My blended ER is less than 70 bps. I run everything independently via Fidelity. The core of my portfolio passive equity exposure as it's my belief that active manager add little value in most market segment.

@JoJo26, well done with your overall ER with other advisor fees! Over time, these fees really add up quickly. There are more ETFs and actively managed ETFs with NO trading commission at large brokerages (Fidelity and Schwab) available today. Vanguard is working hard to catch up in this offering.

I would also note that I will never pay a load as this dig a deep hole to recover from. Most active managers fail to outperform after their regular fees. Imagine starting in the hole 5%.
I may pay some commissions on ETFs, but that's rare and deminimis. Today, all of my ETF exposure is via ETFs that I've purchased commission-free.

Thanks very much for sharing yourr thought processes on this @Old_Skeet. Very helpful to me in thinking about the market. Do your inputs focus on the S&P 500 exclusively? Do you look at international at all?

Thank you @Old_Skeet for drilling down more into your methodology. Your definition of overbought largely coincides with that of Investopedia - https://www.investopedia.com/terms/o/overbought.asp. While valuation is mentioned by both of you, it appears to be a largely inferential determination based on recent market price behavior: ie: S&P falls 12% over 2 months and becomes oversold. Than it rises 10% over 2 months and becomes overbought. Inferentially one might conclude that the underlying assets had greater intrinsic value when the market was depressed than after it became elevated. That sounds to me very much like a technical indicator based largely on recent market price trend lines.
I’ll agree that’s one good way to describe near-term conditions and to time one’s entry and exit points if one is a market trader. But it doesn’t help much with understanding valuations over longer periods (5, 10, 20 years). You said: “... markets can stay overbought and oversold for extended periods of time.” That may possibly be. However, if it were really the case there would seldom be a need to change the barometer from oversold to overbought within a few weeks’ or months’ time. So I’d modify that statement to read: “... markets can stay overvalued and undervalued for extended periods of time“.
What’s the difference? Valuations are based on the intrinsic worth of the individual companies within the index. While complex, that involves appraising different attributes like: underlying assets, debt levels, bond ratings, profit margins, P/E ratios, pending litigation, competitive market advantages and long term growth prospects. In a nutshell: Valuation is much harder to measure than a temporary overbought or oversold condition based largely on a 3-6 month chart.
Warren Buffet was on CNBC this morning and so is on my mind. I do feel his successful methodology leans very heavily towards the “valuation” end of the spectrum and much less so towards temporary technical overbought / underbought nomenclatures.
There are many successful ways to invest. Thanks for your insights into your barometer and how you apply it.

FYI: The headquarters for some of the best-performing and fastest-growing stock funds on the planet is a building on Avenue of the Stars in Beverly Hills. Glamour stocks? Far from it. The money managers at Kayne Anderson Rudnick prefer companies selling lawn fertilizer, swimming pool chemicals and the software used by small banks.
Look at the results. The firm’s hottest fund, Virtus KAR Small-Cap Growth, has averaged a 19.4% annual return over the past decade, to 14.7% for the S&P 500. Virtus KAR Small-Cap Core delivered 15.9%. These numbers are after stiff fees, over 2% a year on the no-load C class shares.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.forbes.com/sites/antoinegara/2019/02/19/this-investors-secret-to-beating-the-street-pick-stocks-that-are-fortresses/#5b9a06751927
M* Snapshot PSGAX:
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/psgax/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot PSGAX:
https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/fund/psgax
PSGAX Ranks #3 In The (SCG) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
https://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/small-growth/virtus-kar-small-cap-growth-fund/psgax
M* Virtus Family Of Funds:
http://quicktake.morningstar.com/fundfamily/virtus/0C00001YUH/fund-list.aspx

Hi @hank: Thank you for your inquiry about Old_Skeet's investment mythology.
Here is the defination of overbought. The term a stock is "overbought" when the stock reaches a point in trading where technical indicators suggest the next price move of the stock will be down. When a stock's price has risen too far, too fast and it is beginning to look expensive to investors, it is overbought.
While I'm not an analyst and just a retail investor much like others on the board I have been working on someting to measures market value. Through my fifty plus years of investing I developed my barometer to aid me in determining better times to add new money to my portfolio. This lead me to develope a market barometer to help measue value in the S&P 500 Index. With this, I came up with three main feeds in my barometer plus some minor feeds. The barometer's three main feeds are a breadth feed, an earnings feed and a technical score feed. These three feeds are scaled and when combined produce a barometric number. The barometric number is then scaled into extremely overbought, overbought, overvalued, fair value, undervalued, oversold, and extremely oversold scalings. When looking for direction I often use the minor feeds to help determine this. A higher barometer reading indicates there is more investment value in the Index over a lower reading. At the first of the year the barometer had a reading of 183 which based upon the barometer metrics indicated the Index was extemely oversold. Presently, the barometer reading of 133 indicates that the Index is extremely overbought. So, in two months the Index has moved from extremely oversold to extremely overbought. Remember, at the end of last year many hedge funds were closing and sold into a vaccum on Christmas Eve. This selling pressure drove stock prices extremely low. Also, the FOMC had been on an interest rate increase campaign plus a number of other market distractors were taking place as well. This selling pressure created an extremely oversold market. As we have now progressed into the new year there has been good investor interest in stocks and their prices have been driven upward through some furrious buying to the point that they are now reaching a buying climax and by the metrics of the barometer become extremely overbought.
As you know (or should know) markets can stay overbought and oversold for extended periods of time. However, for the past couple of weeks I have detected a softening in the money flow. This means, to me, investors have been booking some profit. In addition, there seems to be a good number of companies recently reporting a decline in their earnings and anticipated revenue growth. Will it be enough for the Index to pull back? Perhaps. So, unless there is some news event that would entergize the market and encourage investors to pay up even more for stocks I'm following the barometer reading and looking for a nearterm pullback.
Just because I'm looking for a pullback does not mean that it will take place. But, until I see some higher barometer readings (indicating there is more investment value in the Index) I'm not putting any new money to work at this time. And, since I have no open special investment positions (spiffs) I'm not selling at this time either as the barometer generally drives my purchase and selling of spiffs. If I had any spiffs in play I'd have already closed them.
I hope this helps you have a better understanding of Old_Skeet's investment mythology because my market barometer has help me have a better understaning of stock market movements. With this, I'm posting this for information purposes only. It is not meant (or should not be taken) as investment advice.

I've about 1/3 of equity invested abroad.
For those who hold that markets are efficient (you can't beat the market), I've got too little in foreign stock, which represents only 57% of the world equity market.
For those who hold that multinational companies are all the same regardless of where based, I've got too much overseas.
I'm currently taking a course in comparative political economy. Our reading for this week, An Introduction to Varieties of Capitalism presents significantly different models of capitalism based on the interplay between national politics and the ways companies in different countries cooperate/compete/operate.
While it concedes that there is some movement toward convergence under globalization, it argues that there is still significant variation from country to country. The implication for our purposes is that multinationals are not all the same.
So, splitting the difference (with justification) between 0% and 57%. 1/3 seems like a reasonable allocation.

Old_Skeet's market barometer finished the week with a reading of 133 indicating that the S&P 500 Index is extremely overbought based upon the metrics of the barometer.

Thanks @Old_Skeet for your discussion of how you are positioned.
- I’m curious what you believe an “overbought” reading for the S&P implies for whatever action(s) one should take? I realize you are not offering investment advice, but it still leaves open the question of what an overbought reading might suggest the investor should do? Some obvious choices are: (1) Ignore the overbought reading and stay put, (2) move some or all of the overbought asset to cash, (3) move some or all of that overbought asset into a different asset - perhaps one having a reading of “underbought”.
- Are your metrics based primarily on valuations or on technicals? Perhaps a 50/50 slice of each?
- While it might be discouraging to be buying into an overbought market, a really long time horizon helps. Had you poured all your $$ into the S&P when it was arguably overbought in the 1997-98 period, I believe you would still be very happy with your return today, some 20 years later. :)
Appreciate any thoughts.

@mikew - I will pass.. Don't have 5M lol.. Will make it Simple will add brk.b and some bonds instead
Probably add more to EEM

@MikeW: As you requested. For the week ending 2/22/2019 Old_Skeet's market barometer finished the week with a reading of 133 indicating that the S&P 500 Index is extremely overbought based upon the metrics of the barometer. I'll be doing a more detail report on March 1st.

@Old-Joe: You need go back to school and enroll in Math 101, my links yesterday and today have had over 850 views. How many have you had ?
:( :( :(: :(

@oldskeet top oerformers for me were Grandeur Peak Global reach at 1.35% and Granduer peak emerging markets at 2.07%. Both small positions right now. I'm getting ready to add a number of new positions.
Would you mind giving us a market barometer update?

Buffett lost his edge years ago. In the last 10-15 years, information is quick and available globally so it's much harder to find hidden nuggets. Buffett can still make better deals than most such as: influence management from within, make deals when markets collapse because of his huge assets/cash.

@rfrono: The Brideway fund BRLIX is indeed a fine no load fund.
For me to hold it though I'd have to open a wrap fee based account. I'll call this the new school way. In talking with my broker sometime ago this could be done. The wrap fee was based upon a sliding scale determined by the total value of the assets held within the account. Because of the amount of money I'd have invested in this fee based (new school) account makes it unattractive from my perspective. Here is why. Even with the low expense ratio for the fund BRLIX at 0.15% when you add the account wrap fee could push the cost close to 1.4% and perhaps more. This is based upon the account wrap fee being set at the low range of 1.25%.
For me, I felt the old school way was the best way to continue to invest and thus far I have stayed away from fee based accounts.
Thanks again for making comment.

Where to start?
Catch 22: When you don't know much, you have no idea if your broker (or even your financial adviser) is good, when you get better you don't need an adviser.
Brokers are not Fiduciaries. I would not use a FA(financial adviser) Fiduciary either.
Remember, a FA is a jack of all trades master of none. A FA can give advice after just several months of passing 2-3 courses(I did it in 3 months but never practiced). If you need a tax advice use a CPA. If you want to set up a will, power of Attorney, a trust you want an attorney. Think how many years it took to become a CPA or an attorney.
One of the most important myth for a FA is to put their clients' interest first but if they do that they will starve. A good FA needs about 2-3 hours to set up a typical client (I can do it under an hour). This setup should be good for several years unless something drastic changed. This means, you should pay a $1000 every several years but the reality is a typical FA wants to have a long-term relationship with you (I'm already married :-) ) so they can charge you based on your portfolio size. Why would I pay someone according to portfolio size and not by the hour or the job? Please run. That's how a CPA works and they are real experts.
Here is an easy way to see why your broker has his interest first, send him an email (because you want to see it in writing) and ask him what is the commission to buy 100 shares of AAPL, 500 shares and 1000 shares. Please report back(Hint: it's only $4.95 regardless at Fidelity + Schwab).
Lastly, if you walk in the street and see a broker please cross the street asap, if you see a FA say hi and keep walking :-)

FYI: Shares of Kraft Heinz (KHC) are down nearly 30% today following a big earnings miss and the disclosure that the company has been subpoenaed by the SEC. KHC accounts for more than 7% of Berkshire Hathaway’s’ equity portfolio, and that stock is trading down close to 2% ahead of this weekend’s earnings report on a day when the broader market is firmly in positive territory. Following this weekend’s report, Warren Buffett himself will be all over financial television on Monday to talk about all things Berkshire and its portfolio of companies.
Given the confluence of events, though, the question of whether or not Buffett has lost his touch is once again making the rounds. Remember, it was just a week ago that Coca-Cola (KO), which accounts for over 10% of the Berkshire equity portfolio, dropped over 8% after it reported earnings. In the case of KO, last Thursday’s decline was the most negative reaction to earnings the stock has had since 2002! With two stocks comprising 18% of Berkshire’s total equity portfolio getting demolished on earnings, you can’t blame traders for being a little more skeptical and taking some profits in their Berkshire positions. Year to date, the stock is one of less than 35 in the S&P 500 that are actually in the red YTD.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bespokepremium.com/think-big-blog/has-buffett-lost-his-touch-here-we-go-again/

FYI: Kraft Heinz (ticker: KHC) has become one of the rare cases in which a company’s bondholders are more optimistic than its shareholders.
The company’s shares dropped 27% on Friday after the packaged-foods giant released a fourth-quarter earnings report that was rife with bad news: Disappointing earnings guidance, a regulator subpoena, a 36% dividend cut, and a $15 billion write-down on the value of brands such as Oscar Mayer and Kraft.
But its creditors don’t seem as worried, and the company’s bonds recovered half of their morning losses by midday. And Kraft Heinz bonds are still trading like investment-grade securities, investors say.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/kraft-heinz-bondholders-are-more-upbeat-than-shareholders-51550919600?refsec=bonds

FYI: A month after Jack Bogle’s death, evidence of the good things he wrought continues to arrive, sometimes from unexpected places.
Jack created Vanguard as a penny-pinching institution owned by its funds’ shareholders. He popularized low-cost index funds and, in the process, radically reduced the expenses incurred by millions of rank-and-file investors.
Now, it turns out, cost savings from various types of index funds, run by Vanguard, BlackRock, Fidelity, Schwab, State Street and others, are having a measurable impact on inflation much as prices for groceries and gasoline do.
In January alone, the Bureau of Labor Statistics found, overall portfolio management costs in the United States “plunged 5.2 percent,” Michael Feroli, the chief United States economist at J. P. Morgan, said in a note on Feb. 14.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/22/business/jack-bogle-index-funds-inflation.html?rref=collection/timestopic/Mutual Funds&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection

If I wanted an eq-weighted fund, I'd go with BRLIX - .15 ER and simply takes the top 35 largest companies[1], equal-weights them, and rebalances a few times a year. Easy cheap exposure to large value/growth firms.
[1] Except Facebook, which I don't think they like ... and I can agree with that. :)

Honestly, I think the issue is overrated. But it was on my mind since there was a link to a M* article about how foreign funds might better be left in taxable accounts since there you could take advantage of the foreign tax credit.
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/47736/m-should-you-keep-foreign-stocks-out-of-your-ira
A point that column missed was that the same argument could be applied to investing in separate domestic and foreign funds (where you'd get the foreign tax credit) vs. investing in a global fund where you wouldn't.
Here's a simple example to show what happens when the foreign tax is or isn't passed through:
Say your shares generate $150 in dividends. Say also that the fund owes foreign governments $50 in taxes. It has to pay the $50, leaving $100 in hard cash that it actually pays to you.
The fund could say on your 1099 that you got $100 in divs. No foreign tax credit. The fund simply paid those taxes as an operating expense and paid you what was left.
Alternatively, it could say on your 1099 that it distributed $150 in divs to you and paid the $50 in your name. You would owe taxes on that extra $50 that you only got on paper. Say that extra tax is $7.50 (15% x $50 in qual divs). Now the IRS will give you credit for the $50 "you" paid in foreign taxes (on paper). You would have a net gain of $50 (tax credit) minus $7.50 (extra tax) = $42.50.
It's really hard to tell how much that foreign credit is worth. The size of the credit can fluctuate wildly from year to year. My sense is that it's big enough to rise above the noise level, but it's still just a small factor to consider, not a game changer.

"But pension funds, endowments, and other institutional investors represent the vast majority of public company shareholders—and, according to a recent study, these investors view buybacks as among the best actions management can take when it comes to allocating capital."
I think this is a crock of crap. I contend Management uses this to line their nest.

Of course they do.

For most of the 20th century, stock buybacks were deemed illegal because they were thought to be a form of stock market manipulation. But since 1982, when they were essentially legalized by the SEC, buybacks have become perhaps the most popular financial engineering tool in the C-Suite tool shed. And it’s obvious why Wall Street loves them: Buying back company stock can inflate a company’s share price and boost its earnings per share — metrics that often guide lucrative executive bonuses.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/aalsin/2017/02/28/shareholders-should-be-required-to-vote-on-stock-buybacks
Also: Are Stock Buybacks Starving the Economy?, The Atlantic (July 21, 2018)
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/07/are-stock-buybacks-starving-the-economy/566387/

In an exhaustive financial analysis of buybacks [see link below], the consultancy McKinsey found that companies would generally be better off issuing dividends or increasing investment instead. Buybacks also might distort earnings-per-share calculations and other measures of profitability and value.

https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/how-share-repurchases-boost-earnings-without-improving-returns