Sequoia to me would be a much more "get it and forget it" holding. Yacktman would be another option.

I also see SEQUX as being much more "get it and forget it", or "set it and forget it".
You have so many different analysts each covering different stocks, that you don't have to worry if one of the analysts has "lost it" or needs monitoring.
But if you're concerned that Bruce 'needs monitoring', or that he might possibly be on a rock super star manager ego thing, then you might be kept awake at night.
That's the advantage of a significant pool of highly qualified stock analysts. Maybe the analyst covering Sequoia's xyz stock didn't make a great pick or analysis, but there are a total of 44 stocks, and only 54.67% in the top 10 stocks, versus FAIRX below.
Oops, I made an error:
FAIRX has almost 49% in AIG. I didn't see the stock warrants, below:

Just a note, that there are some big Bruce Berkowitz fans on MFO, and I respect their position. With the exception of a gut wrenching 2011, FAIRX has had a great record.
As I mentioned, I was looking at the players, not the scoreboard, per Buffett's suggestion. The scoreboard for FAIRX has been xlnt, excepting 2011, when it underperformed the stock market by -34.53%. Yikes!

@rjb112 I've been in LSBRX since 2005. Last week, giving the most recent portfolio a little closer scrutiny than I usually do, I was struck by how.... tapped-down it seemed. Consistent with what Sven has posted. I've heard him say something very similar several months ago elsewhere, but not reflected in the port then--- now it is. I can't recall seeing LSBRX this subdued. Loomis is clearly concerned about something in a major way.

@Bitzer: "If I recall correctly, Bill Gross make a similar prediction some time ago and was flat out wrong"
I know for a fact [because I either heard him say it or read it in his monthly Outlook that he writes] that Bill Gross did say something to the effect that "the long-term bull market in bonds, which began in 1982, is over." I don't recall exactly when he said it, but IIRC, it was a few years ago.
I think Bill Gross is a super smart guy and an astute bond expert, but I also recall many years ago when he made a bold prediction about the stock market falling a LOT, which turned out to be completely wrong.
@expatsp: "Overall I did well, but it was too correlated with the equity markets for what I want in a bond fund"
There's a lot of interest in Kathleen Gaffney here at MFO, and I'm quite interested too. But I wonder about the 18.59% of her fund in stocks, and is that going to as you mentioned with respect to Loomis Sayles, will that make Gaffney's fund too correlated with the stock market to serve the needs of bond fund investors.
Seems to me that it would not serve the need of a stock heavy investor to diversify, but would serve the needs of a bond heavy investor to diversify! So if my portfolio was say 100% bond funds, it would serve me very well to have these aggressive bond funds that have junk bonds, emerging market bonds, and even some stocks in them. But if my portfolio had 80% stock funds and I wanted a mellow diversifier, I'd probably go towards Treasuries, or at a minimum investment grade bond funds.
@sven: "I do think their view on low future returns on bonds is realistic. This will pose considerable challenges for those who depends on bonds for income."
I agree that it is realistic, and has already been causing major problems for the income investor, retirees who always depended on safe certificates of deposit in banks and Treasury bonds. And probably will continue to do so in the future.
And of course many say that the stock markets are way overvalued, and will have poor returns over the next 5-10 years, e.g., Jeremy Grantham/GMO most recent 7-year forecast, posted on MFO.
If both the stock market and the bond market are way overvalued and will have poor returns going forward for the next 5-7 years, we are really in investment trouble!

Just my personal opinion.
I like the managers and analysts at Sequoia. I think the two managers are excellent, and they have a team of excellent analysts.
They have an investor day every year, and the document that comes out of it is always very informative regarding the analysts and managers.
http://www.sequoiafund.com/Reports/Transcript13.pdf
I think they are a highly experienced group of stock pickers, whom I trust. And very dedicated. With a storied tradition and history.
If I'm not mistaken, I believe that one of their analysts was or perhaps is seriously considered for the job to take over the main investing role at Berkshire Hathaway after Warren Buffett passes on. [In addition to the 2 former hedge fund managers that Berkshire Hathaway currently has].
Take a look at that Investor Day PDF referenced above. I'm extremely impressed with the depth of the analyst team, and how thoroughly they study the companies they invest in.
I own the fund both in a taxable account and an IRA.
I owned FAIRX for about 11 years. FAIRX is a one man show. It's the Bruce show. Night and day from SEQUX, which is a large team of analysts, each doing work and putting together the efforts in aggregate.
Berkowitz is obviously very smart and talented, but I gave up on him when I wasn't convinced my money was being managed with proper risk management.
When I saw over 50% in one stock [AIG, which is no longer over 50%, but still 42.8%], and generally the most concentrated stock portfolio of any stock mutual fund that I encountered, that concerned me. I was also concerned about Sears, St. Joe, Fannie and Freddie whose fate is in the hands of Congress.....a huge concentration in financials.....I lost my confidence in Berkowitz, and exited.
Also, I read a bunch of articles about Bruce Berkowitz, the sum total of which made me lack confidence in the person I was handing my money to, in FAIRX. Don't know if this is a super rock star mutual fund manager on an ego trip, but didn't want to take the risk, and I suspected it.
I was not making a forecast on the future performance of FAIRX, as that future performance will never be predictable. Warren Buffett suggested to 'keep your eyes on the players, not the scoreboard'. So although the scoreboard of FAIRX was good, I had my eyes on the player, and decided to make a sideways move to another fund.
Finally, although I do like the SEQUX team a lot, their performance over 1, 3 and 5 years is nothing to brag about.....although when I look at it by each calendar year, it looks better to me. Their YTD performance is awful, but who knows, this could be a great time to buy in........or maybe not.
I've been quite impressed by the benefits of just buying a stock index fund, where you don't have performance issues......you just get the market return minus the expenses [plus or minus a tiny tracking differential.] I like VTI and VTSAX.
Warren Buffett prefers a low cost S&P 500 index fund, like VFIAX, and has in his will that his wife's portfolio will be invested 90% in a low cost S&P 500 index fund, and 10% in short term government bonds
Any thoughts?

The page I get has no links.

JohnChisum, does this work for you?
http://online.barrons.com/news/articles/SB50001424053111904537004580085613480909700?mod=rss_barrons_this_week_magazine

What are the numbers below?
Are they since inception of MFO?

The numbers are since the inception of MFO. They reflect the total number of posts, topics, users, and views that exist in our database, today. I don't think they would reflect any deleted posts.

@Sven: It appears your link didn't register, here is the article.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20140815/FREE/140819933?template=printart

Actually, the newer variation is "Strategery" - coined during a SNL parody of former President George W. Bush by comedian Will Ferrell. Here's the Wikipedia story.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategery
In the investment world I think "strategic" can mean about anything they want. But it may carry an underlying connotation that they are smarter and know more than you do. To me it's a little like some of the go-anywhere funds. You pay a manager a little extra to guess which way various market components (stocks, commodities, Treasuries, etc.) will move in the future.
One problem with that approach is that most of us have become very short-term focused nowadays. So, a manager might be "strategically" correct looking 5-10 years ahead and yet see investors flee his fund well before than if it doesn't produce solid near term returns - especially in comparison to whatever market segment(s) are currently hot.

FYI. Be aware of narrowly focused And actively managed ETFs.
http://investmentnews.com/article/20140815/FREE/140819933/ishares-and-pimco-to-shut-22-etfs

Our buddy, Vintage Freak, paints a dismally dark and uncompromisingly bleak portrait of the “Average Investor’s” investment acumen. Initially, his representative caricature has a moderately conservative investment approach. Unfortunately, he abandons his good intentions and does not stay the course. He fails the persistence and the patience tests.
Actually, quite to the contrary. I am castigating all the a-holes who screw up the life of the average investor. I am trying to explain that in the imaginary world of "if you had invested 100k in year X and held on for Y years you would have earned much more" people forget that a person has needs that make that impossible and he only contributes to his portfolio over a period of time.
I am very skeptical of fund returns vs investor returns published by various sources. I don't think they are capturing the problem properly. When you buy vs what you buy is always important for average investor to outperform. That determines over various periods of time whether at any given point of time ones portfolio is positive. As long as it is, that investor holds and continues to invest and not otherwise. Even if that position is cash or short term bond funds.
So quite to the contrary dear MJG I am not criticizing the investor at all. I am simply tired of reading articles mouthing the same thing again and again. Authors need to fulfill their writing quotas wi other topics. Maybe there will be Another mad off like scandal or something soon. I know Marilyn Monroe cannot die all over again to drive conspiracy theory articles. Seems to me after an extended bull market run, the average investor is now fair game.
Finally, we cannot nitpick time periods. from 1995 to 2000, DCA was a suckers game. Whether one wants to admit or not, what I stated tongue in cheek is exactly what happened. Let's not kid ourself everyone was diversified. Even those that thought they were were screwed by their fund managers all owning growth / tech stocks on the equity side and high yield bonds on the income side. Hindsight is always 20/20. However sincenyounhave the ability, is it possible for you to run your calculations for 20 years in prior period? Or even rolling 20 year periods? I think you will agree that would be a more sound way to conclude whether average investor sucks or not.

Excellent article.
MFOers, what do you all think of this?
Dan Fuss is as good as they get.........I look at Dan Fuss, Jeffrey Gundlach and Bill Gross as 3 of the most and possibly the most knowledgeable bond guys out there. 3 pillars of a stool.....
They think rates are going up, bonds will take a hit, and that we should go more towards short duration and high quality, e.g, more Treasuries.......less high yield/junk
"Dan Fuss and co-managers Matt Eagan and Elaine Stokes have put 27% of the fund's $25 billion fund in assets into short-term U.S. and Canadian government issues. Fuss says that's the highest weighting the fund has ever held in such super-safe instruments."
"It's increasingly difficult to find undervalued assets in any corner of the bond market. "Valuations across the spectrum are unattractive," he says."
"Eagan and his colleagues believe the long-term bull market in bonds, which began in 1982, is over, and that Fed action, combined with an improving economy, will push rates higher"
"....junk is now one of the riskiest places in the bond market."
"...the fund has tended to hold large stakes in junk bonds and emerging markets, two categories that tend to mirror the performance of stocks"
"........the fund will suffer some if rates rise. Should they climb one percentage point, the fund's price would fall by about 4%."
"......you'd be foolish not to pay attention to the fund's dramatic portfolio shift—given Fuss's long and superior record"

FWIW, I forewent (if that's a word) the annuity and still have the TIAA real estate fund in my 403b at a prior university employer (St Louis U). Perhaps they think I'll roll over eventually into an annuity, but I didn't have that understanding. In fact, as I rolled my money out of the annuity portion of my funds, I rolled it into the real estate fund. I had left that university for the private world temporarily, so that may have allowed this maneuver. As I recall,the transfer occurred at 10%/yr, so they tried to protect their participants.
A few years back that institution negotiated a good array of funds from other fund companies generally with the lowest ER each offered. My current employer offers TIAA, but only the usual choices, and I haven't chosen to play. TIAA apparently will yield to pressure if the institution is big enough, but I have no idea how this was accomplished.
I agree with those recommending the lowest cost index funds she can find. While bond funds may make one feel a bit better in the crashes, I don't see the point at 27, regardless of experts' recommendations. Start balancing 15 years (or 10) before retirement by changing the choices in your automatic investments.

>> For what interest it holds, I held my position throughout and added monthly. Chip reports similar behavior.
It holds considerable interest, I suggest, as it sets you apart from most other investors on earth, including in this forum. 40% plunge and 5-6y back to whole? I would say your behavior is extraordinary. Adding monthly.
I would like to say I would've done the same. Certainly I have done similarly since 08 in a range of investments, buying greedily and staying in equities, but this would have been a taxing experience. A lesson here in perseverance.

Hi rjb, the only way I know how to find trailing P/E at M* is to put the fund in a Portfolio Manager watchlist and set up 'My View' to include trailing P/E; it's one of the data points on the long menu of statistics you can pick for that page. -Cheers, AJ

Very interesting AndyJ. That will come in handy. Thanks.

This may be a good companion fund to pair with MAINX for more world wide E M fixed income exposure. At present Ms. Padilla and team are nearly 85% invested in various Latin American issues with a longer average maturity .I own both.
DLENX July 31 fact sheet
http://www.doublelinefunds.com/pdf/EM_Fact_Sheet_Monthly_Update.pdf
Excerpts:
Team continues to actively manage
duration
At year end 2012, DBLEX had a duration of 4.4 years compared to the 2013
year end duration of 6.6 years. This shorter duration absorbed most of the impact from rising rates in 2013. The higher duration at the end of 2013 has contributed to out performance so far this year.
We believe 10 year UST rates should remain range bound between 2.20-2.80%
Top country allocations: Brazil, Mexico, Peru, and Guatemala all up double digits
No local currency exposure in the fund, although the team continues to monitor opportunities
DBLEX duration is 5.93 years; this is a result of positioning the portfolio
in BB rated space where new issues have appeared to be
attractively priced. These securities tend to have a shorter duration
49% of portfolio is allocated to Investment Grade bonds
Top sectors: Banking, telecommunications, consumer products, mining &
oil, all of which are strategic sectors for an EM economy
Consumer products aim to take advantage of rising income levels in EM countries

Are these people really serious?
Remind me to check in 5 years to see if either fund is still in existence.

uh and omg ... ! Click the 10y tab and see if you could've possibly hung in.
DS is being, well, generous, or something; from this graph, it looks rather more like ~6y to get back to zero. So it depends on what his 'disastrous' means.
https://www.tiaa-cref.org/public/tcfpi/Investment/Profile?symbol=41091375
Talk about investor returns and behaviors. Who would not have bailed, not knowing what the future held, only imaging the worst?
You would have had to keep in mind that this downward dive was putting you back only to where you were 05/6/7.

One of the main issues I have when I read articles that compare the S + P indexes to actively managed funds is that many managed funds have a mix of US, International, some cash and bonds and some have derivatives. So its not always comparing apples to apples. We all know that you can do very nicely just investing in a few index funds over the long haul. It seems most people that come to MFO do not invest that way. Otherwise, there would be little cause to have a forum such as this.
I have a mix of stocks, managed funds and etfs for my equity portion of my portfolio, but do not own S +P, total market, small or mid cap or international indexes. I do own etfs that help enhance my funds, more than half of which along with my managed funds ytd do exceed the basic benchmark of the S + P. Granted, some are sector or foreign, but the reason I have them is to provide balance to my core holdings so when some areas zig others will zag. They won't always exceed that benchmark, for every dog has its day. Besides, I really like studying, learning and watching the market with all its drama and gyrations. I do play with about 5% of my portfolio with more speculative stocks, but never exceed that 5%. More often than not, they do make money, but not always. I suspect many of us invest this way too.

Thank you David for speaking with Ms. Kong. A lot of valuable information there from a 45 minute interview. As a shareholder of MAINX, I feel very good about the fund and the company and people behind it.
It was enlightening to read that Ms. Kong checked out MFO before the interview. If you are reading this Teresa, thank you very much for the insights , especially on the dollar.

Catalyst Tactical Hedged Futures Strategy Fund & Catalyst/Princeton Hedged Income Fund
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355064/000116204414000987/catalyst485apos.htm