IF I wanted Hussman to control some of my money (which I do not), I'd be more incline to go with a 50:50 mix of HSRTX:HSRTX... but only if I thought Hussman was a decent fund manager (which I do not).

Reminds me of the time (long ago) when I asked the bartender for another "Squirt & 7-Up". Cut me off immediately. (But we agree on Hussman) :)

It hit about $7.50 today, way below the $14 it hit when resumption of diplomatic relations was announced in 2014. Any way I look at it, this fund has not made anyone much dough over its lifespan. It remains an "idea" investment for me and believe me, my attempts to make money off idea stocks and funds has not worked.

IF I wanted Hussman to control some of my money (which I do not), I'd be more incline to go with a 50:50 mix of HSRTX:HSRTX... but only if I thought Hussman was a decent fund manager (which I do not).
Different strokes for different folks.

HSTRX - are you kidding me? It has been so long since that one came up, I thought perchance it had been liquidated. Not only has it lost almost 85% of its assets since 2011, it has increased its expenses by about 8% from that year, too. I really had no problem with the other 9 recommendations (oops, not recommendations, really), but Hussman? Would have picked QMNIX or VMNFX for some kind of hedging, but definitely not Hussman.

RE: TRBUX
What is the difference between "Annualized Dividend" and "SEC Standardized"?
Which of the two is a better predictor of what an investor might expect to earn going forward?
(Excerpted from T Rowe Price's website on 11/27/16):
"Benchmark Definitions
30-Day Yield
Annualized Dividend as of 11/25/2016 1.32%
SEC Standardized w/ Waiver as of 10/31/2016 1.21%
SEC Standardized w/o Waiver as of 10/31/2016 1.06%"
(I think the 3rd line re waiver is pretty easy to understand.)

FYI: Do you need a financial adviser?
It is a simple question, but many investors are not sure about it. New changes in law (the fiduciary standard) and technology (robo-advisers) have added layers of complication to the answer.
To know, you must evaluate your financial situation. Let’s work through it together, so you have a better understanding of your circumstances and can decide what sort of financial services you need.
Let’s begin with the deceptively simple question: How much help do you need? It depends on several factors:
Regards,
Ted
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/get-there/do-you-need-a-financial-adviser/2016/11/22/82258064-b003-11e6-8616-52b15787add0_story.html

FYI: (Dodge & Cox Stock Fund is also having a great year !)
ome Back on Track
T
Regards,
Ted
http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=782075

:) I appreciate the response, @DanHardy. Wouldn't you know? I already own quite of bit in PRSNX (TRP Global multi-sector bonds) and PREMX (EM bonds.) My smallest bond holding is in DLFNX (2.55% of portf, domestic "core-plus.") All proceeds continue to be reinvested. And my two biggest holdings are balanced funds, so there's a big slug of bonds in there... But I'm not about to switch out of them: PRWCX and MAPOX. They run neck-and-neck for the top spot in category.

Thanks for the input. Both Scott Burns and Merriman have shown splitting up the 60% equity side into US Large, US small, Reits, International and Emerging Mkts will outperform the CRSP US Total Mkt Index over time (VBIAX equity side of 60/40). My data shows this portfolio 60/40 will produce 9.32% CAGR since 2002 while VBIAX had 7.62%. That would compound greatly over time. Max drawdown was 4 percentage points higher than VBIAX and beta appeared to be 15% higher. So.....its a matter of personal choice I guess but not a bad option. Not sure which way I will go. Simplicity with VBIAX costs you a little. VBIAX made changes to their benchmark index equity side that has improved their performance around 2006. AOR looks good with limited track record but it is outperforming near term but needs a big down market to properly test it. Put AOR on watch list. This might be in the vein of what K O'Reilly is doing.

Good morning,
It is for certain my small/mid cap sleeve found in the growth area of my portfolio has been the bread winner thus far this year with a year-to-date return of better than 25%. My second best performing sleeve is my domestic equity sleeve found in the growth & income area with a year-to-date return of 10.1% and is followed by my domestic hybrid sleeve which is also a member of the growth & income area with a return of 9.6%. Overall, my investment return for the portfolio as a whole, according to Morningstar's Portfolio Manager, is 8.0% which betters the year-to-date return of the Lipper Balanced Index at 6.3%. Thus far, my better performing sleeves have more than offset my laggards.
As of my last Morningstar Instant Xray analysis (11/25/2016) my asset allocation bubbled at 20% cash, 25% bonds, 33% domestic stocks, 17% foreign stocks and 5% other. This is a little different from my last report of equities being a total of 52%. Seems, my hybrid funds which make up about 40% of my portfolio must have made some asset adjustments for this equity allocation to change. I find it interesting to follow their changing asset movements and how these changes effect my portfolio's asset allocation. I believe, some of my hybrid type funds help keep me positioned in the more faster moving market currents as their investment spectrum encompasses a wide range and variety of assets.
Since, December will soon be here, in only a few days, I don't plan to do any buying until the first part of the new year, if then. During December, I'll collect most of my fund distributions and build cash. I'm not certain what will transpire should the Fed's raise interest rates in December, or January, and it's resulting effects on equities. I do believe it certain that bond prices, for the most part, will continue to adjust downward as interest rates rise. It will be interesting to see what shakes out with the fast money crowd. Since, I am well diverisfied I am most likely to benefit from the fast money crowd's forever changing positioning. I am thinking of adding to my bank loan fund in the near term along with some select stock funds ... but, looking to see how December goes. Looking out, as interest rates rise and when I can get a CD yield in the 2.5% range I'll start to rebuild my CD ladder ... but, CD rates will have to become higher than the average total return I have achieved, thus far, with my short term and limited term bond funds.
To quote a strategy found in baseball ... I am not looking to hit the long ball just play short ball and advance the runners. And, if the long ball should come, perhaps it will score some runners just as the outsized returns of my small/mid cap sleeve, in essence, did.
I hope all had a great Thanksiving ... and, I wish all Happy Holidays as December arrives along with continued "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet

FYI: (Click On Article Title At Top Of Google Search)
Perhaps nowhere else in financial markets is speculation on the ultimate success of Trompononics more rampant than in shares of small U.S. stocks.
Small company shares on Friday notch their longest winning streak in 20 years on a shortened Black Friday trading session. The Russell 2000 Index rose 0.4% in in the shortened session to book its 15th advance in row. This streak ties a run last seen in February 1996. The longest ever streak, 21, was hit back in 1988.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/#q=Unsinkable+Small+Caps:+Russell+2000′s+Winning+Streak+Longest+in+20+Years+wsj

Dry Powder Gang
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2016/05/

More Optimism or " a sense of relief that the election was finally over"

The final index of consumer sentiment for November jumped to 93.8 from a preliminary reading of 91.6, according to a report released on Wednesday.
This report took on added significance because it showed results of the first postelection survey.
"The initial reaction of consumers to Trump's victory was to express greater optimism about their personal finances as well as improved prospects for the national economy," said Richard Curtin, the survey's chief economist.
Curtin said the survey showed that the improved optimism was widespread — across all income and age subgroups across the country. However, it may have been exaggerated by a sense of relief that the election was finally over he said.
http://www.businessinsider.com/umich-consumer-confidence-november-23-2016-2016-11
Final Results for November 2016
2016 Y-Y vs 2015 % Change
Index of Consumer Sentiment 93.8 +2.7%
Current Economic Conditions 107.3 +2.9%
Index of Consumer Expectations 85.2 +2.8%
...and it was perhaps exaggerated by what most considered a surprising victory as well as by a widespread sense of relief that the election had finally ended. To be sure, no surge in economic expectations can long be sustained without actual improvements in economic conditions. Presidential honeymoons represent a period in which the promise of gains holds sway over actual economic conditions.
http://www.sca.isr.umich.edu/
Image source:
Consumer confidence rose more than previously reported to a six-month high in November, showing Americans became more optimistic about their finances and the economy after Donald Trump won the presidential election.
by Patricia Laya Bloomberg News
November 23, 2016 — 9:00 AM CST
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-23/consumer-sentiment-in-u-s-jumps-after-trump-election-victory

FYI: he post-election surge in individual investor optimism continued this week as AAII Bullish Sentiment increased from 46.7% up to 49.9%. So after finally breaking above 40% for the first time in 54 weeks last week, now it is testing 50%! This week’s increase in bullish sentiment is the highest weekly reading since January 2015 and the largest three-week increase (26.25 percentage points) in over six years. Think about it this way — in the last three weeks, bullish sentiment has more than doubled!
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bespokepremium.com/think-big-blog/bull-camp-expands-for-third-straight-week/
AAII Website:
http://www.aaii.com/sentimentsurvey

The purchase of an equal weighted blend of small cap value, emerging small cap, and large cap value or mid cap growth from the Nov 1 to May 1 period, then switched to utilities, Long U.S. treasuries, or cash ( depending on risk model heuristic ) from May 1 to Nov1 has produced risk adjusted median rolling 15 year total return periods > 1600% tinyurl.com/hh3ymn8 ( or 22.4% CAGR vs. 14.8% for Berkshire Hathaway since 1986 ) since 1954.
Would rather examine and trust 60+ years of repeatable empirical data as evidence vs. a couple weeks of post election event market behavior and anecdote !

FYI: On a tear before the election, the average fund is down 4.4% after it because of president-elect's rhetoric about countries like Mexico and China
Regards,
Ted
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20161123/FREE/161129965/emerging-markets-sink-after-trump-victory

@claimui. Isn't ARTGX doing well because it has some US stocks? higher dollar is what is killing international stocks. One would expect ARTKX to underperform ARTGX.

To clarify, I meant that they are doing well compared to their respective categories. ARTKX is in the top 5-10% for the "foreign large blend" category; ARTGX is in the top 10-20% for the "world stock" category.
You are correct that ARTGX is doing better than ARTKX (presumably because of the better performance of US stocks) on an absolute basis, but ARTKX is doing better than ARTGX when compared to their categories/benchmarks -- although both are doing well in general.

@MFO Members Great new, there are simply too many mutual funds. In the United States, there were more than nine thousand mutual funds in 2014, managing assets worth approximately 15.85 trillion U.S. dollars. Domestic equity funds constituted 42 percent of the fund market in the United States. The second most popular were bond funds, with 21 percent of the market share.
Regards,
Ted

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1611894/000114036116087676/form497.htm
497 1 form497.htm CORSAIR OPPORTUNITY FUND 497 11-22-2016
Corsair Opportunity Fund
(THE “FUND”)
SUPPLEMENT DATED NOVEMBER 23, 2016 TO THE FUND’S
PROSPECTUS AND STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
DATED JANUARY 27, 2016
On November 22, 2016, the Board of Trustees (the "Board") of the Fund approved a Plan of Liquidation and Termination (the "Plan"), whereby the assets of the Fund would be liquidated and the Fund subsequently dissolved.
In light of the Board's decision, shares of the Fund are no longer being offered.
As a result of the Fund's liquidation, each shareholder of the Fund as of the close of business on December 15, 2016 will be entitled to receive a distribution in an amount equal to the net asset value of his/her shares as of December 15, 2016, to be received prior to December 22, 2016. The liquidation distribution amount will include any accrued income and capital gains, will be treated as a payment in exchange for shares and will generally be a taxable event. You should consult your personal tax advisor concerning you particular tax situation. A notice concerning the Plan and the liquidation and dissolution of the Fund will be mailed to shareholders.

Here's the actual GAO report.
While some of what it says may be sound and even useful, there are enough things that pop out to suggest one not read a news report without looking at the GAO report itself.
The report starts: "GAO’s nongeneralizable survey ..." Much later it amplifies: "The participants’ responses and our analysis of their accuracy are not generalizable.."
"Our web-based survey was an opt-in panel [self-selecting participants] and open to anyone who received a link to the survey ... [including] plan sponsors and other plan professionals who assist plan sponsors ... On the basis of our application of recognized survey design practices and follow-up procedures, we determined that the data were of sufficient quality for our purposes."
While the report says that people average 11 jobs over the thirty year period between ages 18 and 48, it notes that these jobs may be held simultaneously. Also, half of these (5+) are held before age 25 (Table 4). Where and how is that accounted for when looking at the savings lost by starting jobs that require a one year waiting period before contributing to a 401(k)?
On the one hand, the waiting period for all these early jobs may be more costly than the same waiting period at the later jobs. That's because the early job money that would have been contributed but for the waiting period would have grown for more years than later job contributions. On the other hand, early career wages are lower, so fewer 401(k) dollars may be lost by having to wait. Perhaps even no retirement dollars at all are lost. This is because at starting wage income levels, people might be able to put all these dollars into IRAs without maxing out.
It doesn't seem that the report is this sophisticated. It seems to use hypotheticals that it considers average, but I've taken just such a quick cursory look that all I've got are questions.
The report may hang together. The GAO did use some actual labor statistics. But it seems hard to tell from a very quick first glance. As an employee, I want to get everything I can from my employer - immediate participation, immediate vesting, large match. As an employer, I want to be able to retain employees, especially in the more mobile 21st century. The best way to do that is still to provide a work environment where people want to stay.