Certainly need lots patience and long horizon with this fund. I left in late 2016 when i finally break even.

Also:
FDETX 16.51%
FDESX 17.08%
FALIX 16.92%
FZALX 13.84%
FMALX 15.84%
FXAIX 11.97% (note S&P index fund beating benchmark)
FMILX 14.92%
FGLGX 15.96%
FEQIX does not use the S&P 500 as a benchmark. Its benchmark is the R3K Value. The fourth fund should be FMILX.
I suspect the writer was oblivious to the fact that Fidelity sells load funds (the first five I listed). It is a bit more understandable that a Fidelity Series fund (FGLGX) was ignored, as these funds are only used internally, so don't (directly) affect asset flow.
The last fund (FXAIX) might have been ignored because it was an institutional fund (though such funds also affect asset flow), or because as an index fund it isn't germane to a discussion about how (un)attractive actively managed funds are. Or possibly because the writer couldn't conceive of an index fund outperforming its benchmark.

@jerry:
1. FGRTX 13.03%
2. FGRIX 16.06%
3. FLCSX 16.70%
4. FEQIX 17.38%
S&P 500 (TR) 11.96%
Source M*
Regards,
Ted

Interactive map of the world's economies and there relative position in the the business cycle...at risk, recovering, expanding, and receding. Good to know when looking outside the US to invest. Select each country for a brief summary...most updates written Dec 2016.
https://economy.com/dismal/tools/global-business-cycle-map

FYI: Bond investors aren’t exactly known as risk-seekers.
But when interest rates and inflation could be on the rise, playing it too safe in a “vanilla” bond index fund may not cut it.
That drives the strategy for Eaton Vance Management’s Multisector Income Fund (EVBAX). The fund, which was founded in 2013, approaches fixed-income investing by taking positions in a variety of bonds and other types of debt, including those issued by companies and governments outside the U.S. It also buys stocks and doesn’t shy away from higher-yield, and therefore higher-risk, bonds.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/fund-manager-qanda-a-diversified-approach-to-income-investing/2017/02/16/5dfa70d6-f483-11e6-9fb1-2d8f3fc9c0ed_story.html?utm_term=.b50bcc42628c
M* Snapshot EVBAX:
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/evbax/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot EVBAX:
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/fund/evbax
EVBAX Is Unranked In The (MB) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
http://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/multisector-bond/eaton-vance-multisector-income-fund/evbax

FYI: Fidelity Investments reported record revenue of $15.9 billion in 2016, as well as a record operating profit, despite struggles at its flagship stock funds and a continuing industrywide exodus by investors to lower-cost index funds.
In its annual report Thursday, the Boston-based financial services giant said expense cuts, along with 3.4 percent revenue growth, helped drive a 19.5 percent jump in operating income, to $3.5 billion.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2017/02/16/fidelity-reports-record-revenue-and-profits-even-its-stock-funds-struggled/gO47KIy60FmpIg8liahklK/story.html

I believe a recent interview with Charles De Vaulx held the same opinion about the importance of cash in 2017:
wealthtrack.com/high-risk-market-international-value-advisers-charles-de-vaulx-says-markets-expensive-opportunities/

"We’re holding cash. We don’t mind losing a little bit of money on cash which is a strange statement to hear from me. I’m not known to like to lose money, because what’s unique about cash and only cash has that attribute, cash is not only a buffer. It’s not only something that does not go down in price when other things may go down in price. Cash is what you actually need to buy low so that you can then sell high. When people say – maybe the Rothschilds –you’re supposed to pounce when there’s blood in the street, you actually need cash to pounce.

Transcript:
wealthtrack.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/WEALTHTRACK_DeVaulx_1331_01.20.17.pdf

FYI: In the wake of Donald Trump's election, emerging-market ETFs tumbled as investors feared that the new administration's protectionist trade policies would hurt the countries in these markets. But then a funny thing happened. After ranking as one of the worst-performing sectors in the last quarter of 2016, emerging-market ETFs began the new year with a rally and are outperforming U.S. stocks.
So far this year, Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF (VWO) has jumped 10%, iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) leapt 10%, and the iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) climbed 10% vs. 5% for the SPDR S&P 500 (SPY).
Regards,
Ted
http://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/etfs/emerging-market-etfs-rally-in-spite-of-trump-trade-threats/

@bee: I linked the interview at 8:49 AM, then you relink at 11:38 AM, I'm confused !
Regards,
Ted
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/31380/consuelo-mack-s-wealthtrack-guest-brian-langstraat-scott-welch-tax-advantage-investing#latest

2% growth will be good:
https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2017/02/18/trumps-rosy-scenario

Wow! Mr. Krugman got this one correct. His thinking has been so muddled recently because of his political positions I'm surprised he can do anything remotely related to economics. However, to apply the reason to the growth rates to particular presidents is ridiculous. The conditions that led to the growth rate were put in place prior to the president taking office. The only case where you might ascribe a particular growth rate to a president is the decision to go to war.

Thanks @Ted,
Link to interview:
wealthtrack.com/tax-alpha-tax-advantaged-investing-can-add-1-3-to-portfolio-returns-annually-better-than-most-active-managers-can-deliver-langstraat-welch-explain-how-its-done/

2% growth will be good:
https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2017/02/18/trumps-rosy-scenario

ECRI comes to roughly the same conclusion for structural/longer term growth, via the simple metric of labor-force growth + productivity growth.

2% growth will be good:
https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2017/02/18/trumps-rosy-scenario

Yes. Returns are always after expenses. Perhaps he meant to say a fund earning 2% overcoming a 1% ER will find it hard to do it year after year. The lower the expectations on returns, the more likely they are to be met, the lower the ER.
I'm guessing...

Hi guys!
Good thread, Art. I'm warming up some crow for Duke and I since I badmouthed my leader in past posts. This sector is now the leader in my portfolio. FSPHX - 11.41% - healthcare. I will also give some to all the Barron round table people who, to the man, almost said consumer staples are a no go this year.....its second posting a 6.44%. The laggards are the usual suspects: PONDX and VWINX. They will do their job when the time comes.
God bless
the Pudd

In my "aggressive " portfolio;
AMJVX is up 2.90%. Distribution yield 4.76%
BIGRX is up 4.79%. Distribution yield 2.19%
ALNNX is up 2%. Distribution yield 4.6%.

This fund has been talked about on this board:
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/23366/winning-managers-in-alt-space-are-tough-to-find-hfxix-masfx
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/10507/catalyst-hedged-futures-hfxix
On the plus side, I successfully ignored the hype and didn't buy into Catalyst Hedged Futures Strategy HFXIX.
On the down side, I bought Catalyst Macro Strategy MCXIX instead. -36% in 2016, ouch.

We need to pay attention to the expense ratios for these "cash equivalents". ERs above 1% quickly eat into the lowly 2% total return. That is not counting if they are transaction fee mutual funds.

My best three : VEMAX 9.1%, PRHSX 10.2%, VHT 7.6%
Worst three: VWINX 1.7%, FRIFX 1.9%, VFSTX 0.5%
YTD return is modest and that is good enough for me.

@Old_Joe, just tell me what you are drinking/smoking with the $100 you got from the original seller of the shares, and we'll call it even :-D