John Rekenthaler has been discussing some recent research that shows that Jeremy "Stocks for the Long Run" Siegel might, perhaps, have been relying on some selective, flawed and limited data. Siegel says that, in the long run, stocks have a 6.9% annualized real return. Scholars who did some of the hard archaeological work (for example, going through 19th century newspapers issue by issue to reconstruct the fate of long-dead stocks which aren't reflected in Siegel's data) find that the dominance of stocks is more limited, and more time dependent, than Siegel's faith would lead us to accept.
Nothing here is a definitive rejection of the pro-equity argument. More, it offers a heads up that it's entirely possible that stocks will lag and bonds will lead ... oh, between now and 2050?
JR's closing from today's essay:

The case for the ongoing dominance of stock is less overwhelming than we once believed. That observation bears consideration, especially for retirees tempted by advice that they invest heavily in equities. Such counsel is not necessarily wrong, depending upon individual circumstances (in particular, wealth levels), but it often is coupled with the implicit assumption that stocks will inevitably beat bonds over the long term.
Maybe. If not, though, retirees do not get a second bite at the financial apple. That lesson is very much worth pondering.
Note: When I sent Professor McQuarrie (Edward McQuarrie of Santa Clara University) the reader’s comment (NB: someone responded to JR's first essay on the subject by pointing out that mortality rates from surgery fell, and fell permanently so perhaps all of that old stuff from long ago reflects an age now forever past), he forwarded me the following response:
“My take is in the article’s title. Sometimes stock returns will soar far above bond returns, as after the war. That outperformance can be sustained for decades. Other times stocks will lag bonds, for decades. There’s no rhyme or reason to it, and in all likelihood, no predictability over the individual investor’s limited time horizon of several decades.
“As for your reader’s clever riposte, here is my redo: ‘The rate of death from disease and epidemics stayed at a relatively high and constant level from 1793 to 1920. Then advances in modern medicine fundamentally and permanently altered the trajectory ... or so it seemed until COVID-19 hit in February 2020.’”

For what interest it holds.

This chart suggests that utilizing the income received from dividend paying stocks may be prudent during retirement for portfolios concentrated in stock investments if a somewhat consistent stream of income is important. Any thoughts on this?

The areas shaded gray show periods when the real value of the dividends from the S&P 500 decreased. Notice that they did not decrease much and decreased far less than the real index value. During those periods, a retirement strategy based on those dividends would have been far more successful than one based on total returns.

Relying On Income From Dividend Paying Stocks

From a Rondure email:
January 10, 2024
Dear Shareholders:
After careful consideration, Rondure Global Advisors has decided to close the Rondure Overseas Fund (ticker: ROSIX/ROSOX) on February 8, 2024. It was a difficult decision, but after weighing the pros and cons, we believe it is in the best interest of the Fund and its shareholders.
Since the Fund’s launch in 2017, its assets have consistently been insufficient to generate appropriate economies of scale, resulting in higher operating costs. We ultimately concluded that the Fund’s continued operation was not economically viable for Fund shareholders or the firm. We apologize for any inconvenience its closure may cause you.
As an investor in the Overseas Fund, you have two options prior to February 8, 2024: 1) You may redeem your account or 2) you may exchange into our emerging markets strategy, the Rondure New World Fund (ticker: RNWIX/RNWOX). If neither is done prior to February 8, you will receive a check shortly after the 8th for the value of your account. Please note all options are considered taxable events. Click here for more information: https://go.rondureglobal.com/e/896781/rondure-/dj5r8/362026087/h/cfYqdOa-zsupscok_7riMVFCZxW8BcWN3hh_tubmHEg
We at Rondure look forward to building on our core strength in emerging markets investing as we devote additional resources to the growth and development of our emerging market strategies going forward.
Thank you in advance for your understanding and support.
Best regards,
The Rondure Global Advisors Team

Many government retirement plans offer up to 25% in self directed mutual funds at outside firm such as Fidelity. CA state retirement plans are a mess with agenda that have nothing to do with best risk adjusted return. My wife worked several years for state - I need to move over to something like Fidelity balanced.

To clarify: I was referring to *pensions* that employees only pay into but have no control over how it's invested - those are the places witih the fat allocation to expensive hedge funds/PE black boxes. My state (MD) 403(b) also has the brokerage window where I could dump 0-99% of my 403 now into whatever fund I wanted to offered at TIAA or Fido ... but I'm happy with the one LCV fund I'm in now at TIAA, so I haven't used that.
I could probably buy into one or more 'alternative' type funds that way if I wanted to, but why?

@Tarwheel again I agree completely.
It's also why when I joined my state university system I avoided the pension plan and went for the self-directed 403(b). Many state pensions have huge positions in various (and costly) hedge/PE investments that I want no part of ... plus I don't trust the investing savvy of the political appointees overseeing the pension's investment, many of whom live and die by whatever the Wall Street favorite 'thinking' is at the time regarding allocations.
As I said at the time, if I'm going to lose or make money, I want to be the one responsible for it.
ETA: Somewhat off-topic but IIRC the Nevada State Pension is entirely in Vanguard funds. A WSJ article a few years ago talked about how 'boring' the Pension Chief's job was. :)

Many government retirement plans offer up to 25% in self directed mutual funds at outside firm such as Fidelity. CA state retirement plans are a mess with agenda that have nothing to do with best risk adjusted return. My wife worked several years for state - I need to move over to something like Fidelity balanced.

Throwing some $$$ at Tenaris (ADR) TS. Deep water oil drilling, specialty horizontal shale pipes. Thinking about all those companies in north Alberta, making money by defacing Canada, around Ft. McMurray, plus the offshore stuff around Guyana. And elsewhere, of course.
[url]https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/TS?qsearchterm=ts[/url]
Limit order, just a few cents below the Wednesday closing price, yesterday. 14-day RSI pretty low. At current price, dividend is 3.4%. Current share price tonight: $32.25 and the 1-year target = $44.08. We shall see.....
The funds came from an incremental routine January withdrawal from the IRA.

@BaluBalu
In addition to RPGAX, TRP uses hedge funds in some of their Spectrum allocation funds, such as TRPBX. In the last two bear markets, TRPBX (which I owned for many years) did not perform any better than most comparable funds. I owned TRPBX for about 20 years, and its performance has steadily declined. I’m not sure exactly when they started using hedge funds, but I think it’s been at least five years and its performance has been below average over that period.
I just checked their website, and TRPBX had about 4% of its holdings in Blackstone hedge fund in 2023, and perhaps others. At times, it’s held as much as 10% in hedge funds, if I recall correctly, or perhaps that’s the amount they limit it too. Anyway, that’s one of the reasons I dropped the fund after many years.
According to the TRP website, RPGAX has about 7.5% in Blackstone and PRSIX about 6%.

From Citywire - seems Sharat Shroff is finally leaving Pacific Tiger, which has had horrible performance, unable to beat its benchmark for the trailing 3, 5 and 10 year periods. A bit abrupt, this was announced in mid december and he'll be out the door by year end. Sounds like it was urgent to get him out as soon as possible. Tiger is easily matthews biggest fund so a bit surprised there wasn't a smoother and longer transition.
John Paul Lech, lead manager of matthews flagship emerging markets fund is also leaving as well as long time Japan manager Taizo Ishida. Both left Dec 19th.
I thought the last 4 or so years were bad for Matthews, starting with the departure of Kenichi Amaki, Tiffany Hsiao and Beini Zhou, but this has to be the most turmoil I've seen in my 30 years in the business. Word on the street is previous CIO Robert Horrocks was booted late 2023 as well, and the new CIO Sean Taylor is based in Hong Kong and not relocating to the San Francisco headquarters where most of the portfolio managers are based. How that is supposed to work out is beyond me.
What a mess that keeps getting messier. I wouldn't be surprised if we see the rest of Matthews PMs get lifted out soon or leave. I have no idea why they'd stay at this point. Word to the wise...stay clear. This firm could be going to zero very soon.
https://citywire.com/selector/news/matthews-asia-s-pacific-equity-fund-under-review-as-veteran-exits/a2432941

Would the class view it more important to work with an excellent CPA rather than an advisor? I do.
Also, I remember a convo I had with my VP Engr in the late 90s. He and his wife were in their mid 50s at the time and had done well in their careers....told me that he saw an advisor who was like 20 years younger than him and had like 5% personal wealth than he had. VP felt that he should charge for his advice to the FA.... LOL.
Also, it's my firm belief that I would never take financial advice from anyone who didn't have some gray hair and who didn't have very substantial personal wealth.... just like I like my pilots to have some gray hair....

@FD100 @rforno
I have had a similar experience at Schwab with the local FAs who have been very helpful with moving money, checking on accounts and answering the phone almost immediately. They probably would have been happy to give me investment advice, if I asked. (This is in contrast to Vanguard where your local FA is a "team". Not much experience with FIDO in this regard.)
The current proposal concerns a firm outside of Schwab, not a Schwab FA. The fees are similar or lower than most actively managed mutual funds, and the fees for FI are actually lower than most active bond funds.
FD100, if I had a system as reliable and apparently as successful as you do, requiring little time, I would not consider outside advice.
I have had decades of experience and have read many books about "Lazy portfolio's" "Couch Potato Portfolios" " Ivy League Portfolio", but these tend to work best for the "Accumulation" phase of life, where you can "set it up and forget it"
The computer generated portfolios of Fido, Schwab and Vanguard are similar to these "Couch potatoes" but just more complex and rest on assumptions that most people are not aware of ( and may not agree with) , especially referring to their large % of foreign stocks recently. With bond coupons back up, the 60/40 seem more reliable, but 2022 was a disaster for people who suddenly found they had 15 to 20% less money then they thought on retirement.
For a long winded defense of the above read the thread on Bogleheads
https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=412507&sid=16550dda64788e8838fa5d7004273d09
Now in retirement, my wife and I need advice on Roth conversions, withdrawal rates estate planning and are trying to avoid large drawdowns early on while maximizing income and return. I have investigated all of this and came up with similar answers, but it takes a lot of time.
While I am in good health, I believe as Lynn does , that my wife needs an honest and reliable firm to deal with the investments if I get hit by a bus, with more expert personalized advice than I think you will get at Vanguard. Fidelity seemed to offer a computer driven portfolio for a higher fee.
I have tried other advisors over the years with fractions of our money, and found them to charge 1.25% to put you in their firm's Bond funds and use a 60/40 portfolio to track the SP500. This is quite different than what I am looking for here.
I am starting small and will see how it goes.

The Wayback Machine provides a few precious glimpses into what the most discussed topics were in the past. Unfortunately, only a small handful of dates were available when I looked (about 4 or 5 dates per year). Below are 3 I selected spanning a 7-8 month period beginning in November 2022. If we are collectively some type of voice of the prevailing sentiment (I believe we are) than there may possibly be investment as well as amusement value. You can actually click on a good number of the threads (but not all of them) and pull up the thread for a deeper dive into the discussions.
if you exclude the adinifinitum threads like Wall Street Week, Wealthtrack and Buying / Selling, the one with the most comments in November ‘22 was: ”Steady rising yields in CDs and Treasuries” (106 comments).
November 11, 2022 https://web.archive.org/web/20221110083949/https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussions
February 7, 2023 https://web.archive.org/web/20230207222319/https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussions
June 1, 2023 https://web.archive.org/web/20230601021702/https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussions

MSNBC chart today shows that BA stock price has lost a cumulative 35% over the last five years. I recall visiting the factory prior to that decline. The tour guide touted the then-high share price as evidence of the company’s excellence. Sometimes it does not pay to hold a blue chipper for the long haul.

There was talk a while back about the pros and cons of either Fidelity, Vanguard or Schwab's in house financial advisors. Many of us worry our partners will be left floundering if anything happens to us suddenly. My wife has no interest in managing our big picture finances, although she is a genius on the little stuff.
@lynnbolin2021 probably did the most investigation and chose Fidelity and Vanguard, which use mostly mutual funds at fees of 0.3% to 0.5%. I have shied away from Vanguard having such poor results with their paperwork and accounts handling. My talks with Fidelity indicated they used many mutual funds in what seems like a computer driven process. Schwab will set up an "Intelligent Portfolio" in the same manner with dozens of ETFs, none of which seem to be their best ETFs in that category, and is heavily weighted to international equities.
I have thoroughly investigated Schwab's financial planning process using their recommended "Wealth Enhancement Group". This is the11th largest ( by AUM) money management firm in the US, and seems to buy up smaller ( ? less successful firms).
They have produced some high quality projections about Roth Conversions and cash withdrawals for us for free, hoping we will sign on.
They recommend a portfolio of dividend growth stocks that has a very good track record, equivalent or better than SCHD with slightly less risk. The fees are higher than SCHD's rock bottom ( 0.06%) but no more than a lot of actively managed funds.
Anybody use this platform as Schwab?

M* now likes allocation 60-40. Some "naysayers" were at M*.
Naysayers Were Wrong About the 60/40 Portfolio. Here’s Why.
After a disastrous 2022, it turned out not to be dead after all.
https://www.morningstar.com/portfolios/why-naysayers-were-wrong-6040-portfolio

ROSOX / ROSIX
Morningstar 1* / 2*, Negative
Firm https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/rosix/parent
From Barron's 5/22/21:
VALUE has lagged badly for so long, that it is risky to pick the NEXT GENERATION of value hunters. But that didn’t stop Barron’s from coming up with the following list (all have 10+ years of career ahead of them).
.....
Laura GERITZ, 49, Rondure Global (RNWOX, ROSOX). Quality-contrarian looks for high returns and free cash flows.
Rondure family will now have only EM RNWOX / RNWIX, 3* / 4*. Negative. It has received several favorable mentions in Barron's.
Interesting that Barron's put Geritz in the list of upcoming value managers, but her style in both of her funds is growth or blend.

Wow!
Laura Geritz received many accolades in the press before and after she founded Rondure Global.
According to M*, Rondure Overseas Fund only has $9.5 Mil AUM.
As TheShadow mentioned, probably not worth the effort...
Rondure New World Fund still remains with $163.1 Mil AUM.

A company with a good reputation can rally public support when dealing with regulators. That's a major reason why monopolies advertise.
Just last month, Boeing asked the FAA to waive a safety regulation through May 2026 so that it could deliver MAX 7s. This latest hit to Boeing's safety reputation is not going to help Boeing make its case with the FAA. And it's not going to help sustain airlines' demand.

“You get our attention when you say people might get killed,” Dennis Tajer, a spokesman for American Airlines pilots, told The Seattle Times, which reported on the waiver request Friday.

https://apnews.com/article/boeing-exemption-safety-rules-max-10be423759080f64d4418019e4e4874d

Just taking a look at the investment implications here -
- ”Analysts, Unfazed By 737 Max 9 Grounding, Say Spirit And Boeing Stock Are Buys”
https://www.investors.com/news/boeing-stock-spirit-still-a-buy-with-analysts-unfazed-by-737-max-9-grounding/
- “The order, which the FAA said affected 171 aircraft, requires inspections the FAA says will take four to eight hours per aircraft.”
https://www.investors.com/news/boeing-737-max-loses-emergency-door-in-flight-eyes-turn-to-spirit/
- ”Doing some rough math … , it's likely that there are anywhere between 7,782 and 8,755 commercial planes in the air on average at any given time these days.”
https://www.travelandleisure.com/airlines-airports/number-of-planes-in-air

I responded to a comment about finding allocation funds that performed at least as well as JHQAX with lower volatility.
One can start with equity and attempt to reduce volatility in various ways. One can use options, as JHQAX does. One can add ballast (bonds and cash) via asset allocation. The allocations can be static (e.g. moderate allocation funds) or dynamic (tactical allocation). Tactical allocation is more costly and essentially by definition trades frequently. I linked to a piece documenting these attributes.
The fact that on average tactical allocation funds don't deliver does not mean tactical allocation cannot be executed successfully, just that the odds are against it. Whether by luck or skill HFSAX has beaten the odds for over a decade.
Here's another way one can match or beat JHQAX with equity and ballast. A 72/28 mix of PRWCX and cash (rebalanced annually) outperformed JHQAX 8.02% to 7.29% over the lifetime of the latter, with nearly identical volatility (8.56% vs 8.55%). Want lower volatility? Add cash. You'll reduce performance but still keep it ahead of JHQAX, so long as you don't dial up the cash too high.
“Our findings indicate that tactical allocation funds did not outperform the benchmarks, and investors would have been better off with passively managed funds that followed benchmark indexes.”
Over its lifetime, HFSAX has achieved the same return as a 51/49 mix of VFIAX / VBTLX rebalanced monthly, doing that with significantly lower volatility (6.11% vs 8.28%). Alpha? 3.73% vs. 0.45% for the blended benchmark.
As always, past performance does not guarantee future returns. 20/20 hindsight, back testing and all that.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1537140/000158064224000163/rondure-overseas_497.htm
497 1 rondure-overseas_497.htm 497
Rondure Overseas Fund
Investor Class - ROSOX
Institutional Class - ROSIX
(a series of Northern Lights Fund Trust III)
Supplement dated January 9, 2024 to
the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information dated October 20, 2023
The Board of Trustees of Northern Lights Fund Trust III (the “Board”) has concluded that it is in the best interests of the Rondure Overseas Fund (the “Fund”) and its shareholders that the Fund cease operations. The Board has determined to close the Fund and redeem all outstanding shares on or about February 8, 2024 (“Redemption Date”).
Effective immediately, the Fund will not accept any new investments, will no longer pursue its stated investment objective, and will begin liquidating its portfolio and will invest in cash equivalents such as money market funds until all shares have been redeemed. Any required distributions of income and capital gains will be distributed as soon as practicable to shareholders and reinvested in additional shares, unless you have previously requested payment in cash.
Prior to or on the Redemption Date, you may redeem your shares, including reinvested distributions, in accordance with the “How to Redeem Shares” section in the Prospectus. Unless your investment in the Fund is through a tax-deferred retirement account, a redemption is subject to tax on any taxable gains. Please refer to the “Tax Status, Dividends and Distributions” section in the Prospectus for general information. You may wish to consult your tax advisor about your particular situation.
ANY SHAREHOLDERS WHO HAVE NOT REDEEMED THEIR SHARES OF THE FUND PRIOR TO THE REDEMPTION DATE WILL HAVE THEIR SHARES AUTOMATICALLY REDEEMED AS OF THAT DATE, AND PROCEEDS WILL BE SENT TO THE ADDRESS OF RECORD. If you have questions or need assistance, please contact your financial advisor directly or the Fund at 1-855-775-3337.
This Supplement, and the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information dated October 20, 2023, provide relevant information for all shareholders and should be retained for future reference. Both the Prospectus and the Statement of Additional Information have been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, are incorporated by reference and can be obtained without charge by calling the Fund at 1-855-775-3337.