M* December 2014: "So this fund's true risk profile has been more conservative than the portfolio's credit profile suggests. ... Thanks to having the category's lowest 10-year Morningstar Risk score, its risk-adjusted return over that period lands in the group's top quartile. As a result, this fund has, somewhat improbably, proved to be one of the category's better options for risk-averse investors."
M* December 2015: "One of the better high-yield offerings on a risk-adjusted basis. ...Although its long-term returns trail its benchmark, the fund has been excellent on a risk-adjusted basis. For this reason, the fund retains its Morningstar Analyst Rating of Bronze."
You'll need M* Premium Membership to follow the links.
Maybe it's not that M* has erased its history, but that it didn't say the fund was too risky. What it did write, repeatedly, was that while the fund delved well into junk it also managed that risk exceedingly well. Thus the fund's actual risk profile was different (and lower) than what one would think looking only at its credit ratings.

I really can't tell how the manager had anything to do with it given "value" in general performed very well in 2016. It's not like it returned 20% +

They had been dissing this fund for a time. Saying it was too risky. No suddenly come December 2016, they suddenly like it. There is no evidence they didn't like it before. History is erased just like that. Apparently "not its virtues are not appreciated". Really M*?
And then they pen articles now and again how their rated funds have performed. This is not the first time, and it will not be the last. I wonder if I'm the only one who notices these things, or others don't care. By any chance did anyone "save" their opinion of OSTIX from before December? I want to make sure I'm not losing my mind as I'm getting older.

Week Ending January 6, 2017 © 2016 Payden & Rygel All rights reserved.
Highlights of the Week:
Municipals: The municipal market continued to see heavy mutual fund outflows over the holiday period; however, municipal/Treasury ratios actually rallied, and the market delivered strong positive performance for the month of December. With limited supply and strong demand in the new year, we expect the “January effect” to provide support for municipals in the coming weeks.
Corporates: Corporates started the year with a bang with heavy issuance right out of the gate. Total new issuance for the week was $53 billion,
well above the $20-$25 billion anticipated for the week and reflective of strong sentiment among issuers. Last year was the heaviest year of
issuance ever, but 2017 is forecast to decline by 5-10% by many analysts.
High Yield: In recent years, high yield issuers have taken advantage of low rates to refinance their balance sheets. As a result, only 2% of the high yield universe will mature in 2017. Headed into the new year, we believe this financial cushion will provide a measure of security for the asset class.
Treasuries The 5/30 yield curve remained flatter and close to the lows of the past 12 months at 107 bps. Two rate hikes are currently 100% priced in for 2017, with the Fed’s “median dot” signaling three hikes.
© 2016 Payden & Rygel All rights reserved.
https://www.payden.com/weekly/wir010617.pdf

Hi @johnN,
Thanks for posting the Schwab Municipal Bond Outlook. I have a small representation of muni's in my income sleeve and was wondering when might be a good time to add to the position. I'd like to build it to where it is about 5% of the sleeve. In 2016, the fund was about a break even position as it's nav dropped about the same as it paid in interest. Since, it is held in a taxable account the income was not taxable for me while it put an unrealized loss on my books which will be a tax loss benefit should I choose to sell.
Thanks again for posting the outlook.
Skeet

The Shiller Barclays CAPE US Core Sector Index -- underlying index for the CAPE ETN --has had attractive backtested returns during periods of both growth dominant and value dominant markets. So I am adequately confident to hold DSEEX in varying market conditions. In fact, last week I increased my DSEEX position from 15 to 18%. And like @davidmoran, I am confident that Gundlach will enable his mutual fund to have a higher upside/downside ratio relative to the CAPE ETN. But of course, the future is unknown.
Growth vs. Value
Backtested Returns of CAPE Index

CAPE vs. DSEEX
Kevin

Yeah, you mentioned that concern before. All I care about is that it continues to seriously outperform SP500, whose value components surely will dip at some point, yes, and all its div etfs.
With considerably less risk and downside movement (as analyzed for Sharpe / Sortino / Martin ratios and Ulcer Index per MFO, plus M* and Lipper's quintile rankings), CAPE alone has outperformed SP500 significantly, if I am reading the M* data right, by:
15% in '14
331% in '15
51% in '16
DSENX / DSEEX has improved on the above by another percent or so, amazingly, owing to Gundlach's secret global-bond sauces.
We have not had real testing dips, of course, but it does less badly whenever we have had the little ones the last 3+ years.
I learned about this consistent engine from Snowball / MFO writeup. (So hopefully sometime this year I should be able to do more in return than just the Amz thing.)

http://www.barrons.com/articles/stockpickers-delight-1483767162
This worked at this pc..............free pass/trial thingy.
Your access happiness may vary................
No, I did not yet read this article.
Will currently remain 50/50, domestic equity/IG bonds.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/heresy-these-7-actively-managed-funds-are-winners-2017-01-07
is the free link

All ratings have been updated on MFO Premium site, including MultiSearch, Great Owls, Fund Alarm (Three Alarm and Honor Roll), Averages, Correlation, Dashboard of Profiled Funds, and Fund Family Scorecard.

FYI: (Click On Article Title At Top Of Google Search)
Actively managed mutual funds are poised to make a comeback after years of being trounced by ETFs. Seven great ones to buy.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.barrons.com/articles/stockpickers-delight-1483767162

FYI: In an exclusive interview, Ed Hyman, Wall Street’s # 1 ranked economist for a record 36 years describes how much the financial world has changed in the last year. He and top investor, Matthew McLennan describe what it means for the U.S. economy and markets.
Regards,
Ted
http://wealthtrack.com/u-s-growth-acceleratingu-s-recession-years-away-exclusive-outlook-from-wall-streets-1-economist-ed-hyman/

@00BY:
>> Even if journalists don't like republicans, at least the market does.
Huh ? That isn't even truthy:
http://www.businessinsider.com/democrat-vs-republican-stock-market-returns-2015-12

I have some dough in PTTRX, as it is my ONLY core-bond option in my 401k. So, like a lot of 401k investors, I am a bit of a captive-customer of it.
When Bill Gross left, I was hopeful/encouraged. His behavior & commentaries struck me as somewhat 'off' in the couple years leading up to his departure. From a p-r perspective, I thought it was smart to replace the 'bond-king' with not one, but THREE experienced managers Kiesel/Mather/Worah. And naming Ivascyn as PIMCO's CIO -- I viewed that as wise too. Then too, as PTTRX has been bleeding assets. -- M* always maintained it had too many AUM --- so presumably now, with its AUM considerably shrunken, it should be much more manageable, right?
Maybe my expectations for the new team were too high. -- In 2016, M* indicates PTTRX returned 2.60% vs the bond-index returning 2.65%. And PTTRX lags the index on a trlg 3-year bassis too. I know there is always a cost-drag, but then (successful) active-management is supposed to overcome that drag and then some.
Its doing 'OK', but given the more manageable size, 3 top-tier managers, and Ivascyn's leadership of the firm, I guess I expected a lot more of PTTRX since Gross departed. I admit to some degree of disappointment. Especially as PIMIX (which I hold in large positions in my taxable and IRAs) continues to regularly deliver multiples of the returns of PTTRX. I don't expect PTTRX to achieve returns comparable to PIMIX, but I am disappointed that given all the brainpower running PTTRX it cannot must meaningful, consistent outperformance vs a "dumb" bond index.
Would love to hear thoughts of other PTTRX holders, plus or minus. Am I being too stern of a critic?

Here's a link referencing it for Dec 2016:
finance.yahoo.com/news/this-contrarian-indicator-says-the-sp-500-is-set-to-surge-19-193618725.html
Still looking for the source...

You DO know these guys have no more clue than you, me, or the man in the moon? As for the so called experts, one of the very best, if not best sentiment indicators out there is the venerable Bank of America sell side indicator (formerly the Merrill Lynch sell side indicator) This is a *contrary* indicator based on Wall Street strategists' percentage exposure to equities. As a primer on the futility of Wall Street/mutual fund experts to predict/forecast the markets as well as the perils of groupthink, I highly recommend David Dremen's Psychology and the Stock Market published in 1977.

FYI: Robert “Chip” Rewey was hired to turn around the Third Avenue Value Fund in 2014 after years of underperformance that was tied, in part, to a bad bet on Hong Kong real estate. The mutual fund rebounded last year after posting a loss in 2015.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-is-how-an-investor-turned-around-a-once-venerable-mutual-fund-2017-01-05/print

FYI: Investors pulled $3.2 billion from the Pimco Total Return Fund, once the world's largest bond fund, in December, bringing last year’s total cash withdrawals to $16.1 billion, Morningstar said on Friday.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.reuters.com/article/funds-pimco-outflows-idUSL1N1EW14C

http://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/mutual-funds/after-troubled-2016-ends-on-strong-note-for-mutual-funds-whats-ahead-for-2017/
Mutual fund managers and strategists name names -- including stocks they like in 2017.