Hmmmmm..... don't know what the advisers are doing with "other peoples money".
--- U.S. started and kept the QE money machine running from late 2008. So, U.S. was the best of the breed at that time.
--- Europe was in the restrictive mode as I recall and there were a series of equity "fits", mostly during the springtime months (May). Greece was a concern and then Mr. Draghi did the "whatever it takes" thing with the European QE.
--- China got rolling again after the melt and bought every commodity in sight. That was good for a few years and of benefit to the Aussies (iron) and some folks in South America for awhile.
--- Japan began (again and/or still) their version of QE.
--- Some central banks continue to reduce rates here and there; I suspect, with the aspect of slow spending and the thought of deflation.
So, there was a strong dollar (commodity pricing globally), fracking finally started to produce changes in this countries energy reserves. The Euro and Japan QE provided a positive boost for investors, especially with tools like HEDJ and DXJ type funds. Recalling that the Euro/dollar was just about $1.60:$1 in 2008 and now runs around $1.14, more or less.
Don't know that anything disrupting has been provided. Just a few trinkets from the past several years that have shaped where some money travels and why.
Not included is anything that is military, social or the particular changes of status in many middle eastern countries.
Lots of stuff going on that we know about, and as much that we don't know about.
The U.S. is likely still the best of the economic turd piles for investing, but there are always investment gems here and there that come to life for a period of time.
Take care,
Catch

Would appreciate seeing some substantive disputing of this column:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2015/01/16/investing-international-funds/21825245/

81! How cool! Go with the spending!

At age 81 I am through saving but doing some spending. We do have a cash/checking account at Schwab.

Anyone use preferreds? They seem to be less volatile than REITs.

Yes, I'm new to preferreds, but owned PPSAX (lw at Fido) in 2014-early 2015 and now have a stake in a preferred cef. Good income, not all that volatile, but all the preferred funds I've looked at are at a high price to par now. They seem to do well about every other year and lag some in the off years, and they did great in 2014. Most of the funds I've considered are hybrids, with some straight corporate debt, so they act more like bonds than a REIT fund would. Make sure you check the credit exposure if you go shopping; the credit quality varies quite a bit.
The etf PFF is a quick & easy way to get exposure, but I "prefer" active management in preferreds.

@Dex,
Correct. It was not your own question.
OJ, as a longterm layout editor, I know filler (also pig latin). Do check out better modern ones (cupcakes, bacon, Pulp Fiction ....):
http://mashable.com/2013/07/11/lorem-ipsum/#ZcVH4Mit_qqy

Hi Mona. Right, I used the 2014 distributions to show that equity ETFs don't seem to pay cap gains. In case of Vanguard, some of their ETFs are actually share classes of the mutual funds, so portfolio is essentially same (eg., VHT and VCVLX). Now, perhaps it's just because these mutual funds and ETFs are index funds. But, I believe the active EtF folks are touting they enjoy capital gain advantages that traditional mutual funds do not.

Only bond ETFs, which are hard to get around. No cap gains on any of the equity ETFs, looks like, even though some are literally another share class of their mutual funds. Correct?

Charles,
To my understanding, Vanguard has not announced any of their 2015 year-end capital gains distributions yet.
Mona

No Capital Gains on the ETFs!

It looks like they've just rolled this page forward for 2015... the link you have shows Q3 2015 distributions. Actually, Vanguard paid out on a number of their ETFs last year (see the bottom of the page for the estimates here: https://personal.vanguard.com/us/insights/article/update-prelimcapgains-112014).
They've even already paid out on one of their ETFs (BND) in 2015! See the April distribution for the Total Bond Market fund.
https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/snapshot?FundId=0928&FundIntExt=INT#tab=4

Below is link to 2014 distributions (dividend and capital gains) on Vanguard ETFs...notice anything interesting?
https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/etf/all?sortorder=asc&sortorder=asc&sortorder=asc&sortorder=asc&sort=name&sort=name&sort=name&sort=name#upperTB=distTBI&lowerTB=overTBI
Here is same for the Vanguard Mutual Funds...
https://investor.vanguard.com/mutual-funds/all-vanguard-funds#tab=overview

Nothing jumps out... what are you seeing Charles?

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2015/10/sp-500-bear-markets-of-20-or-more-2/print/

frankly it really depends on the fund. Why would I care if manager of my index fund owns share in the fund. I would care if he owned a different index fund against the same index, but that's something else.
If I'm buying a "mid cap value" fund not just in the name of the fund, but also the stated goal of the fund, I need the managers to own that fund in their equity portfolios for the corresponding sleeve of their portfolio. I don't care if manager is in his 20s and decides 100% of his equity portfolio can be in micro caps because it is appropriate for his age. If he is doing that, he is not focusing on "mid cap value" and if he has no ownership in the fund, THAT is a problem. The more he owns the better I feel. This is just common sense.
I also hear about managers turning 60/whatever and then because of their age they sell all their shares in the equity fund(s) they manage. Fine. Manager is not a bad person. However, WTF do I care? I need my manager focused on managing "mid cap value". So I will go and buy another fund where manager has ownership.
So there! If I have to bear tax consequences, I will do so. Maybe periodically sell a little and then roll it over to other fund. Whatever makes sense. Manager does not get to earn 1%/whatever on my assets if he does not have skin in the game. Period.
So once again, if someone knows I own a fund and realizes manager not holding shares of that fund anymore, please do tell me. You will be doing me a huge favor.

More Blackstone ( BX )
By LISA BEILFUSS WSJ
Updated Oct. 8, 2015 8:36 a.m. ET
0 COMMENTS
Blackstone Group L.P. will acquire BioMed Realty Trust in an $4.84 billion cash deal, adding more office buildings and laboratory-capable facilities to its real estate portfolio.
The $23.75 per share price tag represents a 10% premium over Wednesday’s closing price. Blackstone valued the deal at $8 billion, which may include debt. A representative wasn’t immediately available for comment.
Shares in Biomed Realty gained 8.6% in premarket trading. Blackstone shares were inactive.
Blackstone, the world’s largest private-equity firm, has been raising cash to make deals in the space, last quarter closing a $15.8 billion distressed and opportunistic real-estate funds
http://www.wsj.com/articles/blackstone-to-buy-biomed-realty-trust-for-4-84-billion-1444300840
More on @Scott mentioned stocks here:(Blackstone,Starwood Capital, Brookfield Asset
Management )(This ain't "Mainstreet "finance! )
3Q15
CAPITAL MARKETS REPORT
FOR THE INTELLIGENT INVESTOR
Overview
►
International capital
has accounted
for nearly
16.0%
of all United States sales activity, year to date, up from 10.0% from 2011-2014.
►
Capital investment from China to the United States has exceeded $5 billion in 2015, yet United States investment to China has been cut to $1.5 billion, year to date.
►
Of the ten foreign countries that have invested the most capital in the United States in the past 12 months, all have
purchased assets in Manhattan.
Canada and Singapore have invested in each of the 11 largest United States markets over the past 12 months.
►
Per square foot averages of institutional quality office buildings in major markets have exceeded the prior peak in 2008.

New York City sale prices are currently 14.6%
above the 2Q08 previous high, averaging $973 per square foot.

Asking rents in Manhattan remain 6.9% below the market peak in 2008, and 14.3% below the Midtown 2008 peak.
►
Investors
are seeking higher yields in secondary markets and nontraditional property types as gateway cities have become over saturated.
►
Current commercial and multihousing yields remain significantly higher than the 10
year treasury.
►
C M B S debt has experienced the most growth in 2015, expanding from 12.6% to 19.9% of all outstanding debt.
Concurrently, banks have cut their outstanding debt by 25.8% since 2014
http://www.ngkf.com/Uploads/FileManager/3Q15-Capital-Markets-Report.pdf

Below is link to 2014 distributions (dividend and capital gains) on Vanguard ETFs...notice anything interesting?
https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/etf/all?sortorder=asc&sortorder=asc&sortorder=asc&sortorder=asc&sort=name&sort=name&sort=name&sort=name#upperTB=distTBI&lowerTB=overTBI
Here is same for the Vanguard Mutual Funds...
https://investor.vanguard.com/mutual-funds/all-vanguard-funds#tab=overview

Most fund groups that push for insider ownership allow a little wiggle room. Managers might be required to place "substantially all of their investable assets" in the firm's products, or "all of their equity exposure" in their own fund, or invest their year-end bonuses in them. That allows them to put their kids' 529 money in target-date funds or to maintain age-appropriate income exposure and so on.
The rub is that the SEC does not require disclosure of a firm's policy, if any, and the SEC investment bands are badly out-of-date. The top band for fund directors is "over $100,000" and the top band for managers is "over $1,000,000." As stunning as I find the phrase "over $1,000,000," apparently large financial services firms compensate key personnel pretty generously. Who knew? For many, investments in the millions are routine and in the tens of millions are not unusual.
As ever,
David

the distribution is precisely due to the fact that you (and many others) have bailed and caused forced selling.

If YAFFX (+12% distribution) is any indication, this year the tax man cometh.

Glad I bailed out of this fund earlier this year. Its supposed to do well in down years, but that hasn't been the case this year (-12% YTD). And now it's paying a hefty distribution? No, thanks.

Actually, the cause of the "forced" selling is poor performance. That happens when a fund doesn't live up to expectations.

One the the F P A folks admitted that they were amazed by the reaction of F P A Paramount (FPRAX) investors to the fund's conversion a couple years ago. They replaced the manager, raised the management fee, did a 180 degree turn on the portfolio, unleashed a massive tax bill and their investors not only didn't leave, they didn't even ask questions.
On the bright side, at least we'll never have a lanolin shortage. There are simply too many sheep around.
David

Thanks for all these ridiculous articles on MLPs lately and other factors that allowed me to add to ETE (which will now be the largest pipeline/energy infrastructure company with the purchase of WMB) at $19 the other day.
Brookfield will spin-off another MLP next year - their private equity division.
If I didn't want to limit the amount of MLPs I own I would have added to EPD. I will probably not be into the upcoming Brookfield spin-off, but will continue to own BIP and especially BPY.

FYI: Poor performance could send the income-generating category back to direct investing, where it belongs.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20151007/BLOG12/151009946?template=printart

@soaring, I have had bad luck underwater the last 10 months with PDI, for the first or first few of which I did not reinvest, so it's tricky to figure against the standard growth-10k chart. Plus the discount to holdings. I will bail as soon as I get to the surface.