I'm still 100% in HY Muni bonds paying me about 5.1% - only state tax. Munis haven't seen capital appreciation this year. My guess it is the possible Fed increase later in the year holding them back.
My current plan is to stop the re-investment of dividends in Jan of 2016 and put that $ into other places, maybe high yield international bonds. Time will tell.

The $20M is in DSL - all a single position.
As Junkster pointed out, this is a muni bond, not a corporate. Aside from that, there are other differences from what Gundlach was talking about. He specifically mentioned a flood of maturities in the 2018 time frame. He felt that this would create a problem both in price (lots of new bonds coming on the market to replace the old ones) and defaults (not having the cash flow to deal with higher coupon bonds?).
PR bonds, in contrast, are generally (still) long term maturing in the 2030s and now 2040s. In particular, the series in DSL mature in 2035. PR is having problems servicing its current debt, but it won't have to deal with rolling over its bonds for many years.
PR bonds are unique in another way. They were recently downgraded to junk (the only "state" bonds to be so graded, so they're in a class by themselves). As a result, funds dumped them (as did many other investors), and they have already been badly punished in the market. As Junkster's link pointed out, they're trading at all-time lows. I have a small portfolio of individual munis, and I watch the PR bond prices drop even as all other muni prices (from BBB to AA) rise.
Not wishing to sound like a Pollyanna, I nevertheless offer a (possibly rare) contrarian view for your consideration: https://www.fmsbonds.com/News/bond_article.asp?id=488

@Dex Saw on a blog last week that "over 30%" of all outstanding HY municipal bonds were PR debt. (sigh) Given your note that HYD municipal index has PR debt at 3.4%, the dude obviously has a problem with zee decimal points.
Quite a stretch this is newsworthy. I mean, 20/2260 x 100= 0.885% .... so?

@hank So, with a solid 50% score, does that mean you're a good guesser, a bad guesser, or just average at guessing? :) And since Ted got a perfect 100%, does that mean he is twice as good at guessing as you are? I dunno, quite the outlier.... almost super-human.

On the inaugural show of the new Wall Street Week, Mr. Gundlach mentioned that a crisis in junk bonds was coming. I guess he knows the day and the hour when it will begin.
http://m.wyff4.com/money/junk-bonds-the-next-financial-crisis/32465346

Gundlach was referring to a crisis in corporate junk bonds not munis. This year the junk corporates are outperforming the junk munis, the reverse of last year. The link below indicates there could be big problems ahead for Puerto Rico munis
http://blogs.barrons.com/incomeinvesting/2015/04/23/puerto-ricos-government-could-shut-down/?mod=BOL_hp_blog_ii

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2015/04/the-market-rhythm-deciphered/print/

FYI: The bull market is in its seventh year and it seems like a lot of investors are just itching to make a change to their portfolio or investing habits.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/6-bad-reasons-to-make-changes-to-your-portfolio-2015-03-07/print

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000373504&play=1

@msf: Thanks for the comment. Since IRA acct can go more aggressive, for tax free growth for 6 more years( a lesson I learnt only 2 years ago) before RMD kicks in, I am tweaking my portfolio, making more index based in taxable and aggressive in IRA. my 401k with ltd. choice is on s&p5[email protected]%. So was looking for suitable alternatives for IRA holding. one i found was poskx. There will be a lot more surely. I find some members like catch22, crash ( max B), msf, rono etc giving really great insights, so am looking forward to some.

@andiel049, I have been impressed by everything about GP until now, including the big investments they have in their own funds, closing funds aggressively and even more hard closing funds. As I mentioned this all screams outperformance to me and in a world where not that many managers outperform over time I don't think its a big surprise that they've gathered assets so quickly. Maybe that's the trick. They thought it might take 10 years to gather this amount of assets. They thought they would close everything at $1.5-$2.0 billion then at $3 billion and now something larger. For all the experience they have they're conservative and they were probably too transparent about the asset levels they thought they could manage.
To answer @JoJo26 's question, I look at this as one small cap portfolio. It helps that it's global but as opposed to many small cap fund managers who are at the top end of small cap or have a lot of assets even in mid-caps, these guys are very small cap and that would lower the assets I'd like to see in the fund(s). I think $3 billion is a great level, but I think $5 billion is probably okay, although they don't have a lot invested in the US and I think that makes $5 billion relatively larger. Once you get past $5 billion I think it starts to get more difficult to keep the market cap down or to "only" have 400 plus stocks (based on GPROX) in their collection. I'm already concerned pending their explanation but above $5 billion I think they're losing their ability to prioritize what they said they would when they closed GPROX last September.
From what I understand, the Stalwarts are just going to be another cut of GPROX and it will be limited, more or less, to the stocks with market caps greater than $1.5 billion. That would tend to make me believe they will include the larger small caps and a good portion of the mid-caps in GPROX. There are only a few holdings that M* categorizes as large cap and while those could certainly be part of the Stalwarts, even so they wouldn't likely make up a big part of it.
@Charles, if we believe what andiel049 says, and I have no reason not to, then it's pretty clear this is motivated by pressure from institutional investors more than investment opportunities or more management fees (although clearly that goes along with more assets). Based on what I've read in commentaries, annual letters or press releases closing funds they've talked about understanding the difficulties hard closing funds causes for asset allocation, they've talked about the desire from customers for more room to continue investing, and it sounds like someone has managed to convince them they might be great at making investment decisions but they're wrong about how much money they can manage and keep making those great investment decisions. I'm trying to keep an open mind but hopefully it will help when they share some of the thinking that went into these decisions.

On the inaugural show of the new Wall Street Week, Mr. Gundlach mentioned that a crisis in junk bonds was coming. I guess he knows the day and the hour when it will begin.
http://m.wyff4.com/money/junk-bonds-the-next-financial-crisis/32465346

FYI: DoubleLine Capital’s Jeffrey Gundlach bought $20 million of junk-rated Puerto Rico bonds this year as the commonwealth struggled with its fiscal crisis.
DoubleLine’s $2.26 billion Income Solutions Fund held $20 million of Puerto Rico general obligations as of Feb. 27, data compiled by Bloomberg show. The fund didn’t hold any commonwealth debt at the end of 2014. The bonds, which were issued in March 2014, traded Wednesday at record-low prices.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-22/gundlach-s-fund-buys-20-million-of-junk-rated-puerto-rico-bonds

If you want active management, POSKX is a great fund. I'm just not sure why it should be particularly better suited to an IRA. Both its turnover and its tax cost ratios are extremely low, and pretty close to those of VTSAX.
Turnover: 8% (vs. 3% for VTSAX)
Tax cost ratio: 1/3/5/10 year: 0.95/0.69/0.50/0.36 (vs. 0.80/0.64/0.50/0.40)

FYI: Vanguard Group is reportedly shopping access to its patented exchange-traded fund share-class methodology.
Regards,
Ted
http://blogs.barrons.com/focusonfunds/2015/04/22/vanguard-reportedly-mulls-licensing-etf-structure-to-usaa/tab/print/

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/811030/000089418915001914/jordan_497e.htm
Supplement dated April 22, 2015 to
Summary Prospectus dated April 17, 2015
Upcoming Reorganization of the Fund
The Board of the Trust has voted to approve an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization whereby the Fund would reorganize out of the Trust and merge into the Meridian Equity Income Fund (the “Meridian Fund”), a series of Meridian Fund, Inc. (the “Reorganization”). The Reorganization would be structured as a tax-free reorganization for federal tax purposes.
The Fund and the Meridian Fund have similar investment objectives and investment risks, but there are differences in the investment strategies utilized by both Funds. After the Reorganization, the fees and expenses of the Meridian Fund are expected to be lower than those of the Fund. The Reorganization would result in the Fund having a different investment adviser, as well as being under the supervision of a different board of directors and utilizing different service providers. Arrowpoint Asset Management, LLC, an SEC-registered investment adviser, currently serves as investment adviser to the Meridian Fund, and is expected to do so immediately following the Reorganization. Similarly, the current board of directors and all other service providers to the Meridian Fund are expected to remain in place immediately following the Reorganization.
In the next few weeks, shareholders of record of the Fund will receive a proxy statement soliciting their vote with respect to the proposed Reorganization. A more complete description of the Reorganization, including the differences in investment strategies and fees and expenses, as well as information regarding the factors the Board considered in approving the Reorganization will be provided in the proxy statement. If approved, the Reorganization is anticipated to take effect on or about June 10, 2015. Approval of the Reorganization requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the outstanding shares of the Fund. When you receive your proxy statement, please review it and cast your vote as instructed in the materials so the Trust may avoid any future solicitations.
Please update your records accordingly.
Please retain this Supplement with the Summary Prospectus for reference.

I am planning to replace VTSAX (vg. Total stock : admiral class) with POSKX (odyssey funds) in the LB category. with ER at 0.05 and 0.62 respectively, I feel poskx is more suited to an IRA acct in place of vtsax). Would like to know others views.

My score was a perfect 50%. (Exactly what you'd expect when guessing)
When these robots sign-up and start posting here, then we got a problem.
John Hussman might as well be a robot. Wrong now for how many years? Would also explain why his photo on his website hasn't changed a bit over the last 15 years. Robots don't age like we humans.

Great call; missed it but caught the mp3 yesterday. I thought AF's explanation of how security picking and macro interact in the Seafarer process was about the most detailed and illuminating I've heard from any manager.

Let me second AndyJ on this. I think Foster has it exactly right: It would be wonderful to get the future Macro environment right, but the unfortunate fact is that nobody can. Better to concentrate on something you might be able to judge with some accuracy, i.e., a company's fundamentals over the next couple of years (maybe 5 years tops in my view).
And a belated thanks to David for setting up these calls. In two cases (Seafarer and RSIVX) they've convinced me to invest in funds I likely would not have otherwise.

Vanguard target funds for your 401Ks whenever you can get them. adjust your bond to equities by picking the appropriate retirement year ie. 2050 or 2025 ect.
In your individual accounts IRAs or Brokerage Vanguard has better choices,
Don't use Fidelity so don't comment or care... better options

Hmm ... It's actually "etc.", an English abbreviation based on two Latin words: "Et" meaning "and" and "Cetra", a form of the pronoun meaning "the others". (Don't they teach Latin in schools any longer?)
To your point about not caring. Agree there are better options, but there are still a couple reasons to care. First, a good number of your fellow citizens lacking your knowledge are being "herded" into these products by their workplace plan administrators. I assume you care some for your fellow citizens?
Second, we can learn quite a bit about investing as well as how different fund companies think based on how they operate these funds. The "glide-path" each establishes represents an attempt to balance the risks inherent in investing against the need for younger workers to grow their assets. These "optimum" allocations by age vary significantly from company to company. It's noteworthy, for instance, that T. Rowe Price is generally one of the more aggressive in the degree of risk they consider appropriate at various ages. Also noteworthy is that Price determined a need to add a real-asset fund to their target-date mix only recently. And the type and duration of bonds selected for these funds in this low-rate environment must surely be of interest.
So, there are reasons to care.

FYI: The trade that George Soros and Stanley Druckenmiller pulled off in 1992 by betting against the British pound -- and making $1 billion in the process -- has gained legendary status. So when Bill Gross, the world's best-known bond investor, tweeted yesterday from his current employer Janus Capital that betting against German government debt is the trade of a "lifetime," he reached for that bit of history to benchmark the current opportunity.
Regards,
Ted
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/bill-grosss-short-lifetime-mean-120622905.html