Thanks for sharing @MikeM
The robo at 13.3% YTD is eye-catching. I have no experience with robo. I looked at T. Rowe Price’s funds (more or less out of habit) to see how their target date funds compared. Price’s website puts their Target Date 2025 fund (TRRVX) as of 11/24 at +13.53% YTD (although Lipper has it a bit lower).
From Price’s website, the current composition is:
Domestic Bond 35.1%
Domestic Stock 33.9%
Foreign Stock 18.2%
Foreign Bond 10.1%
Cash 2.8%
Convertibles 0.3%
Preferred .02%
Looks like TRRVX’s total equity weighting is in the 50-55% range (and about where Lipper puts it).
As I think you know, I never offer advice (It would be dangerous!) So just trying to glean what I can from your serve.
I’ll share that my benchmark, TRRIX, is only up +9.5% YTD. I lag it by about a percent. Some of that has to do with an injection of $$ from a real estate sale last summer. That slug of $$ only started earning at mid-year, but due to my poor math aptitude I include the sum in the year’s starting total for computing purposes.
Good luck. Thanks for the informative presentation.

When I look at Europe, personally I would rather be in Europe developed. If any of my world allocation or my (1) EM funds think that is the place to be, so be it. I don't think it is a bad gamble, just not one I plan to take. FWIW, I do plan to move some DSENX money to the European version DLEUX.

Ok. I'll post my self managed portfolio.
But FWIW, I have 1/2 my retirement savings in a Schwab robo-portfolio, which is about 62% equity, 28% bonds and 10% cash. As of 11/24, the robo has returned 13.3% YTD. The percentage is based on $ amounts from 1/1 to 11/24. Up to others to judge if that is good or bad, but I'm happy with the the robo so far. I tend to be too conservative some times and the robo helps not over-think everything.
The self managed portfolio is less aggressive. Most of it has been pretty steady, fund/percentage wise, but I like to play with stocks with a small part of the total and my stocks have changed over the year. I also have adjusted and re-adjusted the bond funds a couple of times. Not sure why I don't just put all the bond allocation in PONDX and be done with it. But what fun is that?
M* instant xray shows the self managed portfolio percentages to be:
CASH 17
U.S. STOCK 21
FOREIGN STOCK 22
BONDS 34
OTHER 7
The self managed, which has consistently been conservative at about 40-45% equity, has returned 12.1% YTD. I think that is pretty good. Again, that's based on real dollars, not M* calculated.
the self managed portfolio consists of:
EQUITY and BALANCED FUNDS:
PRWCX Allocation--50% to 70% Lcap
ICMBX Allocation--50% to 70% Scap
DSENX LV- unfavored S&P500 sectors
GTLOX Lcap Blend
GPGOX World Stock
SGENX World Allocation
FMIJX Foreign LC Blend
SFGIX Diversified Emerging Mkts
BOND FUNDS:
MAINX Asia Centrix Bond Fund
PGMSX TRP Global Multi-Sector
PFIDX Low Duration floating Income
PONDX Multisector Bond
Individual Stocks:
V Visa
VLO Valero Energy
BABA Alibaba
QCP Quality Care Properties
I do think I own to many bond funds. I'll likely cut back. I also plan to move some money from DSENX to DLEUX. I think Europe may have better value and that is what these 2 funds are all about.
For the record, I will be 64 in 2018 and plan to retire from full time work. I'll likely work part time because I get bored easy. I have been doing a lot of thinking, setting up spreadsheets and reading about setting myself up for withdrawals. Looking forward to more discussions on that theme.

Catch22 and Old Skeet, thanks for your input.
@Catch22, these two funds have done well since Jan 2016, but still have slightly under performed the general EM category during that period. Moreover, they significantly underperformed the more traditional diversified EM category (mostly more negative) from 2013-2015, so it emerging Europe might have more catchup opportunity to make up for those years of greater negativity. From what I have read, emerging European countries seem to be putting it together for growing economies (especially Poland), but there are admittedly risks, as in Turkey as you described. I could just see if EM and the US become seen as expensive at some point in 2018, investors could turn to other investment opportunities that are less expensive, such as emerging Europe. I could be wrong of course, but that is just part of my thinking.
@Old_Skeet, one fund that might fit your bill could be FEMEX. I don't know if it is any good, but it hits the areas you are referring to.

Hard to see over 10/5/3/1y why you would ever want it over FTBFX (slightly less volatility, I suppose), much less FSICX and / or PONDX (similar risk rating). I did not check the Metwest and Doubleline competition.

FYI: Ray Dalio is the founder, chair and co-chief investment officer of Bridgewater Associates, a global leader in institutional portfolio management and the largest hedge fund in the world.
What if you knew what your coworkers really thought about you and what they were really like? Ray Dalio makes the business case for using radical transparency and algorithmic decision-making to create an idea meritocracy where people can speak up and say what they really think — even calling out the boss is fair game. Learn more about how these strategies helped Dalio create one of the world’s most successful hedge funds and how you might harness the power of data-driven group decision-making.
This talk was presented at an official TED conference, and was featured by our editors on the home page.
Regards,
Ted
http://ritholtz.com/2017/11/ray-dalio-let-best-ideas-win/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+TheBigPicture+(The+Big+Picture)

PRIDX is a foreign smid-fund. Great year. 36.48% ytd, 6.87%, over past 10 years.... 24th percentile in 2017. Past decade = 12th percentile. No Load. TRP. And $7.6 billion AUM.

Being curious, I checked the following:
Both funds, Oct. 2000 to date:
http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?TREMX,EUROX&n=4311&O=011000
Both funds, Jan. 2016 to date: both funds have had a decent run since Jan. 2016; is there may be more to be had??? If I were to invest in these areas, I would have to study more about the country holdings within the funds; as to economy, politics, etc. I.E.; Russia and energy, etc. for similar relative to a country. Turkey has political upheaval still in place. I recall Austria having severe banking problems after the market melt. I don't know the current status. Both funds have been flat to negative from Sept. 1. This is only an observation, as I don't know why this is the case......profit taking??? 'Course, the "markets" have caused fits for many since the market melt; and still cause head scratching, eh? "This time is different" is still in place, IMHO.
http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?TREMX,EUROX&n=478&O=011000
I don't have recommendations for this area, as we are fully invested in other equity areas; and not a student of this particular area. For our own personal criteria; we tend to place no less than 5% into a given area to be meaningful for us and the overall portfolio.
Just my 2 cents worth on a Sunday morning.
Regards,
Catch

Indeed. Has both Great Owl and Honor Roll designations ...

Russia, Czech Republic, Hungary, and Turkey are among the cheapest markets. Although a lot of fund managers/commentators believe more traditional emerging markets such as those in Asia have more room to run, they have had a run up and may longer be cheep, but "reasonable" (although China might still be considered cheap based on PE according to below link of chart from 9/30/2017...however China has had a good couple of months since then so maybe no longer cheap?).
I'm considering putting a small amount into either EUROX or TREMX. From 9/30/2017, EUROX top 6 country holdings are 34.5% Russia, 15.4% Turkey, 14.5% Poland, 7% Greece, 4.6% Austria, 3.3% Hungary (it should be noted that Morningstar last listed EUROX as having a turnover ratio of 164% so this could be different now). From 10/31/2017, TREMX has top 6 country holdings of 50.5% Russia, 15.6% Turkey, Poland 9%, Georgia 5.1%, Hungary 4.7%, and Romania 4.5%. My overall impression from reading fund reports is that the manager of TREMX is very valuation conscious, which is good if seeking emerging Europe as a value play away from other EM, however that has hurt TREMX in it's 2017 performance by being underweight Poland, which has had a great year. Valuation has also led to it's overweighting in Russia, taking up half of its portfolio. TREMX had a turnover of 48% compared to 164% for EUROX. TREMX is also more concentrated with 51 stocks, compared to 102 for EUROX according to Morningstar. ER of TREMX is 1.75%, EUROX is 2.33%, a difference to consider.
Any thoughts on investing in this region? Any opinions as to whether to invest in EUROX or TREMX? Are there any other Emerging Europe mutual funds (not ETFs) out there to consider?
http://www.starcapital.de/research/stockmarketvaluation

Hi Hank,
Yeah, I posted Dukester 3 last week. Got some looks, but that was all. I will bump it to the top of the stack again just to see. I also really liked the postings. It shows how other people think about things and that the way you do things isn't the only way. I try to be open on the board just to draw comments because I know sometimes my thinking can get quite narrow. I think I'm all that and a bag of chips and, really, that's when trouble starts. I see you're raising cash. Nothing wrong with that. As you can guess, I'm still quite bullish, though I do think we're late in the game. Most of my new buys are short term trades. Really, I still think that some good news is not priced in the market, but by early 2018 will be. But 'til then......party on!
Hi Jafink63,
Good move! I like new funds.....money coming in.....managers' best ideas. And, of course, it's Wellington. Enough said.
God bless
the Pudd

Regarding cap gains on homes - interviewee (at 5:54) states correctly: "it's also important - always important - for individuals who own their homes to keep great records of the improvements they've put into their homes in order to try to eliminate or reduce part of the gain."
The proposed changes would not make the record keeping tasks any more onerous than they are now or have been in the past. Regardless of how home cap gains are taxed, you always want to show as little gain as possible. Just like stocks, where you keep track of your purchase prices, buying and selling commissions, net proceeds (after other taxes/fees are taken out), you should be keeping track of similar home costs. The purchase price, improvements, additions, special assessments, etc.
A proposed House change to the law would only affect high income people ($250K/$500K per year income). Those people likely own homes that already have big gains that are taxable (more than the $250K/$500K that homeowners can exclude). So this proposed change would have no effect on record keeping needs.
Both House and Senate are proposing requiring people to stay longer in their homes to qualify for the $250K/$500K exclusion. The main people this change would affect are those who are flipping houses to keep their gains under the exclusion amount. They don't get much sympathy for me, and they're probably already keeping detailed records to achieve their objective of avoiding taxation on their home gains.
Longer term, more and more people will need those records. The amount of gain you can exclude, $250K/$500K, was set in 1997. At the time, that sounded like a lot of money. Now, $250K won't buy you an entry level home in some neighborhoods, though it's still above the median price of a home in 80% of the states, including New York ($247K). In another 20 years, lots of people may have taxable gains in their homes.

Thanks, Ted and Bee and msf, for the link and the info.
It seems to me that having the step-up in basis at death is important for two reasons:
(1) the heirs don't owe tax on the the appreciated gain (duh)
(2) the heirs don't have the huge hassle and hopeless task of figuring out the true basis from Mom and Dad's incomplete records of purchases and reinvested dividends.
On the other hand, according to Consuelo's interviewee, such complications are being re-introduced for homeowners who sell their house at an appreciated value after living in it a long time: you'll owe capital gains now.
So trying to go back and find the original price and figure how much capital improvements you made through the years ....... Ugh.
Best to will the house to the kids so they get the step up basis.
Like many other things Congress does, these bills make me want to scream. I don't believe it's fair to pay taxes on taxes, so property taxes and state and local income taxes should all be deductible from Federal tax consideration. I don't care whether it's blue state or red state -- it's just not fair.
The issue that bothers me the most is the elimination of the estate tax. Our ancestors fought for freedom from a system in which an aristocracy based on blood lines ruled over everybody. If huge -- multi-billions of dollars -- can be passed on from generation to generation, we run a huge risk of living under a new aristocracy based on overwhelming wealth.
Maybe I went a little off-topic there.
David

"No step up except at death", or except for the 1/2 community property owned by the still living spouse.
In most states, when one spouse dies, that spouse's share of jointly owned property gets a step up, but the surviving spouse's share doesn't. If that property is owned as community property, then all of it gets a step up.

HR 1 won't eliminate the step up. Here's the relevant text:

(a) In general.—Except as provided in subsection (b), this chapter [11, that taxes estates] shall not apply to the estates of decedents dying after December 31, 2024 ...
[and] Section 1014(b) is amended— [in paragraphs (6), (9), and (10) only]
.

So the bill wipes out the estate tax (after 2024) while leaving the step up in basis. That's in a the unchanged paragraph (1) of Section 1014(b) of the Internal Revenue Code Section 1014(b)(1). That paragraph that provides a step up on "Property acquired by bequest, devise, or inheritance, or by the decedent’s estate from the decedent"
The Senate bill does not eliminate the estate tax, despite what you might have heard in that tax proposal interview at 15:10. Neither the Washington Post nor I can find any mention of an estate tax elimination in the Senate bill. Since the Senate bill doesn't eliminate the estate tax, we don't have to worry about how the Senate bill treats the step up when the estate tax is gone.

Hi MikeM,
Yeah, the email......I can't find it right now. I deleted it and it's not in the trash. The gist of it was this: with rates rising slowly and measured, this should not be a problem for a while in the real estate space. And if you look at RAANX when I bought in June and July, you can see how the chart is rising in the face of rates right now. Again, we've discussed this fund, you and I,......it's not like all the others.....57.3% real estate, 10% about outside the U.S. It has cell towers and cloud centers as well as farms and water rights. And with rates so low, at what point does it matter? That's the question, really. And will it take a year or longer to get there? And if you put it on a chart and look at it from October to now, ..... look at the rise. A tech bump, maybe? Just saying.....
God bless
the Pudd

Is this where "re-gifting" finally loses it's negative connotation?

Estate planning moves main stream (...not really):
No way I will ever challenge the present $5M nor the proposed $10M limit, but why not sell assets keeping the new tax proposal (stepped up basis provision for transfer of estate) in mind.
So, if I have 100 shares of xyz stock that I need to sell for income. Instead of selling them from my taxable portfolio and paying the taxes on the capital gain, I instead, gift them "in kind" to my family member first.
-They receive the gift (with a stepped up basis),
-They then sell the xyz stock at the stepped up basis price,
-They pay no taxes on the capital gain since it was eliminated when I first gifted xyz stock to them,
-They then "re-gift" the proceeds back to me (cash proceeds)...minus a steak dinner and a few nights of sleepovers for the grand kids.
This sounds a lot like how a Roth IRA works, but better. It doesn't have pedestrian contribution limits ($20M for a couple), no withdrawal (age) limits, nor any Roth conversion costs (income tax).

Re “I remain in a cash build mode.”
Maybe a “cash build moat”?
moat - NOUN, a deep, wide ditch surrounding a castle, fort, or town, typically filled with water and intended as a defense against attack.
Source: https://www.bing.com/search?q=meaning+of+moat&qs=AS&pq=meaning+of+moat&sc=8-15&cvid=020AF923D25746F5A72AFD2AE8E0E89F&FORM=QBRE&sp=1

FYI: Big gains can be hard to find in the financial markets. Nowadays, though, they seem to be everywhere — and that could change how you feel about taking risks.
Regards,
Ted
http://jasonzweig.com/when-a-10-gain-makes-you-feel-like-a-loser/

FYI: In a year full of political and economic drama, emerging markets have outpaced an aging bull market in the U.S. over the last 12 months. Still, the prospect of Beijing wielding a heavier hand in Chinese companies and economic reforms in India potentially slowing near-term growth means that investors who take a closer look now will need to pick their spots carefully.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/how-to-play-emerging-markets-now-1511579482