I use a timing model found within my portfolio itself that keys me when to load value over growth and when to switch and to load growth. I only do this with a small amount of the portfolio due to the many strategies that I may have engaged from time-to-time. I have found through the years this to be one of the better strategies and a most effective one. Just this past month, most of the large cap value funds which I own and are found in my domestic equity sleeve located in the growth and income area of the portfolio out performed it's growth counter part (large/mid cap sleeve) which is found in the growth area of the portfolio by about 10%.
During the recent selling stampede which took place during the first couple months of 2016 I bought in the value area of the portfolio and once equities recovered I then rebalanced and reduced my equity weighting in the growth area by selling two positions that were held in the ballast/spiff sleeve thus keeping my overall equity allocation at it's target weighting of about 50%.
Again, for those that have had their doubts about my sleeve system, I have found my portfolio fund management sleeve system to be beneficial in making investment and strategy adjustments within my portfolio. However, I respect your right to continue to voice your doubts as I feel my system is geered for the more accomplished investor and might not be right for everyone. In addition, to use the system effectively one needs to be somewhat a student of the capital markets and follow their movement as well as that of the portfolio itself. Please note I am not a professional investor, or trader, but simply a retail investor that sought out ways to improve my returns over both the near term as well as the long term that would come through better positioning with a moving asset allocation of sorts.
For those that might not be familiar with my system I have provided a blurb about it below along with the portfolio's current configuration as of March 22, 2016.
Old_Skeet's Fund Sleeve Management System (03/22/2016)
Here is a brief description of my sleeve system which I organized to help better manage the investments that were held in five accounts along with my current positioning. The accounts consist of a taxable account, a self directed ira account, a 401k account, a profit sharing account and a health savings account plus two bank accounts. With this I came up with four investment areas. They are a cash area which consist of two sleeves … an investment cash sleeve and a demand cash sleeve. The next area is the income area which consists of two sleeves. … a fixed income sleeve and a hybrid income sleeve. Then there is the growth & income area which has more risk associated with it than the income area and it consist of four sleeves … a global equity sleeve, a global hybrid sleeve, a domestic equity sleeve and a domestic hybrid sleeve. An finally there is the growth area, where the most risk in the portfolio is found and it consist of five sleeves … a global sleeve, a large/mid cap sleeve, a small/mid cap sleeve, a specialty & theme sleeve and a ballast & spiff investment sleeve. Each sleeve consists of three to six funds (in most cases) with the size and the weight of each sleeve can easily be adjusted, from time-to-time, by adjusting the number of funds and amounts held. By using the sleeve system one can get a better picture of their overall investment picture and weightings by sleeve and area. In addition, I have found it beneficial to xray each fund, each sleeve, each investment area, and the portfolio as a whole quarterly. Again, weightings can be adjusted form time-to-time as to how I might be reading the markets and wish to weight accordingly. All funds pay their distributions to the cash area of the portfolio with the exception being those in my 401k, profit sharing, and health savings accounts where reinvestment occurs. With the other accounts paying to the cash area builds the cash area of the portfolio to meet the portfolio’s monthly cash disbursement amount with the residual being left for new investment opportunity. In addition, most all buy/sell trades settle from or to the cash area with some nav exchanges between funds taking place.
Here is how I have my asset allocation broken out in percent ranges, by area. My current target allocations are cash 20%, income 30%, growth & income 35%, and growth 15%. I do an Instant Xray analysis on the portfolio quarterly (sometimes monthly) and make asset weighting adjustments as I feel warranted based upon my assessment of the market, my risk tolerance, cash needs, etc. Presently, I am about 20% in the cash area, 30% in the income area, 35% in the growth & income area and 15% in the growth area.
Cash Area (Weighting Range 15% to 25% with target being 20%)
Demand Cash Sleeve… (Cash Distribution Accrual & Future Investment Accrual)
Investment Cash Sleeve … (Savings & Time Deposits)
Income Area (Weighting Range 25% to 35% with target being 30%)
Fixed Income Sleeve: GIFAX, LALDX, THIFX, LBNDX, NEFZX & TSIAX
Hybrid Income Sleeve: CAPAX, CTFAX, FKINX, ISFAX, JNBAX & PGBAX
Growth & Income Area (Weighting Range 30% to 40% with target being 35%)
Global Equity Sleeve: CWGIX, DEQAX & EADIX
Global Hybrid Sleeve: BAICX, CAIBX & TIBAX
Domestic Equity Sleeve: ANCFX, FDSAX, INUTX, NBHAX, SPQAX & SVAAX
Domestic Hybrid Sleeve: ABALX, AMECX, DDIAX, FRINX, HWIAX & LABFX
Growth Area (Weighting Range 10% to 20% with target being 15%)
Global Sleeve: ANWPX, PGROX & THOAX
Large/Mid Cap Sleeve: AGTHX, IACLX & SPECX
Small/Mid Cap Sleeve: AJVAX, PCVAX & PMDAX
Specialty & Theme Sleeve: LPEFX, PGUAX, TOLLX, NEWFX & THDAX
Ballast & Spiffs: FISCX
Total Number of Mutual Fund Positions = 45

I use LPEFX to gain exposure to private equity; and, I hold this fund in the specialty / theme sleeve found in growth area of my portfolio. My historical annualized return since I purchased the fund in September of 2011 has been about 12.50% and my total return in the fund has been better than 70%. For me, it is a keeper plus it sports an income yield of about 4.5% on amount invested. Over time, I plan to keep adding to the position.

FYI: The recent rise in the stock market has attracted a lot of attention — and it’s easy to see why. From the market bottom on Feb. 11 through Monday, U.S. stocks, as measured by the definitive Wilshire 5000 index, rose a bit more than 13 percent, or about $2.8 trillion.
A pretty nice five-week increase, isn’t it? No wonder so many people are talking about it.
But there’s another investment that has also turned positive — but has attracted far less attention.
I’m talking about taxable money market mutual funds. Yes, money funds.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/comatose-money-market-funds-have-finally-begun-to-wake-up/2016/03/21/0f20531c-ef76-11e5-89c3-a647fcce95e0_story.html
Highest Yielding Money Market Funds:
http://cranedata.com/

Maybe Bridgeway 35? BRLIX is the symbol, I think.

bee, it seems to me that SEQUX will be collecting $46 million in annual fees when and if their AUM goes down to $4.6 billion (and the ER is 1%). According to fundmojo.com, AUM as of 02/2016 was $6.04 billion, and AUM as of 05/2015 (the oldest date listed) was $9.04 billion. I believe that AUM decreased because of the drop in share price and shareholder withdrawals.

@bee & MFO Members: In addition to bee's math, on this date,3/26/15, one year ago SEQUX was selling for $252.00 per share.
Regards,
Ted

Please check my math:
With $5.5 Billion AUM, SEQUX with its 1% ER nets $55 million in annual fees. These annual fees are obviously impacted by recent poor fund performance, but in a year when shareholders absorb a 25% share price loss, management will still collect close to $46 million in fees (based on 25% less assets under management due to a 25% drop in the fund's share price).
Share holders selling out of this fund would cause a 100% management fee loss and might be about the only way to properly voice their disapproval of management decision making.

FYI: (This is a follow-up to the follow-up to the follow-up, I think Chuck's a little late to the party !)
In the stock market, there are bad times — and then there is what the Sequoia Fund is going through.
Bad doesn’t even begin to describe the situation for Sequoia SEQUX, -0.64% one of the most legendary mutual funds, which has seen its reputation torched by a bad bet on a controversial stock. The fund’s fall from grace culminated in the resignation of a co-manager after a 45-year career with Sequoia’s management company
Regards,
Ted
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-a-big-bet-on-one-bad-stock-broke-a-legendary-mutual-fund-2016-03-26/print
Sequoia's One Year Performance As 3/24/16: Source M*
1-Day (-0.64)
1-Wk. -(0.13)
1-Mo. -(7/19)
3-Mo. -(14.13)
YTD -(11.55)
1-Yr. -(24.03)

BenWP,
I use it only to check against other LC funds, do not own and did not know about its issues.
I also guess I did not adhere strictly to usual definitions of growth.
I am a large and longtime DSENX owner myself. I try without success to figure out why one set of these named holdings does differently from others, when it does. I should've included FLCEX also.
I look not just for growth but also decline damping. Over 2.5y (and shorter too) it is interesting to me that only NOBL and CAPE do as well as or better than DSENX, although OUSA sure looks like a winner thus far.
In retirement my long historical interest in the broadest diversifications (SC, EM) has become waaay diminished, and in REIT and foreign somewhat reduced as well.

Over the last 10 years T. Rowe Price's Global Technology fund, PRGTX, seems to have edged out NASDX:

Charted Over the last 15 years:

FYI: Easter comes early this year, and U.S. financial markets will be closed on Good Friday, which falls on March 25, while U.K. and some continental markets will be closed for Easter Monday as well.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/when-do-markets-close-for-good-friday-2016-03-22/print

@hank- Oh, you mean like this...

The Southern Pacific, which my father worked for his entire working life, designed these to keep the tracks through the Sierras passable. Some of these are still in use.

@hank- What's a snowblower??
:)

OJ, It's a machine that you run.
Has blades that go round and round. Kind of like an electric Margarita mixer - only more fun. :)
http://www.amazon.com/Margaritaville-Premium-Concoction-Easy-Pour-Blending/dp/B000QH2JCO/ref=sr_1_22?ie=UTF8&qid=1458861547&sr=8-22&keywords=electric+cocktail+mixer+blender

FYI: Sorry, I hit the post instead of the save ! It's no fun being 80 !
Regards,
Ted
Bloomberg Slant:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-23/resurgent-dollar-hits-asian-stock-outlook-as-crude-extends-slump
Reuters Slant;
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-stocks-idUSKCN0WQ14K
MarketWatch Slant:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-stocks-set-to-break-five-week-winning-streak-as-dow-futures-fall-150-points-2016-03-24/print
USA Today Slant:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/markets/2016/03/24/stocks-dow-thursday/82200688/
IBD Slant:
http://www.investors.com/market-trend/stock-market-today/stocks-snap-win-streak-gamestop-down-after-hours/
WSJ Markets At A Glance:
http://markets.wsj.com/us
Sector Tracker:
http://www.sectorspdr.com/sectorspdr/tools/sector-tracker
Current Futures: Negative
http://finviz.com/futures.ashx

Always happy to weigh in on matters I know nothing about :)
"Three Yards and a cloud of dust" (Woody Hayes) is a great handle - perhaps applicable to some investment styles.
Not clear to me from the discussion is that RSIVX looks like a junk bond fund. M* puts the sub-BBB holdings at around 75% (if I'm seeing it right). Most of the remaining 20+% are BBB rated (investment grade with some speculative characteristics). Junk's been a dicey area recently depending on the sector and tier. Lower quality hasn't fared well. I suspect even the brightest of managers might have easily been tripped up in the recent environment, and so I would be slow to cast blame.
Lost in discussion, seems to me, is What do the holdings within this fund add to one's overall portfolio strength or attributes? I'm not one who believes every asset owned needs to rise all the time. The concept behind diversification, seems to me, is that in any given environment, some holdings rise and others fall. (Obviously, winners should outnumber losers over time.) I wouldn't buy this fund. I expect better, more experienced junk bond managers can be had for lower cost. In fact, I haven't felt a compelling reason to own junk bonds for some time.
Thanks guys for the lively discussion. Time to go run the snowblower.

Here is an earlier discussion on the change:
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/25736/taymour-r-tamaddon-to-leave-t-rowe-price-health-sciences-fund-but-stays-with-t-rowe-price#latest

FYI: Did he fall on his sword? The 71-year-old leader of the well-known investment product, which has underperformed 98 percent of its peers since January, is stepping down. Goldfarb’s 36-year tenure at the helm comes to a close after his mutual fund suffered huge losses — to the tune of 25 percent of the fund’s value since 2015 — following heavy investments in Valeant Pharmaceuticals International. Concern over the venerable fund’s reputation has prompted action, and Goldfarb will retire at the end of the month.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.ozy.com/presidential-daily-brief/pdb-68659/bowing-out-68669
Bloomberg Slant:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-23/goldfarb-to-retire-from-sequoia-fund-after-valeant-losses
Shareholders Letter:
http://www.sequoiafund.com/Sequoia_clientletter.pdf

Biotech Related
Biotech Selloff, EVENTIDE FUNDS Semi-Annual Report 31 December 2015
The Gilead Fund and Healthcare & Life Sciences Fund are both exposed to the biotech sector,
which normally is not correlated to the broader economy. The futures of companies in the
biotech industry are dependent on company-specific pipelines of new drugs.
Despite the worst selloff in biotech history, the fundamentals of the industry remain positive. The
decline may be due in part to the 2015 drug-pricing scare in which rising drug prices became a
political issue. In addition, biotech normally experiences one large selloff every year. But, most
likely, the decline is due to a broad flight from risk among investors, and biotech is risky.
As a result, we believe investors are pricing companies far below a rational consideration of value.
While price-to-earnings (“PE”) ratios aren’t normally a useful metric in the biotech sector, given
many companies are pre-earnings, the PE of the four largest companies show them trading
below the PE of the S&P 500. Normally they trade much higher, as earnings growth rates in the
sector typically outperform estimates. Small-cap biotech companies have plenty of cash —
enough to last them for an average of 6.6 years before needing additional investment. That’s
plenty of time to produce new drugs, and the industry has many exciting new drugs in the
pipeline. Finally, the regulatory environment is positive, with officials approving more new drugs
every year. In other words, the fundamentals in the sector are positive.
EVENTIDE FUNDS Semi-Annual Report 31 December 2015
https://materials.proxyvote.com/Approved/MC5611/20160129/SAR_275117.PDF
1 Day Y T D
FBIOX -4.08 -31.06
IBB -3.30 ( nav) -22.26
ETNHX -4.64 -27.50
PRHSX -1.39 -13.40
M* Health: Total Returns Y T D Ave -14.81
http://news.morningstar.com/fund-category-returns/health/$FOCA$SH.aspx

IBB: Political Posturing Sell-Off Presents Buying Opportunity
Mar. 8, 2016 4:49 PM ET
http://seekingalpha.com/article/3956759-ibb-political-posturing-sell-presents-buying-opportunity

Vice President Joe Biden dropped in to Tutta Bella’s Westlake Avenue location during a visit to Seattle on Monday and ordered four Neapolitan pies to go.
Biden was in Seattle to tour a research facility to promote a $1 billion proposal to cure cancer, announced in President Obama’s January State of the Union address.
http://www.pmq.com/March-2016/Vice-President-Orders-4-Pies-to-Go-from-Seattle-Pizzeria/

Thanks junkster, but I only use the ETF because I can get out quickly (versus a fund). Just watching the trend, this ETF is moving nicely over the last month. What is it that you don't like about Bank loans in general.

Mike, in addition to my comments above, today is a good example of why I don't like junk/bank loan ETFs. BKLN was down 0.53% today. On the other hand, in the real world (NAV) the open end were unchanged to up. That is a pretty wide divergence.

PTIAX
Corrected per heezsafe
Total Assets Dec 31 Fact Sheet
$223.02 mil
Total Assets March 23, 2016 per M*
$ 370.3 mil
66 % increase in assets under management. Y T D
Management probably thought Who needs These ?'12B-1 Fee'
BREAKING DOWN '12B-1 Fee'
Back in the early days of the mutual fund business, the 12b-1 fee was thought to help investors. It was believed that by marketing a mutual fund, its assets would increase and management could lower expenses because of economies of scale. This has yet to be proved. With mutual fund assets passing the $10 trillion mark and growing steadily, critics of this fee, which today is mainly used to reward intermediaries for selling a fund's shares, are seriously questioning the justification for using it. As a commission paid to salespersons, it is currently believed to do nothing to enhance the performance of a fund.
Read more: 12B-1 Fee Definition | Investopedia http://www.investopedia.com/terms/1/12b-1fees.asp#ixzz43ljR5V55
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook
From November Discussion
Here's my response to RSIVX, In My Schwab I R A
PTIAX was a $5000.minimum @ Schwab now $100 (see Ted's post here;" Schwab Slashes Minimums On OneSource NTF Mutual
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/71734/#Comment_71734
PTIAX is no longer a Mutual Fund OneSource® fund.
Now (Minimum: $5,000.00 Additional $500.00) with transaction fee.
@MikeM and @BenWP
It was great @ Schwab while it lasted !