So far the results are a bit distressing from a contrarian point of view. If you asked at the beginning of January which would come first 3.50% or 2.50%, I bet you would have received something like 95% (or higher) for 3.50%. Higher rates were all but inevitable (so said the pundits) and one of the surest bets around in many a year. As an aside, and it's still early so maybe much ado about nothing but the S&P futures have fallen out of bed this evening down over 12 handles after being down even more.

Currently German 10 year= 1.06%, US 10 year= 2.39% (Spread= 1.33%)
One year ago: German= 1.69%, US= 2.58% (Spread= 0.89%)
If spread shrinks to 89 basis points, our 10 year would be 1.95%

Hi LLJB,
Currently, my small/mid cap sleeve is up ytd 2.72% with one fund (IIVAX) in the red at -0.25% the other two funds (PCVAX & PMDAX) are up 2.11% & 4.30% respectively. I recently sold KSDVX, at a good profit, with the sale proceeds now parked as cash ballast within my demand cash sleeve awaiting future investment deployment.
Old_Skeet

My handful of US small cap funds spent most of last year leading all my funds. This year they're all at the bottom, and amazingly the best one, in the top 15% of small growth funds, has lost money this year. Ugh! I can't complain based on the longer term record, but its one of those difficult years so far for small caps.

FYI: The average small-cap fund has clobbered its large-cap counterpart and the S&P 500 in the past 15 years, but it's failed to keep its lead in the stock market this year.
Regards,
Ted
http://license.icopyright.net/user/viewFreeUse.act?fuid=MTgzNTkwNTA=
Enlarged Graphic: http://news.investors.com/photopopup.aspx?path=WEBlv080814.gif&docId=712324&xmpSource=&width=1000&height=1062&caption=&id=712327

FYI & Vote: The yield on the 10-year US Treasury hit a 52-week low today for the first time in more than two years, as moves in interest rates continue to confound the bulk of investors.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.bespokeinvest.com/thinkbig/2014/8/7/which-way-for-the-10-year-yield.html?printerFriendly=true

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
http://news.investors.com/photopopup.aspx?path=webMUTpent0807.gif&docId=712115&xmpSource=&width=1000&height=1068&caption=&id=712207

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/07/26/138576167/when-patents-attack
Economists say copyright and patent laws are killing innovation; hurting economy
http://news.wustl.edu/news/Pages/13656.aspx
I thought usufruct was synthetic fructose.

OK. one more time: for the railroad pic, above, I copied the following image location from the pic itself:
http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/2/3/8/8238.1312815119.jpg
When you click on the "image" button at the top of a new post, it brings up Accipiter's magic box. You simply paste that image location (http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/2/3/8/8238.1312815119.jpg) into the box. Not to depreciate the magic box, but all that it actually does is to add this stuff:
<img src=" before your image location, and
" /> after your image location
and sticks it all together to give you:
<img src="http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/2/3/8/8238.1312815119.jpg" />
If, as some have mentioned, you simply get the word "image" instead of the desired picture, either you did something silly or (I've noticed) a few pictures simply won't work using this approach... something about the way in which the pic was embedded in the original site, I'm guessing.
OJ
-

Nope---- it just did not work at all. Might have something to do with my settings in the computer, I dunno. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=623106471138313&set=gm.915317165149443&type=1 (Surprise!)

no you are not using a link to an image.
e.g. notice the above post image ends in jpg and is an actual link to an image.
right click on an image and copy the link and paste into the popup after you click the image icon
http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/2/3/8/8238.1312815119.jpg
cut and paste the above image link into the popup that appears after clicking on the button immediately to the right of the big C and it will work.

Nope---- it just did not work at all. Might have something to do with my settings in the computer, I dunno. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=623106471138313&set=gm.915317165149443&type=1 (Surprise!)

Lemme see if I can make the image itself come up... Here's another try.

Hello, everyone. Here's my contribution. It never occurred to me to use that icon. I used the right-click commands with my mouse. COPY LINK LOCATION, then PASTE.
https://www.facebook.com/GGiffords/photos/a.382045618709.162743.6593503709/10152403990868710/?type=1

to me it is alot easier to see full link url visible, and I prefer it on forums, unless you are creating a web page. In a discussion, it is easier to spot and see where your are going then hovering mouse over a pretty link here or there
to each his own, gets you to the same place.

I am not a fan of diversification and even less a fan of fund of funds. As for IRNIX it makes no sense. I count 24 of its 25 top holdings as junk corporate funds. That category has returned 3.19% YTD with many greater than that. The woeful IRNIX, a poor man's junk fund of funds, has returned only 2.17% YTD.

Hello, everyone. Here's my contribution. It never occurred to me to use that icon. I use the right-click commands with my mouse. COPY LINK LOCATION, then PASTE.
https://www.facebook.com/GGiffords/photos/a.382045618709.162743.6593503709/10152403990868710/?type=1
.....But then the receiver needs to click on the link to get the pic. Gabby Giffords--- beautiful AND strong--- doing her duty, in the faces of the Tea Party dolts.

Are we in for a 20% correction with respect to the S&P 500 over the next three month? If history rhymes a potential drop in the S&P 500 to around the 1750 level is a good possibility.
Here's an interesting historical look at where we are in the presidential cycle and the historical returns of the S&P 500 Index during this period (and the next three-six months) of this cycle:

Link:
2nd_presidential_years_are_different/

My comments from one of Ted's links, here, was as follows:
For those invested in model portfolios, these findings are critical. "What the active share research has revealed," said Prahl, "is that managers relying on market timing are less likely, on average, to add value than managers who engage in stock picking." For those opting for passive portfolios, "stock picking is a lot to give up," he added. "That's what the active share literature shows."
Ibbotson's critique of the 90% rule—combined with active share research showing that diversified, highly active stock pickers have consistently added alpha—means that investors should no longer rely strictly on strategic allocation for their long-run returns.
Lord Abbett Study:
asset-allocation-and-the-90-percent-rule
This chart, from the study, attributes fund performance to:

Hi Catch,
Thank you for your interest and unexpected reply.
Not unexpected in terms of a direct topic exchange, but unexpected by the focus change that your post took. Great stuff. I had not thought whatsoever of what beneficial impact a risk understanding would have on our youth if introduced early in the educational process.
But apparently Gerd Gigerenzer has made that linkage in his “Risk Savvy” book. I have not yet read this recent release, but I have ordered it and anticipate some practical lessons that are exploitable. The subject matter is in my curiosity wheelhouse.
I always focus attention on the odds of any real world scenario and how to improve them. Along those lines, I purchased Gregory Baer’s “Life: the Odds (and how to improve them)” a few years ago. Statistical data is fascinating.
For example, Baer reports that the odds of a golfing hole-in-one improve as the distance shortens (no surprise here). It’s 15,000 to 1 at 175 yards and drops to 13,000 to 1 at 150 yards.
As equipment has improved with time, so has the odds of bowling a perfect game. Currently the odds are 4,000 to 1 for each full game; twenty years ago those odds were a staggering 89,000 to 1. Change happens and matters greatly. Investors must be familiar with past stock market annual rewards to make informed investment decisions.
Gerd Gigerenzer is an acknowledged expert on risk identification and management. He is an advocate for an early introduction of statistical thinking into schools. Our statistical illiteracy is staggering and detracts from our successes during our entire life.
Gigerenzer’s answer is to incorporate a multi-component statistical curriculum starting at the sub-high school level. His proposed curriculum would include health, financial, and digital risk literacy segments. Each of these elements would be subdivided into statistical thinking, rules of thumb and the psychology of risk according to a review by Omar Malik.
Gigerenzer is a popular public speaker. He has recently appeared on a TED video. Here is a Link to one of his talks:

I hope you enjoy it. I did.
Thanks again for your comments. They certainly expanded the discussion context in a positive direction.
Best Wishes.

I dunno, folks- I just copied this first image from a randomly-picked NY Times article,

and this one from a railroad pictures site that I happen to be looking at:

and they both worked just fine.
Remember, for pics you don't copy the URL- you need to copy the image location.
By the way, that User Guide is quite out of date now, as MFO has morphed to a later version of Vanilla. Perhaps one of these days I'll revise that guide, but man, that was a lot of work!
OJ
-

Many sectors/funds slip past our view, in our ever changing world of investing. Most of us are too busy with family and making a monetary living to watch everything, all of the time.
Since late February of this year, we returned some of our monies back into direct investments in TIPs funds.
Yes, there are those who poo-poo such areas of investments.
The argument against, generally being that such investments have such low yields; why in the world would anyone want to invest.
Not unlike equity investing, we look at these from a price point. Yield from bonds, not unlike a dividend from an equity is not usually our focus with a fund holding. If both price and yield work together to some extent; well, all the better, eh?
As to TIPs in general; several areas may affect their value or lack of; being a safe haven, cash equivalent holdings for some funds, pension funds and the persception of inflation.
Generally, if conditions are favorable; TIPs holdings are our "cash" for parking monies.
Lastly, with active managed TIPs funds; one will find a variety of holdings. As seen in the below list; duration of holdings plays an important role, and that many TIPs funds will not be 100% in this bond area; but will also hold other investment grade bond types.
Well, anyway; just a few blips about this area.
A sampling..... YTD numbers, as of Aug 5
---LTPZ, + 17%
---STPZ, + 1.6%
---TIPZ, + 6.7%
---TIP, + 6.1%
---FINPX, + 5.9%
---ACITX, + 5.6%
---BPRIX, + 6%
Note: TIP 5 year annualized = 5.6%
Take care,
Catch