Here is a table of the so-called "lazy portfolios" (these should be familiar to most in this forum I suspect) that is kept updated. The 1-yr performance gives a rough idea of the order of returns for 2015.
http://www.marketwatch.com/lazyportfolio
Of course, unbalanced portfolios or portfolios with higher beta exposures can go much outside that and such deviations are worth taking a look at or thinking about.
Edit: Sorry, I take my assertion back as "kept updated" given the S&P 500 returns there so I would subtract about 1-2% from those returns to get an idea of what happened to typical buy and hold portfolios.

If one had exposure in these areas last year it was a definite drag on investment results and I'm speaking from experience.Even tried to catch some of those falling knives!
1 YR returns @ M*
Energy Limited Partnership ( M L P's ) -35.00
Diversified Emerging Mkts -15.71
Equity Precious Metals -23.69
http://news.morningstar.com/fund-category-returns/
Basket of Commodities

http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=24392
Oilprice.com news
Market Movers in Energy
• Swift Energy Company, an independent oil and gas producer focusing on the Eagle Ford, became the 40th company to declare bankruptcy since the beginning of the oil price downturn.
.. Chesapeake Energy (NYSE: CHK), the second largest natural gas producer in the U.S., was downgraded by Raymond James due to low natural gas prices. The company has lost more than 75 percent of its value over the past year, although its share price jumped 10 percent on Monday (volatility anyone ? )
The instability in China adds to the growing body of evidence that the global economy is not faring well. Yet another way of looking at the problem is through trade activity. In 2015, container traffic at some of the busiest ports in the world grew at its slowest rate in a half decade. In fact, container traffic at the 30 largest ports actually shrank by 0.9 percent in the third quarter..Part of the problem is the strengthening U.S. dollar, .But tepid economic growth is raising concerns about the stability of the global economy.
http://oilprice.com/newsletters/free/opintel05012016
Divinity with my dividends.Opened small position today.
ETNMX
http://eventidefunds.com/news/eventide-launches-the-eventide-multi-asset-income-fund/
Elsewhere
Schwab expands commission-free E T F platform
Jan 5 2016, 12:12 ET | By: Stephen Alpher, SA News Editor
http://seekingalpha.com/news/3014066-schwab-expands-commission-free-etf-platform
With original members State Street (NYSE: STT), Guggenheim, Invesco’s (NYSE: IVZ) PowerShares, ETF Securities, U.S. Commodity Funds and Schwab’s own lineup of ETFs, OneSource now offers select E T Fs from 15 issuers on a commission-free basis. The entire list can be viewed here.
https://www.etftrends.com/2016/01/schwab-adds-six-deutsche-etfs-to-onesource-lineup/
Newly offered examples
JHMH (health)
https://etf.jhinvestments.com/etf/our-etfs/jhmh.htm
RVNU (muni rev bonds)
https://etfus.deutscheawm.com/US/EN/Product-Detail-Page/RVNUl

@charles, just expressing shock at the level of drawdown. Yes, it may be comparable to some of the single funds but this is a diversified/balanced portfolio right? So you wouldn't judge a portfolio return with any single fund especially a sector or a market cap focused fund.
Unless you were on the wrong/unlucky side of @Ted's picks for the year which also seems like an incredible outlier. :)
Yes, it is a paper loss but paper losses do have a nasty habit of damaging investment goals/time frames, the higher they get. That is the damage I was refering to especially with such a negative alpha.
I would have expected most diversified/balanced index portfolios to have returns somewhere between -4 and +1 depending on beta exposure (and luck) despite the ups and downs.
Hopefully, even a reversion to mean will give you outsized returns on the same investments if you stick with them. So wish you well in that regard going forward.
The specific problem with metrics isn't just that they are based on past performance but that they have no information about how the funds got there in any time period. To me the latter is a better predictor of what a fund might do in different market climates. Two baseball teams may have the same average at some point in the season but how they got there is a better predictor how they might do against any particular team than those metrics.

Hi Alex,
Based on your advanced age, you impose a high target returns requirement, a high hurdle that gets higher each year as your RMD increases annually, on your portfolio.
I completely agree with MFOer msf with regard to scoping the problem by consulting the government RMD tables which are tied to life expectancy.
Numerous academic and industry retirement studies have concluded that a withdrawal rate of about one-half your RMD goal is a doable target that results in high portfolio survival odds over extended timeframes. The usual outcome from Monte Carlo simulations is that a 4% drawdown over a 30 year retirement period generates portfolio survival odds that are in the 95% and higher range.
Given your age, the anticipated portfolio survival timeframe is more like 15 years. This shortened period changes the calculus considerably. Some additional calculations are needed.
Nowadays, these calculations are easily and rapidly done with some simplifications that should not significantly impact any conclusions from the analyses. Since learning to fish is more useful than being gifted a fish, I suggest you do the analyses yourself.
One tool to do a respectable Monte Carlo analysis can be found on the MoneyChimp website. Here is a direct Link to the Monte Carlo calculator on the helpful site:
http://www.moneychimp.com/articles/volatility/montecarlo.htm
Please exercise it to get an informed feeling for the likelihood of a successful accomplishment of your goals.
For a representative portfolio with an 8.5% annual average return and a standard deviation of 12%, a survival likelihood of 98% is anticipated for a 15 year period. If that period is extended to 20 years, the portfolio survival likelihood decreases to 86%. If the portfolio volatility is increased from 12% to 15% annually, the portfolio survival probability is deceased from 98% to 93% for the 15 year timeframe.
Parametric analyses like these help an investor to get a feel for the soundness of his plan. These general cases seem like attractive potential outcomes from a portfolio survival perspective. However, note that MoneyChimp does not provide the end value of the portfolio. If a single dollar remains in the portfolio after the designated period, MoneyChimp scores that as a portfolio survival instance.
If you want more detail, please give the Portfolio Visualizer version of Monte Carlo a test run. Here is a Link to that site:
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/
This excellent website will allow you to back-test generic and specific portfolio asset allocations, and also to do a Monte Carlo simulation that outputs portfolio survival odds and average portfolio end wealth values.
For one test run, Portfolio Visualizer yields a 96% survival likelihood for the 15 year period with a 50% US Stocks, 25% Large Cap Value, and 25% International Stock portfolio allocation. A 37,000 dollar average annual drawdown rate was assumed.
The median portfolio end balance was 1.1 million dollars, and both the 25 percentile and 75 percentile end values were provided. Since these are Monte Carlo simulations, results will change a little with each running of the code.
These estimates were done using historical base rate returns. Given the current investment environment, you might want to do the simulations using slightly more muted market return projections. You can input your own predictions and do some sensitivity scenarios.
If you don’t like the specific outcomes, these Monte Carlo tools allow you to play endless what-if options to explore allocations that might improve the projected results. The work is easy and even fun. Enjoy.
I edited to convert my original post from MRD to RMD. Sorry for the nomenclature error.
Best Wishes.

Looks like I am in the basic ball park as many others for 2015, but a few of my highlights were
OSMYX 15.6%
MSEQX 11.9%
FBTIX 11.4%
PJP 11%
CMTFX 10.5%
POGRX 6.1%
A few stocks did ok, but my two MLP funds did a major drag on equity portfolio, since these funds were down over 30%. Im down about 6% on equity side, but my 35% bond and cash allocation saved my taxable portfolio, since I have individual bonds that did not fluctuate. Basically Im down about 4% for year. Since I regularly take money out of taxable portfolio, that equals my distribution level, so basically flat for year. I consider that a win for 2015 considering how it could have been had I taken out from equities.

You are going to go from all cash to 100% equities (I consider the preferred stock ETF fund to be equity-like in its behavior) after a seven-year bull market that has taken the S&P 500 from 666 to 2011 (as I type this) ??
Uh, no. Try again.

"[Inherited funds in IRAs] don't get a basis step-up, but generally, the distributions follow the same rules as they would for the original owner."
Except that they're not subject to an early distribution (10%) tax, spousal IRAs can be transferred to one's own IRA (in which case they follow the heir's IRA rules, not those of the deceased), and you get to take an IRD deduction if estate taxes were paid on the IRA.
https://www.kitces.com/blog/understanding-the-irc-section-691c-income-in-respect-of-a-decedent-ird-deduction-for-the-beneficiary-of-an-inherited-ira/
Possibly other stuff as well - this is off the top of my head. Kitces is very good; otherwise I generally stick with *.gov (e.g. irs.gov), or financial institutions (e.g. schwab.com, fidelity.com, etc.) that have to be accurate.

Hi @Ted.
I recall you were going to divest your equity holdings earlier in 2015.
Based upon your numbers, you have 20% in each of the above holdings for your total investment portfolio, eh?
Take care,
Catch

@MFO Members: The Linkster's five funds were up an average 7.624% in 2015
Regards,
Ted
PRHSX: 12.98%
FBTCX: 10.22%
QQQ 9.45%
PFF: 4.22%
SPY: 1.25%

Here is how I faired in 2015 according to Morningstar's Portfolio Manager. My three best funds were SPECX (+7.1%) ... AGTHX (+5.4%) ... & ANWPX (+5.3%). My three worst funds were THDAX (-15.3%) ... TOLLX (-14.4%) ... & PGUAX (-10.3%) My three worst hybrid funds were FKINX (-7.8%) ... HWIAX (-7.6%) ... and CAPAX (-6.2%) My three best hybrid funds were ABALX (+1.7%) ... FRINX (+1.5%) ...and BAICX (-0.9%). Overall I was down by -2.2%. I have not received my yearending brokerage statement which will reflect how I truly faired as I had a spiff that produced a good return and this would factor in 2015 performance. Plus, I had a loss in two funds I sold ... but, I had gains in some other funds that I trimmed my position in.

@Charles, it is only paper loss until you sell. You are not alone - 2015 was tough for many investors to have any meaningful gain. Let's hope 2016 is a better.

I thought that VBS, like nearly every clearing brokerage, used DTC. That's certainly implied by their fee schedule, where they charge $50 to process a foreign security that can't be held by DTC.
If the clearing broker works with DTC, it seems that all you need to do (for the security to be held by DTC) is have the security registered in street name (which is the default at brokerages). See DTC page:
http://www.dtcc.com/matching-settlement-and-asset-services/issuer-services/how-issuers-work-with-dtc
So the problem may not be that your security isn't held by DTC, but that VBS isn't actively taking advantage of the DRIP discount that is available. Just a thought based on the information here; I've no additional info on how CEF DRIPs are handled.

I will sir.
As of 10:30 pm central coast time, Lipper has still not dropped monthly data through December.
Hopefully, tomorrow and will update soonest.
c

Reliable, relatively un-volatile, dependable, Open Ended Mutual (bond) Funds would not generate your rather steep income requirements (per msf, mentioned above, 7.1%.) I'm thinking of DODIX, DLFNX, and there are many others. Typically they will give you 10 cents per share per quarter, or about .03 cents per share, if they pay monthly. A SMALL portion could be put into FNMIX and/or PREMX. I use the latter, and it brings me about .06 cents per share, each month, currently. But Emerging Markets bond funds are not for any kind of considerable stake in your portfolio. Keep it small.
For a more serious income stream, you might put money into some REITS.
LXP yields 8.37% right now.
NNN yields 4.36%
WRI yields 4.04%
RPT yields 5.07%.
HCN yields 4.83%.
Now I've shot all my bullets. "Break a leg."

No. I've lately begun to use DSPPs, but not re: CEFs. Some plans are awful. Some do indeed offer value.
http://www-us.computershare.com/investor/3x/plans/planslist.asp?bhjs=1&stype=dspp
https://www.amstock.com/investpower/new_dp.asp

1. What is your understanding of the term “captured earnings growth”?
2. "International Stalwarts already has about 127 million in AUM per M*, so I'm not sure how long this one will stay open. 2-3 years"
I think it is going to stay open for longer than 2-3 years......
Since this is more of a midcap fund, they will let the assets run up much more than their other funds

Right, it looks like they're not going to double down on value, even though that could pay off in the long run, but the growth oriented international funds have been strong- OBIOX, OSMAX.
International Stalwarts already has about 127 million in AUM per M*, so I'm not sure how long this one will stay open. 2-3 years? They're sure doing a lot of hiring and then no more offerings planned for the next 6?

@Alex
I would consider a portfolio consisting of: VMNVX (50%), GLIFX (20%), and QMNIX (30%). As a whole, this portfolio would provide relatively low volatility and reasonable returns. Other funds that I would consider would be VMNFX and QLEIX. The institutional AQR funds are available at Scottrade for $100 minimum in both taxable and retirement accounts.
Kevin

@vkt
Thank you.

Down 9%? That is serious damage!

Hmmm.
Yep, certainly if you need to sell.
But, glancing over some notable funds (thru Nov anyway), I'm in good company ...
PIMCO ALL ASSET ALL AUTHORITY INST (PAUIX) -13.5
T ROWE PRICE NEW ERA (PRNEX) -12.9
BERWYN CORNERSTONE (BERCX) -12.8
THIRD AVENUE INTERNATIONAL VALUE INST (TAVIX) -12.8
YACKTMAN SPECIAL OPPORTUNITIES INST (YASLX) -12.7
FPA CAPITAL (FPPTX) -12.3
AQR FUNDS: AQR RISK PARITY II HV I (QRHIX) -12.2
GABELLI VALUE 25 A (GABVX) -11.4
GREENLEAF INCOME GROWTH (GIGFX) -11.3
DODGE & COX INTERNATIONAL STOCK (DODFX) -11.2
FRANKLIN INCOME A (FKINX) -10.7
JANUS CONTRARIAN D (JACNX) -10.5
WADDELL & REED ADVISORS HIGH INCOME A (UNHIX) -10.5
PIMCO ALL ASSET INST (PAAIX) -10
FORUM FUNDS: BECK MACK & OLIVER PARTNERS (BMPEX) -9.8
ARIEL FOCUS INV (ARFFX) -9.7
IVY ASSET STRATEGY C (WASCX) -9.4
BRIDGEWAY ULTRA-SMALL COMPANY (BRUSX) -9
It was a lame year.
Break, break.
Yes, backward-looking performance-based metrics have their limitations, indeed.
c

@willmatt72,
In 2016, I am sticking with my core fund, PRWCX, currently at 20% of our portfolio. For our foreign exposure, I continue to like GLIFX, as it has currency hedges and is avoiding energy. Currently we have a 12% allocation to GLIFX.
This year should be volatile, just like 2015. So we own QMNIX (10%), and will likely take an 8% position in MCXIX and an 8% position in QLEIX. As QSPIX will close to new investors later this month, I will likely take a foothold in this fund. I continue to like VMNFX, and would definitely prefer it over any and all FI funds, CEFs and OEFs, in this environment.
As for the beaten down sectors, oil should rebound, and I am looking at MLPX and RSX, but favor MLPX.
Tech has pricing power and is immune from the political bashing which will be directed at HC in this election year, so I like PRGTX and MGGIX. We will maintain our 5% position in PRHSX.
Kevin