http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-01-29/hasenstab-sees-3-billion-vanish-in-ukraine-as-one-big-bet-sours
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-01/famous-bond-investor-turns-out-be-nothing-more-glorified-btfder
"After loading up on more than $7 billion of the country’s bonds, Hasenstab has seen the value of the securities collapse as the conflict with pro-Russian rebels deepened an economic recession, depleted foreign reserves and prompted government calls for a debt restructuring. His investment, equal to almost half of all Ukraine’s foreign bonds, is now valued at just $4 billion, based on fund holdings from the end of the third and fourth quarters."

16% of global government bonds now have a neg yield...
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-31/16-global-government-bonds-now-have-negative-yield-here-whos-buying-it

Good afternoon,
I don't know how low yields will go ... but, they are now low enough for me to start to make some changes within my portfolio's overall asset allocation. Some of my past favorite fixed income investments are now becoming suspect.
I have now lowered my allocation to fixed income within my portfolio form 25% to 20%. It seems many of my hybrid income, conserative and moderate allocation funds have been reducing their allocation to fixed income for sometime along with reducing the duration.
I can remember when a 30% to 35% allocation to fixed income was of the norm for me and of that allocation I held a good slug in tax free muni's. Not so now.
In addition, since domestic equities in general appear to be mostly overbought I am thinking of changing my allocation to 20% cash, 20% income, 20% domestic equity, 20% foreign equity, 20% other assets. To do this, I'll have to reduce my domestic equity allocation by 10% and increase my allocation to other assets by 10%.
Currently, I don't feel fixed income is paying enough to justify holding as much of it as I have in the past and with domestic equities being mostly overbought well it is time for a change to my overall allocation.
I'll be interested to learn how one of the board's master investors, Ted, positions going forward.
Old_Skeet

Good afternoon,
I don't know how low yields will go ... but, they are now low enough for me to start to make some changes within my portfolio's overall asset allocation.
I have now lowered my allocation to fixed income within my portfolio form 25% to 20%. It seems many of my hybrid income, conserative and moderate allocation funds have been reducing their allocation to fixed income for sometime along with reducing the duration.
I can remember when a 30% to 35% allocation to fixed income was of the norm for me and of that allocation I held a good slug in tax free muni's. Not so now.
In addition, since domestic equities in general appear to be mostly overbought I am thinking of changing my allocation to 20% cash, 20% income, 20% domestic equity, 20% foreign equity, 20% other assets. To do this, I'll have to reduce my domestic equity allocation by 10% and increase my allocation to other assets by 10%.
Currently, I don't feel fixed income is paying enough to justify holding as much of it as I have in the past and with domestic equities being mostly overbought well it is time for a change to my overall allocation.
I'll be interested to learn how one of the board's master investors, Ted, positions going forward.
Old_Skeet

@Dex
I do believe this is part of what you are witnessing with global yields on gov't. debt issues. A race to the bottom, eh?
Sadly, I also feel that some gov't. debt is also "junk".
ECB will reportly buy 10% of public Spanish debt
Two that I have linked in the past years; but are still valid today.
QE, Clarke and Dawe
European Debt Crisis, Clarke and Dawe
Catch

Hold for the long run has been the conventional pablum shoved down investors throats since the beginning of time. I don't know about you, but in the long run I am dead.

"The stock market teaches you to lose." Dex
That is what has been happening since 1999. Fewer people have been putting their money into stocks. The ups and downs have scared them away, and, the lack of disposable income.
http://ns.umich.edu/new/releases/22365-stock-market-participation-has-dropped-most-among-small-investors
But, if you are a contrary investor, you might want to read this:
http://fortune.com/2014/10/23/retail-investors/
Similar to what happened in the 1930s, if there is another large decline, investors will not go back into stocks for many years. This also might lower bond yields.
Investing has been and always will be a war between love(greed?) and fear.
Due to Junkster pointing out HY muni bonds I am sleeping very well. And as a byproduct, my tax forms will be very easy to file this year.
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/18699/how-far-down-will-yields-go-usa-10year-1-64#latest

We, at this house; use the visuals of charting to help us better understand what we think is taking place from verbal or written commentaries, which help form intuitive considerations for investment directions.
Personally, aside from any data obtained using charting that reflects moving averages pricing, relative strength; and the other 1,000 points of interest for hardcore charting folks, my brain "enjoys" and has better investing results from the plain and simple visuals of charts. I need all of the help I may find with investing.
Some charts are more visually interesting than others, due to the relationship of some market sectors; relative to one another. You may find the below linked chart of visual interest, too; among these 3 market sectors.
Chart of SPY v EDV v XLE 200 day period.
Lastly, the spread; as of Jan 30 between the percentage return of EDV and XLE is 58.74.
Now, more coffee before the winter storm hits to keep me busy with other things I would rather not be doing late tonight and Monday morning. I just "heart" winter weather. :)
Enjoy,
Catch

I'm still of the mind that the US 10 year will hit 1%. We'll see if it might go lower when it gets there.
The closer we get to 1.0% the less likely the FED will raise rates - the US$ would rise hurting exports, and decreasing import prices - hurting domestic producers.
What do you think?
U.S. 10yr1.64-0.000.26%
German 10y0.27-0.0516.56%
Italy 10yr1.58-0.010.51%
Spain 10yr1.45+0.000.08%
U.K. 10yr1.34+0.000.29%
Japan 10yr0.28-0.013.38%
Euro1.13-0.000.18%
Yen117.53-0.750.64%
Pound1.51+0.000.22%
Australia$0.78+0.000.48%

Hi Davidrmoran,
I am familiar with several money management firms that assert investment policies and strategies that promise downside protection. Some do so by using a multi-asset strategy that suggests a reduced return (like 80% of the S&P 500 Index) for reduced volatility. I’m not especially impressed.
We accomplish a similar wealth projection outcome by deploying an equity/bond mixed holdings strategy. Diversification works. The multi-asset strategy is simply exploiting that truism.
Some mutual fund managers seem to have Hedge Fund envy. Usually a gap exists between promises and the reality.
But much depends on the current environment. At times, like in an upward trending market, it must be extremely challenging to outdistance a nicely assembled Index portfolio. That task might be easier when the market is trending downward.
The data strongly suggests that active managers play a long-term losing game under most circumstances, but there are exceptional periods that are decades long. But these guys are few in number.
Notwithstanding the accumulated evidence, I still hire active managers for about 30% of the equity portion of my portfolio. That has decreased significantly over the last few years.
Thank you for your question. It is not universally answered. That's why the passive-active debate continues.
Best Wishes.

Hi @ron
Just my opinion at this time. We have held active managed TlPs funds, including LTPZ.
These funds have their periods of in and out of favor, not unlike equity funds. I have not performed a chart study recently, but one will likely discover more swings with the TIPs funds area than with corporate bond holdings. Obviously, these two bond types are supposed to provide somewhat different functions.
I have noted here several times in the past years that the greatest impact in pricing for TIPs that remains in place is the yield of other gov't. issues and that these bonds also become a flight to safety device when folks are not happy with other market sectors.
This is only my opinion, of course.
We have not invested in TIPs for any relation to receiving income from the investment; but to obtain capital appreciation from pricing. We have not used this area as a long term holding; and from my recall, we have not held TIPs for more than a year, during the last 5 or 6 years.
EDV ,TLT ,LTPZ follow the long term gov't. bond pricing. TIP and other TIPs active managed funds tend to follow the middle dated yield/pricing of gov't issues.
All of these had a bad 2013 period, as they followed the gov't longer dated issues.
EDV is the hot dog in this area for both the up and the down, slightly followed by TLT and LTPZ. EDV would be my choice, next would be LTPZ in the TIPs area.
As to active managed TIPs funds, they are pretty much in line with TIP for the longer term, but vary on a shorter term as the managers move around the duration ranges and in many cases also hold corp. bonds as well.
Ron, you noted LTPZ in particular; so I presume you have access to EDV as well.
For our house, we do our best to either purchase a 5% position on day one or at least obtain this percentage within a month's time with an average in once a week. Otherwise, we don't feel the holding has enough effect upon a portfolio.
Lastly, is how long is this down trend going to stay in place relative to bond yield? A real head scratcher. And that the etf's discussed above can and do move as much as a speciality equity sector. One should watch them for price movements, IMO. These will not neccessarily behave like a smoother, well managed corp. bond fund.
I probably forget something........will add later if needed; as I have to be away for a few hours tonight.
Don't forget, lest I get dragged across the carpet. These are only my views/opinions.
Take care,
Catch

I've been in TRP Africa/Middle East TRAMX for 2 and a half years, very pleased. It sank last year through the latter months, but still gave me good profit. Right now, it's less than 3% of my portfolio. I use its (so far) outsized returns to feed money into my core fund: PRWCX. LONG-term bet, for sure, and I'd not let it even get to be 5% of portfolio. The ER is not horrible, at 1.42%. Morningstar puts the fund in a crazy "non-category" category.

From FPACX 4Q Commentary
Conclusion
Not only is the stock market at a new high but so is the dollar and that’s despite continued low interest rates. It does beg the question: Are stocks in developed economies only as good as their respective central banks allow them to be?
At some point, the market intervention will end, hopefully plying us with
opportunity, but we are careful for what we wish for.
We are investors who have had the good fortune of like-minded people like you placing their hard-earned
money alongside ours....
we don’t particularly worry about what happens over the near
-term. Right now, we continue to feel like it is summer in the Rockies and we’re looking at the slopes hoping for snow.
Respectfully submitted,
Steven Romick
President
January 26, 2015
(Hopefully the approaching snow/winter Mr Romick is looking for, will not culminate in a far reaching avalanche)

Sorry for the FT post. I think they allow you to read one article (first click rule), so if you clear your cache you may be able to read it. But it is a short article and you shouldn't have to pay for it.
Here is one other older interview with similar thoughts though:
http://www.pwmnet.com/Wealth-Management/Profiles/Northill-brings-a-little-focus-to-asset-management-world?ct=true
NorthHill likes to buy small firms that focus on investing and aren't just trying to increase AUM. a few blerbs from the two articles:
This ones for you Scott:
Likewise, Mr Little argues Affiliated Managers Group, a big US-listed multi-boutique with assets of $617bn, is stuck on a hamster wheel of relentless expansion.
High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email [email protected] to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a18d69ee-9b1a-11e4-b651-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz3QR6lNq7w
“AMG has 30 managers in its portfolio. They have to do that. They have a premium [stock market] rating because they are a growth stock. When they stop doing that, they go to a [price-to-earnings ratio] of 13-14 rather than 18-19, so the managers can’t stop. They will lose their premium rating and lose their jobs.”
"We would rather invest in people that are consistently closing to new business,” he says.
Speaking about one of the firms they own:
“But they are also incredibly profitable. They don’t have marketing people or advertising or a corporate strategy department. Everyone in the firm is focused on asset management.”
Speaking about the types of firms they want to own:
“They are the unsung heroes of asset management. They don’t advertise, they don’t want money, they are not launching new products, so you very rarely see them in the press.”
To summarize, they are looking for some of the same things that I am in a MF company.
good performance
Focused
willing to close to new investors
low profile / doesn't advertise
small size company
doesn't want to own more than 10 and serves one the board of each that they own ( i broke this rule, but i have dropped a couple this past year)

I think you'll find a lot of different opinions about the "ideal" number of funds and I think the real answer depends largely on your style. For instance, if one is mostly a passive investor, then I would think that person wouldn't need more than 5 funds/etfs. On the other hand, there can be good reasons for having more funds, such as not putting all your eggs in one basket, or because you want both growth and value within your global funds, for instance. Of course you have to worry about becoming a closet indexer at higher cost.
I have 6 large cap funds to cover the world right now (1 of which is in the process of being eliminated so I won't discuss it). Three of those funds are very focused and have a total of 80 positions among them so I'm in no danger of becoming an indexer. These are mostly a 'not all my eggs in one basket' approach. Two others are specific bets that Europe and Japan will experience significant gains thanks to their central bank's QE program and they are hedged etfs. The last one would most likely be eliminated too because it is largely duplicated by one of the etfs (except without leverage), but its closed to new investors. Because of that I've reduced it to a very small position but I don't want to totally exit and at some point, maybe years from now, I'd expect I'll get out of the hedged etf and rotate back into the fund. Do I really need all of those? Maybe not, but I'm comfortable with my approach and I think everything has a clear purpose.
Finally, there are some other cases where I have multiple funds doing essentially the same thing, but for example Grandeur Peak International Opportunities is hard closed, so I have another small-cap international fund that I like as well and use to balance my allocation when its needed. Again, maybe not totally necessary but I'm happy with the approach.

Geez ...
---

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-29/janet-yellen-now-advises-democrats-what-feds-monetary-policy-plans-are
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-01-29/yellen-tells-senators-no-immediate-rate-rise-amid-concern-abroad
This was literally two days ago.
I'm not upset you posted what you posted or are my comments against what you posted or that you posted them or anything of that nature.
I'm simply tired of the endless back-and-forth of - Bullard said what he said and the market drops and I'm sure another Fed member (probably Kocherlakota?) will probably talk it back on Monday.
Again, nothing against what you posted, simply a rant over the endless Fedspeak that never seems to be united. It's either denied a day later (no no no, market didn't like it so we didn't mean it) OR the goalposts are moved or whatever isn't going their way is "transitory."
I'm sure that Bullard's comments were a core reason as to why the market did what it did on Friday. And I'm sure it will be walked back - but there's going to be a point where the "he said, she said" is going to result in credibility eroding entirely.
"Significance of all this? Some if you are a market timer or short-term focused. None if you are a longer term investor."
I don't disagree with you on that, but there is a point where, with the Fed at the zero bound and things looking as if they're slowing down, things will get interesting and possibly for a long while. What do you do if there's a recession and you're already at ZIRP? I guess we'll probably find out sooner than later.
Lastly, I couldn't agree more with this:
"...In other words, their job is not to analyze actual economic conditions, but to condition economic thought toward the end goal. If they convince you that they believe the economy is on track they further believe you will act accordingly (“you” being both investor and economic agent). The more the economy diverges from the “preferred” projection, the more emphatic the cries of “recovery” become. At some point, desperation becomes palpable."
It's a MOPE (Management of Perspective Economy.)
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-31/market-calls-feds-bluff-desperation-becomes-palpable
That's all.

I too am a believer in FM. Many believe that they are traditional EM of 20 years ago, so the growth potential has a huge upside. I have been moving some monies from my traditional EM funds into FM funds.
I currently own MFMPX.lw, WAFMX and MEASX. I like the breadth and depth this combo gives me. Although they are relatively struggling in 2015, this is a LONG-TERM investment and high volatility is to be expected. Furthermore, high ER is the going rate, it cannot be avoided in this arena with mutual funds.
I have not looked into the Dreihaus fund at this point, so I do not have any thoughts on it.

PIMCO 15+ Year U.S. TIPS ETF LTPZ.

I'd say Marc Faber is doubling down. Sure he's been a little wrong - since the dawn of time - but he makes up for it in confidence. Same for Peter Schiff and John Mauldin.

Faber: If I could find a way to short central banks, that is what I would do. This is the year that people will lose confidence in central banks, mostly because of the failure of Abenomics in Japan. [Abenomics, the economic policies advocated by Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to reignite Japan’s economy, encompass monetary easing, fiscal stimulus, and structural reforms.] One way to short central banks is to go long gold. I recommend buying physical gold, silver, and platinum. If you are looking for bigger gains, I suggest either mining-company stocks or the Market Vectors Junior Gold Miners [GDXJ] exchange-traded fund. In last year’s first half, when gold rebounded by 15%, the Junior Gold Miners ETF rallied by more than 40%.

@Anna
Ah, "War Games" !
The full list of scenario names is here; and no winners.

FYI: (Click On Article Title At Top Of Google Search)
Final 2015 Roundtable issue with Marc Faber, David Herro, Oscar Schafer, and Mario Gabelli discussing their approach to investing.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/search?newwindow=1&site=&source=hp&q=stratgies+for+a+new+age+barron's&oq=stratgies+for+a+new+age+barron's&gs_l=hp.3...1830.15777.0.16068.32.32.0.0.0.0.72.1755.32.32.0.msedr...0...1c.1.61.hp..6.26.1392.fKBBMGhIiI0