Some background to the advisor, for what interest it holds: http://www.businessinsider.com/vest-startup-protects-you-from-losing-all-your-money-in-the-stock-market-2015-8. At base, they're using options to dampen volatility.

As usual, I have no idea, but added to junk mortgages after their little blip several days ago, added to stock when the S&P5c made that convincing move above the 50d, and have cut back a little on the rate-sensitive stuff.
As far as junk corporates go, here's some (imho) halfway decent analysis from a week ago id'ing $81-$83 on HYG as resistance for HY corps - and the price of HYG has been hanging just below that level for the past three days. I'd imagine that's the next test of how far the junk run may go.
Edit: it's now 5 days that HYG hasn't closed below 80 or above 81.

Oil service stocks have had statistically significant positive outcomes in the winter and biotech in the fall. A sector model that I use, utilizes oil services, biotech, and utilities combined with a risk management heuristic. It has produced decent returns over 30 years. We will sell out of oil services on May 1.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zlgOYdATSzC7YrUE9yE_uY03sHBRTcLUVyKusqqv2tI/edit#gid=113856734

@Crash & MFO Members: Here's how U.S. News & World Report which uses Zack's, along with M*, Lipper, S&P Capital IQ, and The Street to arrive at a consensus ranks the four funds listed in Crash's link.
Regards,
Ted
ABALX: #5
TRPBX: #22
FBALX: #12
FSGNX #87

On a dollar-weighted basis, the impact on industry performance figures is de minimis.
Just as I don't look at inflated (unweighted) expense ratios - 1.25% for the average fund vs. 0.71% for the average dollar (2013) - I don't pay much heed to all the noise from short-lived, scrawny funds.
http://corporate.morningstar.com/US/documents/researchpapers/Fee_Trend.pdf
While these petty funds don't move the industry needle, they can affect fund families' reputations that are built on high star ratings. For example, T. Rowe Price touts over 60 4 and 5 star funds.

FYI: High-yield bond ETF has received most-ever inflows over 6 days
HCA Holdings boosts high-yield debt offering to $1.5 billion
Investors are sinking cash back into the largest junk-bond exchange-traded fund signaling that the rout in the market for risky corporate debt may be overdone.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-01/investors-plow-record-cash-into-junk-bond-etf-as-tone-improves

Just looked up FGMNX - rated as a "fair" fund with a score of 55 out of 100. I'll take this site with a grain of salt.

I enjoy Max Funds as a quick-take. May not be current and certainly not the full story. I don't know of any other sites that even attempt to evaluate hot money. That has a big effect if you're a long term investor. Killed MFLDX (along with a lot of other problems).
Added 3/4: (1) I've held mostly the same 8-10 core funds for anywhere from 10-25 years with a few good firms. (2) I'll also take an occasional long-shot (speculative play) on a very badly beaten up fund as I did with OPGSX in September '15 and PRLAX 6-8 weeks ago. These spec plays are not intended to be held more than a few months to a few years - time to bounce a lot higher if the educated guess works out. (Yes - they can also fall, so weighing potential upside and downside is crucial)
The point here: For neither of the above types of purchases is the opinion of Max Funds, *M or MarketWatch useful or given much consideration. For the first type (core holdings) I want low fees, stable competent management, good service and annual reports that are comprehensive and readable. For the second (speculative plays) I want a fund that's been hammered hard over several years (probably down 25% or more over the last year). And Nobody loves it anymore. Than it's a matter of trying to become educated on the the fund's investments, reasons for its poor performance lately, macroeconomic conditions that might help going forward - and than taking a plunge, usually with only 2-5% of total holdings.
Sorry so long winded. Guess I've strayed from Max's original point on Max funds. But my point is you need to take all these with a grain of salt. Don't expect them to always point you in the best direction. Use your own pointer.

The small cap value universe has been proven academically and empirically to produce alpha premium above the other stock universes over a 90 year period.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kToqLWLISRk4n4YnSzv1hT5kBN54l5CvhwGgDwJKPJI/edit?usp=sharing
etf.com/sections/index-investor-corner/swedroe-small-caps-still-outperforming?nopaging=1.
Investing in the equity markets doesn't have to be complicated and an investor doesn't necessarily need more than a handful of funds representing the equity universe. An investor in the "young" demographic of the investment "lifecycle" ( age 20 - 50 ) can exploit the maximum asset accumulation into retirement phase and beyond, by first building a core position in small cap value, and then over the course of the career, they can diversify into other stock universes ( mid cap growth producing the next best alpha premium and also being somewhat non correlated to value; performance of value and growth trading off performance "leads" over the course of market cycles ( see P. O'Shaughnessy and T. Carlisle).
Further risk mitigated, maximal asset accumulation has been achieved through the use of small cap value ( and also mid cap growth ) and tactical asset allocation modelling
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1pQuBfbPd18ca0G-KiZc5FIWNMx0pNa87INgsLjEwuzY/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1C37CJypoxHWHB09e3g25ewOGjP83wDZhj5j6tlrLJoA/edit?usp=sharing
This is a new frontier of asset management science.
(Fortunately or unfortunately) this type of minimal, systematic alpha producing process can be automated and eliminates the need for human, objectively derived allocation decision processes ( "The Robot's Are Coming " )

Hi, Kevin.
I know. The problem is that small caps (well, stocks) are volatile and I'm rotten at timing the market or making other tactical allocation moves. Mostly I've got too much else going on to spend a lot of time with assessing the Russell 2K's p/e or peg or whatever, and partly I've got a spectacular track record for guessing wrong. As a result, I try to focus my non-retirement portfolio on multi-asset managers; that is, folks who have the freedom to dodge and weave on my behalf. Sometimes that's an overtly multi-asset fund like FPACX or BBALX, sometimes it's a fund with a broad mandate (Seafarer can invest in companies domiciled in the developed world with substantial earnings in the developing one and such stocks represent something like half of the portfolio) and sometimes it's absolute-value guys who say "if it's not a compelling value, I'm sitting on cash."
There are just a couple focused equity funds (Grandeur Peak, Artisan International Value, Wasatch Microcap Value) where I think the managers are doing something useful and distinctive. On whole, my non-retirement portfolio is about 50% growth (half US, half international) and 50% income (Price Spectrum Income, Matthews Asia Strategic Income, RiverPark Short Term High Yield and so on).
To be clear: I'm not preaching that that's The One Right Way. It's just what allows me to make a little money, sleep well and focus elsewhere.
Over the course of the full market cycle, the small cap fund -inclusive of growth, core, and value - with the highest Sharpe ratio, a measure of whether you're getting compensated for the risks you're taking - is Intrepid. It's #1 of 410. VSTCX is about 120th, just behind NAESX and VISVX. Its correlation with those two funds is .99 and .98, respectively. In addition to a higher Sharpe ratio, Intrepid has higher absolute returns over the market cycle (through 1/30/16) than does VTSCX and a substantially lower correlation to the small cap indexes.
Pinnacle isn't far behind Intrepid at 15th by Sharpe with a much lower correlation to any of the above, though also with lower absolute returns than Intrepid or Vanguard. The Aston fund hasn't been around long enough to have full market cycle data, though its five-year profile is strikingly similar to ICMAX.
Up-cycles present a different picture and these guys get left in the dust. But since I don't get to invest just during up-cycles, I don't tend to focus there.
In short, what I find attractive is the combination of higher returns and lower volatility over meaningful market periods.
David

I still think this is a solution in search of a problem. This "hybrid that combines what some consider the best parts of the actively managed fund with an ETF" also seems to combine some of the worst attributes.
Like an ETF (and unlike a mutual fund) you're subject to a bid/ask spread (generally paying more than NAV to buy, and selling for less). And it is subject to broker commissions.
It does avoid market tracking error (where the ETF price deviates from the underlying portfolio's NAV) by using the end of day NAV - but that also means that the pricing (aside from bid/ask spread) is like a mutual fund. Even if you sell mid-day in a falling market, you'll get the end-of-day price. So from a pricing perspective, ISTM this is the worst of both worlds - the cost of the spread without the attribute of instantaneous pricing.
The cost difference (vs. the mutual fund) is misleading. The article suggests that the ETMF cost should be lower because it has no 12b-1 fee. But neither does the share class (EIERX) to which it is comparing the ETMF.
Both ETMF and mutual fund are benefiting from temporary fee waivers, though the mutual fund waiver is greater. Thus the difference in costs is artificially small. The cost benefit of the ETMF (sans waivers) would be larger. However, that just means the even the ETMF would cost more than the stated 0.65% ER, to wit 0.83% - hardly compelling for a large cap blend fund.

FYI: (This is a follow-up article)
The mutual fund industry’s latest attempt to deal with the rising threat of the exchange traded fund comes from Eaton Vance (EV).
On Friday, the Boston fund giant’s subsidiary, NextShares, launched a brand new structured product called an exchange traded managed fund, or ETMF, a hybrid that combines what some consider the best parts of the actively managed mutual fund with an ETF.
The first ETMF, Eaton Vance Stock NextShares (EVSTC), invests in the same portfolio as $95 million Eaton Vance Stock Fund (EAERX), an equity mutual fund that holds mostly large U.S. stocks. Both are managed by Charles Gaffney. The mutual fund has outperformed the S&P 500 index for the past one-, three- and 10-year periods
Regards,
Ted
http://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/etfs/nextshares-new-product-combines-active-management-with-etfs/
M* Snapshot EAEFX:
http://portfolios.morningstar.com/fund/holdings?t=EAERX

FYI: In a year in which investors have prized defensive, low volatility assets and sectors, it’s not surprising that the Consumer Staples Select SPDR (NYSEArca: XLP) is one of the best-performing sector exchange traded funds on a year-to-date basis with a gain of nearly 2%.
XLP’s bullishness this year is a reversal of fortune from late 2015. XLP and rival staples ETFs had their hands full with rising rate-related issues. For example, several of the largest staples names have reported lackluster earnings, blaming the strong dollar for weak overseas currency conversions.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.etftrends.com/2016/03/consumer-staples-etfs-find-allure-as-investors-play-defense/
Click On XLP YTD & Click On Consumer Staples For Holdings
:http://www.sectorspdr.com/sectorspdr/tools/sector-tracker

For anything less than 5 years, don't bother as there's too much that could go wrong. Another question would be, how much experience do you have? This question is related to what would you do in the midst of a downturn. We all believe we can take the heat, but as Mike Tyson once said, 'Everyone has a plan til they get punched in the mouth'.
Of course, the amount you're proposing to invest would also factor in.

Better to Inquire about investment ideas @ M F O than some of these advisors !
There's a phrase no one wants to read in a sweeping report about the financial advisers who handle their savings: economy-wide misconduct.
By Bloomberg News | March 1, 2016 - 4:28 pm EST
A new working paper by business school professors at the University of Chicago and University of Minnesota found that 7% of financial advisers have been disciplined for misconduct that ranges from putting clients in unsuitable investments to trading on client accounts without permission. That's a troubling mark for an industry that relies on the trust of clients. And some large, well-regarded firms have misconduct records that far exceed the average.
Many fired advisers end up moving to firms that have higher rates of misconduct than their previous employer did, and they become repeat offenders. "Prior offenders are five times as likely to engage in new misconduct as the average financial adviser," the study found.
"This is eye-opening and suggests not only that some firms have a high tolerance for misconduct on the part of their employees, but that their very business model is to attract the broker who can generate high revenue at the cost of repetitive disciplinary violations," said John Coffee, a professor at Columbia Law School in New York. "FINRA needs to focus on this."
Many cases of misconduct arose around the issue of the "suitability" of investments. That would mean, for instance, that an adviser should not suggest that a 75-year-old client put most assets in a high-fee, aggressive-growth mutual fund. Often, the report found, investments involved in reported misconduct cases were insurance products.
The first-of-its-kind study names names, listing 10 advisory firms with the highest misconduct rates, as well as those with the lowest.

http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20160301/FREE/160309989?template=printart
@Shostakovich
I own this fund in the Global Bond space you mention.DHGAX
Assets for the Fund
$2,133,975,285
Holdings
206
Dividend Frequency
Quarterly
Morningstar Category
World Bond
Lipper Category
Global Income
Average Maturity
8.30 Years
Duration
6.83 Years
30-Day Yield (as of
1/31/16)
Class A 1.27%
Class I 1.62%
TOP TEN SECURITIES1
Australian Govt 3.25% 10/21/2018 10.04%
Australian Government 3.25% 04/21/
2025 4.43%
Canadian Government, 2.25% 06/01/
2025 3.79%
Japan (30 Yr Issue) 1.7% 09/20/2044 3.47%
Buoni Poliennali Del Tes 2.36142% 09/15/
2024 2.66%
France (Govt Of) 1% 11/25/2025 2.57%
Canadian Government, 2.5% 06/01/2024 2.45%
Canadian Government 1% 08/01/2016 2.11%
U.S. Treasury Note 1.75% 12/31/2020 2.04%
Buoni Poliennali Del Tes 1.05% 12/01/
2019 2.03%
https://public.dreyfus.com/documents/compliancedocs/factsheets/monthly/6940.pdf

Ain't hindsight something.
As for stabler, B is smoother since 1972, sort of, as are PG and JNJ. With a log scale (M*) it's less easy to detect smoothness and the opposite, of course.
SHW has had this remarkable rise the last six years, so there is that. Do you think in a greener world going forward that this will continue? Is that how you yourself are betting?

What charts are you looking at? It's not a close call or a fair fight with the issues you mentioned...I guess a case MIGHT be made for JNJ in terms of the ride, but its avg return for the past 15 years is 6.8%. SHW is 18%. I'm really not sure what you're looking at. You mention 1972, that's a long time ago. I assume you realize that SHW split 4 times since 1981; 1 share bought then for $35 now equals 32 shares at $281. You'll look a long time for something better than that coupled with a max draw down for the past 15 years of under 8%. As to the future, gun to head to pick one place to put my money for the next 15, SHW may be it. They're going to sell a lot of paint in China and the ROW. And I say all of this having nothing currently invested in the stock, regrettably. That will change at the next opportunity.

Why not just buy SHW and go home? I'd bet that simple paint stock beat 95%+ of all mutual funds and hedge funds over a 15 year period (almost 18% avg return). Up in 2008-2009. Biggest loss under 8%. Unreal. Anyone know a better more stable issue?

Why would Mr. Snowball consider ICMAX instead of ARIVX (as a replacemnt for ARTVX)? Eric Cinnamond built ICMAX until he left in 2010 and started ARIVX. Yes, the team he has left behind has followed his approach, but in the last 5 years and last year, ARIVX has had less volatility, a lower beta, and a higher alpha.

David - apples to oranges. RSP equal weights all 500 stocks in the S&P 500. According to the blurb linked by jstr OUSA contains "The 140 stocks in the Index are selected from the FTSE USA Index, comprised of 600 of the largest U.S. publicly-listed equities." Close, but no cigar.

I am sticking with SCHD and its .05 expense ratio as well as being commission free. FWIW, I am also an investor in DSENX.