There's so much uncertainty since the election. I don't think any of us have a clue where things are heading. If Trump gets the kind of infrastructure stimulus package from Congress which many seem to think he intends, along with higher borrowing and tax cuts, that's bearish for bonds and bullish for just about everything else - at least for a year or two until the rising debt shocks us back into austerity. But he has Congress to deal with. Many commodities, notably copper, have turned up in recent days anticipating some type of stimulus. Big military buildups, as Trump appears to desire, also bolster an economy short term - especially the Northrups, Lockheeds, General Dynamics and Boeings of the world.
On the other hand, the first year of a new President's term usually isn't that good for equities. Both the Pres and FOMC like to get the the tough love out of the way early. The Pres., especially, wants things improving as the next election nears.
Bonds to some extent self-correct. As rates rise there's more income in the pockets of investors helping mitigate declining values. At some point bonds again begin to look attractive to new investors. I'd think, however, that going long on bonds (durations over 10 years) would have been foolish in recent years. It may take decades for those investors to break even. And yes - there were plenty of warnings here and elsewhere about the dangers of longer term bonds when the 10 year was yielding 2% or less.
---
I haven't made any changes to portfolio in recent months - except that a few weeks ago I shifted some $$ intended for near-term household expenses from Price's money market fund to their ultra-short bond fund. The new govt. money market regs caused money market fund yields to suffer even more, but pushed up rates on ultra-short high grade corporates. Even with the sharp sell off, TRBUX held at $5.01 - which surprised me. Since the election I've lost a half-percent on my investments. Balanced and energy/commodity related funds drifted higher. But my meager exposure to bonds - especially the international variety - got hammered. So it goes.

What do you anticipate from there? How much higher can the rates go in 2017? What do you see as the "normalized" rate or "leveling" off rate?

Where from there - you will have to watch the variables.
My gut tells me the we will find a new quieter range of rates but for how long??????

Pretty much any of the American Century funds that are not index will get a boost. This is not the Ultra of years ago although it's still a decent fund. Any growth fund in any fund company will have tech stocks at the top of their top ten holdings list.
Disclosure: I held Ultra in the late 80's to around 1993. 1991 was an exceptional year.

FYI: Artisan Partners Asset Management - board of directors of Artisan Partners Funds, Inc has approved a plan to liquidate Artisan Global Small Cap Fund.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSASC09JSZ
Artisan Press Release:
https://www.artisanpartners.com/content/dam/documents/press-releases/mf/MCV-Reopen-GBLSC-Liquidation-18-Nov-16-vR.pdf

FYI: (Click On Article Title At Top Of Google Search)
In the past two weeks, bonds suddenly have become more appealing investments. Treasury yields have risen sharply since the election, with the 10-year note now yielding 2.33%, up from 1.85% on Nov. 8. The increase reflects expectations of higher federal spending, bigger deficits, stronger economic growth, and greater inflation under President-elect Donald J. Trump’s administration.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/#q=Bonds+Suddenly+Look+Like+a+Bargain.+What+to+Buy+Now+Barron's

DH, thanks for the education; I will have to keep a closer on eye on those factors. You see 3% for the upper limit for this period. That's a pretty significant move from here.
What do you anticipate from there? How much higher can the rates go in 2017? What do you see as the "normalized" rate or "leveling" off rate?
I did move a portion of my bond holding to BL, but I'm inclined to agree with you and put the rest in CASH/Money Market fund, at least I can make 2/3 percent in a MM and still have the flexibility to buy when the time is right, without incurring any restrictions or fees!

@Crash said "rising rates are hurting REIT funds"
Here's some "medicine" for that ailment.
Reefer REIT: Innovative Industrial Properties' IPO
Nov. 9, 2016 9:34 AM ET
Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc (Pending:IIPR) has filed for an IPO seeking to raise $175 million. Innovative Industrial seeks to become the first REIT to monetize the growing medicinal marijuana industry utilizing sale-leaseback transactions and offer investors an indirect method to capitalize on the sector. In a time where REITs find cap rates compressing in most industries, Innovative Industrial hopes to prove the medicinal marijuana industry is a cash cow for investors.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/4021523-reefer-reit-innovative-industrial-properties-ipo
....who would have imagined that there would be a "weed REIT", Innovative Industrial Properties was to list on the NYSE this week. According to the company's website, it "targets medical-use cannabis facilities for acquisition, including sale-leaseback transactions, with tenants that are licensed growers under long-term triple-net leases."
Innovative believes this industry is poised for significant growth in coming years, and is focused on being a creative capital provider to this industry
http://seekingalpha.com/article/4024483-reit-world-back-business
Innovative Industrial Properties™
Removing Financial Barriers For Licensed Medical-Use Cannabis Growers™
Our Team
Industry Leaders
Our Market
The Licensed Medical-Use Cannabis Industry
Our Properties
Medical-Use Cannabis Cultivation and Processing Facilities
Our Tenants
Sophisticated, Best-in-Class Medical-Use Cannabis Growers
Our Leases
Long-Term, Triple-Net Arrangements
http://innovativeindustrialproperties.com/business

Don't put all your eggs in one basket !
Derf

Been doing just that since 1985. I never was much for conventional wisdom.
Edit: The above is incorrect. Been doing that since 1966. Just it took me till 1985 to figure out how to turn it into a consistent market beating strategy.

Floating rate funds move almost lock-step with high yield corporates albeit without the volatility (2008 was an exception) They seem now like a no brainer, can't miss, sure thing trade with among other things the Fed expected to raise rates next month and once or twice or more in 2017. Yes, I know how "sure thing" trades always work out - they don't. Although they are about the only survival in bondland the past three months. If high yield corporates surprise to the downside here because of looming defaults triggered by the rapid rise in Treasuries that could be a huge negative to floating rate funds.

DH, Obviously what I was watching was not correct or I misinterpreted it. I think the better question is, what were you looking at? I am not an overly sophisticated investor, so if you could enlighten me, I would greatly appreciate it.
I do not want to get caught off-guard again. You can bet there will be another leg-up or two in the coming year, but when?
Thanks for sharing!!

The bond market/buyer/brokers are much different then the stock market. The bond market is the family station wagon to the stock market Tesla.
The things that tipped me off to the market change were what bond investors look at:
Macro - unemployment rate and fear of inflation
Monetary - Fed meeting in Dec - rate increase
Fundamental - company earnings not as good as expected - companies will try to raise prices (this did not go into my decision)
Political - Trump uncertainty
Technical - the chart in the link I posted and others (this was the final straw that got me to sell)
I sold all my bond holdings last month and am 100% in cash.
So, from the above you can see this trend continuing until after the Fed meeting and possibly until after the State of the Union address.
An area to watch is the 10 year approaching 3%. That is probably the upper limit for this period.
The areas I am watching are:
High Yield Emerging Bonds - I am putting a toe into this now - monthly investing.
REITS
High Yield Corp.
Closed End Bond Funds
Dividend paying Tech funds
What are your thoughts?

I've read in more than one place (don't have references at the moment) that managed funds do NOT perform better than indexes/ETFs before, during, or after bear markets.
But regarding this, I take a long-term view (5-10 years) on everything. A one or two-year record doesn't mean much.

Speaking of the US $$$..
Jeffery Gundlach in Tue's Webcast did not "pound the table" predicting a higher US $$$$ but stated it would not surprise him to see 120 in the next two years...Also,"don't over analyse" and "keep your seatbelts fastened" Earlier he said he was not interested in becoming US Treasurer.in effect saying " I want to remain brutally honest and politicians are seldom if ever that. ." Closed End Fund Webcast Nov 8th https://event.webcasts.com/viewer/event.jsp?ei=1085775
BUSINESS NEWS | Thu Nov 17, 2016 | 10:56pm EST By Hideyuki Sano | TOKYO Reuters
Rising U.S. yields help dollar to 13-1/2 year high
..rising U.S. bond yields carried the dollar to a more than 13-1/2 year high against a
basket of major currencies, fueled by expectations that President-elect Donald Trump's policies will lead to higher interest rates.
The dollar's index against a basket of six major currencies rose above its "double top" touched in March and December of 2015. The index now stands at its highest level since April 2003. "Double top" is a technical analysis term describing a currency (or other liquid asset) rising to a high, falling, and then rising again to the same level. Breaking the double top is often seen as a bullish sign by technical analysts.
A rising dollar is particularly a problem for some emerging economies that could see capital outflows if investors shift more funds to the United States.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-markets-idUSKBN13D040?feedType=RSS&feedName=businessNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+reuters/businessNews+(Business+News)

http://cdn.tradingeconomics.com/charts/united-states-currency.png?s=dxy&v=201611180455r&d1=20110101&d2=20161231
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/currency

I've never been able to find a listing. I do know an advisor there and asked him to pass along some feedback - that the brokerage information for DIYers is close to nonexistent.
While TIAA has traditionally been focused on assisted investing (they provide extensive help with their 403(b) plans, and have been moving into advisor-managed accounts), it has a lot of catching up to do for the DIY market.
The best I've been able to do is find a list of families offered, where families have asterisks if at least one of their funds is available NTF. Something interesting is that American Funds has an asterisk. This is interesting because supposedly only Fidelity and Schwab are carrying any AF funds NTF, and because the listing is dated August 2016. I think that predates AF announcement of its NTF offerings.
Your guess is as good as mine as to what that says about the info on this list.
Also of note is that Franklin Templeton is starred. That could be for Mutual Series funds like MDISX (which M* lists as TIAA-CREF NTF). T. Rowe Price is starred, but that could be for their Advisor class shares (that carry an extra 12b-1 fee, such as PASVX). All in all, hard to find anything unusual that pops out.
https://www.tiaa.org/public/pdf/MF_families.pdf

Here is a more accessible version:
http://mobile.usablenet.com/mt/www.barrons.com/articles/4-managers-who-consistently-beat-the-market-1452318197
I thought Ahlsten was responsible for Dodson's latterday success, but am out of that family.

Hi Guys,
Nothing could be more misleading than the title of this referenced article. The article does acknowledge that there are smart active fund managers among many who are not so smart, but time and fees work against the small cohort of successful active fund managers.
Here is a Link that summarizes just how small that cohort of smart active fund managers is:
https://www.justetf.com/uk/news/passive-investing/the-proof-that-active-managers-cannot-beat-the-market.html
The odds are not attractive. This article clearly demonstrates the high percentage of actively managed funds that fail to beat appropriate benchmarks. I was surprised by the dismal records registered by funds outside the US marketplace. I wrongly believed that foreign operated actively managed mutual funds were superior in their limited market sphere. The data seems to demonstrate otherwise.
Although forecasting which funds will be winners in the future is a hazardous challenge, some actively managed funds have terrific past performance records. So history can serve as an imperfect guide on the basis that positive momentum might persist. Recently I have added a mix of Index products to my portfolio, but I still own a few actively managed funds that have delivered acceptable performance.
Market beating funds are out there. They are few in number so they may be difficult to find. The long term performance records do identify some of these attractive products. Here is a Link to a short list published by Barron's:
http://www.barrons.com/articles/4-managers-who-consistently-beat-the-market-1452318197
Although the list is very short, it is supplemented with some near misses that are also identified. Hope is eternal. Enjoy and profit.
Best Wishes.

All of the above illustrates the dilemma of finding a way to wring income out of a sector ( Bonds) that is so overbought. Look what has happened to Munis in the last two weeks.. an entire year's income gone.
I had a large position in FFHRX in May 2015 after which it lost 9% in the next nine months, souring me on BL funds for a while
Kiplinger's Income Newsletter portfolio ( widely diversified with MLPs, Taxable and Muni Bond Funds, Dividend stocks) has had an income return of about 16 % since 1/1/2014 (about 6% a year) but the principal has declined 5% in that time so a retiree would see their nest egg shrink (and it was far worse in March before the current rebound in energy!)
A quick M* chart from May 2015 to March 2016 of some of the above funds shows losses of up to 8% ( RSIVX ), and of course those funds with the higher yields lost the most. PONDX somehow sailed right thru, but the leverage is a huge concern.
No one has mentioned ZEOIX which held up nicely but still pays 2.4% . Maybe better to accept a lower income stream (if you can) than to see your money melt away as rates rise.
There is no such thing as a free lunch

@Joe - As noted in the Investopedia page cited by @AndyJ, these bank loan notes have fairly high recovery rates, because they are collateralized and because they are senior to other debt. That doesn't affect the risk of default, but it does mean that you can expect to lose less than "ordinary" junk when they do default. So it is reasonable to count on getting back a good chunk of principal (not interest).
You can find retail share classes of these funds in Schwab OneSource: LABAX is there, BASIX is offered, and LALDX is open as well.
Remember, BobC is a professional. Don't try his share classes at home. :-)
Thanks for the leverage note on PONDX. Its a good fund, well managed. But I remember having taken a look at it and noticing something. I'd forgotten what that something was. Here's a M* thread on the fund's risks (w/contributions by Sam Lee).

DH, I have to agree with Hank; I'm not sure why you believe I and others should known that the 10-year was going to rise from 1.78 to 2.24 in just a handful of days, now. I'm not surprised rates are moving up; just the recent velocity.

What were you watching before the rise that did not alert you to the rise?

Primer on FRs, here. Pretty good roundup, seems like.
Money quote: "A diverse portfolio of floating-rate loans should perform well when the economy is recovering and credit spreads are tightening."
Typically, they're not equivalent to junk corporates, as you sometimes hear/read: generally they have lower yields than junk corps, are higher in the capital structure, are backed by collateral, have lower default rates, and have higher recovery rates when they do default. (The Inv'pedia piece doesn't mention lower default rates that I can find, but several other sources I've read cite lower default rates as an advantage over junk corps.)
They may be overbought now, though, so even a temporary reversal in rates could be a problem. I don't think I'd be buying a significant stake at this point - probably would put new credit-FI $ into a tried and true, more all-weather option like Pimco Income - which pays out a higher yield than FRs now anyway.

"Trump adviser ... Scaramucci has compared the fiduciary rule [for IRAs, 401Ks] to the infamous Dred Scott decision, a 1857 Supreme Court ruling that denied black Americans citizenship."
Would that be because the SEC rule would hold financial advisors slaves to the truth? I'm really having trouble parsing this comment.