5k is right for fidelity and Schwab I believe

Thanks for the information. He clearly struck-out on THAT score. I'll stick with him, though. DLFNX is a small position. Today, I just added a tiny bit to it, too.

His funds have done well. Better than his predictions. Then again these markets of recent years have tripped up many experts. I hold DLFNX as well.

I'm also looking at DLFNX, as well as DoubleLine Total Return.
FWIW, you can get into the institutional share classes in an IRA at asset levels FAR below that required in a taxable account. IIRC, something like $5k, versus 100k......don't quote me on that

OK. I'm not in any munis. Was he correct?

Crash, nope......he wasn't correct. Nothing even remotely close to a "major collapse."
Here's how muni bonds have done in each calendar year starting 2010
We'll look at : Vanguard Intermediate-Term Tax Exempt VWITX
This is a national muni fund (as opposed to a state specific muni fund)
You can also see how the index performed and how the category performed

And what happened in 2013 was not a muni bond market issue, but rather a bond market as a whole issue......interest rates rose. For example, the Barclay's Aggregate bond market index was down roughly 2% that year.

@DavidMMP Maybe you can get it online:
http://ir.oaktreecapital.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=212597&p=taxinformation

From the 2011 article:
By Jonathan R. Laing
Updated Feb. 21, 2011
Gundlach made a couple of very significant predictions in 2011:
http://online.barrons.com/articles/SB50001424052970204442204576144662301971254?tesla=y
Celebrated bond-fund manager Jeffrey Gundlach has a healthy -- some might say overdeveloped -- ego.
"Look, I have a gift, or some would say a curse, of being able to have stunning insight into the reality of markets and the economy," Gundlach says.........But whether it's bond selection or asset allocation, we can do it better than just about anybody around."
"Though I rarely go public with specifics on stocks, I think the Standard & Poor's 500, which is now over 1300, will hit 500 in the next couple of years," he says.

"He foresees a major collapse in the municipal-bond market, beyond the declines to date, given the parlous condition of both state and local government finances. He is preparing, he says, by having established a joint venture with the Chicago financial firm RiverNorth. Among other things, it expects to scoop up closed-end municipal-bond funds in the next year or so when the predicted apocalypse arrives, driving fund prices down, he says, to as little as 40% of net asset value. "

Here's a link to the February Barron's thing on Gundlach:
http://online.barrons.com/articles/SB50001424052970204442204576144662301971254?tesla=y

Am I missing something here? You linked a four year old article.

Oh, goodness, you're right. Sorry about that. I just went to look for the one I MEANT to link here. Sonsofbitches have got it blocked, unless you subscribe. Dated 03 January, 2015.

No problem. I do respect the opinions of Gundlach and overlay it with positive price action. Albeit, I can't recall him ever being overly enthusiastic for junk corporates during its run since the December 2008 bottom. Must not be his bailiwick

Here's a link to the February Barron's thing on Gundlach:
http://online.barrons.com/articles/SB50001424052970204442204576144662301971254?tesla=y

Am I missing something here? You linked a four year old article.

Oh, goodness, you're right. Sorry about that. I just went to look for the one I MEANT to link here. Sonsofbitches have got it blocked, unless you subscribe. Dated 03 January, 2015.

All pretty predictable. Did anyone really think we'd walk away from the talks without some kind of agreement after going right down to the wire (plus agreeing to a couple time extensions)?
No knowledge of the agreement or opinion whether it's good or bad. Of dubious importance from an investing point of view. Stock market reacted with a big yawn - probably the correct reaction. Should prospects of passage in the Senate improve in the weeks ahead ... that's probably positive for the markets - overvalued though they are. Media was all over the 3% slide in crude. Seem to have forgotten about yesterday's near 5% rise.
Not sure what Ted sees in Art Cashin.

One thing that gets tricky is that M*'s "average" market cap is a geometric average, not an arithmetic average, but I agree with your thought. The market cap of the largest positions in VSCIX is above the market cap of the smallest stocks in the S&P 500. The thing I'm having trouble with is that I can't find the biggest positions in VIMAX in the S&P 500. I only checked a couple, but I would have expected to find most of the top positions in the S&P 500 based on market cap. Based on the market cap, I would have expected to find a few of the top positions in VSCIX in the S&P 500 also but I didn't find that either. Maybe my sample of a couple wasn't big enough...
I also think you'll find that most of the smallest companies in the Russell 2500 are not included in VSCIX so if that's important to you then you might need to find a fund that addresses those stocks. VSCIX is about 1500 stocks and I suspect a decent portion of what's missing from the 2500 are the smallest ones based on the criteria CRSP uses for the index that VSCIX follows.

FYI: U .S. money market fund assets fell $44.36 billion to $2.676 trillion in the week ended March 31 for its largest single-week increase since the second week of October 2013, the Money Fund Report said on Wednesday.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/01/us-funds-imoneynet-idUSKBN0MS59E20150401
Correction;
QUARTER ENDS WITH U.S. MMF OUTFLOWS TOPPING $44 BILLION
U.S. money-market funds ended the first quarter with a weekly asset decline of $44.36 billion as of March 31, according to Money Fund Report®, a service of iMoneyNet in Westborough, Mass. The drop erased last week’s $32.37 billion increase and marked the largest one-week exodus of total fund assets since Oct. 15, 2013.
Total fund assets settled at $2.676 trillion for the week. Taxable money fund assets fell $42.55 billion to $2.418 trillion. Prime Institutional fund assets were down by $32.75 billion. Government Institutional fund assets slipped $8.72 billion while Taxable Retail fund assets declined $1.09 billion.
Tax-Free fund assets decreased $1.81 billion, lowering their total to $257.66 billion.
The iMoneyNet Money Fund Average™ 7-Day Simple Yield for All Taxable money-market funds was 0.02 percent for a 10th consecutive week. The iMoneyNet Money Fund Average™ 7-Day Simple Yield for All Tax-Free and Municipal money-market funds remained at 0.01 percent for a 100th straight week.
There were 991 taxable and 396 tax-free and municipal money-market funds reporting this week. iMoneyNet has tracked taxable MMFs since 1975, tax-free funds since 1981, and non-U.S. money funds since 1999.
Note to Media Members: To receive this weekly data summary by e-mail, send request to [email protected].
Posted:4/1/2015 3:06:00 PM
Click here for more iMoneyNet NEWS EXCLUSIVES

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
WSJ Slant:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-stock-futures-edge-lower-1427977270
Bloomberg Slant:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-02/u-s-index-futures-fall-signaling-s-p-500-to-drop-for-3rd-day
Reuters Slant:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/02/us-markets-stocks-idUSKBN0MT15220150402
MarketWatch Slant:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-stocks-futures-point-to-third-day-of-losses-ahead-of-easter-weekend-2015-04-02/print
WSJ Markets At A Glance:
http://markets.wsj.com/us
Sector Tracker:
http://www.sectorspdr.com/sectorspdr/tools/sector-tracker
Current Futures:
http://finviz.com/futures.ashx

Here's a link to the February Barron's thing on Gundlach:
http://online.barrons.com/articles/SB50001424052970204442204576144662301971254?tesla=y

Am I missing something here? You linked a four year old article.

The Lead Manager Jeff Kautz Is Resigning Effective 4/5/15

FYI: you’re not an investing hobbyist and you don’t employ an adviser, you simply have no reason not to invest in index funds—funds that track broad market indexes rather than try to beat them.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.kiplinger.com/printstory.php?pid=13439

FYI: While hardly low-risk, these multisector- and non-traditional-bond funds have held up well in recent stress tests.
Regards,
Ted
http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=691227

FYI: In review of the best mutual funds of Q1 2015, we are not looking to chase after the winners, but rather to gain insights into where the money is flowing, which can then provide clues about investor sentiment and potential investment themes for upcoming quarters.
Regards,
Ted
http://investorplace.com/2015/04/best-mutual-funds-q1-2015-ryjsx-fbiox-pedix/print

Based on what I read on M*'s fund analysis, VIMAX targets the 70-85% range of market capitalization and VSCIX targets the 85-98% range of market capitalization. When I read about the index they replicate, that means they should each be covering roughly the same total portion (a bit more for VIMAX) of US market capitalization, so if you want a market cap weighted approach you would allocate roughly equal amounts.

Here's a link to the February Barron's thing on Gundlach:
http://online.barrons.com/articles/SB50001424052970204442204576144662301971254?tesla=y

The rough market cap of the holdings in VSCIX is about $3.6 trillion while VIMAX is about 3.9, so a 50/50 split would be pretty close to market weighing the holdings across the two funds.

>>>Personally, I share a lot of what I do on this board and when I do, I give reasoning. I do own GILD and other healthcare stocks and a few differerent funds. As for GILD in particular, you have a company that had $24.9B in revenue in 2014, a 127% increase over 2013. Starts a dividend soon, $15B buyback, has a significant pipeline and yet, is trading at a 13 p/e. I think the current valuation is cheap and discounts a lot of the pipeline. It is likely in part to the idea of competition and pricing for their HEP-C treatments coming down, but Abbvie's competing Viekira Pak has been disappointing in terms of numbers and in terms of pricing coming down (also partly due to controversy over prices, although the question becomes how much would a liver transplant be), I think that's largely been discounted already. <<<<
Well, I don't see it but then large cap stocks aren't my thing. I see analysts predicting revenues slowing to 13.10% in 2015 and then 3.80% in 2016. Hopefully my hesitation will act as contrary indicator and propel GILD out of its funk since last summer.
Edit: I assume these large cap biotechs with projected slowdowns in their revenue growth can make strategic acquisitions to remedy that?