The demand for safe assets dominated asset flows in February. The main beneficiary of the risk-off trade last month: foreign government bonds in developed markets. Citigroup’s World Gov’t Bond Index ex-US surged 4.0% in February (unhedged US dollar total return). The gain also pushed this slice of the fixed-income market into first place for the trailing one-year period with a 1.7% increase.
Bonds generally were in high demand last month. The only corner of fixed income that didn’t deliver a gain in February: foreign junk.
As for equities, all the broad categories lost ground last month.

http://www.capitalspectator.com/major-asset-classes-february-2016-performance-review/
Also. Returns from M*
SPDR® Nuveen S&P High Yield Municipal Bond Etf HYMB
1 mo +0.62 Ytd +0.76 1 Yr +3.54 3 Yr +3.76
Alerian M L P Etf AMLP
1 mo +0.77 Ytd -13.03 1Yr -34.75 3 Yr - 9.60
U.S. Gasoline & Crude Oil Prices Move Higher
BY TOM MOELLER MARCH 1, 2016 @haver.com
Petroleum prices stabilized last week following steady declines since the June highs. Regular gasoline averaged $1.78 per gallon last week (-27.9% y/y)
Prices for natural gas continued to decline last week to $1.78 per mmbtu (-42.2% y/y), and were $1.62 yesterday.
More Weekly Energy Prices as of 02/29/16 @ below link

http://www.haver.com/comment/comment.html?c=160301A.html
Related.New markets for American Nat Gas

The Asia Vision LNG carrier ship sits docked at the Cheniere Energy Inc. terminal in this aerial photograph taken over Sabine Pass, Texas, U.S., on Wednesday, Feb. 24, 2016. Cheniere said in a statement last month. Cheniere Energy Inc. expects to ship the first cargo of liquefied natural gas on Wednesday to Brazil with another tanker to be loaded a few days later, marking the historic start of U.S. shale exports Photographer: Lindsey Janies/Bloomberg via Getty Images
The United States is shipping gas overseas for the first time in decades, but private companies sell to the highest bidder — and not just to the countries Washington might want for geopolitical reasons.
BY KEITH JOHNSONFEBRUARY 29, 2016
http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/02/29/americas-natural-gas-exports-wont-be-enough-to-blunt-putins-energy-weapon/
Oil News
ExxonMobil’s record bond sale. ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM) made a big move with a $12 billion bond sale, its largest on record. The world’s largest publically-traded oil company could use the cash to buy up assets on the cheap. Exxon held its cards close to the vest, saying that the proceeds would be used for “funding for working capital, acquisitions, capital expenditures, refinancing a portion of our existing commercial paper borrowings and other business opportunities.” ExxonMobil still has a AAA credit rating, one of the few companies in existence to have the highest rating possible, but S&P issued a “negative” rating in early February.
Saudi cash reserves fall. Saudi foreign reserves continue to dwindle as the OPEC nation tries to shore up its finances and maintain its currency peg. In January, Saudi Arabia’s foreign exchange dipped below $600 billion for the first time in four years, according to the latest estimates. The government is burning through cash reserves at a rate of about $14.3 billion per month.
http://oilprice.com/newsletters/free/opintel01032016

Trivia on the Valeant/Philidor connection:
- Philidor was Valeant's only specialty pharmacy
- After all hell broke loose last October, it still took Valeant three months to terminate that relationship (Valeant products were still being sold through Philidor for months)
- Valeant appears to have moved its business to Walgreens http://www.valeantaccessprogram.com/

Class B shares seem like one of the most misunderstood, maligned vehicles around. (I'm not defending load funds here, just looking at reputation vs. numbers.)

FYI: Class B Shares:: (Source Investopedia)
[...]
Cons
Long Time Horizon Required - If you withdraw funds within a certain period of time (typically five to eight years) you are a charged a back-end or deferred sales charge.
No Breakpoints - Class B shares do not provide breakpoints on the deferred sales charge, so regardless of how much you invest, there is no discount on these charges.
Higher Expense Ratios - Class B shares charge higher expense ratios than both Class A and C shares, until shares are eligible to be converted to Class A.

One of those cons is accurate, and IMHO the only objective negative to B shares (relative to A shares) - they don't give you a break in your commissions (loads) for larger portfolios.
There is one other downside but that has to do with psychology (marketing), not numbers. B shares are/were sold as "putting 100% of your money to work", implying that they were superior to A shares where you pay a load up front. Because of the higher 12b-1 fee (embedded load), B shares put some of that money to work for your broker, not for you. The structure made for an easier sale, but no clear advantage (or disadvantage) relative to A shares.
That gets us to the first dubious con: long time horizon required because of the deferred sales charge. A shares charge the full load up front. B shares amortize that load over several years, by charging an extra 0.75% (typical) in 12b-1 fees annually. Once the load has been amortized, they convert to A shares. If you sell early, then you have to pay that part of the load that hasn't yet been amortized - that's the deferred sales charge. The bottom line is that you wind up taking the same hit on return (due to the load) as with A shares whether you hold B shares for a long time (in which case you've paid the whole load over time), or whether you sell them quickly (in which case you've paid most of the load in a lump sum - just like A shares).
The other con listed - that B shares tend to have higher expenses than C shares - is just wrong. B and C shares typically have the same ERs, give or take a few basis points. That's because they both generally add a 1.00% 12b-1 fee and have the same management fees. The rest ("other expenses") is noise.
A good example is Fidelity Advisor Freedom® 2005 Fund. Here's M*'s purchase page, that shows the ERs for each share class. It is 1.00% for B shares and for C shares. This fund is great for showing the pure difference between share class expenses. As a Fidelity fund of funds it charges 0.00% for the fund; any extra fee is due strictly to the share class sales structure (i.e. load - front, back, level or combo).
The summary prospectus shows the ERs as 1.56%, because that includes the cost of the underlying funds (0.56%).
To reiterate, I am not defending load funds. I am saying that B shares are usually misrepresented (both on the positive side as I noted above, and on the negative side as by Investopedia).

Works for me but I choose to own the individual companies rather than either of those two elf's who's blended yields give me pause.

Likewise. So far, this year is similar to 2011 where the dividend payers provided the positive ballast for the equity holdings. But...it's still early.

FYI: Every year the National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO) puts out a study on the investment performance of college endowment funds. It’s a comprehensive report that goes through the asset allocations and performance numbers of funds ranging from a few million dollars to funds with many billions of dollars (in the latest report there were over 800 funds in total).
Institutional investors are obsessed peer comparisons so they all eagerly await these performance numbers to see how they stacked up against the competition.
Regards,
Ted
http://awealthofcommonsense.com/2016/02/bogle-vs-golitath/
2 0 1 5 N A C U B O C o m m o n Fu n d S t u d y Of E n d o w m e n t s
http://www.nacubo.org/Documents/2015 NCSE Press Release FINAL.pdf

Depends on your age. One of the best moves that an investor in the "young" demographic of the investment "lifecycle" ( age 20 - 50 ) can make for the long term, is to build a core position in small cap value universe. Academic and empirical evidence has shown that SCV has outperformed all other stock universes over 90 years https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kToqLWLISRk4n4YnSzv1hT5kBN54l5CvhwGgDwJKPJI/edit?usp=sharing. Prior to the 21st century, it was difiicult to invest in specific "stock universes" , but the evolution of exchange traded investment products/funds over the past 10 years has provided many options for investing in small cap value ( one being Vanguard small cap value ( VBR )).
The use of a low transaction, quantitative tactical allocation process has produced further risk mitigated alpha vs. buy and hold. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1pQuBfbPd18ca0G-KiZc5FIWNMx0pNa87INgsLjEwuzY/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1C37CJypoxHWHB09e3g25ewOGjP83wDZhj5j6tlrLJoA/edit?usp=sharing. Current model allocation would suggest to hold off on purchases for now.

FYI: Class B Shares:: (Source Investopedia)
These shares are classified by their back-end or contingent deferred sales charge. These shares are typically good for investors with little investment cash and a long investment horizon.
Pros
No Front-End Fees - Your entire initial investment contribution earns interest income.
Deferred Sales Charges - The longer you hold the shares, the lower your deferred sales charge.
Conversion to Class A - Class B shares automatically convert to Class A shares after a certain period of time. This is beneficial because Class A shares have a lower yearly expense ratio than Class B shares (see below).
Cons
Long Time Horizon Required - If you withdraw funds within a certain period of time (typically five to eight years) you are a charged a back-end or deferred sales charge.
No Breakpoints - Class B shares do not provide breakpoints on the deferred sales charge, so regardless of how much you invest, there is no discount on these charges.
Higher Expense Ratios - Class B shares charge higher expense ratios than both Class A and C shares, until shares are eligible to be converted to Class A.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.mfwire.com/common/artprint2007.asp?storyID=53556&wireid=2

FYI: The first two months of 2016 have now come and gone, and below we provide a nice snapshot of how various asset classes have performed this year using key ETFs traded on U.S. exchanges. For each ETF, we include its February, year-to-date, and year-over-year percentage change. ETFs on the left side of the matrix are mostly U.S. equity related, while ETFs on the right represent international equities, commodities and fixed income.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bespokepremium.com/think-big-blog/key-asset-class-performance-february-year-to-date-and-last-12-months/

FYI: It’s hard to imagine a worse time for Sequoia Fund (SEQUX), the biggest backer of Valeant Pharmaceuticals (VRX), to provide an upbeat assessment to shareholders.
Regards,
Ted
http://blogs.barrons.com/focusonfunds/2016/02/29/sequoia-fund-picked-a-bad-time-to-stick-up-for-valeant/tab/print/
M* Snapshot SEQUX:
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/sequx/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot SEQUX:
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/fund/sequx
SEQUX Is Ranked #231 In The (LCG) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
http://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/large-growth/sequoia-fund/sequx

FYI: S&P Dow Jones Indices actually maintains two indices of Dividend Aristocrats:
1. The S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index SPDAUDP, -0.91% includes the 50 S&P 500 companies that have raised their regular dividend payouts for at least 25 consecutive years. That’s the only criterion. It makes no difference how high a company’s dividend yield is. An example of an ETF tracking this index is the ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF NOBL, -0.93%
2. The S&P High-Yield Dividend Aristocrats Index SPHYDA, -0.62% includes components of the S&P Composite 1500 that have raised their dividends for at least 20 consecutive years. This is made up of 107 stocks, including all of the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats. The SPDR S&P Dividend ETF SDY, -0.72% tracks the performance of this index.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/these-dividend-aristocrat-stocks-have-risen-up-to-24-a-year-for-a-decade-2016-03-01/print

funds-newsletter.com/mar16-newsletter/mar16_new.htm

I bought it near its inception and turned $5k into >10x that before I bailed, which made me realize the intersection of skill and luck investing streaks entail, also the wisdom of holding and having conviction.

Not a melt down, but I share everybody's concern of how a fund with Romick's cash component can barely stay even with any index he may want us to consider as a benchmark.
@Mark said on January 17 in Off-Topic
Then I thought of some other fairly noteworthy melt downs involving esteemed managers: Bill Miller (LMVTX), Bill Nygren (OAKLX) and Ken Heebner (CGMFX) who I thought at one time or the other were the sharper tools in the box; and I recalled folks hanging on through the storm and vowing to sell once they got back to the even plateau.
Hence the question - does that work or do you just take your chips off the table and is there any studies that have delved into the matter. I'm quite aware of the sell decision thought process for mutual fund holdings yet sometimes leeway is granted.
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/73903/#Comment_73903
A comparison/alternative ?
Value investing vs value-based investing.I'll take some divinity with that monthly dividend,please ! I started a position with the latter earlier this year.Crescent is top 5 holding in my portfolio.Tend to appreciate @davidrmoran comment "Be aware this may be a classic bailing too soon and not sticking longterm."
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND STRATEGY:
The Fund seeks to generate equity-like returns over the long-term, take less risk than the market and avoid permanent impairment of capital.
PHILOSOPHY:
Absolute value investors. We seek genuine bargains rather than relatively attractive securities.
FPACX
http://www.fpafunds.com/crescent
A young and smaller go anywhere contender .
Investment Objective: The Fund seeks current income while maintaining the potential for capital appreciation. The Fund has significant flexibility to achieve its investment objective by primarily investing in a broad universe of income-producing securities. These securities include debt and equity securities of companies in the U.S. and other markets around the world.
Values-based investing: We aim to analyze each potential investment’s ability to operate with integrity and create value for customers, employees, the environment, and other key stakeholders. While few companies may reach these ideals in every area of their business, these principles articulate the Advisor’s ideal characteristics of good corporate behavior. The Advisor makes no guarantee that fund investments will meet any or all of these characteristics.
ETNMX
http://eventidefunds.com/our-products/#!income
http://eventidefunds.com/wp-content/uploads/Eventide-Multi-Asset-Income-Fund-Fact-Sheet-12-31-2015.pdf

Investors have to take charge and be their own smart beta managers. Just using a simple empirically based moving average switch strategy on an index and a bond fund has produced risk mitigated alpha above buy and hold.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XwZjcWy7KlSwA7xi0rax7nevIBCtW0Uu4UZFH-Hc1ns/edit?usp=sharing
And if that's too complicated, then try a 60 / 40 balanced portfolio of vanguard specialized Health and Vanguard long bond https://portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&allocation1_1=60&showYield=false&endDate=02%2F28%2F2016&allocation2_1=40&startYear=1985&lastMonth=12&symbol1=VGHCX&endYear=2016&frequency=4&symbol2=VUSTX&s=y&inflationAdjusted=true&annualOperation=0&rebalanceType=1&initialAmount=10000&timePeriod=4&firstMonth=1&annualAdjustment=0&reinvestDividends=true&annualPercentage=0.0
As the finance industry is incentivized to sell "product and charge fees, there is a dearth of incentive and funding for quantitative research. Even something as simple as the moving average strategy would slip through the "echelons".

I have OAKBX along with AMRMX and others in my 401. OAKBX compared to AMRMX has worse numbers than the LV fund over the last year. In a downturn I would think the allocation fund would do better than a stock fund. I am considering culling OAKBX and splitting between stocks and bond fund choices myself. It seems as if the bond portion has added to the loses, not acted as a buffer of late. MAPOX and JABAX have both had recent manager changes while GLRBX has better performance numbers in the short term it is not considered a moderate allocation fund. Maybe the managers of FPACX and OAKBX have seen their best years.

@Shostakovich: Thanks, but this took place over a year and a half ago on 10/1/14.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.roycefunds.com/news/2014/10/steven-mcboyle-joins-charlie-dreifus-royce-special-equity-funds
Steven McBoyle Bio:
http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/person.asp?personId=10442085&privcapId=28113085

Fascinating. I just graphed slightly less than 10y performance for SP500, VTI (oddly identical), vs RSP (SP500 equal-weight) and VIG (div), which both outperformed SP500 and VTI, not hugely, by <5% and >3%.
VIG had the least dip 08-09, RSP the worst.
Very different story the last 1y and 3y (and not the same story).
Fwiw.
Happy thus far w smart beta DSENX, CAPE plus secret bond sauce. (CAPE not mentioned in the Glushkov article.) Sure hope it continues.

FYI: Last week, Financial Advisor magazine published a story announcing that one of the mutual fund industry’s oldest funds, run by one of its most enduring fund managers, Kenneth Heebner, went out of business when Natixis Global Asset Management liquidated its CGM Advisor Targeted Equity Fund.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.etf.com/sections/index-investor-corner/swedroe-star-manager-loses-luster?nopaging=1
M* Snapshot CGMFX:
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/cgmfx/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot CGMFX:
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/Fund/CGMFX?countrycode=US
CGMFX Is Ranked #240 In The (LCB) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
http://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/large-blend/cgm-focus-fund/cgmfx

FYI: (Copy & Paste from Amazon.Com)
How does one spot the bottom of a bear market? What brings a bear to its end?
There are few more important questions to be answered in modern finance. Financial market history is a guide to understanding the future. Looking at the four occasions when US equities were particularly cheap - 1921, 1932, 1949 and 1982 - Russell Napier sets out to answer these questions by analysing every article in the "Wall Street Journal" from either side of the market bottom.
In the 70,000 articles he examines, one begins to understand the features which indicate that a great buying opportunity is emerging.
By looking at how markets really did work in these bear-market bottoms, rather than theorising how they should work, Napier offers investors a financial field guide to making the best financial provisions for the future.
This new edition includes a brand new preface from the author.
(Scroll And Click On Download)
http://www.moneylifeshow.com/highlights.asp

I usually rebalance the major areas (cash, bonds, stocks & other assets) of my portfolio when one of them gets to be plus or minus five percent form it's target with the exception being cash.
Example. My current target allocation to equities is 50%. With this, should equities rise to above 52.5% (105% of it's target) during a normal market cycle then I'll trim equities. However, if we are in a seasonal trend then I'll, at times, delay the rebalance towards the end of the seasonal cycle usually following some technicals looking for a breakdown in the trend. With this, I can either rebalance by the calendar or anytime by a break down in the trend. Should equities reach their upper limit within their asset allocation (currently set at 55%) then this requires a rebalance back to at least the 52.5% level and when the seasonal strategy concludes I'll generally rebalance back to the traget allocation of 50% unless equities are selling at a low price to earnings multiple and I'll position towards their mid to high allocation range for me.
Generally, if stocks are selling at a high price to earnings ratio valuation then I'll position towards the low end of my allocation range (45%) and if they are selling at a low price to earnings ratio valuation then I'll position towards my high allocation range (55%).
I am thinking there are many triggers that can warrant a rebalance incuding a need for cash. The above are just a couple of the things that can trigger a rebalance for me with most of them being driven by both stock and bond market valuations. In addition, I'll generally buy major downdrafts in the stock market and sell some equities off as the market recovers keeping within my allowable asset allocation range.
I call this working within one's asset allocation and somewhat follows Biblical beliefs in there is a time to plant and a time to harvest. Through the years this strategy has worked well for me.
Below is a description of my sleeve management system along with my portfolio's configuration. Note, there has been some recent fund movement within the sleeves.
Old_Skeet's Sleeve Management System (02/26/2016)
Here is a brief description of my sleeve system which I organized to help better manage the investments that were held in five accounts along with my current positioning. The accounts consist of a taxable account, a self directed ira account, a 401k account, a profit sharing account and a health savings account plus two bank accounts. With this I came up with four investment areas. They are a cash area which consist of two sleeves … an investment cash sleeve and a demand cash sleeve. The next area is the income area which consists of two sleeves. … a fixed income sleeve and a hybrid income sleeve. Then there is the growth & income area which has more risk associated with it than the income area and it consist of four sleeves … a global equity sleeve, a global hybrid sleeve, a domestic equity sleeve and a domestic hybrid sleeve. An finally there is the growth area, where the most risk in the portfolio is found and it consist of five sleeves … a global sleeve, a large/mid cap sleeve, a small/mid cap sleeve, a specialty & theme sleeve along with a ballast & spiff investment sleeve. Each sleeve consists of three to six funds (in most cases) with the size and the weight of each sleeve can easily be adjusted, from time-to-time, by adjusting the number of funds and amounts held. By using the sleeve system one can get a better picture of their overall investment picture and weightings by sleeve and area. In addition, I have found it beneficial to xray each fund, each sleeve, each investment area, and the portfolio as a whole quarterly. Again, weightings can be adjusted form time-to-time as to how I might be reading the markets and wish to weight accordingly. All funds pay their distributions to the cash area of the portfolio with the exception being those in my 401k, profit sharing, and health savings accounts where reinvestment occurs. With the other accounts paying to the cash area builds the cash area of the portfolio to meet the portfolio’s monthly cash disbursement amount with the residual being left for new investment opportunity. In addition, most all buy/sell trades settle from or to the cash area with some nav exchanges between funds taking place.
Here is how I have my asset allocation broken out in percent ranges, by area. My current target allocations are cash 20%, income 30%, growth & income 35%, and growth 15%. I do an Instant Xray analysis on the portfolio quarterly (sometimes monthly) and make asset weighting adjustments as I feel warranted based upon my assessment of the market, my risk tolerance, cash needs, etc. Currently, I am about 20% in the cash area, 30% in the income area, 35% in the growth & income area and 15% in the growth area. When a rebalance is warranted I'll trim first from the ballast & spiff sleeve.
Cash Area (Weighting Range 15% to 25% with target being 20%)
Demand Cash Sleeve… (Cash Distribution Accrual & Future Investment Accrual)
Investment Cash Sleeve … (Savings & Time Deposits)
Income Area (Weighting Range 25% to 35% with target being 30%)
Fixed Income Sleeve: GIFAX, LALDX, THIFX, LBNDX, NEFZX & TSIAX
Hybrid Income Sleeve: CAPAX, CTFAX, FKINX, ISFAX, JNBAX & PGBAX
Growth & Income Area (Weighting Range 30% to 40% with target being 35%)
Global Equity Sleeve: CWGIX, DEQAX & EADIX
Global Hybrid Sleeve: BAICX, CAIBX & TIBAX
Domestic Equity Sleeve: ANCFX, FDSAX, INUTX, NBHAX, SPQAX & SVAAX
Domestic Hybrid Sleeve: ABALX, AMECX, DDIAX, FRINX, HWIAX & LABFX
Growth Area (Weighting Range 10% to 20% with target being 15%)
Global Sleeve: ANWPX, PGROX & THOAX
Large/Mid Cap Sleeve: AGTHX, IACLX & SPECX
Small/Mid Cap Sleeve: AJVAX, PCVAX & PMDAX
Specialty & Theme Sleeve: LPEFX, PGUAX, TOLLX, NEWFX & THDAX
Ballast & Spiff Sleeve: FISCX, VADAX & VNVAX
Total Number of Mutual Fund Positions = 47