FYI: Gautam Khanna’s philosophy of “respond instead of react” is one he learned as a teenager mountaineering in the Indian Himalayas. “When you’re going into the elements at very high altitude, above the tree line, and snow-capped year-round, it’s all about preparation,” says Khanna, who moved to the U.S. after high school. “It’s understanding the risks and understanding how are you going to handle those risks when they arrive.”
The same can be said for fixed-income markets, where unexpected economic news or government policy can trigger losses. Khanna, who has been the lead manager of the $606 million BNY Mellon Insight Core Plus bond fund (ticker: DCPAX) since its 2010 inception, credits a rigorous investment process for the fund’s consistent returns. Its institutional shares have returned an average of 3.2% a year over the past five years, better than 92% of intermediate-term bonds. (Retail shares became available in 2018.)
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/bny-mellon-bond-fund-51559273407?refsec=funds
M*Snapshot DCPAX:
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/DCPAX/quote.html

Thanks John for posting the newsletter. I always enjoy reading what Dr. Madell has to write. I am most happy to see he posted his model portfolio asset allocations. Being an asset allocator, myself, this is something that I enjoyed seeing.
One of the ways I deal with fear (and greed) is by adjusting my asset allocation mix.
As many on the board my know, I recently moved from an asset allocation of 15% cash, 35% income and 50% equity to 20% cash, 40% income and 40% equity. This required me to reduce my equity allocation by 10% and raise both my cash and income allocations by 5% each. This was mostly done due to my age; but, also because of the current market climate.
This new allocation provides me sufficient income, allows for some growth of principal, over time; and, if a cash draw is needed, above portfolio income generation, then there is ample cash available. Plus, I also have enough cash available for new investment purposes if felt warranted.
Again, thanks for posting Dr. Madell's newsletter. I enjoyed reading it.
Old_Skeet

I hate to say this, but the author of this article should be ashamed. Look at the long-term history of this fund including before the 2009 recovery began compared to Berkshire or the S&P 500 and there's no comparison. You can do this by either clicking the "Maximum" link or entering an earlier start date on this chart which goes back to September, 1999 if you adjust it, then add the S&P 500 Benchmark and Berkshire:
quotes.morningstar.com/chart/fund/chart?t=TEFQX&region=usa&culture=en-US
To compare a pure tech fund to Berkshire or the broad market is absurd to begin with but especially misleading if you don't include the fund's previous history before 2009 as we've been in a super bull market for tech ever since. Since 1999, this fund even lags the average tech fund, which is an apter comparison.

FYI: 6 investing lessons you can learn from tech investor Kevin Landis.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/forget-warren-buffett-this-fund-manager-has-walloped-the-stock-market-over-the-past-decade-2019-05-23/print
M* Snapshot TEFQX:
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/TEFQX/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot TEFQX:
https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/fund/tefqx
TEFQX Is Ranked #9 In The (T) Sector By U.S. News & World Report:
https://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/technology/firsthand-technology-opportunities-fund/tefqx

https://money.usnews.com/investing/buy-and-hold-strategy/slideshows/7-best-vanguard-funds-to-buy-and-hold
Couple of funds mentioned
Vti
Vt
Vanguard Growth Index Fund (VIGAX)
Vanguard mid cap fund
Vanguard Mid-Cap Index Fund (VIMAX)
Vanguard total bond funds
VMBEX
Anyone has vmbex? in portfolio
7 Best Vanguard Funds to Buy and Hold
Investors seeking a one-stop investment broker will find a choice of low-fee funds ideal for a balanced and diversified portfolio.
By Barbara Friedberg, Contributor May 29, 2019
U.S. News & World Report
More
Young businessman multitasking using laptop
Credit
Picking low-fee index funds.
Index fund investing is the practice of buying low-fee funds that own the same investments as those in popular unmanaged market indices such as the S&P 500 or Dow Jones Industrial Average. Innovator Vanguard offers no-load, low-fee mutual and exchange-traded funds for investors along with actively managed funds. Known as a champion of the small investor, Vanguard launched the first index mutual fund in 1976; this fund is now known as the Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund (ticker: VFINX). With an asset allocation in mind, an investor can begin crafting a suitable investment portfolio. Here are seven of the best Vanguard index funds to buy and hold.
Next:Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund (
Office buildings, car park, transport hub.
Credit
Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund (VTWAX)
This comprehensive Vanguard index fund offers shareholders exposure to the world investment markets spanning the U.S., developed and emerging foreign markets for a low fee. David Dietze, founder and president of Point View Management in Summit, New Jersey, recommends VTWAX due to the fund's broad diversification and low cost. The expense ratio is 0.1% of assets under management and requires a $3,000 minimum investment. For investors who prefer ETFs, this fund is also available as Vanguard Total World Stock ETF (VT) with a 0.09% fee. VTWAX's 10-year and five-year average returns are 12.27% and 6.65%, respectively. For investors seeking to complete their stock market allocation with one fund, this global offering is difficult to beat.
Next:
1 of 10
Barbara Friedberg, Contributor
BrandFuse

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/926678/000089418919003288/brandes05292019497e.htm
497 1 brandes05292019497e.htm BRANDES NEXTSHARES VALUE FUND 497E
BRANDES VALUE NEXTSHARES
(The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC - BVNSC)
__________________________________________________________
Supplement dated May 29, 2019 to
Prospectus dated January 31, 2019
______________________________________________________________________
Brandes Investment Partners, L.P., the Advisor to the Brandes Value NextShares (the “NextShares Fund”), has recommended, and the Board of Trustees of Brandes Investment Trust has approved, the liquidation and termination of the NextShares Fund. The Advisor’s recommendation was primarily based on the fact that the Advisor does not anticipate that the NextShares Fund will experience meaningful growth in the foreseeable future. The liquidation is expected to occur on June 28, 2019. As a result, the Advisor and the Board believe that the Liquidation of the Fund is in the best interests of shareholders.
Effective June 3, 2019, the NextShares Fund will no longer accept orders for new creation units. Shares of the NextShares Fund are listed on The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC. Trading in shares of the NextShares Fund will be halted prior to market open on June 21, 2019. In addition, effective immediately, the Advisor will begin an orderly transition of the NextShares Fund’s portfolio securities to cash and cash equivalents and the NextShares Fund will cease investing in assets in accordance with its stated investment objective and policies. Prior to June 21, 2019, shareholders may only be able to sell their shares to certain broker-dealers, and there is no assurance that there will be a market for the NextShares Fund’s shares during that time period. Customary brokerage charges may apply to such transactions.
On or about June 28, 2019, the NextShares Fund will liquidate its assets and distribute cash pro rata to all remaining shareholders. These distributions are taxable events. Shareholders should contact their tax adviser to discuss the income tax consequences of the liquidation. In addition, these payments to shareholders will include accrued capital gains and dividends, if any. As calculated on June 28, 2019, the NextShares Fund’s net asset value will reflect the costs of closing the Fund. Once the distributions are complete, the NextShares Fund will terminate.
Please contact the Fund at (800) 395-3807 if you have questions.
Please retain this Supplement with the Prospectus.

The S&P 500 is up about 300% since its March 2009 lows, yet its oversold. Go figure.

FYI: As shown in our Trend Analyzer snapshot below, all six of the most closely watched US equity index ETFs are now trading in oversold territory. The dot in the "trading range" section of the snapshot shows where each ETF is currently trading within its range relative to its 50-day moving average. A move into the green shading of the chart represents oversold territory, which is more than one standard deviation below the ETF's 50-day moving average. The dark green shading represents extreme oversold territory, which is between two and three standard deviations below the 50-DMA. The Russell 2,000 (IWM) small-cap ETF is the most oversold, while the remaining five are all in roughly the same position just above extreme territory.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bespokepremium.com/interactive/posts/think-big-blog/us-equity-indices-now-solidly-oversold

FYI: Heading into 2019, one of the biggest fears among investors was the idea of an “earnings recession,” a situation where corporate profits decline for two quarters or more in a row. A few months later, those concerns are starting to fade.
The latest figures from FactSet suggest that first quarter earnings for S&P 500 firms will be down 0.5% from a year ago, much less than the 3.9% decline analysts were expecting at the end of March.
Moreover, with 76% of companies beating estimates by an average of 5.5%, there is a good chance that when the earnings reporting season is officially over, first quarter profit growth will end up in positive territory. About 10% of S&P 500 companies have yet to report.
Flat earnings for the first quarter is a much better situation than investors had feared only weeks ago, and raises hopes that full-year 2019 earnings can grow by 3.3% or more, as analysts currently expect.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.etf.com/sections/features-and-news/consumer-financial-sector-etfs-lead-way

"..the average return of the S&P with dividends is 11.45% while municipal bonds averaged 6.03% during the same time period."
And so yes, munis will have lower volatility due to lower expected returns.
If you are in the very top Income tax brackets, muni's become a lot more interesting. But most of us don't hit those levels.

(The Closing Bell will be updated sometime after 4:00 PM CDST to include the latest updates from IBD and Bloomberg Evening Briefing.)
FYI: The S&P 500 fell Tuesday, as the dimming likelihood of an imminent trade deal upended earlier gains and sent investors seeking less risky assets like U.S. government bonds.
The broad index was recently down 0.4%, giving up an earlier advance of as much as half a percentage point to put the S&P 500 on pace for another tough week. Losses widened among shares of consumer staples, utilities and energy companies throughout the session, more than offsetting gains from communication stocks.
The S&P 500 fell 0.84%, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average shed 237 points, or 0.93%, to 255347. The Nasdaq Composite also reversed an earlier lead, falling 0.39% in recent trading.
Investors, meanwhile, appeared to be taking on less-risky assets, such as U.S. government bonds, pushing the yield on the benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury down to a fresh 19-month low.
Consumer staples shed 1.2% to lead the S&P 500 lower. Food companies notched some of the biggest losses, with Kraft Heinz sliding 6.3%. Kraft, which said last week it wasn’t in compliance with Nasdaq’s financial disclosure rules, has fallen 32% this year due to a regulatory probe into its procurement practices.
Utilities also struggled, shedding 0.9% in recent trading, while energy companies fell 0.7%.
Meanwhile, communication stocks were the only S&P 500 sector to still be in the green in late-afternoon trading. Shares of some media companies were helping to support the sector, along with videogame makers after a Goldman Sachs analyst said Activision is on the cusp of an earnings inflection, upgrading the stock to a buy.
Shares of Activision were up 2.6% in recent trading.
Overseas, the Stoxx Europe 600 fell 0.2, snapping a two-session winning streak, while stocks in Asia mostly gained. The Shanghai Composite added 0.6%, Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index was up 0.4% and Japan’s Nikkei was up 0.4%.
Regards,
Ted
Bloomberg Evening Briefing:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-28/your-evening-briefing
MarketWatch:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/stock-index-futures-edge-lower-as-trade-worries-hang-over-market-2019-05-28/print
WSJ:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/investors-grow-jittery-over-italy-11559053435
Bloomberg:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-27/asia-stocks-set-for-muted-open-dollar-edges-up-markets-wrap?srnd=premium
IBD:
https://www.investors.com/market-trend/stock-market-today/stocks-fade-sp-500-today-ends-lower/
CNBC:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/28/stock-markets-wall-street-in-focus-amid-lingering-trade-worries.html
Reuters:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-stocks/tech-gains-keep-wall-street-afloat-idUSKCN1SY15F
U.K:
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-stocks/ftse-100-miners-capitalise-on-iron-ore-surge-galliford-jumps-idUKKCN1SY0L2
Europe:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-stocks/european-shares-retreat-led-by-banks-on-italian-budget-woes-idUSKCN1SY0SE
Asia:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/asian-shares-up-in-muted-trading-after-trump-visit-to-japan-2019-05-28/print
Bonds:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/28/us-bonds-wall-street-set-to-monitor-economic-data-treasury-auctions.html
Currencies:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/28/forex-market-eu-elections-trumps-japan-visit-in-focus.html
Oil:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/28/oil-market-chinese-economy-opec-supply-cuts-in-focus.html
Gold
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/28/gold-market-dollar-moves-eu-elections-in-focus.html
WSJ: Markets At A Glance:
https://markets.wsj.com/us
Major ETFs % Change:
https://www.barchart.com/etfs-funds/etf-monitor
SPDR's Sector Tracker:
http://www.sectorspdr.com/sectorspdr/tools/sector-tracker
SPDR's Bloomberg Sector Performance Pie Chart:
https://www.bloomberg.com/markets/sectors
Current Futures:
https://finviz.com/futures.ashx

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4266599-write-munis-comparing-historical-municipal-bond-returns-stock-returns
Do Not Write Off Munis: Comparing Historical Municipal Bond Returns To Stock Returns
May. 27, 2019 7:39 AM ETAFB, BFK...9 Comments6 Likes
Summary
Municipal bonds.
S&P 500 stock market index.
S&P 500 versus municipal bonds Risk and volatility.
Average vs. annualized returns.
Do taxes really make a difference?
So ~7%vs 6% annual return for 25 yrs...

17 monthly dividend to buy hold forever
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brettowens/2019/05/26/17-monthly-dividends-to-buy-and-hold-forever/#1d6c416a48c7
Investors in turn often build complicated dividend calendars that get knocked out of whack whenever they ever have to cut back on certain stocks. May’s dividend check might be enough, for instance but June won’t be, forcing the investor to withdraw from his retirement fund, shaving away future income-generating potential.

Bonds are important to mitigate risk as one approach retirement or as the students start to pay for their college tuition with 529 funds. I agree the bond's yields are no where near the historical levels. Most average investors do not have access to other vehicles without incurring additional risk.

Hi Guys,
The uncertainties in sequence of returns is a persistent issue to portfolio survival. The level of accceptable risk for an individual coupled to portfolio survival also is an issue. Some folks would be satisfied with a 95% success likelihood while others would not be comfortable with those odds. We’re all different especially when risk and uncertainties enter the equation.
One tool available to all of us that allows us to explore the vicissitudes of these risks is Monte Carlo computer simulations. That tool allows us to explore countless what-if scenarios in just a few minutes. Thousands of scenarios are examined within the simulation for the given input and a likelihood (probability) of success and/or failure is the simulation output. That should help in the decision processs. And it’s fun.
I have run many simulations myself and these have indeed been useful before taking any action. I have posted this recommendation many times in reply to earlier questions, but it is still worth repeating. Please go to the Portfolio Visualizer and use it’s Monte Carlo tool. Don’t be intimidated by the math. Here is the Link:
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/monte-carlo-simulation#analysisResults
Try many what-if cases. Each will help identify how robust to shortfalls your portfolio really is. It just might shock you. This insight will permit you to make adjustments in your portfolio’s construction and should help you to gain confidence in its survivability odds. Changes can be made to improve those odds as required. Good luck. Monte Carlo codes are great tools when exploring the unknown and unknowable future.
Best Regards

In doing a recent Instant Xray analysis of my portfolio I am currently holding, within my equity allocation, a little better than five percent in emerging markets. The two emerging market funds that I hold are NEWFX and DWGAX plus some global asset allocation funds along with some other funds that have some emerging market exposure. I'm thinking, for me now being in retirement, a seven percent position in emerging markets would be all that I'd want due to their volatility and performance over the past five year period. In doing a five year look back, NEWFX has gained an average of 3.2% per year while DWGAX has lost an average of -0.8% per year. However, for the past three year period they have both performed with average annual returns of 10.4% and 6.50% respectively. With this, they both have been underperforming funds when compaired to other funds held within the growth area my portfolio. It will be interesting to see what the next five year period brings. For me, they are both considered a contrarian investment play.
From Xray, within equities, I'm currently 1.27% Latin America, 0.42% Europe Emerging, 0.49% Africa/Middle East, and 3.18% Asia Emerging which brings my emerging market exposure to 5.36%. With this, I've got room for some more emerging market exposure before reaching my seven percent threshold. I'm also considering adding to my commodity strategy fund as many emerging market economies are also major commodity producers.

"During the year ended December 31, 2018, the volume of the fund’s activity in options, based on underlying notional amounts, was generally between 8% and 15% of net assets."

In the back section for individual securities, the option written amounted to 0.4%, and that seems to be much smaller than the 8-15% of the net assets. Am I looking at two different items?

The quote is at the tail end Note 3, describing how options may be used. My guess, and it is only a guess, is that what you're seeing is the difference between notational value (how much impact an option has) with market value (the price of the option).
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/050615/what-difference-between-notional-value-and-market-value.asp
Regarding the purported boilerplate nature of the Note: It jibed nicely with hank's original description, which sounded like covered calls (use of options to generate income at the cost of forfeiting upside potential).

Thanks to @msf for the SEC link. It’s much better than the (SEC) one I uncovered about an hour earlier - but still time-consuming and difficult to navigate. I managed to pull-up perhaps eight or ten reports for PRWCX. And thanks to @Sven for the opportunity to go back and do all the reading. :)
- Most significant is this reference to covered call overwriting by David Giroux in PRWCX’s Semi-Annual Report of June, 2013. (Since he references the last five years I saw no need to plow back through those earlier reports.)
“Before we review the portfolio, we want to briefly discuss the Capital Appreciation Fund’s covered call overwriting strategy, which we have employed for more than five years. Covered call overwriting involves buying a stock and then selling a call option—a contract whereby we agree at a future date to sell the stock at a predetermined (strike) price. In return for selling this call option, we are paid a premium (typically a 2% to 5% annualized incremental yield) that provides extra income to the fund. While the strategy caps our upside in an individual stock (usually 10% or higher), it provides incremental income that can enhance total returns, lower our downside risk, and generally has produced excellent risk-adjusted returns. Over the last five years, this strategy (a return combination of underlying stocks, calls, and dividend income) has generated a stronger return than the fund itself and has done so with less risk. However, in the first six months of 2013, this strategy produced subpar total and risk-adjusted returns mainly due to poor stock selection. Given the excellent long-term risk-adjusted returns of this strategy, we believe it will continue to play a meaningful role in your fund. As of June 30, 2013, we had calls written on about 14% of our equity holdings.”. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/793347/000120677413003000/srcaf_ncsrs.htm
- Another interesting reference involves futures positions in his Annual Report from December 2014:
“In addition, we have initiated futures positions in two European indexes that give us exposure to the European equity market, but we have effectively hedged much of the currency risk associated with these investments so that we have generated local currency market returns (and thus have a better risk-adjusted return for U.S. investors). The combination of these investments is still relatively modest at only about 3% of your fund’s assets and is unlikely to become greater than 5% under most circumstances.”. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/793347/000120677415000583/arcaf_ncsr.htm
- A breakdown of the fund’s positioning included in this (above) report shows -1% “options”. Adding up the numbers suggests that this -1% represents a short position in some security.
- There’s a reference to investing in leveraged loans in his June, 2017 Report. I don’t have knowledge of how risky these are - but it’s not something I’d normally have thought the fund a big player in:
“Our high yield and leveraged loan holdings have declined from 17.9% of assets at the end of 2016 to 13.1% at the end of June due to a combination of selective sales, maturities, bonds being called, and choosing not to consent to repricings of leveraged loans. While we are continuing to buy a couple of high-quality, idiosyncratic high yield bonds, we would still expect our exposure to decline in the second half of the year—in the absence of a correction in spreads.”. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/793347/000120677417002589/srcaf_ncsrs.htm
- On a final note, a recent move into Amazon was (by Giroux’s admission) far outside the fund’s normal (valuation driven) approach. My suspicion (only a suspicion) is that fund bloat may be one driving force behind this purchase:
“We readily acknowledge that Amazon is not a classic Capital Appreciation stock, as it lacks the traditional valuation support and easily quantifiable downside found in almost every other equity investment that we have made ... While Amazon is not classically inexpensive, the size of the market opportunity available and Amazon’s sustainable competitive advantage in both cloud computing and e-commerce make it unlike anything in which Capital Appreciation has invested before either. We strongly believe that our ownership of Amazon is in the best interests of our shareholders ...” . (December 2016). https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/793347/000120677417000506/arcaf_ncsr.htm
PS - Getting late. If any of the above links don’t work or are inaccurate, let me know and I’ll make appropriate corrections.

@msf, thank you for the reference to the annual reports. I had read the manager's discussion section and have not located the statement above.

"During the year ended December 31, 2018, the volume of the fund’s activity in options, based on underlying notional amounts, was generally between 8% and 15% of net assets."

In the back section for individual securities, the option written amounted to 0.4%, and that seems to be much smaller than the 8-15% of the net assets. Am I looking at two different items?

@johnN, Ted posted an interesting article from Vanguard that is worth reading on that subject. In a nutshell, International, which I assume includes EM, should outpace US over the next 10 years, 8.5 to 5 percent. So, seems like over weighting international/ em may be the way to go.