FYI: Forget Brexit, lackluster economic data and a contentious U.S. presidential election campaign, investors jumped into exchange-traded funds with both feet in July, with more than $50 billion flowing into every asset class, according to data provider FactSet.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/investors-stampede-into-these-funds-as-stocks-hit-all-time-highs-2016-08-02/print

Was reading through the profile and just wanted to confirm something...
Does Rupal really aim to hedge currency most of the time? My understanding was that she would hedge currency differences from the benchmark, and only when the currency is overvalued on a PPP basis and it's cost effective. For example, if the Fund was overweight 10% the U.K. she would attempt to hedge back ~10% of the Pound to keep currency exposures in-line with the index (in USD terms). She would not, however, hedge all of the exposure back to USD, making the local currency return more relevant for evaluating performance.

Well-said. Which also underscores the reason for the vast majority of retail investors should IGNORE the whatever-way-the-wind-is-blowing nature of the financial media puditocracy and get their investing analysis from more responsible organizations and sources. Like, oh, I don't know .... MFO, among other places. ;)

Perhaps there are two types of investors, those who want to get rich and those who want to stay rich? Gundlach, with a net worth of $1.4 billion, is certainly in the latter camp. He can achieve his personal goal by staying high and dry, others cannot. I get the impression from Ed that a number of the other folks in the "stay rich" camp (Mr. Soros and Dr. Druckenmiller among them) have reached a similar conclusion; in consequence, they're more exposed to gold and/or gold miners than to other asset classes.
The common adage is "being early is the same as being wrong." Perhaps they're more comfortable taking the risk of being that kind of wrong rather than the other kind?
Just pondering,
David

Thanks for your replies. The bench mark used by 401-k was Dow Jones target .... Index.
Checked on another 401-k & it was using 70% Barclays US Gov/Credit Interm TR USD & 30% S&P TR USD for VTINX , (target date retirement income). % changed as target date was increased. I'll check out other retirement funds & see how they performed.
Derf

I looked quickly through Vanguard's fund pages, all of which conveniently show bar graphs comparing each fund's performance with their benchmarks, as of Q2 2016 (June 30).
I didn't see a single target date fund where the fund's performance has exceeded the benchmark for any period. All of them are lagging the benchmarks over all periods. In Vanguard's defense, the lag is very small and could possibly be entirely attributable to the expense ratio -- in other words, it is about as close to the benchmark as an actual investor can reasonably expect to get.*
The fund pages also further explain that that benchmark is derived "by applying the fund’s target asset allocation to the results of the following benchmarks", meaning that Vanguard must be adjusting their benchmark whenever the fund allocation is changed. So that wouldn't explain any differences. Perhaps your 401k statement is using another benchmark?
* Note: Vanguard's target date funds only invest in the "Investor" class of Vanguard's index funds. The "Investor" class is the most expensive class available; this is price Vanguard charges for the convenience of the target date funds. Otherwise, an investor can get even closer to the benchmark by managing their own allocation and using a cheaper share class ("Admiral" or "Institutional"). But for most folks the difference will be trivial -- we're talking a difference of maybe $1 for every $10,000 you invest, depending on what share classes are available to you.

Perhaps there are two types of investors, those who want to get rich and those who want to stay rich? Gundlach, with a net worth of $1.4 billion, is certainly in the latter camp. He can achieve his personal goal by staying high and dry, others cannot. I get the impression from Ed that a number of the other folks in the "stay rich" camp (Mr. Soros and Dr. Druckenmiller among them) have reached a similar conclusion; in consequence, they're more exposed to gold and/or gold miners than to other asset classes.
The common adage is "being early is the same as being wrong." Perhaps they're more comfortable taking the risk of being that kind of wrong rather than the other kind?
Just pondering,
David

I received 2/nd Qt. 401-k statement & noted their target date returns for one year & ytd had fallen below their benchmark. 3, 5, & 10 year returns were above benchmark.
Was this slip age due to V.G.'s reallocation from 30% to 40% in international equities, plus increase from 20% to 30% in fixed international income exposure during 2/2015 ?
Thanks for any replies.
Derf

You're getting lost in the weeds.
Here's a simple math problem to illustrate: Two trains are 100 miles apart, each traveling at 50 MPH. A bee, flying at 100 MPH starts at the first train, flies to the second train, reverses direction until getting back to the first, and so on, until it is squashed between the trains. How far does the bee fly?
One could calculate the sum of the infinite series of flights that the bee makes from one train to another, or one could simply observe that the trains meet in an hour, in which time the 100MPH bee will have traveled 100 miles.
Same idea here. You could calculate how much you'd make with what investments with what trades at what times, or you could simply ask: with the $70K you have now (7000 @ $10), what is the better investment - the fund you're in or a different fund? You could be holding the wrong fund at the wrong time whether that's the fund you currently own or a different fund.
Your numbers do help with this decision. Consider: if your fund is currently yielding 14% ($10K/year on $70K market value), and the alternative funds are currently yielding 8%-10%, what is the market telling you?

lets put some bad math to it. Bought 7000 shares at $7 in 2008. Rose to$17 in 2013. Roughly $70k profit plus $10k/yr in dividends (@20% yield) = $120k. The fund is choppy up and down since $17 peak but lowest it goes is $10. So at $10/sh I got $21K cap gain plus $50k dividends (not reinvested)= $71k plus $10k/yr for the foreseeable future. I get 20% yield at a $7 cost basis that will be tough to create a cap loss, while others get 8-10% yield reinvested in a new fund plus the chance of buying the wrong fund at the wrong time at a loss. At what point (timeframe) do I overtake the people who wanted to sell at $17 and attempted to reinvest? By now all you math majors are cringing at my mistakes, but you get my point. 401k so no taxes. You would be able to buy more shares of the new funds with the $120k profit if you sold. This would be a good website calculator ....assuming a constant share price and yield of the new fund purchased for the sake of answering the timeframe question.

“The artist Christopher Wool has a word painting, 'Sell the house, sell the car, sell the kids.' That’s exactly how I feel – sell everything. Nothing here looks good,” Gundlach said in a telephone interview. "The stock markets should be down massively but investors seem to have been hypnotized that nothing can go wrong."
Just who is Gundlach addressing here?
(A) 30-year old workers socking away money in a 401k or buying their first home?
(B) 85-year old widows living on social security and pension?
No to the first group and Yes/Maybe to the second.
I'm always suspicious of these everything or nothing approaches. You're really exposing your *** big-time if you bet wrong.

FYI: Just Like a good railroad, always on time !
Regards,
Ted
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2016/08/august-1-2016/

Here is Gundlach's "Sell everything" call from January 13, 2016 when the S&P 500 was around 1880:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/gundlach-warns-investors-not-to-be-a-hero-in-this-wild-market-2016-01-13

@DanHardy I'm keeping inflation on the stove (on a "side burner") if only to keep myself honest. Is it starting, or is this only a meandering, to and fro? I don't think it's wise to bet too much on trend-following here. If the bond vigilantes become convinced that inflationary pressures are building up and here to stay, there won't be much the Fed will be able to do about it (and if they were to decide to try, I suspect it would have to be in a way that would be a "naked tell" they have been playing favorites all along). Get caught leaning, and there could be some hell to pay.
May you live in interesting times. :)

Well the work that comes to mind is stagflation - but not the '70s flavor - History may not repeat but it rhymes.
There are key differences from the '70s.
Now with have weak growth & that will continue

Now we have pass through of energy, food and service industries but not in other areas. "Free Trade" will help to keep imported goods prices down and keep US workers worried.

Now the worker does not have pricing power. They will have to suck up any price increases.

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2008/03/frbsf-the-econo.html
Bottom line - while we have inflation you have to look where it is coming from - e.g. health care and health insurance is much larger part of the US economy then it was in the '70s.
So while we have inflation returning from the dead it is weak, we do not have the other aspects to make it a concern to bond prices. There is a lot of liquidity sloshing around the world looking for a return.

i did, in practice, purchased several CEFs during 2008/2009, which made for a significant return in the following years. they consequently moved to premia and i had to exchange them for what i thought was a better relative value. each year, different class of CEFs is underpriced (while 2008/9 it was the entire universe). 2011 saw a huge downdrift in munis. 2012 affected not-agency RMBS. 2013 was unkind to all income producing stuff, most of which just recently recovered. preferreds stayed down for two years before rallying in 2016. right now, there is little value in CEFs as discounts approach those in 2012, i.e. non-existing... i have sold a few, but am still long a bunch...the question is always, if you sell what are you reinvesting in? when everything is expensive (except for some 'real asset' stuff) I just stay the course with the existing positions and some dry powder.

At Fidelity, its CMA account and most tax-sheltered accounts also use bank accounts.
However, the bank accounts used by brokerages for sweeps are low paying checking accounts (they can't be savings accounts which are allowed only 6 withdrawals per period). So if you want to get something for your cash at a bank, it's still DIY - find a good yielding bank account and manage the cash yourself.
Sample brokerage FDIC sweep rates:
Fidelity: 0.07%
Schwab: 0.10%
E*Trade: 0.10%
TDAmeritrade: 0.10%
Scottrade: 0.10%
I think a footnote on Scottrade's page says it all:
"The fee paid to Scottrade by the Program Banks may exceed the interest rate amounts paid to clients."

Better to own particular stocks? Yields are thin, yes: PNM 2.44%, Duke Energy 3.86, PG&E 2.9% AEP 3.19% Southern Company 4.09%. ...PNM has been waiting forever for a rate hike from the regulatory agency. August, sometime, is the next hoped-for approval day. This is all about a 2nd try, too. The rate board panned the first request, said it was just incomplete and not tight and precise enough.

@DanHardy I'm keeping inflation on the stove (on a "side burner") if only to keep myself honest. Is it starting, or is this only a meandering, to and fro? I don't think it's wise to bet too much on trend-following here. If the bond vigilantes become convinced that inflationary pressures are building up and here to stay, there won't be much the Fed will be able to do about it (and if they were to decide to try, I suspect it would have to be in a way that would be a "naked tell" they have been playing favorites all along). Get caught leaning, and there could be some hell to pay.
May you live in interesting times. :)

I chose DLFNX, didn't want to pile on top of what seemed already to be a fund getting bloated, and that was in 2012.

In one of his webcast in 2011, he told audience he had sold all his stock holding around 1150. I don't think his forecast for equity is good. He also has to close a doubline equity fund after poor performance.

@davidmoran
You noted: "How come we never hear from anyone who purchased lots of longterm T-bills 1988-1990?"
I don't know anyone who ever purchased individual long term U.S. bonds. There are probably a few folks in my small world of investors who have, but have not stated so.
Do you know of anyone?
Regards,
Catch