The model portfolio has a very high (35%) allocation to international equities, IMHO.

Little bit of a home bias there @willmatt72?

Here are a few bullet points from the newsletter.
"Our current Model Stock Portfolio bears many resemblances to the one from a year ago since I still believe that several of its basic premises remain valid. These are
-International stocks remain the category with the most forward-looking promise.
-Value stocks are likely to be a better place to be than Growth Stocks.
-Sector funds, if chosen at all, should represent the most undervalued sectors available."
For information purposes ... I am about 35% foreign equity within my own portfolio. In addition, I am overwieght the materials and energy sectors (plus a couple of others) by a couple of percentage points above the weightings currently found in the S&P 500 Index. And, value stock make up about 40% to 45% of my equities. So, it looks like I am good to go as I have aligned parts of my portfolio along the lines of his bullet points not knowing his thinking until recently. Seems, we derived at much of the same conclusions.
Old_Skeet

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
October 1, 2015
Dear WEALTHTRACK Subscriber,
Today’s front page of “The Wall Street Journal” sums it up: “A Painful Quarter for Markets.” The third quarter, which just ended was the worst for stocks since 2011’s third quarter during the European debt crisis. In the three months ended yesterday, the S&P 500 lost 6.9% and the Dow Industrials dropped 7.6%. Concerns about a slowdown in global growth, especially in China and faltering corporate earnings contributed to the damage. According to the Journal, analysts are predicting third quarter profits for S&P 500 companies will decline 4.5% versus a year ago. They fell 0.7% in the second quarter. It will be the first time since 2009 that profits fall two quarters in a row. However, a big decline in energy company profits is responsible for most of the anticipated damage. Without the estimated 65% decline in energy operating profits the S&P’s earnings would be up 3.4%.
Another key contributor to the market’s malaise was the Federal Reserve’s decision not to raise interest rates in September. After nearly seven years of its unprecedented zero interest rate policy, or ZIRP as it’s known on Wall Street, the consensus was it was time to get interest rates out of emergency mode and back to some sort of normalcy.
It turns out Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen agrees with the consensus. In a stunning speech the week after the Fed’s decision, Ms. Yellen made a lengthy case for a rate hike this year “…it will likely be appropriate to raise the target range for the federal-funds rate sometime later this year and to continue boosting short-term rates at a gradual pace thereafter as the labor market improves further and inflation moves back to our 2% objective.”
As veteran Fed watcher, Roberto Perli at Cornerstone Macro noted, after months of not knowing where Chairwoman Yellen stood on rate hikes, we now have clarity on her views at least.
This seemingly endless fixation on when and if the Fed will raise short term rates might seem overdone but the signals and actions of the world’s most influential central bank, of the world’s reserve currency country has huge implications and can steady or roil global markets.
This week’s guest, Kathleen Gaffney, is among those very concerned about recent Fed policy and its financial impact on markets and investors, but she is also more optimistic than most about the world’s growth prospects.
Gaffney is Co-Director of Diversified Fixed Income at Eaton Vance Investment Management. She is also lead portfolio manager of the Eaton Vance Bond Fund, which she launched in early 2013. Until 2012 Gaffney was Co-Portfolio Manager of the Loomis Sayles Bond Fund with legendary investor Dan Fuss where their team was named Morningstar’s Fixed Income Manager of the Year. In this week’s interview, I asked Gaffney why the Federal Reserve’s decision not to raise interest rates in September was a mistake and about the contrarian positions which have hurt her fund’s performance this year.
If you’d like to see the show before it airs, it is available to our PREMIUM subscribers right now. We also have an EXTRA interview with Gaffney, about bond market illiquidity and how she is handling it, available exclusively on our website.
As always, if you have comments or questions, we encourage you to connect with us via Facebook or Twitter.
Thank you for watching. Have a great weekend and make the week ahead a profitable and productive one.
Best Regards,
Consuelo

Another take on it, as well as who else is starting to do it.
http://www.etf.com/sections/daily-etf-watch/daily-etf-watch-jpm-plans-europe-funds
@ibartman Momentum, of course! That's the one I couldn't recall. Thanks for looking it up. Now, if they were to offer a fund in the small cap space (where I think their out-performing strategy is really their claim to fame), then I'd have to admit I'd probably have to dig fairly deeply into those documents, despite the fact I'm still quite reluctant to use ETFs for anything other than short(er)-term trading purposes. And that, it appears, puts me increasingly in the "outlier" position, once again (sigh):

from http://www.ai-cio.com/channel/ASSET-ALLOCATION/Smart-Beta-s-ETF-Domination/?curator=thereformedbroker&utm_source=thereformedbroker

The model portfolio has a very high (35%) allocation to international equities, IMHO.

New Model Portfolios are contained in this newsletter along with why the cash allocation has been reduced in all the model portfolios.
http://funds-newsletter.com/oct15-newsletter/oct15.htm

YASSX has a minimum investment of 25k.

David Snowball's Monthly Commentary for October 1, 2015
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2015/10/october-1-2015/
(Note to readers: I screwed up yesterday and linked David's September Commentary - which explains the initial reactions.)

Champlain:
http://www.cipvt.com/pdf/Champlain Estimated Yr End Distributions 09 17 15.pdf
Dimensional Funds - DFA
https://my.dimensional.com/insight/special_postings/171466/
Evermore
http://www.evermoreglobal.com/dividends.html
Harbor
http://www.harborfunds.com/downloads/2015_Dividend_Estimates.pdf
Loomis
http://www.loomissayles.com/internet/internet.nsf/content?readform&ctype=capitalgains&channel=fa
Oakmark
http://www.oakmark.com/News/News-and-Insights-Placeholder/2015-Fund-Distribution-Estimates.htm
Parnassus
http://www.parnassus.com/parnassus-mutual-funds/dividend-info
Royce
https://www.roycefunds.com/news/2015/10/open-end-funds-2015-year-end-distributions

Uh, Valeant might be in a spot of trouble - or at least have some considerable explaining to do.
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2015/09/valeant price chart.jpg

The Lazard prospectus does say: "The Investment Manager generally seeks to substantially hedge foreign currency exposure in the Portfolio against movements relative to the US dollar by entering into foreign currency forward contracts, although the Portfolio’s total foreign currency exposure may not be fully hedged at all times."
The Northern Funds (multiple funds described in its prospectus) are allowed but not required to hedge: "Each of the other Funds may enter into forward currency exchange contracts for hedging purposes, in anticipation of the purchase of securities and for liquidity management purposes, but not for speculative purposes or to seek to enhance total return, and are not expected to use these instruments as a principal investment strategy." (p. 74, pdf p. 76)
Another difference is that the Lazard fund is diversified, while the Northern fund is not:
Lazard: "Although the Portfolio is classified as “diversified” under the 1940 Act, it may invest in a smaller number of issuers than other, more diversified, investment portfolios."
Northern: "The Fund is classified as non-diversified under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), and may invest more of its assets in fewer issuers than 'diversified'
mutual funds."
That is however misleading. Lazard is the more concentrated fund, investing in 30 or so stocks, Northern invests in around 80 (which could simply represent the addition of two portfolios, from Lazard and Brookfield). That seems to be confirmed by M*'s overlap tool. It shows 25 of Lazard's holdings are in the Northern fund, usually at half the concentration. That is, the same ratio, just cut in half since Lazard manages half the Northern fund's assets.

See my comment to Ted's Aug 15 post:
Is Your Small-Cap ETF Now A Biotech ETF?
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/23079/is-your-small-cap-etf-now-a-biotech-etf

August 15
Ted: Thanks for link. It's more than just "small cap" investors.
Consider ... Is your Sequoia Fund now a biotech fund?
Morningstar: SEQUX Portfolio Summary
Morningstar: SEQUX Portfolio Holdings

CURRENCY HEDGING IN NORTHERN FUND?
I believe [unsure] that one difference between (at least the Lazard-managed-portion of the) Northern Trust Fund (NMFIX) is that they don't appear to hedge their currency risk.
Suggested by prospectus available here:
https://www.northerntrust.com/documents/prospectuses/individual/prospectus_3708710_statutory.pdf?bc=24061071
and page # 35 of the annual report available here:
https://www.northerntrust.com/documents/annual-reports/mutual-funds/individual/nf_annual_multi_manager.pdf?bc=24061071
I don't believe that there is much currency hedging going on with the Northern fund.
I recall that the directly sold Lazard fund does hedge currency risk. Can others confirm?
The Fact Card for the Lazard fund (Note 1, on back at bottom) notes that the Custom Benchmark for fund is:

The Custom Infrastructure Index (USD Hedge) is the UBS Global 50/50 Infrastructure & Utilities Index (Hedged USD) from inception to March 31, 2015 and the FTSE
Developed Core Infrastructure 50/50 100% Hedged to USD Net Tax Index afterwards.

Fact Card available at right, here:
http://www.lazardnet.com/us/mutual-funds/lfi-open-end-funds/real-assets-portfolios/global-listed-infrastructure/
For what it is worth, Deutsche Bank has a very tiny (AUM) ETF that follows the same index as IGF and GII [S&P Global Infrastructure Index], but which hedges currency exposure. Info available here:
DBIF: http://tinyurl.com/DBIF-GIFund
IGF: http://www.etf.com/IGF
GII: http://www.etf.com/GII
CHART
http://tinyurl.com/dbif-igf-glifx-nmfix

One use for such a fund....?
If the fund company allows you to establish withholding for your non-retirement fund accounts, then it would be an easy way to increase the amount of dollars that you have withheld with respect to your 2015 tax year..... ;^)

Update:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318342/000139834415006624/fp0016238_497.htm
497 1 fp0016238_497.htm
361 Managed Futures Strategy Fund
Investor Class (AMFQX)
Class I (AMFZX)
A series of Investment Managers Series Trust
Supplement dated September 30, 2015,
to the Summary Prospectus and Prospectus
dated March 1, 2015
IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING PURCHASE OF FUND SHARES
The closure of the 361 Managed Futures Strategy Fund to investment by new investors that was disclosed by the Fund in a Supplement dated September 9, 2015, has been delayed until certain administrative and other implementation matters have been completed. The investment advisor to the Fund, 361 Capital, LLC, anticipates that the Fund will continue to be publicly offered to all investors until on or before December 31, 2015.
Please file this Supplement with your records.

Just another viewpoint: anyone who owns a substantial slug in their older global funds may not particularly need to chase the micro fund - GPROX has 30% in micros and GPGOX has 25%.

For a rebuttal to the Barron's article go here: http://mlpguy.com/archives/5181
Writers on or for Barron's have been after MLP's for some time now beginning with the dreck they published on Kinder Morgan. I'm not sure what their agenda is but I'm disappointed that their editorial board deems this nonsense worthy of publication. Sells magazines I guess.

Well, for those holding it still, don't say you weren't put on notice. :)
SURPRISE!!! [this notice just came to me via e-mail]:
FPA U.S. Value Fund, Inc. (FPPFX) Estimated Capital Gains Distribution
Los Angeles (September 22, 2015) - As discussed in the June 4, 2015 announcement, “FPA Launches U.S. Value Strategy,” the strategy change has resulted in the realization of significant long-term capital gains. Currently, this amount is approximately $38.00 per share. It is important to note that the actual distribution rate will be calculated as of September 30, 2015, and may change from this preliminary amount. The distribution is payable on October 2, 2015. This distribution will be taxable in 2015 and reported to shareholders on the Form 1099 they will receive in early 2016. FPA expects to reopen the Fund to new investors in October, following the distribution and completion of the portfolio transition.

Thanks, catch22. I just noticed that myself. Also, GLFOX is not as heavily invested in energy per se. I see about 8.5 % whereas TOLLX is about 25%. I'm sure that's part of the difference as well.

That's probably the core difference - pipeline companies and other such energy infrastructure names have done terribly this year.

More smartness comes to the indexing space in the form of an ETF (believe in the Force, Luke, just believe in The Force).
As first announced (er, sorry, "unveiled"), in July:
http://blogs.barrons.com/focusonfunds/2015/07/13/john-hancock-to-partner-with-dimensional-fund-advisors-on-smart-beta-etfs/
John Hancock Investments filed the paperwork with the SEC to offer six factor-based ETFs, to be subadvised by Dimensional Fund Advisors. I assumed they would be some kind of enhanced index funds, or index funds enhanced by some kind of smartness ("smart-beta").
And so they become, as described upon their initiation yesterday:
http://blogs.barrons.com/focusonfunds/2015/09/29/john-hancockdfa-multifactor-etfs-debut/?mod=BOL_hp_blog_fof
John Hancock Investments’ first exchange-traded funds hit the market on Tuesday.
Hancock’s six “smart-beta” stock ETFs are are driven by Dimensional Fund Advisors, the market-beating investment firm that adheres to the academic work of Eugene Fama and Kenneth French. Four of the index-tracking ETFs target market sectors, while two others aim at large- and medium-sized companies.

John Hancock Multifactor Large Cap ETF (JHML) (0.35%)
John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF (JHMM) (0.45%)
John Hancock Multifactor Consumer Discretionary ETF (JHMC) (0.5%)
John Hancock Multifactor Financials ETF (JHMF) (0.5%)
John Hancock Multifactor Healthcare ETF (JHMH) (0.5%)
John Hancock Multifactor Technology ETF (JHMT) (0.5%)
Who knows? Maybe some or all of them will work out just fine.
I think DFA uses 4 factors to take a measure of things, but I can't recall what they are. Perhaps someone could step into this thread and specify what those factors are.