Few here will remember that this fund made a lot of money for investors in the early part of the new millennia (roughly 1999-2005). I enjoyed double digit returns during some of those years as oil slowly climbed towards the $100 range. I bought the Class A shares in 1997 shortly after Oppenheimer received approval from the SEC, seeking to diversify. It was an early forerunner in the commodities mutual fund area - possibly the first such fund.
Actually, the fund did not hold pork bellies, lumber or barrels of crude, but invested in the commodities futures markets using derrivitives which allowed most of the fund's assets to sit in T-Bills or cash, earning additional income. A black box? Yes - for certain. But something happened in roughly the 2003-2005 period when they temporarily closed (to all new money) what had been a successful fund. Investors received a letter stating that Oppenheimer had uncovered structural weaknesses in how the fund was being operated which might cause significant losses and that it would be restructured over the coming months to reduce these risks. (I'm relying here on best recollections.)
When the fund reopened to new money, it wasn't the same fund. It became a perineal looser. As Ted's article mentions, the fund was clobbered by the worst commodities bear market in recent history. But it wasn't managed well either and also carried close to a 2% ER on Class A shares.
I took a gamble in early 2015 and converted my entire holding with Oppenheimer (5-10% of assets) to Roth. All was in this fund. It was a calculated risk that the fund would bounce sharply. But it never did and dropped another 15-20%. What saved my skin, so to speak, was that in early September '15 I split that money 4-ways. 25% remained in QRAAX. 25% each went into OPGSX (gold), OREAX (Real Estate) and OEMAX (EM bonds). All three of the new funds experienced sharp rebounds after that point. The Roth is now back to break-even. Even QRAAX has had a pretty good year so far (up 6.6%).
As noted earlier, I have little money with these guys. Looks to me like the quality of many of their funds has fallen during the 2 decades since I purchased shares. Since it appeared they were planning on returning the $$ from the liquidation directly to investors rather than reinvesting it automatically (which would have tax repercussions), I moved the money myself to their Capital Income Fund (OPPEX) for the time being. This amounts to moving from one black box into another. However, the new black box appears better managed.
:)
Added note: Really appreciate the Shadow's heads-up on this pending fund liquidation. Nice to be informed early.

IMHO this is a lot to pay for convenience. These days, I'll buy what's cheapest, with convenience being secondary. How hard is it to purchase/sell via ACH? So that might mean buying directly from the fund or paying a TF to come out cheaper in the long run. The only time I buy NTF funds is when I like the fund and can live with the ER (and the fund can't be purchased more cheaply by buying direct).

Thanks for bring this to our attention. Unless there are real compelling reasons, I have gradually moved away from NTF funds in the past 10 years, and some are already high to begin with. For sure these discount brokerages want their piece of pie or two.

Over the years on M F O,these ideas and others have been mentioned in the ag/farm thesis,many by @scott
NASDAQ:CRESY
NASDAQ:LMNR
OTCMKTS:BWEL
NASDAQ:ALCO
Income issue ideas.
CHSCO
NASDAQ:CHSCP
Also fertilizer companies and seed genetics although with more volatility.
I own and reinvest dividends in LAND, FPACX, OTCRX
Millennials spending is accelerating, new demands for healthier foods and using e-commerce
Calavo Growers (CVGW) MasterCard (MA)
http://www.ottercreekfunds.com/media/pdfs/OCL_Call_Presentation_1Q20161.pdf
LAND a real estate investment trust, or R E I T LAND
The geographic regions where our farms are located continues to experience steady appreciation
We currently own 23,456 acres on 47 farms in seven states in the United States. We also own some cooling facilities, packing houses, and processing facilities as well; there is several other structures on the farms. These are part of the farming operation on our farms.
We have a couple of different lease structures that we use for our tenants and we have been extremely successful in our leasing strategy. We've been able to average an average annual increase of over 16% on lease renewals over the past three years.
There are no new farms being developed in most of these areas because all of the arable land is currently being farmed or it has already been converted to other uses, such as housing, schools, or factories.
The trend that we are seeing is a steady decrease in a number of farms in our growing regions have been sold or converted to suburban uses. So California alone has been losing about 100,000 acres of farms per year. This has caused the farms that we own to be highly sought after and they have been rented for decades without ever being vacant.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/edited-transcript-land-earnings-conference-174914965.html
Farmland Partners Inc:FPI
Farmland Partners Inc. is an internally managed real estate company that owns and seeks to acquire high-quality North American farmland and makes loans to farmers secured by farm real estate
http://ir.farmlandpartners.com/file.aspx?iid=4426904&fid=33287632
FPACX owns 0.31% of assets here.Very small position in a $17 bil fund.
U.S. FARMING REALTY TRUST I, 0.07%
35,000,000 U.S. FARMING REALTY TRUST II, 0.24%
TOTAL LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS: 53,567,775.00 0.31%
The sponsor of those trusts offered another opportunity last year.Maybe they"ll put together another in the future . Save your money for the minimum! Probably only available to "accredited Investors"
Issuer
U.S. Farming
Realty Trust III,
LP
/s/ Charlie
McNairy
Charlie McNairy
Manager, International
Farming Corporation
GP3, LLC
2015-07-17
11. Minimum Investment
Minimum investment accepted from any outside investor
$ 1,300,000
http://b4utrade.brand.edgar-online.com/efxapi/EFX_dll/EDGARpro.dll?FetchFilingCONVPDF1?SessionID=CzTMe5a8UvZMR8Y&ID=10812508
With a glass of wine. American Farmland Company.AFCO
http://www.americanfarmlandcompany.com/portfolio.html
NY Times Business Day from 07/22/14
Cash Crops With Dividends
How a few sophisticated investors found a way to transform
strawberries into securities. Copyright © 2014 by The New York Times Comp
http://investors.americanfarmlandcompany.com/Cache/1001205369.PDF?O=PDF&T=&Y=&D=&FID=1001205369&iid=4589976
Not Always Wine and Roses
American Farmland Announces Review of Strategic Alternatives
Company Release - 4/14/2016 4:01 PM ET
NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- American Farmland Company (NYSE MKT:AFCO) (the “Company”), a specialized real estate investment trust focused on the ownership, acquisition, development and management of a portfolio of diversified, high-quality U.S. farmland, today announced that its Board of Directors has authorized the Company to commence a review of strategic alternatives to enhance shareholder value.
Since the Company’s October 19, 2015 initial public offering, its shares have consistently traded at a substantial discount to net asset value which, as of December 31, 2015, was estimated to be $10.05 per share. The Company’s net asset value is based upon independent third-party appraisals of its farms which were performed as of December 31, 2015. The Company has retained Citigroup Global Markets Inc. and Raymond James & Associates, Inc. as its financial advisors and Goodwin Procter LLP as legal counsel to assist in a comprehensive analysis of all potential strategic alternatives. Alternatives to be explored may include, among others, joint venture arrangements, a merger of the Company, or a sale of all or part of the Company and/or its assets
http://investors.americanfarmlandcompany.com/file/Index?KeyFile=33849746

I respectfully disagree. While much of the content superficially resembles motherhood, the column is supported by references and encapsulation that is seen too infrequently.
Mr. Zweig reports on the acceptance status of a professional code of conduct. Did you know that most firms won't sign on? Were you even aware of this code? I wasn't.
If investment firms are already as ethical as you feel, why do they fight so hard against putting that in writing? Whether that is being held to a fiduciary standard, or to the loyalty standard in this code: to "place client interests before their own".
Asset managers competing on costs or dying? Too many high cost families thriving to support that. Which gets us back to ethics - these high cost funds exist in part because advisers sell them as "suitable", they're just not the best for their clients.
I do find that Mr. Zweig may be pining a bit too much for the "good old days". Around 1960, it is true that the vast majority of equity funds charged 0.50%. But rather than representing competition, this uniformity was viewed by an SEC study as evidence of lack of competition.
That study (The Wharton Report) also noted that many funds were actually owned by brokerages (e.g. the Dreyfus Fund). My suspicion, though I'm still wading through all of this, is that brokerage commissions (which were much higher in 1960) is where a good chunk of the profits came from. Total fund expenses (including trading commissions) were possibly as high as today.
Asset management companies have always gotten their fees. They've just moved them around from one form to another as the industry has changed. Schwab gets rid of load funds but continues to increase the fees it collects on NTF funds. Advisers charge wrap fees instead of collecting loads. Different structure, similar cost.

It's not looking so good for farmland; some similarities to the picture of the mid-1980s, when a lot of family farms got overextended and were crushed and lost everything. But not that dire (yet), so I don't anticipate that much calamity. It's just gonna take some time for the fundamentals to improve.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-14/american-farmer-its-death-1000-knives”-us-farmland-values-plunge-most-30-years
https://www.chicagofed.org/~/media/publications/agletter/2015-2019/may-2016-pdf.pdf?la=en
Nonetheless, many of the TBTF banksters went into farmland in a big way in the mid-00s and bought up what they could (and, of course, "financialized/securitized" it), so I'd hesitate investing in anything publicly-traded because I'd be concerned I'd be encouraging the corporate farming trend and hastening the demise of a way of life I think is very important to preserve (not to mention the loss of local control and good environmental stewardship).
On the other hand, there are a number of farmers in the Midwest who are continuing to pool their needs into some rather substantial cooperative businesses, and I've seen several interesting preferred stock offerings, with good yields and very ample dvd coverage, if you wanted to invest for income with a margin of safety. However, I haven't pulled that string because it was my impression, the deeper I went in researching them, that they are very tightly-held, and one would have to put in many buy orders, over time, to ever get lucky and have one filled. Not my territory.... could be dead wrong about it. Anyone who knows something about how to buy stuff so off the beaten path, please take me to school!

Seems every year or two a thread along this line comes up, discussing how much funds pay the supermarkets to participate either NTF or TF. I ran across a sizeable M* column from two years ago that goes into detail.
Morningstar, NTF Platforms Can Mean Higher Costs (November 6, 2014)
Highlighting a bit of the column: "Oddly, those fees have gone up since the 1990s ... despite the fact that technology has made servicing fund accounts much cheaper. ... Indeed, NTF fees may have risen to compensate for declining trading revenues".
Let me quantify that a bit. Schwab OneSource (NTF) started in 1992. At the time, Schwab charged 0.25% (sometimes as much as 0.35%) That actually made economic sense for boutiques that couldn't service directly sold accounts for less. Not for Vanguard of course, but for many smaller funds.
Over time, the rates rose. According to the WSJ, in 2003 Schwab's typical fee, which had already risen to 0.35% was raised to 0.40%. In addition, Schwab started charging TF funds for the first time. The original fee was $20/account/year. The article goes on to note that families like Longleaf and Yacktman balked (so they were closed to new investments). But Schwab didn't impose the fee on Fidelity or Vanguard.
WSJ, Schwab Fees Steer Some Funds to the Exits, Others Get a Pass (May 5, 2003) - link is google search, pick first result.
Today, the fees are even higher. NTF fees are typically 0.40%, but can go as high as 0.45%. TF funds now typically pay 0.10% (but as high as 0.25%) per year in addition to the aforementioned $20/account/year (which can go as high as $30).
Schwab Compensation Disclosure
IMHO this is a lot to pay for convenience. These days, I'll buy what's cheapest, with convenience being secondary. How hard is it to purchase/sell via ACH? So that might mean buying directly from the fund or paying a TF to come out cheaper in the long run. The only time I buy NTF funds is when I like the fund and can live with the ER (and the fund can't be purchased more cheaply by buying direct).
Older thread on same topic:
http://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/15542/how-much-do-fund-companies-pay-to-be-on-fund-supermarket-platforms

FYI: It’s high time that individual investors had their own equivalent of a Bill of Rights.
Regards,
Ted
http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2016/05/13/an-investors-credo-to-live-by-what-would-mom-buy/

FYI: (This is a follow-up article)
The roller coast ride continues for investors in commodity-focused funds, as witnessed Wednesday with the announced liquidation of the 19-year-old Oppenheimer Commodity Strategy Total Return Fund (QRAAX).
Regards,
Ted
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20160513/FREE/160519957?template=printart

@DanHardy: Sorry Dan, but the Linkster already touched this base.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/27546/baml-investors-dump-stocks-at-fastest-rate-since-aug-2011#latest

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/investors-dump-stocks-fastest-rate-093312693.html
I've been doing the same. After reading some of the discussions here about long range trends, I think interest paying investments will do very well.

Thanks David. What's so interesting is that it seems the fund has been given the OK as of May 3rd.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000139834416012748/fp0019074_485bpos-xbrl.htm
There was a previous prospectus approved by the SEC on April 15th.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000139834416011997/fp0019019_485bpos.htm
Strange. Thanks for checking into it. We'll just have to wait until it launches.

I just looked at the Royce web site. As we know they are "small cap specialists". They have 11 domestic small cap funds with 10 year records. How many of them would you guess were able to beat the 7.10% annualized returns of the Vanguard small-cap index fund VSMAX? Would you believe none? That's the fact.
So I looked at the 3 and five years returns. They are also batting an even .000 for those periods.
Are they not a marquee example of the damage that high fees, stock-picking mistakes, and trading can do? Is there something I am missing?
All those smart people going to work every day for 10 years!

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
May 13, 2016
Dear WEALTHTRACK Subscriber,
Bankers, financiers or money lenders, as they have been called derisively at various points in history are currently at one of their reputational low points. Presidential candidates from Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have all taken their shots. Sanders has introduced the “Too Big to Fail, Too Big to Exist Act” which would break up the big banks.
Dislike of banks and bankers is not a modern phenomenon.
Thomas Jefferson once stated: “I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.” You can see why he and Alexander Hamilton, who created the first national bank and was the first Treasury Secretary, had their disagreements!
Even some titans of industry have been critics. Henry Ford, the Founder of the Ford Motor Company was one of them, stating: “It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and money system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”
Luckily, that revolution never came. For the record, banking and Wall Street provide the essential fuel for economic growth, mainly money and credit. They enable individuals, companies and governments to raise capital, buy goods and services, build, expand and invest. As this week’s guest points out, the vast majority of us are bank customers!
Investing in financial stocks in recent years has been challenging. Over the last decade the S&P 500 Financials Index has delivered negative annualized returns whereas the S&P 500 has not. And although their annualized performance over the last five and three year periods has been close to 10%, the group has continued to underperform the market.
This week’s guest is Christopher Davis, a third generation value investor whose family has a long history of investing in financial stocks and continues to do so today. Davis is Chairman of Davis Advisors, Portfolio Manager of the Davis large cap portfolios, and Co-Portfolio manager since 1995 of the firm’s flagship Davis New York Venture Fund, which was founded by his Dad in 1969. Chris has also been the Portfolio Manager of the fund’s no-load equivalent, Selected American Shares since its launch in 2004. In 1991 he created the Davis Financial Fund, now celebrating its 25th anniversary.
Rated 4-stars by Morningstar, the fund has far outperformed its benchmark and the market since inception with better than 11% annualized returns. I began the interview by asking Chris why he created a fund focused on financial stocks in the first place.
If you’d like to see the show before it airs, it is available to our PREMIUM subscribers right now. We also have an EXTRA interview with Davis about how his approach differs from his grandfather’s and father’s. It is available exclusively on our website.
WEALTHTRACK is also available on a YouTube Channel. So if you are unable to join us for the show on television, you can watch it on our website, WealthTrack.com, or by subscribing to our YouTube Channel.
Thanks for watching. Have a great weekend and make the week ahead a profitable and a productive one.
Best Regards,
Consuelo
M*: Davis Family Of Funds:
http://quicktake.morningstar.com/fundfamily/davis-funds/0C00001YWZ/fund-list.aspx
Selected Funds Website:
http://selectedfunds.com/funds/

@Maurice
(1) Isn't there some way of turning the No-Script plug-in off for websites you would designate as "Safe"? I'm also not familiar with this add-on (but would be interested in learning more).
(2) All my checkers tell me it is as chip says it is. There is only one tracker running on MFO, called Site Analytics, which has been thoroughly vetted and approved by Ghostery as a tracker that does what it claims to do and no more (and if it tried to do more, chip would be able to see it happening, wouldn't she?).

Hi, Maurice.
We use Google analytics for tracking basic site visitor information only. We get overall number of sessions, browser and OS stats, visit duration, and so on, but only on an aggregate level. At no time are we able to identify any specific visitor to our site (unless you happen to login and post here).
We use the information we do gather to monitor site traffic, to see which pages people spend time on (the discussion board is #1), and to make sure we're keeping our page design accessible for the greatest number of our readers.
We have not made any recent changes to our site or discussion board software, but I'd be happy to try to work with you to ensure that you continue to be able to post and edit correctly. Please be aware, though, that this is not my area of expertise. You may have to be patient while I muddle my way through it.
Chip

The "best" fund in any category can be a moving target, but especially so with actively-managed EM funds. YTD vs. 3 Yrs? Does 10 years even matter? Some say yes, some say no. Because EM stocks carry higher volatility than developed international stocks (for the most part), there may be a reason to make relatively low volatility a key screen. If that is the case, Seafarer SFGIX is worth a look, even though it only has a 4 year record. Its 3-yr Sharpe ratio is ahead of the other EM funds we track. If you value management that separates itself from the index, Driehaus DREGX and Wasatch WAEMX might fit the bill, since they are small-cap focused. If high Sortino ratio (performance compared to downside risk) is important, SFGIX once again comes through. Just because an entire asset class tends to have high volatility does not mean you have to accept that in the funds you select. ODYMX has the best 10-year record (Leverenz having run the fund for 9 of the 10 years). American New World NWFFX has a darned good record, too. But understand it only has about 35% in EM stocks. And Seafarer is only 57% EM stocks, both of which explain the lower volatility. So there you go.

@MFO Members:
Rank in Category: Government Securities Portfolio (STGSX)
89 84 99 99 98 94 98 99 92 97
1Day, 1-Wk, 1Mo, 3Mo, YTD, 1, 3, 5, 10, 15 Yrs.
Rank In Category: Growth Portfolio: (STWAX)
81 23 74 66 13 49 60 77 89 76
Regards,
Ted

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/870156/000087015616000085/s497.htm
497 1 s497.htm
STRATUS FUND, INC.
Supplement dated May 11, 2016 to the Prospectuses, dated October 31, 2015,regarding the Retail Class A Shares and the Institutional Class Shares, respectively, of the Government Securities Portfolio and Growth Portfolio (the “Portfolios”) of Stratus Fund, Inc.
The Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Stratus Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”) has determined that it is in the best interests of the shareholders of the Fund to liquidate and terminate the Fund. The laws of the Fund’s state of incorporation require the approval of a majority of the shareholders of each Portfolio to effect such a liquidation and termination. As such, the Board intends to call for a Special Meeting of Shareholders to be held on or about June 7, 2016.
If the liquidation of the Fund is approved by a majority of the shareholders of each Portfolio, the Fund will cease accepting purchase orders from new or existing investors, except for the reinvestment of dividends, effective as of the close of the New York Stock Exchange on that date. The liquidation is expected to be effective on or about June 10, 2016, or at such other time as may be authorized by the Board (the “Liquidation Date”). Termination of the Funds is expected to occur as soon as practicable following liquidation.
The Fund anticipates making a distribution of any income and/or capital gains of the Portfolios in connection with its liquidation. The liquidation distribution may be taxable. The tax year for the Fund will end on the Liquidation Date.
Purchasers of Fund shares who purchase from the date of this notice and before the liquidation date may be subject to liquidation expenses that they would otherwise not bear, and also may incur short-term capital gains on losses on those shares upon liquidation.
Shareholders of the Fund may redeem their shares at any time prior to the Liquidation Date.
If a shareholder has not redeemed his or her shares as of the Liquidation Date, the shareholder’s account will be automatically redeemed and proceeds will be sent to the shareholder at his or her address of record. Liquidation proceeds will be paid in cash for the redeemed shares at their net asset value.
If a you are a retirement plan investor, you should consult your tax advisor regarding the consequences of a redemption of Fund shares, or the receipt of a liquidating distribution. If you receive a distribution from an Individual Retirement Account or a Simplified Employee Pension (SEP) IRA, you must roll the proceeds into another Individual Retirement Account within sixty (60) days of the date of the distribution in order to avoid having to include the distribution in your taxable income for the year. If you receive a distribution from a 403(b)(7) Custodian Account (Tax-Sheltered account) or a Keogh Account, you must roll the distribution into a similar type of retirement plan within sixty (60) days in order to avoid disqualification of your plan and the severe tax consequences that it can bring. If you are the trustee of a Qualified Retirement Plan, you may reinvest the money in any way permitted by the plan and trust agreement. If you have questions or need assistance, please contact your financial advisor.
If the liquidation is approved by shareholders, the Fund’s portfolio managers will likely increase the Fund’s assets held in cash and similar instruments in order to pay for Fund expenses and meet redemption requests. As a result, as of the date of shareholder approval of the liquidation, the Portfolios...
(more information on the link)

FYI: Small-company stockpicking legend Charles “Chuck” Royce announced Thursday morning that he is stepping down as CEO of the eponymous asset management firm he founded in 1972. Co-chief investment officer Chris Clark will succeed him in July.
Regards,
Ted
http://blogs.barrons.com/focusonfunds/2016/05/12/charles-royce-passes-ceo-baton-to-clark-will-continue-stockpicking/tab/print/
M* Royce Fund Family:
http://quicktake.morningstar.com/fundfamily/royce/0C00001YTG/fund-list.aspx

@MFO Members: For your information.
Regards,
Ted
FYI: (Click On Article Title At Top Of Google Search)
Money management firm OppenheimerFunds Inc. is shutting down its nearly two-decade-old commodities fund, the firm said, following years of losses and underperformance.
Oppenheimer plans to liquidate the Commodity Strategy Total Return Fund “on or around” July 15, the firm said last week in a supplement to the fund’s prospectus.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/#q=OppenheimerFunds+to+Shut+Down+Nearly+Two-Decade-Old+Commodities+Fund+
M* Snapshot QRAAX:
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/QRAAX/quote.html