FYI: Midcap stock mutual funds, like their small-cap cousins, have lagged large-cap funds and the S&P 500 this year, but midcaps remain close behind small caps' stellar performance in the past 15 years.
Look what a $10,000 investment on Sept. 30, 1999, would do in each. Investors holding the average midcap stock fund would have $36,323 as of Oct. 20 this year, according to Morningstar data. That's a bit behind small-cap funds, which would have $39,299.
Regards,
Ted
http://license.icopyright.net/user/viewFreeUse.act?fuid=MTg1ODMzNjI=
Enlarged Graphic: http://news.investors.com/photopopup.aspx?path=WEBlv1022.gif&docId=722910&xmpSource=&width=1000&height=1152&caption=&id=722911

Hi rjb112,
Thanks for your comments.
I am linking the details on the seasonal strategy that I have followed for a good many years.
http://www.streetsmartreport.com/sts
Call it a timming strategy if you like ... or call ... it a rebalance of sorts based upon the calendar. Old_Skeet

Thanks Old_Skeet.
So do you "sell in May and go away" according to the STS? Do you subscribe to both these newsletters and follow their advice?
I don't recall you posting in the last several months that you "sold in May and went away"
How have you been applying these 2 newsletters?

Hi rjb112,
Thanks for your comments.
So far it looks as though it might come through as I anticipated as history tells us STS will work more times than not. However, there are many things that can take place for the rally to turn as you have stated above. Note though history tells me that the best time to be invested in the stock market is during the 4th quarter and 1st quarter of each year. With this, I just put in what I am expecting to get paid back out through anticipated capital gains distributions during the months of November and December. My gain, with this, will be what is made on the spiff between now and then. After that I'll be back to my starting equity allocation once the distributions have taken place plus or minus the gain and/or loss that might occur on my remaining invested principal.
I am linking the details on the seasonal strategy that I have followed for a good many years. Again, note that it has worked for me more times than not and I felt my chances of it working now were greater, by my thinking, than it not working. There seems from what I have been recently reading and hearing that big money sold around the low of 1840 to 1820 during the recent plullback, perhaps this was due to margin calls as reported by some news outlets and now they are having to buy back in at higher levels pushing prices back upward. And, another ... I felt good corporate earnings would be coming through for the third quarter reporting and thus far they have. It has been my experience that earnings drive the markets.
http://www.streetsmartreport.com/sts
Call it a timming strategy if you like ... or call ... it a rebalance of sorts based upon the calendar. I am still within the confines of my asset allocation and from my thinking that makes me an investor rather than a trader as they seem to be all in or all out over short periods of time. So, call it what you like, either way, I am currently on the heavy side in my equity allocation.
Old_Skeet

Hi Hank- Yeah, we've subscribed to the Smithsonian for many years, but I have to tell you that even that has been "dumbed down", confusing somebody's ideas of a "wonderful new layout" with previously solid reporting. Used to read it cover-to-cover, but now the quality varies widely between issues, and we find ourselves picking and choosing. Some issues are much better than others, but the whole thing is now somewhat shaky. We've come close to cancelling, but we're still hoping for a change for the better.
With respect to the Chron, you're probably better off reading it via the internet- in the last two weeks we've had to call because of late or non-delivery about ten times. In other great news, we've just been informed by the WSJ that here in SF they are going to combine their delivery, which up till now has been very reliable, with that of the Chron, so now we probably won't get either one on time. How come NOTHING ever gets better, only worser??

I also own VTAPX. Swapped it after several years of owning VIPSX.

@Scott

I'm waiting for the period over the next year where this fund - which, admittedly has had stunning performance for a fund in the managed futures category - under-performs for a period (given the nature of the fund, it will happen) and everyone who got in because of its initial performance gets upset and dumps it.
So true. Like L/S funds, managed futures funds are in a troubled space that has not done well over the past 3-years, and many of the funds I follow in this space are somewhat pricey (I follow PQTIX, ASFYX, EQCHX, HFXIX, LCSIX). For these reasons, I am following but not buying PQTIX. Maybe PIMCO has the secret sauce for the space, but maybe they don't. Time will tell.
Kevin
I have TFSHX. What's your opinion on it?

I just added some additional money to this fund. It's up about 9% this year, despite the hit small cap stocks have taken. I invested when it first opened, taking advantage of the legacy shares lower fees for long-term Matthews investors.
I'm a value fund investor, but I thought I would give these guys a chance. So far, so good. MVALX has been good to me over the years.

Hi Guys,
In selecting her aggressive retirement portfolio, Benz wisely chose 7 funds that all had positive Alphas for the past 5 years. Now comes the acid test. Will these funds retain their positive Alphas for the next 5years?
Who knows? Historically, that has not been the case with reversion to the mean exerting its influence.
Best Regards.

@Scott
I'm waiting for the period over the next year where this fund - which, admittedly has had stunning performance for a fund in the managed futures category - under-performs for a period (given the nature of the fund, it will happen) and everyone who got in because of its initial performance gets upset and dumps it.
So true. Like L/S funds, managed futures funds are in a troubled space that has not done well over the past 3-years, and many of the funds I follow in this space are somewhat pricey (I follow PQTIX, ASFYX, EQCHX, HFXIX, LCSIX). For these reasons, I am following but not buying PQTIX. Maybe PIMCO has the secret sauce for the space, but maybe they don't. Time will tell.
Kevin

I've found in past years the distribution totals were fairly accurate but would shift a little in the amounts of dividends vs. short term cap gains vs. long term capital gains.
These gains are based only of the gains and losses the fund incurred when selling a security that was in the fund.
This distribution has nothing to do with the YTD or any other investor performance, although a fund that has lost money is likely to have more shares redeemed by shareholders. This could force the fund to sell some assets to pay the shareholders getting out. Some funds try to manage the distributions to minimize taxable income passed to the remaining shareholders, and some don't.
Dave

Thanks folks,
All great suggestions that I will heed. PRWCX has been great for years. Core type fund.
As mentioned, wifey has her rollover there and I had a traditional IRA there for about 10 years.
Whence I get it set up, I'll share with you good people.
and so it goes,
peace,
rono

FYI: From New York to California, Wisconsin to Texas, hundreds of thousands of teachers, firefighters, police officers and other public employees are relying on their pensions for financial security.
Private equity firms are relying on their pensions, too. Over the last 10 years, pension funds have piled into private equity buyout funds. But in exchange for what they hope will be hefty returns, many pension funds have signed onto a kind of omerta, or code of silence, about the terms of the funds’ investments.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/19/business/retirement/behind-private-equitys-curtain.html?ref=business
I hold a position in KKR: M* Snapshot Of KKR:http://quotes.morningstar.com/stock/kkr/s?t=kkr

@msf: great, I see how you did that now. Quite a project. Thanks. I had never used the premium screener before.
One thing I like about Yahoo Finance is that it gives the calendar year performance of mutual funds since inception. As you now, M* doesn't have that even with a premium membership. Some of those funds on your list have very long consecutive years of positive performance, beyond the 10 year cut off to make the list.

Morningstar premium screener. Ask for 2004 annual returns >= 0 and 2005 returns >=0 and ...
Pretty easy (but you do need a premium account with M*). The tedious part was transcribing the tickers :-( But I find a manual exercise like that helpful; it forces me to take a close look at the results.
Beyond that, I just made notes on a few funds that I've kept eyes on, like Bernstein (for very stable very short term state-specific munis), TCW/MetWest, and Vanguard. WEFIX was on my short list for years (and I'd included it in a suggested portfolio for a friend), until they upped the min and created a more expensive retail class.

@msf: an excellent piece of research. What research tool or resource did you use to find all those funds with positive returns in the past 10 calendar years?

Now you're getting close to the interesting part of the case. Derf is right - the piper gets paid one way or the other.
Some of what's at issue here is whether the employer could have the employees pay. The plan docs say no, but the docs also give employer the responsibility to interpret what "employer pays fees" means.
So, if employees pay implicitly (via higher retail fund fees and a kickback to the plan operator), does that violate the terms of the plan?
The employer is obviously taking the position that the requirement that the employer pay the fees refers only to explicit fees; those fees that are billed directly to the employer.
The case is not so much about retail vs. institutional class shares.
Where is all the outrage with Vanguard using investor class shares in its target date funds? Same idea - Vanguard doesn't charge the investor a management fee for those funds; instead it gets paid for its costs by charging higher (investor class share) fees in the underlying funds.
The question of three year limit is in a sense a side matter. I think it's interesting, but then again, I think most stuff is interesting. As I recall (it's been a little while since I read the case) ERISA does not support a continuing violations theory argument. In plain English, that means that the fact that the act is still ongoing (a continuing violation) doesn't save you from the three year statute of limitations.
The appeal claims (rightly I feel) that it's not a single ongoing act (that started more than three years ago), but repeated breaches of fiduciary duty. Every time a plan trustee acts or doesn't act, he or she is making a decision, which must be in the best interest of the employees.
This argument won't get damages going back more than the three year limit, but it should allow damages for the past three years, even on funds that were originally selected more than three years ago. Just MHO - I'm not a lawyer, I don't even play one on TV.

According to M*, there are exactly two non-bond funds that did not lose money in any of the past ten calendar years. WICAX (one of the three funds named), and KRFEX.
While NSTLX (the institutional share class of N&B Strategic Income) makes the cut, the ticker that was given in the article, NSTAX (A class) does not, because that share class did not exist until 3/3/2008.
Both share classes of TCW Total return (TGLMX as well as the named TGMNX) made the grade, but it is worth noting that management changed about midway through the ten years. The MetWest management that TCW bought is great, but I'd rather invest in their flagship fund MWTIX.
As I've said before, I don't think there's anything magical about 0.000% return. But FWIW, the other nonlosers are:
Taxable bond funds: FXICX, AALPX, AVEFX, BBBMX, CCBAX, DFIHX, DFGFX, SDGIX, FGUSX, FPNIX, GSTGX, MXSDX, HUBAX, JASBX, JIBDX, HLLVX, LKFIX, DFCFX, DFYGX, MSTIX, MUCYX, BSBAX, PYSBX, PRVBX, PIASX, PMYIX, PSBAX, PIFZX, SIGVX, STBFX, BSGAX, PRWBX, TSDOX, DIHQX, FOSIX, UGSDX, VBISX, VFIRX (note only the Admiral shares made the cut), WEFIX (used to be NTF until Weitz added a retail class with a 0.25% admin fee in 2011), SGVAX, MVSAX
Muni bond funds: ALABX, ATOIX, SDCMX, SDDMX, SDNYX (Bernstein short duration funds don't make much but are very stable; don't know any way to get them without a load), MDLMX, MINSX, CNTIX, HICOX, NSMIX, DFSMX, DSIBX, FMUUX, FSHIX (the retail version, FMTAX - load waived at Vanguard - lost a few basis points in 2008 and 2013), FISHX (the T class lost 0.17% in 2013), FSTFX, FFTFX, GSDUX, FLTRX, SUMAX, PRMDX, PRFSX, LTCAX, LTMIX, VMLTX, VWSTX, SCTIX, SMUAX, SHDAX.
Not surprisingly, the muni bond funds tend to be short or short-intermediate.

Hi rono. Hard to give suggestions to a guy I used to take advice from. Heck, I think I remember guys like you and Ed talking about PRWCX 7 or 8 years ago.
Good luck on your roll over and have a happy retirement. I'm sure you and the Barron von Rothschild have all the bases covered.

your passion for news/ investing/ mfo is admirable. while i don't always agree with your style, i wish you many more years of the same energy!
fa

2fundalarm: I peddling the bike as fast as I can, but at 78 that's not very fast. !
Regards,
Ted

FPA New Income FPNIX
30 years without a single calendar year loss under management by FPA
Prior to that an additional 9 years without a calendar year loss
Total of 39 consecutive "up" calendar year total returns
Source: Yahoo Finance performance data
In its commentary on the fund, M* states "This fund starts with a laserlike focus on not losing money".......and "This fund hasn't lost money on a total-return basis in a single calendar year since 1984 "