FYI:
Regards,
Ted
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000259274&play=1

Hello, Steve999. You don't even need to get as specific as you are getting. The backdrop here is capitalism. It's dirty. It's about supply and demand, not about what's the right thing to do. Capitalism BEGS to be regulated, otherwise a very few become stinking, filthy, sweaty wealthy while most get left behind, eating dust. ...Hmmmm. Wait a minute, that's the way things are NOW, come to think of it! The regulations in place don't even stop the High Rollers from screwing everyone else in order to make money. Corporations just do what they want, and wait to see if MAYBE they get discovered by regulators or Attorneys General who will slap them with a fine that amounts to a slap on the wrist.
...But if you want to survive....... It's the "only game in town." So, in the end, there's no escaping it. At least not HERE in the USA. Everything I read tells me that Denmark and the other Scandinavian countries have a much better idea about how to operate.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=441971712601827&set=a.278989962233337.1073741829.263803127085354&type=1&theater

I define positive momentum as persistent upward movement above a trendline over short, medium and long time frames. The charts below shows GDX over two time frames (long = 7 years) and (short =3 months). By charting and setting some rules I am trying to accept a certain amount of volatility over the short term while trying to capture a short term upward movement spike. For GDX these short term spikes tend to be 20 -30%. The first chart show a number of these periodic short spikes. Regardless to the direction of the long term trend (up or down) these short term spike seem to consistently exist.
My short term rules are:
1. I entry the investment after a "higher lows" trend has been established (I try to confirm this with 5-10 days of data).
2. Any 10% gain is captured as a gain and invested elsewhere.
3. A 10% drop from any rolling new high is a trigger to end the short term investment.
4. I re-entry the investment after a new "higher low" trend has been re-established (again, I try to confirm this with 5-10 days of data).
Here GDX's long term chart showing these many short term "spikes" (a 20-30% movement in these short spikes).

Here's the last three months (25% upward spike movement). Over the short term, GDX has been making "higher lows" in a pretty consistent manner. You can see it has bounced off the trend line I've drawn a number of times over the last 3 months. This week it is testing the short term trend line again and actually seems to have broken through. I am using GDX's price of $25 (which is 10% below its rolling high price of $27.73) as a potential trigger point to close out this momentum play. If it bouces up above the trendline I would be encouraged to hold this position. I'll see how this works out by weeks end.
I would be interested in hearing from others who use a momentum strategy for all or part of your investments (speculations).

I believe the thread with the confusing title was intended as YOUR best 5 funds YTD, not the best funds over the last 5 years. Just one of those forum feel-good pastimes not meant to be taken seriously as fund recommendation.

I could always invest in Vanguards fund VDIGX but with my brokerage account its not a NTF so I'd be hit with a $50 fee anytime I invested more. I dunno....I'm just kicking some ideas around. I never really considered an ETF before but with 10-15K to invest maybe it's not a bad idea. Maybe DLN's tax bill wouldn't be as bad as I initially thought.

Thanks guys. It would be approx. 10-15K. It's not for income. I'd reivest all dividends at some point each year. It's just a way to invest in high quality US multinationals. Companies that for the most part I know, I understand, and feel comfortable with. The companies that each of these ETF's invest in seem to hold up better in down markets than most.

@jlev is right. It is the curse of small numbers.
In any case, the impact of a rate increase is related to the increase in basis points regardless of whether it is at near zero or at 6 percent and the speed with which it increases. 75 basis points in 7 quarters isn't that great an increase and allows the market and economy to adjust with less distortions than the current almost zero rate.
The 125 basis points move in 2016 seems a bit too fast unless they are expecting an accelerating economy with significant inflation pressures. The Fed doing this in an election year seems a bit of a stretch to be credible. My guess is that this is just to set up higher expectations so that the minimal increase to end of 2015 is taken seriously rather than as a very tentative one with the increase having no effect.

With the understanding that fed funds rate changes may cause some future gyrations; in particular, I smiled as I read the numbers in the bold text below.
---A few words from the first link below: "If you take away one thing from the Federal Reserve's statement Wednesday, it's this: Interest rates are going to be low for a long time yet, but not quite as low as Wall Street expected.
The Fed raised its prediction for the key fed funds rate slightly, to 1% by the end of 2015 and 2.25% by the end of 2016. "Those are very modest rate increases. The Fed's policy objective still very, very accommodative," says Krishna Memani, Chief Investment Officer of Oppenheimer Funds."
Slightly---modest rates increases !!! Now here is where you have to check my math; as I have had a too long and busy work day, today.
My math indicates a change from .25% to a 1.00% rate is a 300% increase and to 2.25% by the end of 2016 is a 800% increase.
Would these percentage increase numbers also indicate "slightly" if this were an equity index forecast???
I must be too tired to read properly or I have entered the "Twilight Zone" or I have a math problem.
Fed funds rate increase article
Currrent Fed funds rate = .25%
Take care,
Catch

FSAGX 27.43%
FPHAX 11.35%
FSELX 10.79%
FTQGX 6.13%
FSMVX 5.37%
GARY

Roughly how much would you be investing? If it's hundreds of thousand to millions you might increase your tax bill by a few thousand which in that case wouldn't be that much to you anyway.
Let's say you want to invest $50,000. You would end up with maybe $1,200 in dividends and your tax bill would go up by maybe $300. Is that worth a second thought?

Look at GASFX (US - centric) and TOLSX (TOLLX) (50% US / 50% foreign) if you would like exposure to Utilities. Also, GLFOX (Small Cap & 80% non-US) for smaller global industrial and utility sector companies.

@Old_Skeet & Others:
Regards,
Ted
ETF DeathWatch:
http://investwithanedge.com/etf-deathwatch-for-march-2014-have-income-funds-reached-saturation
Market Leadership Strategy:
http://investwithanedge.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/MLSranking2014-03-17-top5.jpg

Wednesday, March 19, 2014
Editor's Corner
World Boundaries Change
Ron Rowland
It’s never a dull news week when world boundaries change. Although the paperwork is not complete, the Crimean Peninsula went from being a territory of Ukraine to a part of the Russian Federation. Over the weekend, the residents of Crimea held a referendum and overwhelmingly (more than 95%) voted to secede from Ukraine and rejoin Russia. President Putin wasted no time, signing treaties at the Kremlin yesterday to annex Crimea. In a speech to the Russian Parliament he waved-off recent sanctions levied by Europe and the U.S., said a further “partition of Ukraine” was not needed, and referred to Crimea as Russia’s “historical south.”
The historical reference comes into play because Russia transferred Crimea to Ukraine in 1954 – 60 years and two generations ago. However, Ukraine was part of the USSR back then, and the transfer was seen as mostly symbolic. Many political analysts believe Putin is nostalgic for the old days of USSR supremacy in the region and he would like nothing more than to oversee Russia’s return to its former greatness. Markets seemed to take their cue from the portion of the speech downplaying further action and began the week with a strong relief rally.
Today, the Federal Reserve is grabbing the headlines as the FOMC completes its first meeting under the leadership of Janet Yellen. Some recent economic weakness caused analysts to lower the probability of another automatic $10 billion monthly reduction of bond purchases. However, the Fed proceeded to make that cut, bringing the monthly injections down to $55 billion, consisting of $25 billion in mortgage backed securities and $30 billion in Treasury bonds.
One significant change in the post-meeting statement was the removal of the 6.5% unemployment rate as a threshold to begin considering interest rate increases. This change seemed to catch many Fed watchers off guard. However, unemployment has approached that level the past few months, and we view the removal of this data point as consistent with the Fed’s prior commitment to keep rates low for an extended period after the completion of the asset purchase program.
Yellen also conducted her first post-FOMC meeting press conference today. She stressed that recent economic weakness was believed to be weather related and the uptick in the labor force partition rate was an encouraging factor. Market reaction to the FOMC meeting was negative. Stocks fell, bonds fell, gold fell, and the dollar rose. Last week’s market action looked like a flight to safety, and today’s reaction seemed to undo it all.
Sectors
Utilities made a spectacular jump from eighth place all the way to first as part of last week’s flight to safety. Health Care has controlled the top of the sector rankings for ten weeks, but Utilities’ climb pushed it down a notch to second place. Materials stayed close on the heels of Health Care. Real Estate, an income-oriented sector, climbed two spots to fourth. Technology had a good overall week, but its temporary pullback last Thursday and Friday resulted in a loss of momentum and a two-position slippage to fifth. Financials were essentially unchanged the past week, but that was good enough to increase its ranking a notch to sixth. Consumer Discretionary and Industrials were in a tie a week ago and are again today. In the meantime, they both fell three places and turned in some of the poorest performances of the week. Consumer Staples continued its steady climb off its early February low and managed to move ahead of Energy. Telecom broke out of its four-month downtrend while remaining in last place.
Styles
No changes in the top two positions, and no changes in the bottom four either. The short-term performance graphs of first place Micro Cap and last place Mega Cap may appear similar at first glance. However, once you plot them on the same chart with a consistent scale, the contrast becomes obvious. Zooming out to include a whole year, the fact the Micro Cap category doubled the performance of Mega Cap is readily apparent. Falling in behind Micro Cap are Small Cap Growth, Small Cap Blend, and Small Cap Value, giving small company stocks a decisive advantage over their larger brethren in this market. Small Cap Value posted the biggest improvement, allowing it to join this group by climbing from seventh place a week ago. This week’s changes in the middle of the rankings were consistent with the new inverse capitalization alignment seen in the accompanying chart. The Mid Cap trio occupies the middle ground while the Large Cap trio sits near the bottom above Mega Cap.
Global
Events in Ukraine generated global tension and market nervousness the past week, allowing the U.S. and its “safe haven” status to keep the top ranking. The physical proximity of Europe to these events caused exaggerated moves in European stocks, but the region managed to hold its second place position. Canada climbed two spots to third, moving into the upper tier for the first time in months and pushing World Equity down to fourth. Pacific ex-Japan moved up a notch to fifth, while EAFE weakened to sixth and is in danger of flipping into a negative trend. The U.K. held its relative position but lost its upward momentum. Japan posted a terrible week due to its inability to join the rest of the world in bouncing back from last week’s selling action. Last week we reported that China was on the verge of replacing Latin America as the worst-ranked category, and today’s chart indicates that has indeed happened.
Note:
The charts above depict both the relative strength and absolute strength of various market sectors, styles, and geographic locations on an intermediate-term basis. Each grouping is sorted (top to bottom) by relative strength. The magnitude of the displayed RSM value is a measure of absolute strength, which is our proprietary method of measuring and reporting the intermediate-term strength as an annualized value.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Star Investor
Named to Hulbert Financial Digest's Honor Roll
Our sister publication, All Star Investor, is one of only nine newsletters to make the Hulbert Financial Digest's (HFD) Honor Roll for 2012. That is fewer than 10% of the newsletters it follows. All Star Investor earned even more accolades from HFD as it is one of only six to be named two years in a row. The editor, Mark Hulbert, writes "making it onto the Honor Roll really means something" and suggests "you give our Newsletter Honor Roll serious consideration"".
To make the honor roll, a newsletter must perform better than average in both up markets and down markets since 8/31/98, including measures of risk-adjusted performance.
Sign up for a free 14-day trial to an Honor Roll newsletter here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“With the unemployment rate nearing 6-1/2 percent, the Committee has updated its forward guidance. The change in the Committee's guidance does not indicate any change in the Committee's policy intentions as set forth in its recent statements."
FOMC Statement on March 19, 2014
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
=== Follow Us===
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recent Articles Posted at InvestWithAnEdge.com:
ETF Stats for February 2014 – Actively Managed ETFs Gaining Share
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLOSURE
© 2014 AllStarInvestor.com All Rights Reserved. Protected by copyright laws of the United States and international treaties. Nothing in this e-mail should be considered personalized investment advice. Although our employees may answer your general customer service questions, they are not licensed under securities laws to address your particular investment situation. No communication by our employees to you should be deemed as personalized investment advice. Any investments recommended in this letter should be made only after consulting with your investment advisor and only after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company. All Star Investor employees, its affiliates, and clients may hold positions in the recommended securities.
Distribution is encouraged. Please do not alter content.
Courtesy of: www.AllStarInvestor.com, Publisher of www.InvestWithAnEdge.com
This message was sent to Old_Skeet from:
All Star Investor | 11651 Jollyville Road, Suite 200 | Austin, Texas 78759
Email Marketing by
Update Profile | Forward To a Friend

How long before they have Dreifus managing 3 or 4 or 5 funds?

I certainly hope this will not happen. RYSEX and RSEMX are the only 2 Royce funds in which I have any interest (and RYSEX is the only one in which I have any money).
According to Charlie Dreifus's interview on Wealth Track with Consuelo Mack, the creation of the multi-cap fund was totally his idea, and in fact he requested permission and lobbied to do it. Largely because he felt, and still feels, that as an asset class, small caps are more fully valued than mid and large caps.
So I don't think we have any reason, at least at present to feel that Royce is going to multiply funds under his management. I did feel that Royce was going over-the-top in some of its internet banner advertising, trumpeting Dreifus as "a brilliant investor". This was the occasion of my Open Letter to Charlie Dreifus. (coincidence or not, the ads stopped cold and have not been seen since).
So whatever our concerns might be about Royce (and exorbitant fees should be high on that list), it appears that Charlie Dreifus operates independently, being given the support he needs, but making his own investment decisions. RYSEX is a keeper.

Strangely (?)--- some of my bond funds are doing better y-t-d than some stock funds. The 5 YTD "winners" so far--- IN DESCENDING ORDER, and size in portf.
-TRAMX.......2.6%
-MSCFX.................2.6%
-PRESX.......16.4%
-PRWCX..................................19%
-DLFNX.......2.55%

Hi Guys,
In general, I'm very satisfied with Morningstar's database and its presentations. I do not wish to pile-on, but their operation does slip on occasion.
Their upside and downside capture ratios are one such occasion. The concept is excellent: the execution is terrible.
Although Morningstar has a huge number of fund categories, they elect to rank all funds against just 3 benchmarks: the S&P 500, the MSCI EAFE Index, and theBarclays Aggregate Bond Index. That's just plain lazy. The Capture Ratios are only solid signals of performance when contrasted against a meaningful benchmark measure.
Is it fair to measure the performance of a small cap value fund against the S&P 500? Is it an honest assessment to judge a short term corporate bond fund against the Barclay benchmark? The answer to both questions is a definite No.
I'm not sure I understand why Morningstar gets into these easily avoidable pitfalls.
Best Regards.

Hi Gary,
Simplification is usually beneficial, but over-simplification can be financially hazardous. I believe an investor needs to know as much as possible when assessing financial matters. Constant learning is essential to improve investing outcomes.
Hiring a fund manager or a team of managers does not relieve you of your portfolio management duties. It is just one step in the process. Yes, buying a mutual fund or ETF does transfer some of the investment tasks to the fund manager, but not all of them. You’re still the most important cog in the investment decision wheel.
So continue educating yourself on financial matters or risk ruin from the many professionals who will gladly exploit your blind spots. These guys are experts at filling their pockets while providing services that either fill or empty your pockets. As you correctly emphasized, fees are a persistent annual portfolio drain regardless of market outcomes.
There are simple strategies to substantially decrease this reward drain. Warren Buffett observed that “Beware of little expenses; a small leak will sink a great ship”.
Yale institutional investment genius David Swensen authored his “Unconventional Success” book in 2005. He likes to say that both amateur and professional investors only have 3 tools to work their magic: asset allocation, market timing, and security selection.
By hiring a fund manager, you transfer 2 of these 3 tools to his responsibility: the specific security choices and some of the market timing aspects. However, you fully retain the asset allocation responsibilities. David Swensen concludes that the asset allocation function contributes at least 80 % to the overall returns profile whereas the other two functions each only add 10 % to the returns picture.
Here is a Link to a recent Swensen lecture that he delivered as a guest on Robert Shiller’s economics and finance series:

In his book, Swensen said: “Poor asset allocation, ill-considered active management, and perverse market timing lead the list of errors made by individual investors.” Remember, you are still responsible for at least the asset allocation decisions.
Costs always matter and individual investors are always exposed to potentially escalading investment charges, some obvious and some hidden.
The private investor and his portfolio suffer from a triple whammy in this regard that is a heavy burden to overcome. The triple whammy for the individual investor is: (1) the fund and advisor fees, (2) the average underperformance of active fund managers to just match passive Index outcomes, and (3) the poor exit/entry timing of the investor himself.
All three factors are frictional drags that substantially reduce the private investors annual returns to approximately one-third of overall market returns. Countless academic and industry studies document this dismal shortfall.
The simple strategy to substantially attenuate this wealth robbing burden is to eliminate the second tier of advisor fees, to invest in low cost mutual fund and ETF products like Index funds, to avoid frequent trading that is tied to short term market timing, and to be alert to behavioral biases like overconfidence and herding that encourage faulty market decisions.
The MFO membership is dominated by folks who own mutual funds and ETFs. As a group, we recognize and reserve the asset allocation and the long-term entry/exit decisions for ourselves. To execute this task with some success, each of us continually upgrades our knowledge base by learning and with experience. I suggest that you will enhance your portfolio’s growth prospects by also adopting this learning pattern.
Thank you for your participation in this exchange and thanks for the Link.
Best Wishes.

Agree with cman...watching for weekly confirmation of higher lows (continued upward trend). I will be stopped out if GDX crosses $25 which is 10% below its most recent rolling high ($27.73). Hoping this is a period of consolidation rather than a trend reversal. GDX is still very much out of synch with the rest of the equity market.
How I would interpret GDX YTD ? - Higher lows with periods of consolidation:

related - gold miner etf
http://www.nasdaq.com/article/gold-mining-etf-investing-101-etf-news-and-commentary-cm336251