FYI: Walking the exhibit hall at the Schwab IMPACT Conference in Boston last week was a bit like strolling through the perfume and cologne department at a big department store.
Every few steps, it seemed like a representative from a firm selling exchange-traded funds was jumping out to spritz you with their wares.
Some of the smells were pleasing and appealing, others muddled and a few were offensive and seemingly hard to scrub off, like they could leave a portfolio reeking for years.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/some-sweet-smelling-mutual-funds-and-etfs-could-turn-out-to-be-skunks-2015-11-17/print

Echos of Andrew Foster's outlook going back three years - and he's crushed the index with SFGIX. Still, even following the Foster/GaveKal formula, EMs haven't done much, in absolute terms.

https://www.onefpa.org/journal/Pages/NOV15-Updated-Advice-on-Mutual-Fund-Selection.aspx
"Over the past three years, academic research has revealed new characteristics to look for in an actively managed mutual fund. In 2012, I suggested that financial planners look for funds with a high level of fund manager ownership, board of director ownership, a short-term redemption fee, a high active share or low R-squared value, and that lack affiliation with an investment bank. Recent research shows that financial planners should also look for funds that manage their portfolios in-house, outsource the execution of their shareholder services, have managers with performance-linked bonuses, and have a key role in their fund family performed by someone with a Ph.D. Each of these characteristics are associated with outperformance. "
I'd like to see a little math. It's early for these.

Tradability or low expenses or whatever 'benefits' aside, I'm not a fan of ETFs either. If I want a 'fund' to buy and hold for a long time, I will go with a properly-run, low-cost OEF any day of the week. If I'm bored and want to speculate on a sector/idea, I'd play with an ETF. ETFs also present the illusion of "power" to individual, and likely less-informed, investors who end up churning their accounts regularly based on every wiggle of the market, because they can do so, and quite cheaply if not for free, with ETFs.
The fact that hedge funds and others hold/trade ETFs versus their underlying holdings (or futures contracts) right there turns me off to them as a long-term investment vehicle.
I used to hate the idea of mutual funds and their once-a-day trading. But seeing the markets in recent years, I've come to like that feature since, among other things, it forces me to analyse a situation versus react intraday -- and likely emotionally. Plus, most OEFs are designed / intended as long-term holdings, not trading vehicles.

@VF - I'm in the same boat as you - been looking for another moderate allocation fund the past few years to compliment PRWCX - was going to go with BRUFX - but passed and keep adding to PRWCX instead; but it's getting to be too big a chunk of my portfolio. Thinking of just starting a position in GLRIX within a couple of years to balance.
There are too many negative things I see with BRUFX - thin bench, succession plan issues - the dad is older than dirt and the son is up there now too, have to do contributions via paper check, strict limitations on withdrawals per their prospectus, limited access and literature on them, long periods of underperformance. Possibly some of these negatives are unwarranted - it's just hard to find any info out there on these guys!

I was actually eyeing their DLCMX for when the commodity sell off is over.

I hold uncle Jeffrey's core-plus bond fund. I had not even seen this offering before. It does make me nervous that the DL shop is planning to spawn so many new items, so soon. Like Royce, several years ago. Uh-oh.
As for commodities (DLCMX,) I just initiated a tiny position which I intend to grow over the long haul, in ConocoPhillips--- for the dividend. (Ticker COP.) When oil's price rises again, this depressed stock--- the largest of its type in the world--- should rise, also. That's the theory, anyhow.... 5.5% yield on the sucker, at the moment.

@VintageFreak. The database is good. It's the presentation of the legacy screener that is causing you the confusion. The tabulated metrics are only for the longest evaluation period applicable ... 1, 3, 5, 10, or 20 years ... so you can only compare the metrics of funds from same age group. The return group rankings are directly comparable, but not the metrics.
Below are the risk/return metrics for BRUFX, OAKBX, PRWCX, and WGRNX across various periods from the MFO premium site ... hope this helps.

@VintageFreak and catch. No worries. Right, so, the legacy screener tabulates metrics only for the longest evaluation period applicable ... 1, 3, 5, 10 or 20 years. In case of WGRNX, that means 5 years (through September ... it crossed the 10 year mark last month). Its big drawdown occurred prior to that ... as can be seen in the lifetime metrics on the premium site (snapshot below). The legacy site ratings will be updated again after 4th quarter.

The power of patience. Not just of BRUFX managers but both of investors who did buy and those who didn't. It's top holding was once $2, now it is $450. The problem is it is now 12% of the fund. The chart below shows BRUFX underperformed the S&P 500 for 20 years after inception.
After having waited so long, I think I might want to wait a bit longer.

I have owned BRUFX for years in a regular account. Bought into it when NAV was about $288 per share.
I thought there were some states that would not permit you to buy BRUFX?

That's correct. I'm in TX and lamented about it long, until someone not too long back on MFO let me know it is now available in TX. Since minimum is $1000 I'm thinking I would start DCAing in. At least enter at $1000 and watch and creep in over time, would be a better way to put it.

I would like to see Gundlach start an unconstrained fund of his best ideas not exclusively tied to bonds ....

I've had that thought too, and every time I do,

check out DMLIX (multi-asset growth, I think the closest thing to that approach in his fund stable) to see how it's doing, and it's only a middling-sorta fund, so far anyway. It may not really be unconstrained, though - every time I look at the asset mix, it has a "check off this box" feel to it.

I was in this fund when it first opened. It did not seem to move anywhere,at least compared to other balanced/allocation funds, so I eventually sold it. I have not followed it closely in the last couple years, but it does not look like the type of fund we would be looking for, as far as Gundlach's highest convictions. It looks more like a play it safe fund.

I expect most have had quite enough of the Valeant business by now, but for those who haven't, or who have lingering questions re. the nitty-gritty of the matter, here is some number crunching done by a corp finance wonk at the NYU Stern School of Business.It's the weekend. More leisurely hours for musing. Might as well use them.
http://aswathdamodaran.blogspot.com/2015/11/checkmate-or-stalemate-valeants-fall.html
Teaser:
3. Accounting games: Part of Valeant’s rise can be attributed to the laziness of analysts, who apply multiples (that they pull from a cursory assessment of the comparable) on pro forma earnings, and some of it to the debris of acquisition accounting (goodwill, impairment of goodwill and acquisition-related restructuring charges). I have written before about the damage that goodwill does to both accounting statements and to good sense, but the degree to which acquisition accounting has muddied up the numbers at Valeant can be captured by looking at how they have taken over Valeant's financials in the last 5 years:

He also makes his case as to whether Valeant will be a going concern re. its value. He breaks it down pretty well.

I have owned BRUFX for years in a regular account. Bought into it when NAV was about $288 per share.
I thought there were some states that would not permit you to buy BRUFX?

@MFO Members: BRUFX is a Winner Winner Chicken Dinner. #1 or #2 percentile for the last fifteen years.
BRUFX Fifteen Year Performance:
http://performance.morningstar.com/fund/performance-return.action?t=BRUFX&region=usa&culture=en_US
BRUFX Is Ranked #3 In The (MA) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
http://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/moderate-allocation/bruce-fund/brufx

Many things are at/near 5 year lows, including emerging-market equities (EEM), emerging-market debt in local-currencies (EMLC), most commodities (DBC), MLPs (MLPI). Looking at a 5-year chart, without doing anything else, and drawing inferences as to the investment merit of an asset is... foolhardy.
AU/USD, like most of the investment classes cited above are a function of the strength of the USD. --- I say this, because AU, while down in USD terms, is NOT down across all currencies. Its down vs. USD, GBP, SFR over 5 years. AU is also down vs CNY -- but then CNY's is (usually-) manipulated to track the USD. However AU is UP vs the CAD$, Yen, rand, rupee, AU$, ruble and MXP. AU is (essentially) flat vs. EUR.
The strength in the USD is itself a function not of American economic strength, but of our economy being the "cleanest dirty shirt", and of waning commodity demand from China. No one can foresee when these trends will reverse, but I suspect, they will reverse/mean-revert at some time. I suspect AU will still experience a "capitulation panic", however, generally assets are best bought when they are cheap, not dear. US equity enthusiasts should keep that in mind, as we are now in the 7th year of a very, VERY high-return equity bull. No tree grows to the sky.
AU can be first/foremost thought of as portfolio insurance -- providing diversification of returns over long periods of time. During the past 5 years, US equities have done wonderfully. So US equity investors were rewarded, while their AU holdings declined. OTOH, during the 2000-2010 period, equity returns languished/were lousy, but bullion holders were well rewarded.
For anyone dis-enchanted with their bullion holdings, I have a standing offer: contact me, and I will be happy to haul away any of your unwanted bullion, and I won't charge you a fee for the service, not a dime.

@Old_Skeet,

So, in short words I should expect about half of what I received from the market going forward for the next ten years when compared to the past ten year period.

I concur with the range of 4% total return. Not quite as bearish as GMO forcast earlier, but unlikely to match the historical averages.

Interesting ...
I took the anticipated returns as noted in the article for bonds at 3% and stocks at 6% and I ran a forecast of what my portfolio would be expected to return based upon it's current asset allocation. It bubbled close to 4%. According to Morningstar's Portfolio Manager in doing a ten year lookback (portfolio's current configuration) returned better than 8%. So, in short words I should expect about half of what I received from the market going forward for the next ten years when compared to the past ten year period. With this, I just may have to make some special investment positions from time-to-time if I want to better these projected return estimates as I'd like to at least average 5% to 6%; and, I don't want to be fully invested in stocks to do it. So, it looks as though I will have to make those spiff investment positions, from time-to-time, to achieve my return goal.

Maybe there are many money managers taking a look down the road they imagine and not much liking what they imagine could happen. And so, having made some very good money for themselves, some are concluding they just don't want to play that rough game anymore. It isn't just the greybeards. Just saw a blimp about Brett Lynn, manager of Janus Overseas, about to walk away from his charge at the end of 2015. He's still a young guy, hitting his prime years, yet he's had enough.
Just wondering. Given the number of liquidations being reported by The Shadow, there should be no shortage of possible replacements.

I would like to see Gundlach start an unconstrained fund of his best ideas not exclusively tied to bonds, such as when he recommended shorting Apple and the yen a few years ago, and now I believe he is big on the Indian market, at least for the long term.

Yes and no in my opinion VintageFreak. I think broad range index ETFs like the S&P 500 are definitely investing tools. I would even say more so then a managed large cap fund for many people who are seem tempted to jump to the fund of the month. Heck, see it here all the time.
Specific sector funds like gold minors, a perfect example, are certainly a traders tool. And for the last 8+ years more of a Las Vegas betting tool. Most people will loose with the minors. I think Barry is right-on point.