FYI: It's been another tough year for the average actively managed mutual fund.
Regards,
Ted
http://license.icopyright.net/user/viewFreeUse.act?fuid=MTgzODA1ODg=
Enlarged Graphic: http://news.investors.com/photopopup.aspx?path=WEBact081514.gif&docId=713319&xmpSource=&width=1000&height=603&caption=&id=713318

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1048702/000113743914000295/nmf497080152014.htm
497 1 nmf497080152014.htm
NATIONWIDE MUTUAL FUNDS
Nationwide Fund
Nationwide Global Equity Fund
Nationwide Growth Fund
Nationwide International Value Fund
Nationwide Small Company Growth Fund
Nationwide U.S. Small Cap Value Fund
Supplement dated August 15, 2014
to the Prospectus dated March 1, 2014 (as revised June 5, 2014)
Capitalized terms and certain other terms used in the supplement, unless otherwise defined in this supplement, have the meanings assigned to them in the Prospectus.
Nationwide International Value Fund
Effective September 5, 2014, the Nationwide International Value Fund will no longer accept purchase orders from new investors. Investors who own shares of the Fund as of the date hereof may continue to purchase shares.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

Thanks David,
Owning MAINX provides the following country exposure as of 3/31/14:

The first and last (Cayman Islands and The British Virgin Islands) seems to hold some intrigue, especially the over weighting of the Cayman Island bond Issues.
Any thoughts?
Updated per AndyJ's link:

Baird Core Plus (BCOSX) and Baird Aggregate (BAGSX), both long-established no-load, intermediate term bond funds.
Angel Oak Multi-Strategy Income (ANGLX), a three-year old multisector bond fund with a 2.25% load. The managers used to run a lot of money for Washington Mutual (WAMU!), a famous "story stock" (the Wal-Mart of banking) which became the country's largest bank failure.
Hotchkis & Wiley High Yield (HWHAX), a five-year old high yield fund with a 3.75% load. The managers are former PIMCO guys.
The smallest of them is $1.7 billion. They average about $3 billion in AUM.
I'm glad we don't rely on Morningstar's radar to safeguard us from sneak attack.
David

Dear friends,
I talked for about 45 minutes with Ms. Kong, who'd already visited the board, read and thought about your questions. Here's the short version of what I heard:

• headline risk is the least of your worries. We started with the questions around Russia and Ukraine. Her position is that the outcome there is relatively short-term and difficult to predict. At the margins, the presence of NATO sanctions is causing wealthy Russians to move their money to Asian financial centers but those flows really aren't driving markets.
  the US is being irreversibly marginalized in global financial markets which is what you should be paying attention to. She's neither bemoaning nor celebrating this observation, she's just making it. At base, a number of conditions led to the US dollar becoming the world's hegemonic currency which was reinforced by the Saudi's decision in the early 1970s to price oil only in US dollars and to US investment flows driving global liquidity. Those conditions are changing but the changes don't seem to warrant the attention of editors and headline writers because they are so slow and constant. Among the changes is the rise of the renminbi, now the world's #2 currency ahead of the euro, as a transaction currency, the creation of alternative structures to the IMF which are not dollar-linked or US driven and a frustration with the US regulatory system (highlighted by the $9B fine against BNP Paribas) that's leading international investors to create bilateral agreements that allow them to entirely skirt us. The end result is that the dollar is likely to be a major currency and perhaps even the dominant currency, but investors will increasingly have the option of working outside of the US-dominated system.
  
• the rising number of "non-rated" bonds is not a reflection on credit quality: the simple fact is that Asian corporations simply don't need American money to have their bond offerings fully covered and they certainly don't need to expense and hassle of US registration, regulation and paying for (compromised) US bond rating firms to rate them. In lieu of US bond ratings, there are Asia bond-rating firms (whose work is not reflecting in Morningstar credit reports) and Matthews does extensive internal research. The depth of the equity-side analyst corps is such that they're able "to tear apart corporate financials" in a way that few US investors can match.
  
• India is fundamentally more attractive than China, at least for a fixed-income investor. Most investors enthused about India focus on its new prime minister's reform agenda. Ms. Kong argues that, by far, the more significant player is the head of Indian's central bank, who has been in office for about a year. The governor is intent on reducing inflation and is much more willing to deploy the central bank's assets to help stabilize markets. Right now corporate bonds in India yield about 10% - not "high yield" bond but bonds from blue chip firms - which reflects a huge risk premium. If inflation expectations change downward and inflation falls rather than rises, there's a substantial interest rate gain to be harvested there. The Chinese currency, meanwhile, is apt to undergo a period of heightened volatility as it moves toward a free float; that is, an exchange rate set by markets rather than by Communist Party dictate. She believes that that volatility is not yet priced in to renminbi-denominated transactions. Her faith is such that the fund has its second greatest currency exposure to the rupee, behind only the dollar.
  
• the appointment of a new comanager is mostly a recognition of the strong contributions that person has made since joining the fund at inception. The new comanager is a credit specialist. The existing one is an interest rate specialist.
  
• two factors seem to be constraining growth of AUM: (1) there's a general withdrawal from fixed-income in reflection of interest rate anxiety and that withdrawal seems to disproportionately impact non-core categories and (2) advisors are intrigued even to invest their own money in many cases but not yet ready to invest their clients. They seem to be waiting for a three year record and "clarity" in the market.
  
• the fund's maximum drawdown continues to track the firm's expectations which is good given the number of developments which they couldn't have plausibly predicted before launch. They're sitting at a beta of about .30.

For what that's worth,
David

Also see:
FAYEZ SAROFIM & CO: Investing in Quality Companies
https://www.sarofim.com/assets/white papers/sarofim-quality-white-paper-2014.pdf
[Manager of Dreyfus Appreciation Fund]

Fayez Sarofim is a ginormous holder of Kinder Morgan shares and serves on the board. Probably having a good week.

This is the worse example of hijacking a thread I have ever seen :)

Well, maybe it's the worst, but that's a different debate.
I thought it was interesting that a manager of a particular mutual fund - whose paper was mentioned in the discussion above - is an enormously wealthy individual (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fayez_Sarofim) who is on the board of the third largest energy-related company in the United States and who owns 22,789,655 shares. Almost a billion dollars in one particular company. Wasn't aware he was a manager on a fund.
Meh. Just going to post less on here.

Thanks Ted. Enjoyed the article.
With a rollover from a 401k to an IRA, it gave me the opportunity to reconstruct my portfolio. So I've given this diversification thing a lot of thought. My conclusion was I am not diligent or knowledgeable enough to know the perfect mix of investments, nor do I want to spend the time trying to be. So, getting diversified in general terms and letting good managers do the rest seemed like the safe way to go. But as the article implies, what do you need to be diversified. I like the idea of seasoned managers/management teams with good risk adjusted returns, running focused funds with smallish AUMs making those decisions.
I decided on 3 sleeves, buckets, categories, 3 sections on a spread sheet, what ever name you give it, which felt right to me. I ended up with 14 funds in my plan. Could easily have been less, but there are so many good names to choose from. And I'll admit I was very influenced by MFO commentaries and data.
The break down being:
Allocation/balanced funds: 5 funds which I could argue was enough diversification in itself.
Equity funds: 6 funds, diversified w/ US, Int, and EM, but with a LC dividend focus.
Bond funds: 3 funds, a moderate risk multi-sector, conservative, MS, and a cash equivalent.
Low and behold, M* stats show pretty good diversification at about a 60:40 mix, which was my aim point. So, diversified I am - guess :)
And thank you David and Charles for doing much of the hard work in helping me reset my portfolio.

FYI: Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (NYSE: BRK-A) released its public equity holdings as of June 30, 2014. Warren Buffett’s different portfolio holdings have not been changing much of late, but it turns out that many of the stakes were changed – some changes were substantial. There was one issue which also stood out handily ahead of this in the quarterly filing where Warren Buffett and team counted some $116.9 billion in equity securities in the investments as of June 30, 2014. This was versus $116.16 billion as of March 31 and versus $115.46 billion as of December 31.
We had also known going into this report that approximately 58% of the total value of the Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (NYSE: BRK-B) equity holdings was concentrated in just four stocks – Wells Fargo & Company (NYSE: WFC) at $25.4 billion; International Business Machines Corporation (NYSE: IBM) at $12.7 billion; and The Coca-Cola Company (NYSE: KO) at $16.9 billion; and American Express Company (NYSE: AXP) at $14.4 billion. That concentration was 56% in the prior quarterly report
Regards,
Ted
http://247wallst.com/investing/2014/08/14/major-portfolio-changes-for-warren-buffett-and-berkshire-hathaway/print/

Good Morning! Today is August 15th and it is about 6:30 AM ESDT as I first write.
Here is a look at the futures … and, they are currently pointing upward. In addition, current news can be found by clicking on the news tab.
http://finviz.com/futures.ashx
For those that wish to follow the major indexes and the markets throughout the day I have provided a link below. During market hours the site updates data about once every minute.
http://markets.wsj.com/usoverview
In addition, after the market close today the Yield & P/E Ratios will update on the S&P 500, Nasdaq 100 & Russell 2000 Indexes.
http://online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3021-peyield.html?mod=wsj_mdc_additional_ustocks
Here is one traders take on the market ...
http://www.markets.fallondpicks.com/2014/08/daily-market-commentary-rally-continues.html?
And, if you are looking for some of top performing & rated mutual funds below is one of my reference links ...
http://money.msn.com/investing/top-funds.aspx
Have a grand day … and, I wish all “Good Investing.”
Old_Skeet

What does he do for risk control? It's been a great fund so far, but the trailing/forward PE's are up to 27/24 (per M* - the AKREX fact sheet doesn't mention P/E), so how much upside can there be left in it this market cycle, and how much risk is there of really significant losses in a correction or recession?

AndyJ, excellent question about the PE's.....I'm interested in that too.
Where did you find the trailing PE ratio? I only found the forward PE on M*, below:

Howdy @rjb112 @Old_Joe
April 1, 2011 was the active opening for MFO.
The below link is a view only, archive page; for FundAlarm in April, 2011.
You'll find a few names that you see today, here.
https://web.archive.org/web/20110423104354/http://www.fundalarm.com/wwwboard/wwwboard.html
Note: redundant, as David was posting as I was writing...............2 minutes is a lifetime, once in awhile.
Take care,
Catch

Catch, that was an interesting webpage you linked. You're right, a bunch of names that are here today. Sounds like Fund Alarm was really special. Now I finally have some idea what is meant by 'MFO is a site in the tradition of Fund Alarm'

>>>>It does take learning, patience, and persistence. And some painful losing, and a ton of reading.<<<<<
Of all that you have posted, much I have agreed with, while some vehemently disagreed with ( i.e. your fixation with intelligence, math, and statistics) the above we could not agree more. I may have posted this before, but at one time I had a library of around 500 books on the stock market (now culled to around 250) In fact, one of those, Rogues To Riches by Murray Teigh Bloom begins its first chapter with an interview of your aforementioned Alfred Cowles. And a really fascinating interview at that. In fact, it was one of the many books I read that reinforced my belief in the power of momentum investing. Mr Cowles said in that interview that the only positive finding he uncovered while conducting his research on the futility of the forecasters was how you could make a lot of money in following what he called the "inertia" principle. On a side note, I spoke with Mr. Bloom a couple years after his book's publication and found him very welcoming and gracious.
Alfred Cowles also mentioned in his interview with Mr Bloom that " the element of luck is terribly important in the market." Amen to that!! I am the poster boy for luck in the markets - and PERSISTENCE since I spent my first 19 market years just spinning my wheels. Of course I have mentioned before that one of my top five books of all time is Max Gunther's The Luck Factor and primarily Part IV of that book on the five luck adjustment theories.

I dollar cost averaged my whole investment lifespan. It began with $25 a month through Twentieth Century and at least once a year I would revisit that number and increase or stay put. As time went on I was putting in several hundred dollars a month. This meant of course that I was frugal in my social life. I didn't forgo a social life per se, but I didn't throw money away either. It was this discipline that got me to where I am now.
If I had been making only 2% all those years I would have been discouraged for sure. I had my losing investments as well as my home runs. I certainly made more than 2% so this article like so much of the Marketwatch stuff is just drivel to me.
What I find fascinating now is investing this money on my own after years of 403b. I rolled it over to my own account and am testing what I have learned over years. I think I have done well so far but knock on wood. At least I know who to blame if things don't go right.

Keep in mind, that's real-return, so they are assuming something like 2.5% inflation. Which means something around -1.5 to -2% a year going forward.

Still need substantially sized cajones to make the call ANY mainstream asset class is going to on average yield negative returns for 7 years. I don't think even Hussman is saying that, and he is already in the dog house for the rest of this century!
My point, we need to applaud the true visionaries and/or need to verify if Grantham is also a BS artist. 7 years. I hope to be alive. I hope to remember to check.

Hello,
I think you really meant "cojones" :)
Anyway, I don't think they mean uniformly but on average or compounded. We will see. I am not going to make any changes based on these predictions. I take these predictions with a grain of salt.
What is more interesting to me is the timber. It has the highest expected return. Now, if timber is in such a demand and everybody gets into timber business we can get another real estate like bubble or timber mania (like tulip bubble). For timber to be so much in demand we should either have a construction boom again.

Strategy or Strategic funds.....
Scroll down a bit to the Mutual Funds listings.....a whole bunch; in spite of redundant class types.
https://www.google.com/finance?q=strategic+fund&ei=yXftU5j0KoekqwGmooCYDA

TIAA-CREF would be my recommendation. Their programs come in many flavors, not all of which offer the same combination of retirement class funds and annuities. As a general matter, they have a nice series of target-date funds that are built purely around index funds. And their Real Estate account is, literally, in a class by itself. It invests directly in real estate rather than just in real estate securities. It utterly crashed in the 2008 market crisis; that was one disastrous 24 months period sandwiched by 18 years of remarkably steady returns.
David

Howdy @rjb112 @Old_Joe
April 1, 2011 was the active opening for MFO.
The below link is a view only, archive page; for FundAlarm in April, 2011.
You'll find a few names that you see today, here.
https://web.archive.org/web/20110423104354/http://www.fundalarm.com/wwwboard/wwwboard.html
Note: redundant, as David was posting as I was writing...............2 minutes is a lifetime, once in awhile.
Take care,
Catch

For those unfamiliar with FundAlarm and for folks looking for a nostalgic rush, here's a snapshot of the FA discussion board from January 2011 and April 2005.
Roy Weitz launched FundAlarm 18 years ago as an antidote to the mindless hype that fund companies were getting away with. He combined a tart monthly commentary with a list of funds to avoid, then added a discussion board. About six years ago he felt himself running out of steam and asked if I'd write a new feature on small and new funds; after a year, Roy granted himself a sabbatical and I took up the monthly commentary. About four years ago he admitted that he'd written himself out; he felt he was stretching for content and made my role permanent.
About three and a half years ago, Roy's parents encountered simultaneous health crises and he let the community know that he was retiring FundAlarm to care for family. At Roy's prodding a number of folks encouraged me to launch "a site in the tradition of FundAlarm." Lacking any technical skills, I paid Brad Isbell, an IT colleague at Augustana, to design the site and prevailed upon my friend Cheryl Welsch (a/k/a Chip) to maintain it. We did a "soft launch" on April 1 2011 and had a sort of grand opening on May 1 2011. Our early look was ... uhhh, rudimentary. Anna Zolotusky, web designer whose mom was (is?) a fan, volunteered to bring us into the 21st century (and did).
We run two major software packages side-by-side: WordPress underlies the entire site and Vanilla underlies the discussion board. Chip frets rather more about WordPress, Accipiter - who taught himself programming for the purpose - frets rather more about Vanilla. Accipiter also wrote the Navigator program, which allows you to find a wealth of targeted information about any fund. As our discussion board software grew in complexity (Accipiter has written a bunch of custom programs for it), OJ generously wrote a really first-rate users guide.
Charles, like me, started as a member of the discussion community with a special knack. I'm not sure what my knack was. Charles's is making data sing. After reading one particularly fine post, I asked Charles if we might include it in the monthly commentary and had the pleasure, thereafter, to have him contribute pieces with a sophisticated statistical bent on a regular basis. As he thought about what the site needed, he also designed both our fund screener and the metrics behind it which led to the Great Owl designation.
Ed Studzinski, whose career included stints in the Navy JAG office and banking as well as co-managing OAKBX, had been sharing behind the scenes commentary on the industry and its players by phone. Eventually I persuaded him to address a larger audience about the dynamics of the industry and the way they affect our fates.
All on less than $700 a month.
Hope that helps,
David

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

I will tell you why average investor has lagged. It is because average investor does not invest lumpsum and hold on for dear life for 20 years. This is what happens to average investor.
Average investor is told to DCA. So he starts DCAing at Y-20. He had $100,000 but he does not invest $100,000 at Y-20. He invests $5K, then another $5K at Y-19. Market is going up. He DCA'ing is effing him up. At Y-15 he realizes is $25 investment is only worth $40K. Everyone is celebrating 5-year returns. M* is rolling out red carpet for fund companies.
Average Jo now takes remaining $75K and invests it Y-15. Y-14 his $115K investment is now worth $120K. He is still up, and he is complacent because so is everyone else. Market starts tanking. Y - 12 his investment is worth $120K. 5 Years numbers are still positive from funds. He thinks, oh yeah market will come back. Y - 11 He is at $55K. 5 year numbers suck!. Things are not okay any more. He sells.
$100K is now worth $55K. Y - 10. Market returned 50% in the past 2 years. Time to get back in again. Rinse. Repeat.
Moral Of the Story: Stop watching CNBC, Stop reading M*. Come to MFO. Learn.