https://www.onefpa.org/journal/Pages/NOV15-Updated-Advice-on-Mutual-Fund-Selection.aspx
"Over the past three years, academic research has revealed new characteristics to look for in an actively managed mutual fund. In 2012, I suggested that financial planners look for funds with a high level of fund manager ownership, board of director ownership, a short-term redemption fee, a high active share or low R-squared value, and that lack affiliation with an investment bank. Recent research shows that financial planners should also look for funds that manage their portfolios in-house, outsource the execution of their shareholder services, have managers with performance-linked bonuses, and have a key role in their fund family performed by someone with a Ph.D. Each of these characteristics are associated with outperformance. "
I'd like to see a little math. It's early for these.

Sequoia Fund SEQUX
http://www.sequoiafund.com/si-dividends-capital-gain.htm
"On November 16, 2015, Sequoia Fund, Inc. made a long term capital gains distribution to shareholders of record on November 13, 2015. The distribution amount was $7.98 per share. "

Hi Guys,
Regret minimization is not a new topic. It is studied in academic circles and oftentimes has rather sophisticated mathematical modeling coupled to it.
But a very thoughtful, practical column on that subject appeared in today’s “A Wealth of Common Sense” by Ben Carlson. Here is a Link to that article:
http://awealthofcommonsense.com/regret-minimization/
The piece discusses the tradeoffs between risk and reward, and the need for a balanced investment approach for portfolio survival during the down cycles. Long term thinking is mandatory. It concludes that risk can not be entirely eliminated. Therefore an investor must develop a resilience capability.
Just this year a book that emphasizes the need for resilience and how to learn it has been published. The book is titled “Stronger”. It was written by three men who have terrific backgrounds in this field including one Navy SEAL. I recommend the book although I have only part way finished it.
The book identifies five resiliency elements: active optimism, decisive action, a moral compass, persistent tenacity, and a reliable support structure. The good news is that the authors believe resiliency can be learned. Failures are learning experiences. To sharpen resilience, study history and successful investors from the past. And keep things simple. I look forward to more tips as I complete the book.
In the end, I suspect that keeping cool under duress, having a diversified portfolio, having a reserve that allows the markets to return to you, and having a long term perspective will again be the advice offered. Not too much new there, but the repetition from experts gives comfort. Bogle’s “staying the course” is again practical wisdom, but sometimes difficult to execute.
By the way, in the article, Carlson asked this series of questions: “Some investors will regret missing out on huge gains while others will regret participating in huge losses. Which regret will wear worse on your emotions? Missing out on future gains or future losses?”
Kahneman and Tversky’s answer to those questions are embedded in their Prospect Theory. In Prospect Theory, expected gains and losses have an asymmetric impact on an individual’s emotions. Gains are appreciated one-half as much as losses are feared. Therefore, most folks would not accept a potential 10 dollar gain if a 10 dollar loss was equally possible. The wager would only be accepted if the potential 10 dollar loss was matched against an equally likely 20 dollar winning reward.
Please give “Stronger” some consideration.
Best Regards.

FYI: A deep look at Janus today.
Regards,
Ted
http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=723115

"...let’s look at China from the 30,000 foot view. From this perspective we observe two things that will unfold over the next decade. First, investment as a share of GDP will fall from almost 50% of GDP to closer to 35% of GDP, if not lower. Second, consumption as a share of GDP will rise from 38% to around to 50%, if not higher...Companies that feed off of Chinese investment in infrastructure will likely struggle and companies that benefit from Chinese consumption will do ok, if not great."

"...all the common benchmarks for diversified developed or emerging markets (MSCI, FTSE, Vanguard, etc) are around 50% (or more) allocated to the economic sectors with the largest headwinds in the decade ahead. That means that any diversified EM or DM investment products (mutual funds or ETFs) that look anything like the benchmark are by default leaning into the wind rather than letting it push them. "
See: GaveKal

Update: On 11/16/2015, Verso released its Q3 results.
Included in the results were management comments (essentially) that Verso is "going concern" risk and that they don't have adequate liquidity and that "restructuring" is a real possibility.
I don't recall seeing that verbiage in earlier press releases.
Foreseeable. Predictable. Apollo Investments does it again!

We have experienced the same emotional selling after Sept 11th, and that was an even bigger event. The martket eventully fully recovered and advanced more.
I also agree with many posted here that regardless when the hike starts, the rate will be gradual over time.

DoubleLine's Gundlach: Fed hike 'no-go more likely than most people think' Paris attacks alone are unlikely to play a factor in next month's decision.
Reuters By Jennifer Ablan Sun.Nov 15th
DoubleLine Capital co-founder Jeffrey Gundlach said on Sunday that the Federal Reserve may hesitate to raise rates given rocky economic and financial conditions, though the Paris attacks alone are unlikely to play a factor in next month's decision.
The influential money manager, who recently warned that the U.S. Federal Reserve should not tighten monetary policy in December, said the Paris attacks could pressure stock markets around the globe, "which we know Fed officials have been watching, even if they try not to admit it."
Gundlach cited a number of asset classes that are signaling deteriorating conditions: The S&P Leveraged Loan Index, which is at a four-year low, the SPDR Barclays High Yield Bond Exchange-Traded Fund "very near a four-year low" and the CRB Commodity Index at a 13-year low. "You also have the Eurozone doubling down on stimulus. Fed raising rates? Really?"
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/15/us-doubleline-gundlach-idUSKCN0T417Z20151115#Xa4BZzDyQ3V3uC0h.97

FYI: The deadly terror attacks in Paris are likely to strike financial markets, too, when trading resumes Monday. But the initial losses expected in risk assets like stocks and the shift into safer holdings like U.S. government bonds and cash are likely to be short-lived, history says.
Investors’ knee-jerk reaction to terror attacks and other "shocks" is to sell so-called risky assets until they have a chance to measure the resulting economic fallout, according to data compiled by Sam Stovall, U.S. equity strategist at S&P Capital IQ. The good news is the losses tend to be recouped relatively swiftly as Wall Street typically concludes that both the domestic and global economy won’t be derailed by acts of terror.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/markets/2015/11/15/terror-and-markets-sell-offs-tend-short-lived/75822426/

@VintageFreak. The database is good. It's the presentation of the legacy screener that is causing you the confusion. The tabulated metrics are only for the longest evaluation period applicable ... 1, 3, 5, 10, or 20 years ... so you can only compare the metrics of funds from same age group. The return group rankings are directly comparable, but not the metrics.
Below are the risk/return metrics for BRUFX, OAKBX, PRWCX, and WGRNX across various periods from the MFO premium site ... hope this helps.

FYI: Bearded and tanned, Peter S. Kraus, the chief executive of AllianceBernstein, strode with assurance into a Midtown Manhattan conference room full of financial advisers from a large investment bank.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/05/business/dealbook/the-man-who-hates-etfs.html?_r=0

@VintageFreak and catch. No worries. Right, so, the legacy screener tabulates metrics only for the longest evaluation period applicable ... 1, 3, 5, 10 or 20 years. In case of WGRNX, that means 5 years (through September ... it crossed the 10 year mark last month). Its big drawdown occurred prior to that ... as can be seen in the lifetime metrics on the premium site (snapshot below). The legacy site ratings will be updated again after 4th quarter.

The power of patience. Not just of BRUFX managers but both of investors who did buy and those who didn't. It's top holding was once $2, now it is $450. The problem is it is now 12% of the fund. The chart below shows BRUFX underperformed the S&P 500 for 20 years after inception.
After having waited so long, I think I might want to wait a bit longer.

Hi @VintageFreak
I have not looked at the MFO ratings/Lipper charts; but at StockCharts (link below) indicates that WGRNX had a drawdown of -52.4% from a 2007 high of $14.47 on 11-1-2007 to its low of $6.89 on 3-6-2009. These numbers are + or - a few points for exact dates.......a quick and rough number.
At this linked chart you may have to drag the left edge of the slider below the chart to see the full chart of this fund, which is back to November 14, 2005. You hover the pc cursor over any area of the chart line for date and price info. You will also note that the high price in 2007 required until July, 2011 for full recovery to the same price level.
http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?WGRNX#
I won't use this thread more for this, as it is dedicated to MFO/Lipper.
Regards,
Catch

FYI: An anecdote from World War II tells us a lot about why most of what passes for investment data is wrong.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.dallasnews.com/business/columnists/scott-burns/20151113-the-missing-bullet-holes-problem.ece
Just for the record, Scott Burns's investment firm AssetBuilder is a agent of DFA Funds.

I have owned BRUFX for years in a regular account. Bought into it when NAV was about $288 per share.
I thought there were some states that would not permit you to buy BRUFX?

That's correct. I'm in TX and lamented about it long, until someone not too long back on MFO let me know it is now available in TX. Since minimum is $1000 I'm thinking I would start DCAing in. At least enter at $1000 and watch and creep in over time, would be a better way to put it.

I expect most have had quite enough of the Valeant business by now, but for those who haven't, or who have lingering questions re. the nitty-gritty of the matter, here is some number crunching done by a corp finance wonk at the NYU Stern School of Business.It's the weekend. More leisurely hours for musing. Might as well use them.
http://aswathdamodaran.blogspot.com/2015/11/checkmate-or-stalemate-valeants-fall.html
Teaser:
3. Accounting games: Part of Valeant’s rise can be attributed to the laziness of analysts, who apply multiples (that they pull from a cursory assessment of the comparable) on pro forma earnings, and some of it to the debris of acquisition accounting (goodwill, impairment of goodwill and acquisition-related restructuring charges). I have written before about the damage that goodwill does to both accounting statements and to good sense, but the degree to which acquisition accounting has muddied up the numbers at Valeant can be captured by looking at how they have taken over Valeant's financials in the last 5 years:

He also makes his case as to whether Valeant will be a going concern re. its value. He breaks it down pretty well.

Yeah, I'm not disagreeing with anything you wrote. Solid post.
Additionally, CEF (phys gold/silver CEF) now trading at over a 10% discount.