, boosted by the Brexit vote. Longer maturity debt was particularly popular. Japan’s negative yielding debt grew about 18% to $7.9 trillion, France’s by 13% and Germany’s by 8% to over $1 trillion each.
Britain is the first country to exit the 28 country European Union, which took its current form in 1992 as a single market allowing goods, services, money and people to move freely among member states, as if it were a single country. It has its own parliament, located in Brussels, with the ability to regulate a wide range of areas including the environment, transportation, consumer rights, employment rules and even such things as mobile phone charges and electric tea kettles.
Its single currency the Euro wasn’t created until 1999. The United Kingdom opted to keep its own currency, the Pound Sterling, as did several other member countries including Denmark and Sweden.
Why did the Brexit vote set off such a firestorm in global markets? How much of a threat is it to the global economy and financial markets now?
Joining us on WEALTHTRACK this week are two market pros who have been tracking these developments closely. Philippe Brugère-Trélat, Executive Vice President of Franklin Mutual Series is a contrarian, value investor with years of experience investing in Europe and other international markets. He is Co-Portfolio Manager of three funds, all rated 4-star by Morningstar. He has managed Franklin Mutual European Fund since 2004, and both Franklin Mutual Global Discovery Fund and Franklin Mutual International Fund since 2009.
Our other guest is one of our Financial Thought Leaders. Jason Trennert is Co-Founder, Managing Partner and Chief Investment Strategist at Strategas Research Partners, an independent investment strategy and macroeconomic firm celebrating its tenth anniversary this year.
Identified by Barron’s as one of “Wall Street’s Best Minds”, Trennert and his team are known for their original and timely economic, political and market analysis and identification of investment themes. The firm recently started Strategas Asset Management to enable clients to invest in portfolios based on three of those themes. One is Policy Opportunities, another is Large-Cap Dividend Growth and the third is New Sovereigns, formerly their Thrifty Fifty portfolio which we have discussed on previous episodes. I will ask Trennert for an update.
If you miss the show on television this week you can always catch it on our website. We also have an EXTRA interview with both of our guests. As always, we welcome your feedback. Click on the Contact Us link on our website, or connect with us on Facebook or Twitter.
Have a great summer weekend and make the week ahead a profitable and a productive one.
Best Regards,
Consuelo

I have always thought (well at least fora few years) that People like Peter Lynch had better information some of which would be illegal today because everyone must get this stuff at the same time. Therefore its harder to get an edge and hence harder to beat passive by much more than expenses. Plus everyone makes mistakes even the best of investors so shareholders in Sequoia like me may not recover from one mistake made in a long career.

LLJB - What impresses you about their approach? They seem to fly under the radar, so any info you can provide would be very helpful.
Thanks!

My impression from what I was able to read is that they look at things both bottom up and top down, which I think is a pretty good idea for frontier markets. Although I don't remember anything specific related to the Frontier Markets fund, my understanding with the Emerging Markets Small Cap fund was that they actively tried to hedge market risk. I've looked at their most recent SEC filing and there's no indication they're doing that in the Frontier Markets fund but IIRC they do have the ability based on the prospectus.
I've read most of what they write about Frontier and Emerging markets for the last few years and in most cases I find the analysis consistent with the things that I believe in. That was one of the reasons I chose WAFMX originally, and I wanted the focus on a growing middle class in many of these countries. I also believe continued structural reforms are necessary and most of what they write suggests they're paying attention to those things both from the macro perspective but also the micro perspective.
Chad Cleaver has spent most of his investment career working with emerging markets and until the last couple of years had a great record. I don't follow DRESX closely so I'm not sure what happened but I've generally thought pretty highly of him. The high turnover that's normal for the Emerging Markets fund is more of a concern in a taxable account although originally I was hoping to put it in an IRA. That's something that I think bears watching as we start to get the one year data for the fund. I'd also watch the performance allocation. So far they've done okay but I guess part of that is thanks to the cash they've held.

I'm with Catch- as Bob C. has opined, Brexit may not be a factor in the long-term. But there is a very real chance that the world-wide banking system is in for an extended nasty patch of uncertainty until the European politics settle down. With interest rates where they are there is almost no way that the international European banks can prosper, and there are way too many large financial swans flying around over there. Not only Greece and Italy, but even some large German and Swiss banks are finding themselves against the wall. Additionally, I won't be surprised if England and the EU drag out the resolution issues for a couple of years, leaving the future of London as a banking and financial center a major unknown.
Before this settles out we may be very glad that the US banks have been forced to increase their capitalization, despite their kicking and screaming every inch of the way. While the US is in better shape than Europe, the interconnectedness of world finance could very well make things more difficult over here also. Now the Fed not only has to worry about the US directly, but also what ricochet effects the US system might have elsewhere, which in turn would come back to affect the US. Things are far from promising in the banking sector, worldwide.

These points having been discussed from years ago and now, at FundAlarm and here.
.....aging demographics, too much debt, and technological advances including job-threatening robotization are significantly responsible for 2% peak U.S. real GDP as
opposed to 4-5% only a decade ago.
The "this time is different" has been dismissed by many talking heads since the 2008/09 market melt.

FYI: (Click On Article At Top Of Google Search)
A candid chat with Bill Nygren, who has been manager of the Oakmark Select Fund (OAKLX) since 1996. The fund ranks in the seventh percentile of large-company value funds the past 15 years. Mr. Nygren discusses finding value in today's market, what stocks to avoid, and whether the Chicago Cubs will go to the World Series.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/#q=Oakmark's+Bill+Nygren+sees+value+in+bank+stocks

rjb112: I would not hesitate to take Ted's advice for now. I was put in the very same position 3 1/2 years ago, but we had not discussed investing my inheritance since we both were active investors, its how we met. He led a class on investing that I took. I chose to take on an advisor, but have since taken some out to manage on my own since I am confident I can do as well. It did give me some excellent planning and allocation plan, which I am basically following. As your friend learns more about investing and gains confidence, she can then branch out to some investments she make like better. I am not a fan of Vanguard's advisory service concept since they only will invest in their products. She may find others investments she likes. If she is does not want to have an advisor help manage right now, she may want to go to https://www.napfa.org/ and find an hourly rate advisor to help come up with a plan for the future when she is ready.

Hi Guys,
Hallelujah!! It was a great celebration of our Nation’s birthday. The fireworks were launched early, were continuous, were extensive, and lasted well into the night.
Given the costs of these fireworks, one interpretation is that the South Bay area of Los Angeles is highly prosperous and confident. A less forgiving explanation is that the South Bay is populated by very spendthrift, but proud, citizens. As anticipated, I did overeat, but enjoyed it all.
Thank you for taking time to participate in this discussion. I did not anticipate such deep and appropriately nuanced responses. It’s always a good policy to seek and consider a diverse set of interpretations on any matter. That mostly produces better decision-making.
The submittals have ventured down a pathway not expected. That’s good. I agree with much of what has been said.
Inflation matters. That’s why I like to assess investment returns after adjusting for it. Averages don’t say it all; investment return volatility acts to corrupt end wealth which is pathway dependent based on that volatility and drawdown policy during retirement. That’s why I like Monte Carlo analyses when making retirement decisions. Equity returns are likely to be muted in the near future relative to historical averages, so I expect the averages to drop a little due to a near-term quiet productivity growth rate period.
I have no opinions about the Japan marketplace. It is a challenge to just keep pace with developments in the USA. Emotions are a huge factor in moving the marketplace, and the Japanese and American populations behave differently in that dimension.
In considering our divergent characteristics, I probably oversimplify to reach a faulty decision, but I am reminded of a famous soldier’s axiom. I am now quoting General George Patton. He said: “A good plan violently executed NOW is better than a perfect plan executed NEXT WEEK”.
I am not sure anyone can generate or define a perfect plan. Timing and decisiveness matters greatly when investing. Please understand I take no issue with Japanese folks. I have played tennis with one such terrific competitor twice a week for over 20 years.
Timing and decisiveness are delicate subjects in the investment world. It means different things to different folks at different times during a dynamic environment. When does good enough outweigh perfect? My answer is always.
I suppose that’s what I was thinking about when I closed my initial post with a few comments that distinguish between a Satisficer and a Maximizer. I am definitely a Satisficer. Based on some posts, MFO has a cohort of Maximizers. That mix is good since it makes for a vibrant marketplace.
Well, I’ve likely written myself into yet another hole. That’s okay because it’s only my opinion. Thank you all once again for contributing during holiday obligations.
Best Wishes.