Many load families, like many noload families, enter into bilateral agreements with individual brokerages to sell a class of funds NTF. For example, LCEAX is available NTF at Fidelity but is sold with a load at TD Ameritrade.. Likewise, the same noload fund may be sold without a fee at one brokerage, but you'll have to pay a fee at another brokerage. For example, HOVLX, NTF at TD Ameritrade, but Fidelity charges a fee.
The best thing you can hope to see in a prospectus or SAI concerning NTF load waivers is just that the fund is allowed to enter into these agreements with brokerages.
For example, Blackrock permits front end load waivers for shares sold through "Financial Intermediaries who have entered into an agreement with the Distributor and have been approved by the Distributor to offer Fund shares to self-directed investment brokerage accounts that may or may not charge a transaction fee".
http://quote.morningstar.com/fund-filing/Prospectus/2017/11/28/t.aspx?t=MDDVX&ft=485BPOS&d=b0560dd20f97785f3e555c63cbc03440 (MDDVX prospectus)
Similarly, PIMCO allows load waivers in its SAIs: "Each Fund may sell its Class A shares at net asset value without a sales charge to ... client accounts of broker-dealers ... with which the Distributor or PIMCO has an agreement for the use of Class A shares ... in particular situations in which the broker-dealer will make Class A shares available for purchase at NAV."
http://quote.morningstar.com/fund-filing/SAI/2018/3/23/t.aspx?t=PONAX&ft=497&d=081d50585090e2443fe13f6a9c05c8c4 (PIMCO SAI)
broker-dealer = financial intermediary
has an agreement = entered into an agreement
particular situations = self-directed brokerage accounts
Sure, nothing required PIMCO to offer A shares load waived at Fidelity or elsewhere. If it hadn't though, it would have been bucking an industry trend by moving from no load to load. That's what the industry was doing 20 years ago (e.g. American Century, Invesco adding loads), not now.
PIMCO was already selling A shares NTF, so this was simply a question of where, not if, A shares would be available NTF. Terminating NTF arrangements with brokerages would have been the bigger change; keeping the funds available NTF maintained the status quo.
Was there no plan at PIMCO, or simply no plan that the rep was at liberty to tell you about?

@expatsp, I'm going to go with there is much more probability of down side than up. I'm no expert, but I personally wouldn't add anything right now... except for CDs.
As far as I'm concerned, if the market is going to drop 10, 15, 20%, let it happen asap. This is playing mind games on my retirement thinking.

My own investing history goes back only as far as 2003. 15 years. The bull is long in the tooth. I had figured that uncle Donald's cukoo-nuts pronouncements were the MAIN factor in this topsy-turvy market, currently. Politics, not fundamentals. But the market has been disconnected from fundamentals for quite a while, it must be said. Don't mind me, I'm just typing out loud.

reminds me similar Winter 2007... later everything crashing very quickly over next few months in 2008
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/dow-may-already-bear-market-185419194.html

FYI: Vident Investment Advisory today has launched a first-of-its-kind ETF tracking the U.S. REIT market, though it can also include other types of real estate companies. The U.S. Diversified Real Estate ETF (PPTY) has a four-pronged approach to REITs, targeting property type, geographic diversification, leverage and governance.
The fund lists on the NYSE Arca and comes with an expense ratio of 0.53%.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.etf.com/sections/daily-etf-watch/new-reit-etf-has-regional-twist

FYI: Real estate funds can play an important role in diversifying a portfolio, because real estate returns tend not to be too highly correlated with either the broader stock market or the bond market. Also, because real estate investment trusts tend to pay healthy dividends, these stocks are often seen as income plays. That has broadened their appeal in recent years, as low interest rates have left many investors seeking income wherever they can find it.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.morningstar.com/articles/857081/our-favorite-domestic-reit-funds.html

FYI: Buy and hold isn’t a perfect strategy. If you convinced somebody in the fall of 2007 that this was the right way to invest, they’d have a bone to pick with you, as they’d watch U.S. stocks crash by nearly 60% over the following sixteen months.
But if this person were able to hold on, even if they bought on the day that the market topped, they would have received 7.48% per year over the next 10.5 years. Not so terrible. The most recent decade actually worked out okay for investors, even if it wasn’t easy.
Regards,
Ted

Now both GABCX and GADVX are available with a tf at E-Trade with a 25 basis point difference in expense ratios. Still hoping GADVX will go back to a ntf fund as it was several years ago.

Hi all --
Appealing to the wisdom and experience of the good folks here, looking for thoughts and pros/cons:
1. Does it make sense to hold global bonds (what is the rationale)?
2. Does it make sense to have your one bond fund holding be a global bond fund if you are getting domestic bond exposure via asset allocation funds (currently 50% of my and my wife's portfolios)?
Much obliged.
D.S.

Overall, I'm about -2.5% YTD, due to some of my largest holdings having a bad start to 2018, such as PIMIX, VWENX, VWIAX, USMV and FMIJX. I hold a few other stocks and they have been beat up this year as well. My bond funds have been a mixed bag, with some holding up better than others.

Of my holdings, biggest surprises: YTD: POAGX up 11.4%, OPGIX up 8.6%, ARTTX up 5.2%
Biggest disappointments: YTD: OLVAX down 5.7%, LCCAX down 4.5%,

@MFO Members: "You only need to read the last paragraph, this is just an advertisement for a financial adviser." Mike is right on the money, this is nothing more than a spin on the original article that appeared in the WSJ.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/15/your-money/how-many-mutual-funds-routinely-rout-the-market-zero.html

FYI: Most people think of bonds as being appropriate for those who need regular current income without a huge amount of risk. Yet some bonds are structured specifically not to pay income currently. The special ways in which these zero coupon bonds work can make them appropriate for very different uses than the typical fixed-income security.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.cetusnews.com/business/Should-I-Invest-in-Zero-Coupon-Bonds-.BkYgQZE5G.html

Hello,
This report is coming from the Gamboa Rain Forest Resort, Panama.
Old_Skeets market barometer closed the week with a reading of 156 which indicates that the S&P 500 Index is undervalued based upon the barometer's metrics.
I'm looking to see a reading around 162 before I start to consider buying.
Traveling and have limited wi-fi access so my
my post will be few.

A weighted average is beyond my pay grade. Teachers gave me passing grades in math as gifts. Holdings:
PRWCX = 35.73% of portf. and is down -0.99% ytd.
Next: MAPOX, at 18.66% of portf is down -5.27%. HURTS.
Next: PREMX, 15.13% of portf. is down -1.71%. (EM bonds doing better than my balanced fund. Go figure.)
PRSNX 9.3% of portf.is down -0.18%.
PRIDX is 8.04% of portf. and is up by +0.69%.
PRDSX is 5.86% of portf. and is up by +0.60%.
VSCIX (wife's 403b) is 3.33% of portf. and is down by -1.96%.
PNM (electric utility) is 1.99% of portf. and is down ytd by -9.23%.
SFGIX is 1.96% of portf and is down by -2.28%.

Down 0.1% YTD with 72% equity, 18% in a commodities etf and about 10% cash. I've been back and forth between commodities and equity twice this year but otherwise no trades. POAGX is my best position +11.4% and its a sizeable position for me whereas MSCFX is my worst position -5.7% and its a small position.

More importantly to me, how are people's portfolios holding up? Individual funds will have their day, what holds up now still may not be the best option to hold over time.
So if anyone wants to share, how's the portfolio doing YTD now that we have seen the "Trump bump" and the start of the "Trump dump"?
I'll throw it out there. After yesterday my 50/50 combination of Schwab robo (62:38), down -1.6%, and my self managed (about 40:60), down -0.3% gives me a total loss of -0.9% YTD.
A benchmark I use is the TRP 60:40 retirement fund TRRBX,down -1.3% and the 50:50 fund TRRGX also down -1.3%.
And just because some like to measure against it, the S&P 500 (VFINX) is down -2.8

" ... In fact, not a single mutual fund has beaten the market since 2009. "
There's your first clue that the writer is statistically challenged. Is the question about outperformance since 2009 (i.e. 2010 to the present), or since March 2009? The start of the bull market is often pegged as March 9, 2009.
Then there's the question of what "the stock market" means: S&P 500, S&P 1500, Wilshire 5000, MSCI All Country World Index (ACWI), .... For kicks, let's use the S&P 500. Growth of $10K (using M* charts) :
March 9, 2009 through March 23, 2018
VPMCX: $52,028 vs. S&P 500: $45,832
Jan 1, 2010 through March 23, 2018
VPMCX: $31,087 vs. S&P 500: $27,587
Though the lead question (regardless of starting date or market index implied) is not what the article is about. The article asks whether any fund landed in the top quartile every year since the bull market began. Again there's the question of whether this means calendar year or years ending each March 8th.
Then there's the question: top quartile of what? Peer funds (same category) or all broad-based domestic stock funds? But wait, it gets worse. While the article says that the universe studied was broad based domestic stock funds, it writes about two small cap energy funds that remained in the top quartile for five successive one year periods. Bzzt, wrong universe (of funds).
The bottom line is that, lousy writing and lousy analysis aside, it's starting with a lousy premise: that a good fund is one that lands in the top quartile year in, year out. That would rule out index funds.
VFINX (among large cap blend peers) ranked in the 54th percentile in 2009, 31st percentile in 2010, 38th percentile in 2012, 44th percentile in 2013, 29th percentile in 2016, 33rd percentile in 2017, and 29th percentile YTD. Since 2008, VFINX landed in the top quartile only 3 times (1/3).
Don't get ripped off by bogus metrics.
Edit: I was working on this as Catch posted other comments. Interesting that we both cited VPMCX. I was originally going to use FCNTX (another of Catch's funds), but while it outperformed the S&P 500 from 1/1/2010 on, it slightly underperformed since March 9, 2009. Still, a very good fund.

Well, I have not posted for awhile; but just could not resist this one.
The writer does not indicate what benchmark is being used; so, I will presume the market common benchmark of the SP-500 is the reference.
I'll offer this chart of active managed funds of which this house has had money invested at one time or another. I'm sure there are other funds. These are just 3 with which I am familiar.
Chart time frame = March 6, 2009 - March 23, 2018, just about 9 exact. You be the judge of the info in the article. NOTE: chart wouldn't set today for time frame, but you'll be able to judge with your eyes from March, 2009.
http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?SPY,FCNTX,FDGRX,VPMCX&p=6&O=011000
IMHO, the article is quite weak as to offering any evidence.
Regards,
Catch

FYI: Users and lawmakers outraged over privacy and politics pose the steepest challenge yet to Facebook. How can the social network changes ?
Regards,
Ted
http://www.cetusnews.com/business/Facebook-Comes-Under-Siege.r1Hj28VQqz.html
Facebook Shares Look Like a Bargain:
http://www.cetusnews.com/business/Facebook-Shares-Look-Like-a-Bargain.HybY6U4mqM.html
Facebook Shows How Not to Handle a Crisis:
http://www.cetusnews.com/business/Facebook-Shows-How-Not-to-Handle-a-Crisis.H14aUE75f.html
Facebook Shareholders Force Data Privacy Vote:
http://www.cetusnews.com/business/Facebook-Shareholders-Force-Data-Privacy-Vote.rJJ68475f.html