Do these ETFs deduct 10% and give it to the poor for tithing? I guess not:
https://thegospelcoalition.org/article/7-reasons-christians-not-required-to-tithe
or maybe:
https://washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/08/29/we-were-never-closed-joel-osteens-houston-megachurch-disputes-claims-it-shut-its-doors/?utm_term=.82409523c2a6
The Lord works in mysterious ways.

Ah. Thanks v much for specific example. Interesting. I bet that was not unique. That's a nontrivial bid-ask.
I just checked at ML and for AOR at the moment it's 44.24 and 44.28, 4 cents. ~1% if my arithmetic is good today. Vol 56k. I did not try and trade a small quantity, so I suppose worse is possible. I did not check at Fido.
Given the kind of entity it is, such a nice diverse mix of other etfs (AOA, AOK, and AOM are very similar, different proportions), I guess it should be buy-hold and not something to consider trading.
But your point is taken and I will remember what I have learned when I suggest it in the future. Thanks much.

@Wholly Terrier: In the future , would appreciate if would link article .
Regards,
Ted
https://corporate1.morningstar.com/ResearchLibrary/article/817415/morningstar-prospects---q2-2017/

@Wholly Terrier: In the future , would appreciate if would link article .
Regards,
Ted
https://corporate1.morningstar.com/ResearchLibrary/article/817415/morningstar-prospects---q2-2017/

Will read up on the link. My only direct experience from a year back was losing 1.5% on a market trade of 500 shares due to bid-ask spread. Limit order penny below ask did not go through for a long time and was forced to enter market order because I wanted to get out to fund another position. Never happened to me for high volume ETFs. Note that some days the volume can be dramatically lower than the average volume. Could be one-off.

Thanks @Maurice for posting this.
"Buffett’s firm pulled the trigger on a 2011 options deal that lets it buy 700 million shares — at a 70 percent discount to its share price — all for bailing out the bank when it was facing questions about its soundness."
Note that Buffett was patient and waited 6 years for his bet to pay off. And note that he invested in the bank when many considered it a "falling knife" and were fleeing. But Buffet's patience paid off and he gets the last laugh.
I saw him on Bloomberg today and, although he's 15-20 years older than me, he appears to have more energy. Yikes. All that CocaCola I guess. :)

You can see the full list here -
corporate1.morningstar.com/ResearchLibrary/article/817415/morningstar-prospects---q2-2017/
Hood River Small-Cap Growth HRSMX has been briefly mentioned on MFO a couple times. Anyone have an opinion (other than investor shares are expensive)?

If you think M-Star's current ratings are shaky, you are going to love this -
"The number of funds that receive an Analyst Rating is limited by the size of the Morningstar analyst team. To expand the number of funds we cover, we have developed a machine-learning model that uses the decision-making processes of our analysts, their past ratings decisions, and the data used to support those decisions. The machine-learning model is then applied to the "uncovered" fund universe and creates the Morningstar Quantitative Rating™ for funds (the Quantitative Rating), which is analogous to the rating a Morningstar analyst might assign to the fund if an analyst covered the fund. These quantitative ratings predictions make up what we call the Morningstar Quantitative Rating. With this new quantitative approach, we can rate nearly 6 times more funds in the U.S. market."
As far as I can tell, it is not satire.
corporate1.morningstar.com/ResearchLibrary/article/813568/morningstar-quantitative-rating-for-funds-methodology/

@Maurice: I believe if spent a little more time reading the stories that have already been linked, instead of slapping tabloid NY Post sneakers stories, you wouldn't run into this problem and embarrass yourself ! Ted 52 Reads-Maurice 29 ! You lose !!!
Regards,
Ted

@Maurice: :(
Regards,
Ted
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/35002/buffett-becomes-bac-biggest-shareholders#latest

Pardon ignorance, but not following --- how does volume affect much of anything in this case? They are made up of a variety of other etfs ....
Ah, if you had a mil (20k sh) in AOA and wanted to sell it all at once, that would depress your price?
Is this informative?
https://sixfigureinvesting.com/2015/08/determining-liquidity-of-low-volume-etf-etn/

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1500604/000119312517273155/d447144d497.htm
497 1 d447144d497.htm 497
Janus Detroit Street Trust
The Health and Fitness ETF
Supplement dated August 30, 2017
to Currently Effective Prospectus and
Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”)
The Board of Trustees of Janus Detroit Street Trust (the “Trust”) approved a plan to liquidate and terminate The Health and Fitness ETF (the “Fund”), effective on or about October 2, 2017 (the “Liquidation Date”). After the close of business on or about September 26, 2017, the Fund will no longer accept creation orders. Trading in the Fund will be halted prior to market open on or about September 27, 2017. Proceeds of the liquidation are currently scheduled to be sent to shareholders on or about October 3, 2017. Termination of the Fund is expected to occur as soon as practicable following the liquidation.
Prior to and through the close of trading on The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“NASDAQ”) on September 26, 2017, the Fund will undertake the process of closing down and liquidating its portfolio. This process may result in the Fund holding cash and securities that may not be consistent with its investment objective and strategies. During this period, the Fund is likely to incur higher tracking error than is typical for the Fund. Furthermore, during the time between market open on September 27, 2017 and the Liquidation Date, because shares will not be traded on NASDAQ, there may not be a trading market for the Fund’s shares.
Shareholders may sell shares of the Fund on NASDAQ until the market close on September 26, 2017 and may incur typical transaction fees from their broker-dealer. Shares held as of the close of business on the Liquidation Date will be automatically liquidated for cash at the current net asset value. Proceeds of the liquidation will be paid through the broker-dealer with whom you hold shares of the Fund. Shareholders will generally recognize a capital gain or loss on the liquidation proceeds. The Fund may or may not, depending upon the Fund’s circumstances, pay one or more dividends or other distributions prior to or along with the liquidation payments. Please consult your personal tax advisor about the potential tax consequences.
After the Liquidation Date, all references to the Fund will be deemed to have been removed from the SAI.

I was talking about the ETFs of ETFs David mentioned. Average daily trading volumes from M*
AOR: 131,000
AOK: 72,000
AOM: 125,000
AOA: 71,000
That's not a lot of volume. Of course, I am aware of the highly traded iShare and other ETFs, and have used them to get sector or market exposure.

I have minor issues with his methodology and definitions. Nevertheless, his conclusions are reasonably valid. Though rather than saying that there's an inverse relationship (negative correlation) between analyst rating and actual future performance, I'd be more inclined as to describe the relationship as none or random.
M* says that "The Analyst Rating is based on the analyst's conviction in the fund's ability to outperform its peer group and/or relevant benchmark on a risk-adjusted basis over the long term."
The author looked at raw performance, not risk-adjusted performance. So that's one issue. Another is related to the definition of analyst ratings. Obviously M* isn't really looking at a fund's ability to outperform its relevant benchmark. Else how could it give VFINX a gold rating, when with near certainty it will underpeform its relevant benchmark over any time period? M* is really rating funds against their peers.
With that in mind, a better (or at least different) analysis would be to look at the percentage of gold, silver, bronze, neutral, and negative funds that outperformed their peers over his selected five year period (1/1/2012 - 12/31/2016). Using this metric, the results are virtually independent of rating.
6/27 (22%) of large cap gold funds failed to beat their category peer average. (Two additional funds were merged out of existence: Vanguard Tax-Managed G&I, and Morgan Stanley Focus Growth).
3/15 (20%) of large cap silver funds failed to beat their peer average.
3/11 (27%) of large cap bronze funds failed to beat their peer average.
No neutral funds (out of 11 survivors) failed to beat their peers, though Columbia Value and Restructuring (UMBIX) and Putnam Voyager (PVOYX) were merged away.
The author reviews only one of the two negatively rated funds. I assume that's APGAX. Aside from a grouping of just one fund not being meaningful, this fund changed management almost immediately (Feb 2012). Curiously, M* still refuses to rate this now five star fund above neutral, because it says that five years history isn't long enough. The other negatively rated fund, the one I think the author disregarded, is LMGTX. This one also changed in 2012, even more significantly. It changed from being classified domestic to being classified foreign.
Another problem with the analysis is that because of the funds M* selected, there is a tendency to double count. It's as if M* gave medals in 1998, and awarded gold to half a dozen Janus funds, all virtual copies of each other.
That's what happened with at least a couple of families: Yacktman (where gold Yacktman and silver Focused both underperformed), and Weitz (silver Value and gold Partners Value both underperformed).
Overall, I think the best (worst?) you can say is that the analyst ratings are a better indication of which funds are popular (M* doesn't pay much attention to lesser-followed funds) than they are any indication of how funds will perform.

Here is the attachment Ted forgot.

FYI: Table Of Content:
S&P 500 & Panic Attacks
Regards,
Ted
https://www.yardeni.com/pub/sp500panicattack.pdf

FYI: Click On Article title At Top Of Google Search)
Ranked by one-year return
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/search?q=best-+and+worst-performing+emerging-market+funds+investment+news&oq=best-+and+worst-performing+emerging-market+funds+investment+news&gs_l=psy-ab.3...3125.7165.0.7627.16.16.0.0.0.0.118.1084.15j1.16.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.11.787...33i22i29i30k1j33i160k1j33i21k1.5ahlj4tLIV4

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318342/000139834417011044/fp0027752_497.htm
497 1 fp0027752_497.htm
Horizon Spin-off and Corporate Restructuring Fund
Supplement dated August 28, 2017, to the
Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”)
each dated September 1, 2016, as amended.
IMPORTANT NOTICE ON PURCHASE OF FUND SHARES
Effective as of the close of business on August 31, 2017, the Horizon Spin-off and Corporate Restructuring Fund (the “Horizon Fund”) will be closed to all investment, and the Horizon Fund’s transfer agent will not accept orders for purchases of additional shares of the Horizon Fund, either from current Horizon Fund shareholders or from new investors. Existing shareholders may continue to redeem Horizon Fund shares. If all shares of the Horizon Fund held in an existing account are redeemed, the shareholder’s account will be closed. This temporary closure is expected to last until September 18, 2017, at which time the Horizon Fund intends, subject to shareholder approval at the special meeting described below, to re-open as the Kinetics Spin-Off and Corporate Restructuring Fund (the “Acquiring Fund”), a newly created series of Kinetics Mutual Funds, Inc.
As previously disclosed, the Board of Trustees of Investment Managers Series Trust (the “Trust”) approved an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization (the “Plan”) providing for the reorganization of the Horizon Fund into the Acquiring Fund. The reorganization of the Horizon Fund is subject to approval by its shareholders.
The Trust has called a shareholder meeting at which shareholders of the Horizon Fund will be asked to consider and vote on the Plan. Shareholders of the Horizon Fund have been provided with a combined prospectus/proxy statement with additional information about the shareholder meeting and the proposed reorganization. The shareholder meeting has been adjourned to September 14, 2017. If shareholders of the Horizon Fund approve the reorganization, the reorganization is expected to take effect on September 18, 2017.
Please file this Supplement with your records.
Classes:
LSHAX "A"
LSHCX "C"
LSHUX "I"

Update Posted for 8/28
investwithanedge.com/market-leadership-strategy

@msf,

Much of the complexity arises from insurance companies' efforts to give people high-priced features that they think they want but don't need. Such as return of principal.

When I considered an annuity for myself a few years back (almost 8 years now) it was somewhat comforting to know that my lifetime income stream also had what I called a "cash value". This "cash value" has incrementally been drawn down with each annuity payment I have received (at a rate equal to 25% of all annuity payments). So, in a sense, each annuity payment consist of 75% return "on principal" and 25% return "of principle".
I have calculated that somewhere in my mid 80's I will have "drawn down" the cash value. Prior to that my beneficiaries will receive a death benefit equal to the annuities starting value minus 25% of the total payout over the life of the annuity.
What seemed missing in the article is the fact that we are in a very low interest rate environment and this could be a singular reason to not lock ones money up in an annuity product (whatever flavor) at such low rates.