Another perspective - ranking by percentage of market, and percentage increase/decease of position (e.g. a fund that had 10% or market share and now has 8% would have a decline of 20% of its position):

Family		Market Share	Pct Inc (Dec)	Cumulative Market Share
Vanguard	18.5%		 13.5%		18.5%
Fidelity	10.4%		  1.0%		28.9%
Capital Group	9.9%		 (1.0%)		38.8%
T. Rowe Price	3.9%		  5.4%		42.7%
Franklin Tmpl	3.8%		 (5.0%)		46.5%
PIMCo		3.6%		(29.4%)		50.1%
DFA		2.1%		  5.0%		52.2%
JPMorgan	2.1%		  5.0%		54.3%
Blackrock	1.9%		  5.6%		56.2%
Oppenheimer	1.7%		 (5.6%)		57.9%

Viewed this way, it seems that just three companies dominate - Vanguard, Fidelity, and Capital Group (American Funds) hold over 3/8 of all fund assets.
Vanguard is obviously the big winner, no matter what perspective you take. And viewed from the perspective of what fraction of their market share was lost last year, PIMCo is the big standout (no surprise there).
Aside from Fidelity and Capital Group (both of which held their market share pretty constant relative the share they already had), all the others had gains (or losses) of about 5% of their market share position.
For example, DFA had a 2% share; its 0.1% gain in share represents a 5% increase in their share of the market.) Could just be noise (rounding error - with market share this low, a 0.1% change in absolute market share amounts to a 5% change). Just another way of seeing that after the first three (or six) families, the rest of the figures aren't particularly significant.

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
http://www.mfwire.com/common/artprint2007.asp?storyID=50219&wireid=2

Below is a message board posting by an employee of Morningstar on the Morningstar.com discussion board.
"As you see other securities that are slow to update, please pass them on as well as the time the delay was noted."

Re: Incorrect mutual fund prices on Morningstar.com 2 hours, 17 minutes ago | Post #3593223
"All,
We recently shifted Portfolio Manager to a faster data source for price data, including end-of-day prices and NAVs. This aligned Portfolio Manager with the change we made to Quote pages earlier this year. End-of-day prices should be flowing in earlier, as much as 1-2 hours earlier. When I review our automated QA tests, I’m seeing that the data is flowing through more quickly. Based on the feedback in this forum it is clear that is not the case for all securities. I appreciate the feedback and examples of specific securities. I am following up on these securities to identify why these are delayed. As you see other securities that are slow to update, please pass them on as well as the time the delay was noted.

Thank you,
M*_Darrin"

@Max: "If I remember, you own MAINX. Closed at $10.54. Up a penny"
Mine are all updated via Yahoo.Com. on my laptop.
Regards,
Ted
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=MAINX&ql=1

Max, If I remember, you own MAINX. Closed at $10.54. Up a penny.
Mine are all updated via apps.

FYI: U.S. stock benchmarks climbed to records, giving the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index a fifth weekly gain, as optimism in the global economy grew after central banks in China and Europe signaled additional stimulus measures.
The S&P 500 rose 0.5 percent to 2,063.34 at 4 p.m. in New York, paring an earlier rally of 0.9 percent. The index advanced 1.1 percent this week, pushing its gains in 2014 to 12 percent. The S&P 500 is now only 62 points away from being up 15% closing 2014 at 2,125 just what MFO's Ted predicted back in February.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2014-11-21/u-s-index-futures-rise-as-s-p-500-heads-for-fifth-weekly-gain.html
Markets At A Glance: http://markets.wsj.com/us

The S&P 500 vs. the EAFE over time:
http://finance.yahoo.com/tumblr/blog-avoiding-the-recency-bias-in-foreign-stock-markets-134430904.html
P.S. Imho, quite a few of the new-ish Yahoo Finance Blog posts look to be worth reading.

I know this will open the apples & oranges benchmarking can of worms, but I got my info from the WSJ Quarterly Mutual Fund tables which are created by Lipper. The 3 funds had C and D ratings over the last 3 years. If there are better performance comparisons I will gladly look at them. Thanks.

Why not use the Lipper ratings directly instead of using the munging that WSJ contracted Lipper to do?
Three year ratings for VDIGX are 4/4/5/5/5 (Total return/consistent/preservation/tax/expense)

I know this will open the apples & oranges benchmarking can of worms, but I got my info from the WSJ Quarterly Mutual Fund tables which are created by Lipper. The 3 funds had C and D ratings over the last 3 years. If there are better performance comparisons I will gladly look at them. Thanks.

Not to sound like a broken record, but it depends what you want the funds to do in your portfolio and what your risk tolerance is.
Both of the dividend funds are indexed to the NASDAQ Dividend Acheivers Index. I think they're both outperforming that, but that index isn't going to keep up with the bull market we've had. If you go back and compare to the S&P they are going to look mediocre over the last 1, 3, and 5 years.
FSIVX's problem is that it's an index in markets that are lagging. That's when indices look bad. It will lead the way when developed markets come back. Bill Bernstein had some name for the phenomenon which I can't remember.
To your original question, concur with msf and Jerry above. If these are in a taxable account, sell before distribution to avoid cost basis problems. If qualified, doesn't matter one bit.

FYI: To get a handle on funds' downside risks, you need to step into the wayback machine.
Regards,
Ted
http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=674501

commentary from FMI on the matter (pages 2-5)
http://www.fiduciarymgt.com/funds/shrpt/ann_shrpt_093014.pdf

Is there any doubt?
that:"We're all Keynesians (Krugmans)now."The last two paragraphs from a Bill Gross perspective posted today @ Seeking Alpha
"But now at 500% to 600% of GDP (shadow debt included), it’s a Sisyphean struggle just to stay above water. Inflation, in other words – or in simple math – is required to pay for prior inflation. Deflation is no longer acceptable.
Such is the dilemma facing central bankers (and supposedly fiscal authorities) in 2014 and beyond: How to create inflation. They’ve made a damn fine attempt at it – have they not? Four trillion dollars in the U.S., two trillion U.S. dollar equivalents in Japan, and a trillion U.S. dollars coming from the ECB’s Draghi in the eurozone. Not working like it used to, the trillions seem to seep through the sandy loam of investment and innovation straight into the cement mixer of the marketplace. Prices go up, but not the right prices. Alibaba’s stock goes from $68 on opening day to $92 in the first minute, but wages simply sit there for years on end. One economy (the financial one) thrives while the other economy (the real one) withers.
Perhaps sooner rather than later, investors must recognize that modern day inflation, while a necessary condition for survival, is not a sufficient condition for increasing wealth at a rate necessary to satisfy future liabilities associated with education, health care, and a satisfactory retirement. The real economy needs money printing, yes, but money spending more so, and that must come from the fiscal side – from the dreaded government side – where deficits are anathema and balanced budgets are increasingly in vogue. Until then, Grant’s deflation remains a growing possibility – not the kind that creates prosperity but the kind that’s the trouble for prosperity."
-William H. Gross
http://seekingalpha.com/article/2699545-the-trouble-with-porosity-and-prosperity

NOVEMBER 20 2014
Rising equities and falling prices at the pump will bring holiday cheer, but be aware of potential headwinds as we head into 2015.
Global CIO Commentary by Scott Minerd ( Guggenheim)
"Even if gasoline prices remain unchanged for the rest of the year, we project real discretionary consumption should rise by the most since the beginning of 2011, helping to spur GDP growth.
The short-term trajectory of oil prices will depend on a number of factors, including the growth outlook for Europe and Asia, as well as the global supply/demand dynamic. Despite the recent decline in market prices, producers in the Middle East have not yet cut back on production. With fracking having fundamentally increased output in the United States, I suspect that oil is at least ten dollars a barrel away from any kind of price support."
http://guggenheimpartners.com/perspectives/macroview/falling-gas-prices-fuel-holiday-cheer

Well, today at 5:35pm PST both Google and M* are in agreement with the day's results. Who knows what tomorrow will bring, but at least we're heading in the right direction.

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
https://17eb94422c7de298ec1b-8601c126654e9663374c173ae837a562.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/Documents/Barrons_Soros_Ad_Tombstone7jr.pdf

Formula:
1.) Sign up for multiple domain names.
2.) Ditto multiple aliases
3.) Quickly, quickly write official-sounding predictions, preferably citing multiple sources (including many at random, since few will actually read the sources) containing all kinds of predictions of immediate debacle.
4.) If you want to actually invest the time, look for a few really bad predictions to quote from well-known dire predicters.
5.) Couch your own prediction of immediate catastrophy in the most dire-but-official-sounding terms.
6.) Publish as widely as possible. (May take time since many will dismiss you as a quack, but find some who will prefer to fan your flame.)
7.) Pour a drink & enjoy.

Article missed that PRBLX handily beat all of those funds over that time period (9.64% annual return) with much less volatility (SD = 12.93, Beta to S&P = .78, all of the others averaged around 15-16 and .9, except FRDPX, which came in at 12.98 and .73, but returned 8.47% p/y)

I don't believe we're going to have a crash. Another minor correction, or some consolidation wouldn't surprise me. The US economy is better than most others now and I think if we saw the market down 10% there'd be lots of buying interest. I don't even think we'll see a 10% correction but I'm confident we're not going to see a 50% crash.

FYI: Last week, my friend Simon emailed me in a panic. “I just read that stocks are going to crash,” he wrote. “Should I trade my stocks for bonds or cash?” He linked to a November 6, 2014 article in MoneyNews, Warning: Stocks Will Collapse By 50 Percent. Even the hearts of stoic investors skip a few beats when reading such headlines. Why wouldn’t they? Nobody wants to lose money. And watchful experts have stethoscopes on the heart of the economy. If they’re predicting a market crash, we should listen, right?
Regards,
Ted
http://assetbuilder.com/andrew_hallam/experts_say_stocks_are_going_to_crash—so_what_are_you_going_to_do_about_it