http://funds-newsletter.com/may19-newsletter/may19.htm
Why Being "Rational" Usually Fails When Making Investment Decisions
By Tom Madell
Without wanting to sound presumptuous, this may be the most unusual investment article you are likely to ever read. Why? Because it likely goes against everything about investing you may have ever have considered.
The article consists of two related parts. The first part deals with deciding whether or not to invest at all. The second part tries to shed some light on making more specific buy/sell decisions. In both cases, I argue that using apparently reasonable and logical information to help make investment decisions may not turn out favorably. Feel free to skip the first part if you are already committed to a long-term program of investing.

https://etfdailynews.com/2019/04/26/russian-stocks-have-rallied-15-in-2019-where-are-the-headed-from-here/
Russian stocks have rallied 15% in 2019, where are the headed from here?
Share This Article
April 26, 2019 1:37pm NYSE:RSX
russia flag
From Craig Mellow: A lot of things are suddenly going Russia’s way, the most important of them emanating from Washington. The Mueller Report, despite voluminous detail on Moscow’s election interference, broke no news on that score that could combat the prevailing “sanctions fatigue.” The Trump administration’s reinvigorated campaign to block Iranian export is putting one more prop under a surging oil market. In Ukraine, the more-or-less peace candidate, erstwhile comedian Volodymyr Zelensky, won the presidential election.
Anyone buying rsx?!

@Derf
Agree, with @hank
There has been an uptick relative to the large whack of Dec. 2018, and those doing dollar cost averaging via 401k, etc. should do okay going forward.
However, I do review/watch what is shown in the below chart.
The chart starts at about the first trading day of 2018; and I use SPY and ITOT to generally look at U.S. large cap, although ITOT has some mid/sm. cap. The NYSE reference is more broad based U.S. cap sizes. The IXUS is global and doesn't include U.S.
NOTES: ITOT is about 80% large cap and contains about 3,300 holdings. IXUS is about evenly split between Asia and Europe regions representing 88% of the 3,200 holdings.
>>>Indeed, there remain some decent sectors returns, as well as those drifting about.
Much of the "up" bump in some etf's and active funds can thank the broad tech. sector and whatever the percentage inclusion may be in a given fund for some of the gain.
Many bond styles remain fairly strong at this time, as well. The 1 year Treasury currently has a higher yield than the 30 year.
IMHO, a lot of varying opinions must be in place to find the equity and bond worlds in their current state.
Chart

Anyone using this up tick as a reason to take some profit ?

Interesting question. But why are you calling today’s market conditions an

“uptick” ? U.S. equity markets today have barely clawed their way back to where they were 6-12 months ago. “Rebound” or “recovery” might better describe today’s market. @Derf, I share your apprehension. While I don’t have access to the Barrons story, I suspect it’s bearish in sentiment. Problem is: These warnings are becoming like a “broken record”. (For those too young to remember vinyl, “broken record” was a phenomenon characterized by the unstoppable repetition of a few notes or words - over and over again.)
Read virtually any respectable financial publication from Barrons to the MFO Monthly Commentaries over the past 8-10 years and you’ll find warnings about overvaluation, lofty levels, dangerous markets, overbought markets, over exuberance, etc.. Yet, had you heeded those warnings 3, 5 or 8 years ago and moved to ultra-safe investments like cash and limited duration bonds you’d likely have been left standing in the dust along the road as markets marched higher.
Does this make me optimistic going forward? No - not in the least. But something isn’t adding up when you compare the decade old flood of warnings about valuations alongside actual U.S. stock market performance over the same period. One possibility (but only a possibility) for those fixated on indexes is that the 10-year steady march higher since 2009 will eventually be erased by a sudden, rapid, downward spiral in valuations. Let’s hope that doesn’t happen. Should it occur, however, it might make the roughly 18 months slide from late ‘07 to early ‘09 look like a Sunday picnic.*
I don’t get paid to give investment advice here, so offer none. :) I share your concerns and I’ve done what I can to lower overall risk in how my retirement monies are invested - appropriate to age and a 10-20 year time horizon. But there are no guarantees. And, whatever plan / course one decides on, it needs to be tailored to age and circumstances. @Derf, I realize this does nothing to satisfy your concerns. But thanks for the question anyway.
*From its peak in 2007 to its low in 2009, The S&P 500 Index fell roughly 50%.
https://www.frbatlanta.org/cenfis/publications/notesfromthevault/0909

Absolutely super post Hank. One that younger investors should save as a reference.

Anyone using this up tick as a reason to take some profit ?

Interesting question. But why are you calling today’s market conditions an “uptick” ? U.S. equity markets today have barely clawed their way back to where they were 6-12 months ago. “Rebound” or “recovery” might better describe today’s market. @Derf, I share your apprehension. While I don’t have access to the Barrons story, I suspect it’s bearish in sentiment. Problem is: These warnings are becoming like a “broken record”. (For those too young to remember vinyl, “broken record” was a phenomenon characterized by the unstoppable repetition of a few notes or words - over and over again.)
Read virtually any respectable financial publication from Barrons to the MFO Monthly Commentaries over the past 8-10 years and you’ll find warnings about overvaluation, lofty levels, dangerous markets, overbought markets, over exuberance, etc.. Yet, had you heeded those warnings 3, 5 or 8 years ago and moved to ultra-safe investments like cash and limited duration bonds you’d likely have been left standing in the dust along the road as markets marched higher.
Does this make me optimistic going forward? No - not in the least. But something isn’t adding up when you compare the decade old flood of warnings about valuations alongside actual U.S. stock market performance over the same period. One possibility (but only a possibility) for those fixated on indexes is that the 10-year steady march higher since 2009 will eventually be erased by a sudden, rapid, downward spiral in valuations. Let’s hope that doesn’t happen. Should it occur, however, it might make the roughly 18 months slide from late ‘07 to early ‘09 look like a Sunday picnic.*
I don’t get paid to give investment advice here, so offer none. :) I share your concerns and I’ve done what I can to lower overall risk in how my retirement monies are invested - appropriate to age and a 10-20 year time horizon. But there are no guarantees. And, whatever plan / course one decides on, it needs to be tailored to age and circumstances. @Derf, I realize this does nothing to satisfy your concerns. But thanks for the question anyway.
*From its peak in 2007 to its low in 2009, The S&P 500 Index fell roughly 50%.
https://www.frbatlanta.org/cenfis/publications/notesfromthevault/0909

Thanks Lewis:
Regards,
Ted
GAM: 2/1/27
CET: 10/1/29
TY: 1/14/29
ADX: 0/11/29
PEO: 1/30/29

I just checked how Merrill handles mutual fund tax lots. Its inability to handle fractional shares results in its doing backward somersaults to get the numbers to add up right. Fictitious lots are thrown in with phony prices. A single fund purchase of mine is shown as three different buys on the same date, all with different prices!
These cascading "rounding errors" result not in a difference of a penny here and there, but tens of dollars in costs for various lots. One cannot inform Merrill of cost basis errors online, one must submit a paper form.
Nor is it possible to specify online which fund shares to sell. (You can do this at Merrill with stocks/ETFs.) Even at Vanguard (the brokerage everyone loves to hate) one can sell specific mutual fund shares online. Of course, Vanguard understands mutual funds.
And that paper form dated 2019? It highlights (italicizes) the following incorrect information:
NOTE: The information contained in the Capital Gain and Loss section of your annual tax statement is provided by Merrill Lynch as a value-added service and is not furnished to the IRS. The IRS has several approved methods for calculating cost basis. The calculation method you choose will affect the amount of the taxable gain or loss reported for the year. You are being required to specify the method you have elected to use on your tax return. Once a method is selected, that method must be used for all shares held in the security. To change the method, the approval of the IRS is required.
The parts I underlined are wrong with respect to covered shares.

FYI: As an investor, it’s easy to blow it. You could sell too early, buy too late. Bet on a loser or pass over a winner. But often the most damaging mistake has nothing to do with the selection or timing of investments—it is carelessness when it comes to managing a portfolio for taxes. This is particularly important when you’re planning how you’ll take withdrawals for retirement income.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.marketwatch.com/articles/have-multiple-retirement-accounts-use-them-in-this-order-51553425225?mod=barrons-on-marketwatch

FYI: Even the happiest married couples sometimes fight over money. When two people share a life and a financial future, it’s only to be expected—especially when you each come into the relationship with different levels of financial literacy, risk tolerance, earning power, assumptions, and expectations. Part of the problem is that spending and saving are often deeply emotional, reflecting our values, goals, and unspoken assumptions.
In my experience working with hundreds of couples, I’ve shared the following tips to help people get on the same page as the person they love:
Regards,
Ted
https://www.marketwatch.com/articles/how-to-stop-fighting-with-your-spouse-about-money-51556370000?mod=barrons-on-marketwatch

There are also old closed-end funds, which really are mutual funds precursors:
generalamericaninvestors.com/
GAM
CET
TY
ADX
PEO
All were founded prior to 1930.

CENSX and the work of Allan Fulkerson made for an interesting story for someone invested heavily with them for 20y or so starting early 1980s, as I was.
There are some history and background here:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/containers/fix044/1093439/0000891804-08-002063.txt
Reading about them on M* and elsewhere was an object lesson in niche research and stock selection; even with the usual broad charter they invariably focused on financials, some energy, iirc, but above all on insurance and reinsurers.

@MFO Members: And don't forget Voya, Lexingtion, Corporate Fund LEXCX
with an equal number of common stock shares of leading U.S. companies at the time; currently invested in a total of 22 leading U.S. corporations.
New stocks can’t be purchased, so holdings have changed only due to spin-offs or mergers since fund inception 11/18/35, and is ranked #11 in the LCV category by U.S. News & World Report.
Also, contrary to popular belief, the first index fund was not created by John Bogle. The Qualidex Fund was lanuched in 1972. It was based on the DJIA, and in 1979 was acquired by John Galbraith and renamed the American Industry Shares. In 1984 it became part of Templeton Funds, but because of John Templeton's aversion to the index concept the fund was liquidated. Bogle started his Vanguard Fund based on the S&P 500 Index on 8/31/76 !
Regards,
Ted

@msf, Thanks for the clarification. I was doing some comparisons of longer term returns on various funds I own when that 1931 inception date jumped out at me. Tossed-up a hastily unearthed Investopedia link which you correctly took to task.
I knew there were some mutual funds around at the time of the Great Depression, but didn’t realize any would still be around or be recognizable today. (I’ll see if I can come up with a copy of the 1931 Prospectus for DODBX - assuming they even existed in 1931.) Per Lipper DODBX has returned +9.50% annually since inception June 26, 1931.)
Nice words about the firm from Ed in the April 1 Commentary. Definitely not for everyone. 2008 was a real eye-opener for at least some of their funds. Certainly low profile, considering their sizable foot print in the investing community. I wouldn’t be able to name a single manager there. Can’t recall ever reading / viewing an ad for any of their funds. Can’t even remember the last time one of their reps appeared on CNBC or Bloomberg.

Here is an update for Old_Skeet's market barometer (which follows the S&P 500 Index) for the week ending April 26, 2019 along with my thinking.
Old_Skeet being a retail investor provides this information for information purposes only. It simply reflects what I am seeing in the markets, my thinking, along with what sectors have worked best within the Index and my best performing funds for the past week. My thinking, my positioning, along with my comments, should not to be taken as investment advice.
First quarter earning season is now well underway with about 25% of the companies within the Index reporting. Thus far, earnings are far better than expected while revenues are falling short. For the week Old_Skeet's market barometer closed with an overbought reading of 138 which is the same as last week's reading. Short interest in the Index moved from 1.8 days to 2.3 days to cover as some investors have increased their short positions during the week. The yield on the US10YrT moved from 2.56% to 2.50% while the yield for the Index (SPY) remained at 1.85%. The 500 Index moved from 2905 to 2940 for a gain of 1.2% for the week. Trading volumes remain light and below their averages as investors continue to ponder stocks while many investors seek the safety in bonds. The three best performing sectors, for this past week, were Health Care +3.66%, Telecom Services +2.69% and Consumer Discretionary +1.42%. For Old_Skeet, I'm not presently putting new money to work in either my stock or bond funds while I await a higher barometer reading indicating a better investing climate for stocks; and, I'm also awaiting better yields from bonds. Clearly, by the metrics of the barometer, the Index is overbought.
For the week my three best performing funds were AOFAX +5.31% ... SPECX +3.21% ... and, KAUAX +2.68%. For the month the three best performing were SPECX +6.17% ... NDVAX +5.35% ... and, LPEFX +5.33%. In compairson, the S&P 500 Index was up 1.20% for the week and 4.31% for the month.
I'll be moving back to monthly reporting starting in May. For me, summertime is calling and Old_Skeet is going to follow an old seasonal trend, again, this year, where I reduce my investing activity towards the beginning of summer and then begin to get more active sometime around Labor Day. I'm still with my plan to trim equities and raise cash during the next few weeks as my asset allocation is presently equity heavy and cash light.
Thanks for stopping by and reading.
I wish all ... "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet

FYI: IF YOU ASK an insurance agent how much coverage you should have, the answer invariably is “more.” What if you show too much interest? Next thing you know, you could find yourself the unhappy owner of a high-cost variable annuity.
Consumers, meanwhile, take what might be politely described as a barbell approach. Sometimes, they’re acutely aware of a particular risk and buy more coverage than they need—a frequent occurrence with auto and health insurance. But in other instances, they simply ignore the risk. This leads folks to skip life, umbrella liability, disability and long-term-care insurance.
Want to make more rational decisions? Keep in mind these 11 rules of insurance:
Regards,
Ted
https://humbledollar.com/2019/04/cover-me/

FYI: More than 30,000 shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway are expected to descend on Omaha, Neb., for its annual meeting on May 4. There, they will celebrate the company and savor insights from its leadership at what could be one of the last meetings when CEO Warren Buffett and Vice Chairman Charlie Munger share the stage. Buffett is 88, and Munger, 95.
Berkshire (ticker: BRK.A) holders, however, haven’t had a lot to cheer about lately as the stock has trailed the market this year amid frustration among some investors that Buffett continues to sit on more than $110 billion of cash in what may be a fruitless quest for what he has called an “elephant-size” acquisition.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffett-berkshire-hathaway-annual-meeting-51556318055?mod=hp_LEAD_1

FYI: Two thousand nineteen isn’t even a third over and it’s already shaping up as a great year for the financial markets. The S&P 500 index and the Nasdaq Composite both ended the week at record highs, a big reason that global equity markets have gained $10 trillion in value since the turn of the year, with global credit markets kicking in another $2 trillion to investors’ wealth, by the reckoning of Torsten Slok, chief economist at Deutsche Bank Securities.
At the risk of propounding American exceptionalism, U.S. markets have handily outdistanced the rest of the world. Using exchange-traded funds to illustrate, the SPDR S&P 500 ETF (ticker: SPY) posted a total return (including dividends) of 16.73% for the year through Thursday, according to fund tracker Morningstar’s data. The Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ), which tracks the biggest stocks in the tech-heavy Nasdaq, returned 23.7%. Venturing abroad paid less well. The iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA), which tracks the major non-U.S. developed markets, returned 12.59%, while the iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) returned 11.9%.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/intel-and-3m-are-among-the-losers-in-this-record-setting-market-51556325767

Unfortunately, one can usually count on articles like this to not really dig into details. Especially those concerning fund changes.
MFO doesn't generate a link for #4 (Century Shares Trust), because that fund no longer exists. It was merged into an already existing fund in 2017. Here's the proxy statement on the merger.
Century Shares, with AUM of $223,701,378.25 was merged into the smaller CMLIX, with AUM of $49,242,957. For accounting purposes, Century Shares Trust was considered the survivor and thus its history prior to the merger is now shown as the history for CMLIX. (See Accounting Survivor and Reporting History in this RR Donnelley paper, Merger of Investment Companies.) Accounting tricks aside, CMLIX was designated the acquiring fund, and Century Shares was absorbed.
Similarly, albeit more simply, Putnam Investors Fund was merged into Putnam Multi-Cap Core Fund (PMYAX and other share classes) last year, with the latter being the surviving fund; Investors Fund's record was merged out of existence.
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/39698/putnam-investors-fund-reorganization
On the other hand, this list omits the first no load fund sold. Scudder launched it on April 24, 1928 as Norfolk Investment Corp. On May 24, it was renamed First Investment Counsel Corp. On Sept. 5, 1939, its name was changed to Scudder, Stevens & Clark Fund, Inc.
Somewhere along the line its name was changed to Scudder, Stevens & Clark Balanced Fund. In 1970, it changed its investment objective and became Scudder Income Fund. (See Bogle, Clash of the Cultures, pdf p. 187.) Then things got really convoluted. Scudder was bought by Zurich (which owned Kemper) in 1995 but the fund retained its Scudder name. Deutsche Bank acquired Scudder Investments from Zurich in 2001.
The Scudder funds retained their names until 2006, when Deutsche Bank renamed all of them with DWS. Scudder Income Fund was renamed DWS Core Plus Income Fund. Then on 10/30/17, it was renamed again, to DWS Total Return Bond Fund (SZIAX and other share classes).
Unlike Century Shares Trust, no mergers or acquisitions. Just enough name changes to get dropped from its rightful place on this list.

Interestingly, DODGX (Dodge and Cox Stock) wasn’t opened for more than 30 years (1965) after the inception of DODBX (Dodge and Cox Balanced) in 1931. I’m thinking that 1931 probably wasn’t an opportune year in which to try and sell the public on a stock fund. :)
1 MFS Massachusetts Investors Fund (MITTX) 1924
2 Putnam Investors Fund (PINVX) 1925
3 Pioneer Fund (PIODX) 1928
4 Century Shares Fund (CENSX) 1928
5 Vanguard Wellington Fund (VWELX) 1929
7 CGM Mutual Fund (LOMMX) 1929
8 Fidelity Fund (FFIDX) 1930
9 Dodge & Cox Balance Fund (DODBX) 1931
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/08/oldestmutualfunds.asp

(Apologies - A bit late reading all of the April 1 Commentary).
Ed Studzinski never fails to entertain, inform and enlighten (sometimes more of one than another). Just a brief snippet (actually the closing lines) from his look at the creative process in designing and marketing new funds by purveyors of the art (“Brand or Generic?”).
“And understand something that is too often not emphasized enough. Or it is glossed over. Your mutual fund manager and his firm are in business to make money, first for themselves. The fund is a product. You are the consumers. As consumers, you should feel free to pull your money and go elsewhere if the product changes in ways you don’t understand, is cheapened, or does not meet your goals, objectives, and expectations. Loyalty is not a two-way street in the investment world. It is strictly buyer beware.”
(Underlining mine)