I agree that it's percentages that matter, not absolute numbers.
It looks like the fund has taken in almost no money in the past six months (thus failing to broaden the base receiving those early realized gains).
AUM at the end of April was $30.735M @$10.38/sh; currently it is $32.5M (5.7% increase) @ $10.90 (5.0%), showing that virtually all the increase in AUM came from appreciation, not inflows.
(Current data as of 11/28/16 from M*; April 30 data from annual report.)
Two things that strike me as curious, since Derf is pointing out oddities:
- 1/3 of distribution coming from income; I thought microcaps don't often generate dividends;
- Despite having no inflows and just modest appreciation, the fund will have a hard close at the end of this year (prospectus)

FYI: Last week my colleague Michael Batnick pointed out that small cap stocks have seen the equivalent of both a bear and bull market this year alone:
The people that use all-time highs to scare you are the same people who told you that the 27% selloff in the Russell 2000 earlier this year was the canary in the coalmine. Small-cap stocks are now at all-time highs and 40% off their February lows.
It seems like a distant memory now, but the S&P 500 was basically the only stock market that didn’t go into a bear market — as defined by a 20% or greater loss — during the early-2016 selloff.
Regards,
Ted
http://awealthofcommonsense.com/2016/11/the-agony-of-investing-in-small-cap-stocks/

I don't think it matters whether they have a lot of AUM or a little, the percent of AUM is more relevant. One-third of the distribution is income and they apparently took net gains equal to roughly 1% of AUM this year for a total distribution of roughly 1.5%. I don't think that's particularly surprising, especially considering they were still getting original cash invested at the end of last year, probably took advantage of some of the low prices early in the year and must have taken some of those gains.

I came across estimate last week, here at MFO, & thought someone else would ask this question ,but to no avail.
So I'll lay it out & see if I can get any answers. Why would this fund with so little aum, $28 million (?) be giving distribution of $.1625 from a micro cap fund. I believe most of their other funds distribution were (0) or less than $.1625 by quite a lot.
I realize these are estimates only.
Happy investing,
Derf

FYI: Is the Land of the Rising Sun set to rise again?
Following an extended and massive retreat from the region, investors are moving back into major Japan-related exchange-traded funds, seeing the potential for economic acceleration following an extended period of tepid growth.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/investors-rotate-back-into-japan-etfs-2016-11-28/print

FYI: The Treasury yield curve has been steepening since the election, with 10-year yields hitting one-year highs in recent days amid a bond sell-off. In that environment, and in the face of a potential interest rate hike next month, negative-duration bond ETFs could come into the spotlight as investors look to profit from the rate rise.
There are only two funds in this segment, and they haven’t really captured investor attention:
Regards,
Ted
http://www.etf.com/sections/features-and-news/election-boosts-negative-duration-bond-etfs

@David_Snowball said in May, 2016 "Small/Mid Cap Value Options" discussion.
Intrepid Endurance (formerly Intrepid Small Cap, ICMAX) - absolute value which means huge cash holdings until compelling valuations appear. Up 4% YTD despite 67% cash which implies that equity portion was up 12%. Lost 18% in the 2007-09 crash.
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/77466/#Comment_77466
Yes Indeed!
3Q 2016 Fact Sheet
ICMAX ICMZX September 30, 2016
SECTOR allocation (% of net assets)
Cash Equivalents and Other 79.5%
Industrials 5.4%
Materials 4.7%
Information Technology 3.6%
Consumer Discretionary 3.3%
Financials 2.3%
Health Care 1.2%
http://www.intrepidcapitalfunds.com/media/Intrepid_Endurance_Fund_3Q16.pdf
Fact Sheets and 3rd Q Manager Commentaries
http://www.intrepidcapitalfunds.com/funds/fact_sheets.html

It hit about $7.50 today, way below the $14 it hit when resumption of diplomatic relations was announced in 2014. Any way I look at it, this fund has not made anyone much dough over its lifespan. It remains an "idea" investment for me and believe me, my attempts to make money off idea stocks and funds has not worked.

FYI: The Cuba-linked closed-end mutual fund that's going bananas in the wake of Fidel Castro's death is a product investors had grown increasingly sour on over the past six months.
The Herzfeld Caribbean Basin Fund (CUBA) was up as much as 17 percent on Monday morning, its best one-day showing since December 2014, amid hopes that the dictator's passing will herald profit-making opportunities for a number of firms that operate there, mostly in the businesses of tourism and infrastructure development.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-28/investors-hated-the-cuba-fund-that-s-now-going-parabolic
M* Snapshot CUBA:
http://www.morningstar.com/cefs/xnas/cuba/quote.html

HSTRX - are you kidding me? It has been so long since that one came up, I thought perchance it had been liquidated. Not only has it lost almost 85% of its assets since 2011, it has increased its expenses by about 8% from that year, too. I really had no problem with the other 9 recommendations (oops, not recommendations, really), but Hussman? Would have picked QMNIX or VMNFX for some kind of hedging, but definitely not Hussman.

It helps to read the footnotes. These figures all come under the heading "30-Day Yield"; on the page in question, that heading has a footnote #2

The 30-day dividend yield represents the average daily dividends for the 30-day period, annualized and divided by the net asset values per share at the end of the period; it is available the first quarter after the fund's inception. The SEC standardized yield is computed under an SEC standardized formula and reflects an estimated yield to maturity (assuming all portfolio securities are held to maturity); it is available the first month after the fund's inception.

While the footnote used slightly different names (creative writing, I guess), what it is calling "dividend yield" is the "annualized dividend", and of course what it is calling the "SEC standardized yield" is the "SEC standardized yield."
Both are computed based on the past 30 days (hence the 30-Day Yield heading). As the footnote says, the annualized yield is just the past monthly yield annualized. So if the fund paid out 0.1% in dividends in the past month, the annualized yield would be roughly [(1+ .001) ^ 12] - 1, or about 1.2%.
The SEC yield is a formula that tries to approximate yield to worst for a portfolio of bonds rather than for a single bond. If you buy a bond at $101 that matures in a year, with a coupon of 2%, your yield to worst (assuming there's no call option) is going to be about 1%. That's because you get 2% in interest (coupon) but lose 1% in value. Now, throw lots of bonds like that into a portfolio, and you see why the SEC came up with a slightly more complex formula. But the idea's the same.
The SEC yield (which I prefer) represents what you might expect for total return, assuming interest rates don't change, that you're able to reinvest at the same rate, etc. The annualized dividend ignores the premium or discount of the bonds in the portfolio, and just tells you the current dividend yield (in percent per year, i.e. annualized).
The portfolio might hold lots of high coupon bonds (so you'd get a high dividend payout), but over time the price of that portfolio is going to decline, reducing your total return. Or it might hold zero coupon bonds, where the annual dividend is zero (seems pretty obvious), and your return comes from the appreciation of that portfolio.
It depends on what your focus is - cash flow or return. Mine is on return.

RE: TRBUX
What is the difference between "Annualized Dividend" and "SEC Standardized"?
Which of the two is a better predictor of what an investor might expect to earn going forward?
(Excerpted from T Rowe Price's website on 11/27/16):
"Benchmark Definitions
30-Day Yield
Annualized Dividend as of 11/25/2016 1.32%
SEC Standardized w/ Waiver as of 10/31/2016 1.21%
SEC Standardized w/o Waiver as of 10/31/2016 1.06%"
(I think the 3rd line re waiver is pretty easy to understand.)

(MFO's What's Your Best 10)
FYI: The only certain thing about 2017 is that it will be challenging for investors. And that is exactly why we’re here to help investors out … by lighting the path to the 10 best mutual funds to buy for the coming year.
The Top 10 Mutual Funds to Buy for 2017The backdrop right now is a difficult one: rising interest rates, a maturing business cycle, a new president. Investors have good reason to feel cautious, if not downright nervous.
But now is not the time to hit the sidelines and move completely into risk-off mode.
In any market, bull or bear, you’ll have your share of underperformers and outperformers, so if there’s any money to be made, you need to find the latter. And more broadly, there are plenty of plays designed to capture gains while protecting against the next correction.
We’ve selected our top 10 list of the best mutual funds for 2017, then, with both eyes on the difficult market and economic conditions in mind. This list represents a diverse roster that should help you navigate the challenging year ah
Regards,
Ted
http://investorplace.com/2016/11/10-best-mutual-funds-to-buy-2017/view-all/#.WDrJ3n0SVOZ

FYI: Do you need a financial adviser?
It is a simple question, but many investors are not sure about it. New changes in law (the fiduciary standard) and technology (robo-advisers) have added layers of complication to the answer.
To know, you must evaluate your financial situation. Let’s work through it together, so you have a better understanding of your circumstances and can decide what sort of financial services you need.
Let’s begin with the deceptively simple question: How much help do you need? It depends on several factors:
Regards,
Ted
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/get-there/do-you-need-a-financial-adviser/2016/11/22/82258064-b003-11e6-8616-52b15787add0_story.html

FPA Funds
2016 Year-End Distribution Estimates
From: FPA Funds – Mutual Fund Operations
http://www.fpafunds.com/docs/tax-and-dividend-info/year-end-distribution-estimates-2016.pdf?sfvrsn=2

Thanks for the input. Both Scott Burns and Merriman have shown splitting up the 60% equity side into US Large, US small, Reits, International and Emerging Mkts will outperform the CRSP US Total Mkt Index over time (VBIAX equity side of 60/40). My data shows this portfolio 60/40 will produce 9.32% CAGR since 2002 while VBIAX had 7.62%. That would compound greatly over time. Max drawdown was 4 percentage points higher than VBIAX and beta appeared to be 15% higher. So.....its a matter of personal choice I guess but not a bad option. Not sure which way I will go. Simplicity with VBIAX costs you a little. VBIAX made changes to their benchmark index equity side that has improved their performance around 2006. AOR looks good with limited track record but it is outperforming near term but needs a big down market to properly test it. Put AOR on watch list. This might be in the vein of what K O'Reilly is doing.

The same person also said he did not think Brexit would happen when asked in Q & A of his webcast. So this time it could be lucky side of a coin toss. And once you are right, it is not diificult to find why you are right. Also don't forget he said he sold all his equity holding in a 2011 webcast call. He never said if he did buy back or not. In forum like this MFO, readers are supposed to be more rational and objective. But it is amazing to see some topic still look like one side only story.

Good morning,
It is for certain my small/mid cap sleeve found in the growth area of my portfolio has been the bread winner thus far this year with a year-to-date return of better than 25%. My second best performing sleeve is my domestic equity sleeve found in the growth & income area with a year-to-date return of 10.1% and is followed by my domestic hybrid sleeve which is also a member of the growth & income area with a return of 9.6%. Overall, my investment return for the portfolio as a whole, according to Morningstar's Portfolio Manager, is 8.0% which betters the year-to-date return of the Lipper Balanced Index at 6.3%. Thus far, my better performing sleeves have more than offset my laggards.
As of my last Morningstar Instant Xray analysis (11/25/2016) my asset allocation bubbled at 20% cash, 25% bonds, 33% domestic stocks, 17% foreign stocks and 5% other. This is a little different from my last report of equities being a total of 52%. Seems, my hybrid funds which make up about 40% of my portfolio must have made some asset adjustments for this equity allocation to change. I find it interesting to follow their changing asset movements and how these changes effect my portfolio's asset allocation. I believe, some of my hybrid type funds help keep me positioned in the more faster moving market currents as their investment spectrum encompasses a wide range and variety of assets.
Since, December will soon be here, in only a few days, I don't plan to do any buying until the first part of the new year, if then. During December, I'll collect most of my fund distributions and build cash. I'm not certain what will transpire should the Fed's raise interest rates in December, or January, and it's resulting effects on equities. I do believe it certain that bond prices, for the most part, will continue to adjust downward as interest rates rise. It will be interesting to see what shakes out with the fast money crowd. Since, I am well diverisfied I am most likely to benefit from the fast money crowd's forever changing positioning. I am thinking of adding to my bank loan fund in the near term along with some select stock funds ... but, looking to see how December goes. Looking out, as interest rates rise and when I can get a CD yield in the 2.5% range I'll start to rebuild my CD ladder ... but, CD rates will have to become higher than the average total return I have achieved, thus far, with my short term and limited term bond funds.
To quote a strategy found in baseball ... I am not looking to hit the long ball just play short ball and advance the runners. And, if the long ball should come, perhaps it will score some runners just as the outsized returns of my small/mid cap sleeve, in essence, did.
I hope all had a great Thanksiving ... and, I wish all Happy Holidays as December arrives along with continued "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet

FYI: (Click On Article Title At Top Of Google Search)
Perhaps nowhere else in financial markets is speculation on the ultimate success of Trompononics more rampant than in shares of small U.S. stocks.
Small company shares on Friday notch their longest winning streak in 20 years on a shortened Black Friday trading session. The Russell 2000 Index rose 0.4% in in the shortened session to book its 15th advance in row. This streak ties a run last seen in February 1996. The longest ever streak, 21, was hit back in 1988.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/#q=Unsinkable+Small+Caps:+Russell+2000′s+Winning+Streak+Longest+in+20+Years+wsj

Thanks for the link, PRESSmUP. @golub1, why not just raise some cash on your own? I find it hard to believe that most of these cash-heavy guys are really brilliant enough to use that cash at just the right the time, again and again. If they were, they wouldn't be running OEMs for relative pennies compared to what the hedgies earn. Even the market timers with the best long-term records, like FPACX, have barely topped a simple 60/40 index fund like VBINX -- what happens when they finally get a big call wrong? Or when current management retires?
Better, I think, to just keep 20 or 40 or 60% cash or short-term Treasuries or whatever makes you comfortable, then rebalance every quarter or year to keep that number in line. There are clearly a few guys out there (though not many) who know how to pick a slightly higher proportion of good stocks than bad, but market timing is far harder.
But I fear I've opened up a philosophical discussion here...