This one hurts.
I'm crazy about many things this fund offers ... Whitebox does a lot right by shareholders, especially compared to say houses like AQR.
But markets have simply not supported their hedges. In fact, like mentioned above, getting hurt on both sides lately.
Still a younger fund ... time will tell if it ever lives up to the all-weather fund I had hoped it would be.
Losing a percent a month is always painful, but especially during bull markets ... would not mind so much if it just stayed even during such times.
Here are links to previous write-ups on the fund:
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2015/03/whitebox-tactical-opportunities-4q14-conference-call/
Might note chart about getting of the bus early. (BTW Dr. Hussman never gets on.)
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2013/10/whitebox-tactical-opportunities-conference-call/
c

"Morningstar and Barron's ninth annual survey of perceptions and usage of alternative investments sheds some much-needed light on decisions taking place at advisory firms and intuitions. (The survey was conducted in the spring of 2015 and covered the 2014 period.) '
"The survey highlights some astonishing trends at a time when alternative flows are starting to moderate. While organic growth rates for liquid alternative mutual funds during 2014 are still larger than any other broad Morningstar Category, they were the slowest on record since 2008, at 12%. But the survey shows that advisors aren’t all doom and gloom and may be looking to allocate more into alternatives over the next couple of years. But the pace at which institutions appear to be withdrawing from alternatives does raise an eyebrow."
http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=691385&SR=Yahoo

VF, if donations to charity were a reason for sticking with Hussman, and I've seen you state that before, wouldn't it be more effective to just donate directly to those charities yourself while investing with a winning manager? Then at least 100% of your donation, or expenses, goes to a good cause instead of 66% and 34% into his pocket.
From what you stated, you seem to be happy paying for no-BS and a charitable individuals expenses. When in actuality, everything he has said for the last 10 years has turned out to be BS in investment sense. You don't mention how or why this fits your investment plan.
You are right about the silence on Whitebox though. Much like all the ballyhoo about Marketfield just a year or so ago. Which makes me feel even more strongly that none of these market timing funds are worth a hoot. They will look good until they're not.

@MikeM, @LewisBraham
At some point we have to accept, just like we had "long" quacks pretending to be geniuses in the 90s, we've had "short" quacks pretending to be geniuses between 2000-2002, and 2008-2010.
I bought HSGFX because at least I didn't sense bulls*** from Hussy. I actually understand how he invests. This is not always possible for these types of funds. Admittedly him donating 66% of profits to charity had something to do with it too. I own HSTRX as well, which I have actually owned for quite a while and I'm fine with it.
Coming back to WBMAX. I'm surprised at the silence on the boards. I could have sworn half of us married Whitebox and had children with it.

FYI: Last August [1], we called out the San Diego County retirement fund for paying way too much in fees to Salient Partners, its outside pension fund manager. Terrific reporting by Dan McSwain at the San Diego Union-Tribune [2] alerted readers to a dramatic increase in the use of leverage once Salient took the reins.
Last night, the county fired Houston-based Salient, according [3]to the Union-Tribune
Regards,
Ted
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2015/07/san-diego-county-fires-its-high-priced-underperforming-outside-manager/print/

@kevindow. I have sworn off all things AQR. They are not a retail investors friend.
PS How are you able to by institutional shares?

VF, I always hunt for brokerages which offer access to targeted institutional funds at a reasonable minimum. QLEIX is available at Scottrade for $100 minimums in taxable and retirement accounts with a TF.
Kevin

FYI: When wading through the predictions of financial doom and gloom ahead, keep in mind one key component of human nature.
Regards,
Ted
http://fundreference.com/articles/2015/1000555/the-clowns-of-wall-street/

@mrc70
You know we need to really examine why we own a fund. "Performing well in a downturn...". Scarier words have never been spoken.
I think one MFO measure of how long it takes to bounce back is telling. I have got my share of flak for holding HSGFX. The point is we see these funds underperform. Then if we see market tank 50% we will expect these funds to go up 100%. That's not likely to happen.
If we want to hedge, maybe we just buy short funds. If we buy HSGFX, WBMAX, etc. I think we need a different reason. I moved some HSGFX holdings out last year. If I owned WBMAX I would do the same unless there is some miracle bounce back. One of the sure things in life is taxes, so no reason to not at least take a tax loss at end of year.

YTD -11%. WTF?
I thought this fund was the "bomb". I have WBLSX. Flat YTD.

thanks for info...I already own PRWCX...was just trying to help learningcurve.

Little5bee: Happy to help. Just happen to have held PRWCX & a number of their funds-of-funds for many years. PRWCX dates back almost to inception.
Yours is an interesting question/suggestion - as a purely academic pursuit (the spirit in which I responded). As a practical matter, however, it's unlikely one would purchase 10 shares of a fund they don't need to secure an interest in one share of PRWCX. And it's uncommon (but not unheard of) for their fund-of-funds to hold much over 10-15% of any one fund.
Regards

Google's Class A shares (NASDAQ:GOOGL) are now up 11.5% AH, and its Class C shares (NASDAQ:GOOG) up 10.7%, following the Web giant's Q2 beat. Both share classes are making new 52-week highs
Dow Jones 18,120.25 0.39%
Nasdaq 5,163.18 1.26%
Technology 1.18%
GOOGL 601.78 3.05%
601.78 +17.82 (3.05%)
After Hours: 671.60 +69.82 (11.60%)
Jul 16, 6:39PM EDT
http://seekingalpha.com/news/2634955-google-now-up-over-10-percent-cost-cuts-mobile-youtube-growth-discussed-on-cc
More
Markets Heard on the Street
By Dan Gallagher WSJ
July 16, 2015 7:21 p.m. ET
Google Gets Starting Bonus
Google’s new finance chief is making the right noises on costs, but there is much still to prove
In closing that gap, Ms. Porat has her work cut out for her. At Morgan Stanley, she presided over a cost-cutting program so stringent that employees were nervous about using their BlackBerrys. In Google, she has joined a Silicon Valley paragon that still provides free gourmet meals for the thousands of new hires who join its ranks each year.
On the conference call, Ms. Porat said Google remained committed to big ideas and big growth but added that “pursuing revenue growth is not inconsistent with expense management.” It is an encouraging message but not easy to pull off and yet to substantiated—which makes the stock’s recent surge look premature.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/google-gets-starting-bonus-1437088861
Hero for at least one day!
http://investors.morningstar.com/ownership/shareholders-concentrated.html?t=GOOG&region=usa&culture=en-US&ownerCountry=USA

Apparently the author does not care for high yield.
FAGIX........80% hy bonds/20% equity
15 year annualized at 7.9%, which includes the market melt.

The backdoor entry to funds that are closed to new investors is to buy a share off someone and have that person transfer that share into your account. There are also other ways. Click here: bloomberg.com/bw/stories/2001-11-04/unlocking-the-door-to-closed-funds

In addition to the obstacles mentioned in the article, some funds require you to have continuously owned shares from the closure date (or on the closure date). For example, according to its prospectus eligible purchasers of MDISX (class Z shares) include:

• Current shareholders who owned shares of any Mutual Series Fund on October 31, 1996
  
• Shareholders who owned shares of any Mutual Series Fund through a broker-dealer or service agent omnibus account on October 31, 1996

FYI: Fidelity Investments, which has some $1.8 trillion invested in its mutual funds, needs no introduction. But if earning cash from your investment portfolio is a chief goal, it is worth revisiting the behemoth's income-oriented lineup
Read more at http://www.kiplinger.com/article/investing/T041-C009-S003-best-fidelity-funds-for-income-investors.html#UxFDyh3XH0xM8udu.99
Regards,
Ted
http://www.kiplinger.com/article/investing/T041-C009-S003-best-fidelity-funds-for-income-investors.html

FYI: Some headlines from developing markets on a day in which the Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF (VWO) rose 1.2%.
Regards,
Ted
http://blogs.barrons.com/emergingmarketsdaily/2015/07/16/emerging-market-headlines-greece-etf-sinks-venezuela-default-likely/tab/print/

@Maurice - you're right, I missed your question about an inherited IRA. I would have sworn the rollover could not be done (as, e.g. you cannot roll over an inherited IRA into your own, unless you inherited as a spouse). But a little searching turned up IRS Notice 2008-51, which seems to say this is okay:

The distributions must be from an IRA or Roth IRA to an HSA owned by the individual who owns the IRA or Roth IRA or, in the case of an inherited IRA, for whom the IRA or Roth IRA is maintained (i.e., a qualified HSA funding distribution cannot be made to an HSA owned by any other person, including the individual’s spouse).

Regarding HSAs that are worth opening, my brief look at Saturna suggests to me that it has improved a bit, and is very good if you want to invest entirely in mutual funds. They offer several NTF funds (not a huge number, but enough) from a modest set of families. The main downside IMHO is that you must make one transaction each year to avoid a $12.50 fee, and you have to hold an NTF fund at least 180 days. (So you have to remember to do a transaction between July and December every year if you're not buying/selling for other reasons.)
if you're just looking for a higher yielding "bank" account, you can get 1% (or more, for higher balances) at a few credit unions. (Link is to a listing of top paying HSA accounts; you'll need to configure for your state and balance amount.)

I share Old Joe's puzzlement over the GMO forecast that seems to decouple both Timber and Emerging Markets from US equity returns.
For example, correlation coefficients between US equity and Emerging Markets in the past have been as high as 0.8. Recently it has dropped some to roughly 0.6. That's still reasonable coupling. Emerging markets depend on prosperity in the developed nations.
In GMO's world, something has changed. I'm not familiar with their analyses methods. Why the current decoupling? These are very smart investors.
Best Wishes.

I'm sure their reasons are strictly valuation based:
US markets valuations from the WSJ:

Emerging Markets valuations per M*, from the Vanguard Emerging Markets Stock Index Fund:

FYI: (I wonder where I've heard that before?)
Bond veteran Dan Fuss, vice chairman of investment firm Loomis Sayles, said on Thursday that it was still highly likely the Federal Reserve could delay raising rates until early next year.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/16/investing-loomis-rates-idUSL2N0ZW2F920150716

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
WSJ Slant:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-stock-futures-rise-as-greek-uncertainty-ebbs-1437049167
Bloomberg Slant:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-07-16/u-s-index-futures-climb-on-greek-vote-before-goldman-earnings
Reuters Slant;
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/16/us-markets-stocks-idUSKCN0PQ14220150716
MarketWatch Slant;
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/wall-street-set-for-higher-open-after-greek-vote-2015-07-16/print
WSJ Markets At A Glance:
http://markets.wsj.com/us
Sector Tracker:
http://www.sectorspdr.com/sectorspdr/tools/sector-tracker
Current Futures: (Positive)
http://finviz.com/futures.ashx

Well a million isn't what it used to be.
Year = 2015
1965 = $7,549,365.08
1975 = $4,420,167.29
1985 = $2,210,083.64
So pick a year and then ask the question what percentage of the population has the equivalent amount now.
That would tell us more insight into what is going on.
http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=1,000,000.00&year1=1985&year2=2015
As to retirement planning the 1 million number doesn't mean much.
Yes, a 4% withdraw rate is doable on 1 mil but not a Lifestyle of the Rich and Famous.
With 1 mill and $25K social security, you could live well in most parts of the USA on $65K. But even with that, it will be reduced by taxes.
$5 Million Is the New $1 Million: But Can You Save Your Way to 'Wealthy'?
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2013/09/10/retirement-savings-millionaire-wealthy/
---------------
If I only had 1 Mil. I would not have retired at 51. A small pension with a imputed (7%) values of $200,000 at 60 and SS of 25K at 63 with an imputed value of $357,000 gave me the confidence it could be done. 1 Mil alone for a single person isn't enough - it could be done but, why constrain yourself that way if you can help it.
I think it is time we retire the 1 mil. as some sort of goal.

Hi Dex,
This from a 2015 article by CNBC's Robert Frank:
"The study, from market research and consulting firm Spectrem Group, found that there are now 10.1 million households in the U.S. with $1 million or more in investable assets, excluding the value of their primary residence."

Another aspect in this is the word 'household' I tend to think in terms of an individual. A 'household' could be 2 people. It could have taken 2 people to get to 1 mil. Again, if it is 2 people that 1 mil. means even less since that money needs to support two people.