What has worked well for me and my family as I managed my parents investments while they were in retirement and that was to take no more than one half of what the portfolio's five year total return averaged. Naturally, you have to start with ample principal and live conseratively (but well) through retirement. I grew their principal and their income while they were alive while also at the same taking good care of them making sure they enjoyed life's pleasures. The result was I was indeed blessed and wound up with a nice inhertiance.
Today, I practice the same for me and my wife as I did for my parents. Actually, our income (over the past five years in retirement) has increased and now totals more than what we made during our last five years while were working full time. So, it pays to grow principal even in retirement.
I am not saying this will work for everyone. It is simply what I have done and experienced good success with. The key though is to watch what you spend but to also do some things to enjoy life along the way. And, yes we plan to leave some for our son, daughter in law and grand children as was done for us.
Indeed, we believe in passing some of it forward.

and just to give further flavor of how much stupider, and fuller of straw, it gets:
"Though the 4% rule has its flaws, it is still a reasonable starting point for retirement planning. So rather than regard it as unassailable truth, ..."
tagline:
"As the 4% rate faces the test of time, it’s clear that retirement readiness is too complex to be codified by a simple rule of thumb"
Dear God. I could never look for guidance or give money to someone as dimwitted as this.

FYI: ( Just a rule of thumb, I'm sure MJG will comment on this subject.)
n 1994, financial adviser William Bengen introduced the concept of the 4% rule, which found that retirees who withdrew 4% of their retirement portfolio balance, and then adjusted that dollar amount for inflation each year thereafter, would create a paycheck that lasted for 30 years.
Now 20 years out from the publication of Bengen’s study, experts recognize that this simple rule of thumb needs some modernization.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-4-rule-desperately-needs-to-be-modernized-2018-07-20/print

How to Invest in Zero Coupon Bonds
July 19, 2018
Zero-coupon bonds live in the investing weeds, easily ignored by ordinary investors seeking growth for college and retirement. Even fixed-income investors may pass them by, because they don't provide regular coupon payments – the interest earnings come all at once when the bond matures.
But the fact that they exist suggests they are useful to someone. Should ordinary investors take a look? How do they tend to do in times like these, with a strong economy but the threat of rising interest rates, which typically undermine interest-earning investments?
Because of that interest-rate risk, ordinary investors are probably wise to stay away for the time being, says Robert R. Johnson, principal at the Fed Policy Investment Research Group in Charlottesville, Virginia.
Zeros are purchased through a broker with access to the bond markets, or with an actively managed mutual fund or and index-style product like an exchange-traded fund.
"The idea of owning a zero makes sense when you have a target date in mind like college savings or retirement," says Travis T. Sickle, a financial planner in Tampa, Florida. "But once you look at the rates you realize they're not that great right now." – Jeff Brown
See why income investors consider zero coupon bonds for their portfolio.
From us news

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/809586/000089271218000338/hgi497.htm
497 1 hgi497.htm
Registration No. 33-11371
1940 Act File No. 811-4982
Filed Pursuant to Rule 497(e)
HEARTLAND GROUP, INC.
Heartland International Value Fund
Investor Class Shares (HINVX)
Institutional Class Shares (HNNVX)
Supplement dated July 18, 2018 to
Prospectus and Summary Prospectus,
each dated May 1, 2018
The Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Heartland Group, Inc. (the “Company”) has approved the liquidation of the Heartland International Value Fund (the “Fund”), subject to shareholder approval. Upon the recommendation of Heartland Advisors, Inc. (“Heartland”), the investment adviser to the Fund, the Board approved a Plan of Liquidation (the “Plan”) for the Fund on July 18, 2018. After considering a variety of factors, the Board concluded it was in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund be closed and liquidated as a series of the Company.
The Board also determined to close the Fund to purchases and incoming exchanges after market close on July 18, 2018. Exceptions may be made in limited circumstances when approved by the officers of the Company where it is not operationally possible or otherwise impracticable to prohibit new purchases by an account.
Although the Fund will be closed to purchases, you may continue to redeem your shares of the Fund as provided in the Fund’s prospectus or exchange your shares of the Fund for other Heartland Funds, as provided in the Fund’s prospectus. No redemption fees will be imposed by the Fund in connection with such redemptions or exchanges; however, please note that your financial intermediary may charge fees in connection with such redemptions or exchanges.
You should note that on or about July 19, 2018, the Fund will no longer actively pursue its stated investment objectives and Heartland will begin to liquidate the Fund’s portfolio. The Fund’s portfolio managers will likely increase the Fund’s assets held in cash and cash equivalents in order to prepare for the orderly liquidation of the Fund and to meet anticipated redemption requests.
Shareholders will receive a proxy statement discussing the Board’s decision to recommend the liquidation of the Fund and requesting that shareholders vote to approve the liquidation of the Fund pursuant to the Plan at a special meeting of shareholders. If the Plan is approved by shareholders, the Fund will be liquidated on or after the date of the shareholder meeting (the “Liquidation Date”). Any shareholders who have not redeemed their shares prior to the Liquidation Date will have their shares redeemed in cash and will receive one or more payments representing their proportionate interest in the net assets of the Fund as of the Liquidation Date, after the Fund has paid or provided for all taxes, expenses and any other liabilities, subject to any required withholdings. The automatic redemption of shares on the Liquidation Date will generally be treated the same as any other redemption of shares for tax purposes, so that shareholders (other than tax-qualified plans or tax-exempt accounts) will recognize gain or loss for federal income tax purposes on the redemption of their Fund shares in the liquidation. In addition, the Fund and its shareholders will bear transaction costs and tax consequences associated with the disposition of the Fund’s portfolio holdings prior to the Liquidation Date. The Fund expects to have declared and paid, by the Liquidation Date, a distribution or distributions, which, together with all previous such distributions, will have the effect of distributing to the Fund’s shareholders all of the Fund’s investment company taxable income and net capital gain, if any, realized in the taxable years ending at or prior to the Liquidation Date. The distribution or distributions may be reduced for any available capital loss carryforward and will include any additional amounts necessary to avoid federal excise tax. Shareholders should consult their tax adviser for further information about federal, state and local tax consequences relative to their specific situation. Because the Fund has been closed to new investments, including those made through the automatic reinvestment of Fund distributions, all distributions made after the date of this prospectus supplement will be paid in cash.
Important Information for Retirement Plan Investors
If you are a retirement plan investor, you should consult your tax adviser regarding the consequences of a redemption of Fund shares. If you hold your Fund shares through a tax-deferred retirement account, you should consult with your tax adviser or account custodian to determine how you may reinvest your redemption proceeds on a tax-deferred basis. If you will receive a distribution from an Individual Retirement Account (IRA) or a Simplified Employee Pension (SEP) IRA that is terminating as a result of the liquidation of the Fund, you must either roll the proceeds into another IRA within 60 days of the date of the distribution in order to avoid having to include the distribution in your taxable income for the year, if applicable, or request the distribution be made directly to another IRA or eligible retirement plan. Please note you can make only one tax-free rollover of a distribution you receive from an IRA to another (or the same) IRA in any 12-month period, regardless of the number of IRAs you own. If you receive a distribution from a 403(b)(7) custodial account (tax-sheltered account) or a Keogh account, you must roll the distribution into an eligible retirement plan within 60 days in order to avoid disqualification of the plan and inclusion of the distribution in your taxable income for the year. If you are the trustee of a qualified retirement plan or the custodian of a 403(b)(7) custodial account (tax-sheltered account) or a Keogh account, you may reinvest the proceeds in any way permitted by its governing instrument.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1548609/000089418918003759/baf-macquarie_497e.htm
497 1 baf-macquarie_497e.htm SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
BROWN ADVISORY FUNDS
Brown Advisory – Macquarie Asia New Stars Fund
(the “Fund”)
Supplement dated July 17, 2018
to the Prospectus, the Summary Prospectus and the Statement of Additional Information
dated October 31, 2017, as amended on June 15, 2018
The Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of Brown Advisory Funds (the “Trust”), based upon the recommendation of Brown Advisory LLC (the “Adviser”), the investment adviser to the Fund, has determined to close and liquidate the Fund. The Board concluded that it would be in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund be closed and liquidated as a series of the Trust effective as of the close of business on August 30, 2018. Accordingly, the Board approved a Plan of Liquidation (the “Plan”) that determines the manner in which the Fund will be liquidated.
The Board has determined to waive any applicable redemption fees and exchange fees for shares redeemed on or after July 16, 2018.
Effective July 16, 2018, in anticipation of the liquidation, the Fund is no longer accepting purchases into the Fund. In addition, the Adviser will begin an orderly transition of the portfolio to cash and cash equivalents and the Fund will no longer be pursuing its investment objective. Shareholders of the Fund may redeem their investments as described in the Fund’s Prospectus.
If you hold your shares in an IRA account, you have 60 days from the date you receive your proceeds to reinvest or “rollover” your proceeds into another IRA and maintain their tax-deferred status. You must notify the Fund’s transfer agent by telephone at 800-540-6807 (toll free) or 414-203-9064 prior to August 30, 2018, of your intent to rollover your IRA account to avoid withholding deductions from your proceeds.
Pursuant to the Plan, if the Fund has not received your redemption request or other instruction prior to August 30, 2018, your shares will be redeemed on August 30, 2018, and you will receive your proceeds from the Fund, subject to any required withholding. These proceeds will generally be subject to federal and possibly state and local income taxes if the redeemed shares are held in a taxable account, and the proceeds exceed your adjusted basis in the shares redeemed.
If the redeemed shares are held in a qualified retirement account such as an IRA, the redemption proceeds may not be subject to current income taxation. You should consult with your tax advisor on the consequences of this redemption to you.
Shareholder inquiries should be directed to the Fund at 800-540-6807 (toll free) or 414-203-9064.
Please retain this supplement for your reference.

Hello dear MFO everyone. I rarely post here (the tone is tricky to engage with) but I read often and am grateful for the many perspectives on financial health and responsibility that many share. So for that: a big thank you.
I just wanted to respond to Catch and Hank's note about people not having financial knowledge or desire to gain the knowledge. I grew up in a poor family in the Midwest. Both my parents worked hard but having money to pay the bills seemed to be what took up most of their time. Investing in the stock market wasn't remotely possible for my family which means there was almost no conversation about investing and managing monies. Flash forward and I was a young writer living in New York -- my "day job" was working as a temp ("word processing" -- remember that nostalgic term?). One of my temp assignments took me to an investment banking firm called The Portfolio Group which was a subsidiary of the old Chemical Bank -- 57th floor of Rockefeller Plaza. They invested money for wealthy individual and foundations. This was the late 1980s. I was just a guy doing word processing around a lot of conversations about millions of dollars. Some of the portfolio managers noticed that I was a curious guy (they knew I was an artist) and offered to tutor me about the stock market. They even convinced me to open an IRA, to fully fund it (it was $2,000 max in those days, I think) -- which I did and continued to do. They gave me articles to read, engaged me in conversations, and made me feel like I was someone who had the right to know more about financial/investing opportunities. That was all I needed -- someone taking an interest in me and my financial future. I've been invested through Fidelity for nearly 30 years now. And that was last temp job I ever had. I've made my living as a writer ever since (which means financially there have been some incredible years and some awful years). It also means I've been self-employed all these years and so my retirement is fully self-funded. One reason I can still do my work is because I invested fairly young and never stopped. But I needed help to not be intimidated. I was lucky to have gotten that help. I just wanted to point out that some folks come from families and places where the very idea of participating in the stock market is not possible. It isn't just laziness or disinterest. (And if anyone happens to read this from The Portfolio Group: thank you!)
Sorry for the long post. I'll now go silent again! Thank you for reading.

If you can set aside Cramer’s cartoonish on-screen persona and the fact that Jon Stewart in a face-to-face once made him look like an inept school child, the article here, written by Abigail Stevenson of CNBC (I skipped the video), seems about on par with the dozens (if not hundreds) of diverse financial analysis / advice columns that get churned out daily by our journalistic mill. One thing these writers all seem to do is inject some type of “edge” into their article to try and distinguish it from the hundreds of other competing articles (including some they may have written themselves). So Cramer / Stevenson take aim at some of mutual funds’ most obvious excesses.
One of Cramer’s shots is at the extraordinarily large number of funds. I think he has a point here. Heck, just with TRP where I’ve invested for quarter century I’m confused by the hundreds of funds and what exactly distinguishes one from another. Their latest attempt to play off the success of PRWCX with a milder income-focused version of that fund is but one example. Others have noted that they appear to have two different lines of retirement funds competing against each other for investor assets. Personally, I’m able to ignore most of that clutter and maintain a rather short list of six or seven funds which I have long held there.
And, how can one argue with his logic on fees? Of course owning individual stocks (which he suggests) rather than mutual funds would reduce the cost of being in the market. What he doesn’t say is that people invest in funds because it’s an easy (and initially cheaper) way to get the diversification they desire as compared to buying small slugs of hundreds of individual stocks. Also, through retirement plans (like the IRA) many with minimal investment knowledge are first introduced to investing. In this case, a “half-loaf” (funds & fees) may be preferable to no bread at all (not investing).
Where I might argue with Cramer is his assertion that fund companies have no incentive to perform well, since fees are derived from AUM rather than performance. That’s true to an extent; however, by performing well (and rising in value) the company’s funds do serve to increase its AUM (and revenue) over time - albeit indirectly.

Pretty much agree with @Catch22 ’s graphic illustration and @MikeM ‘s wry humor. :)
Well, here we are half way into the year and HSGFX is having one of it’s “better” years with a gain of +1.12% while sporting a 1.3% ER - which ain’t exactly cheap. Over 10 years the fund is still down around 6.5% annually. There must be some cash equivalency instruments that would have matched that 1.2% YTD for lower ER - but with less excitement.
Catch is correct that there’s a tradeoff between risk exposure and return. All depends on one’s situation. Don’t know if the board still draws youngsters in their early cumulative years (ages 20-40). Haven’t heard from them lately. But those folks having a 40-60 year investment time horizon should be all or nearly 100% in low-fee aggressive growth funds. For those of us over 70 and well into retirement & drawdown it’s a bit more complicated.
One added thought: If you consider balanced funds to be among your more risky assets, than there may be a bit of room for some of the more exotic hedge-like instruments for added diversification - allowing for the fact that, as Mike says, they’re high fee vehicles. I’ve got a small foothold in Price’s new TMSRX which certainly looks like a hedge fund on paper. Yet Price bills it as an “income” fund. Their definition agrees with its placement on their risk/return spectrum where it’s listed as comparable to old faithful RPSIX for anticipated risk/return. I’m currently “underwhelmed” by TMSRX’s performance - but, to its credit, it often runs opposite stocks, rising on down days for equities also moving in the reverse direction on up days. Anxious to read their first fund report which hasn’t been released yet.

Still about 80-20 w 401k distributions and bought more stocks real-estate reits previously w private equities portfolio... I Still have least 20 yrs until retirement so taking the lazy portfolio approaches... We are overdue for a large15s%correction so nothing surprises me anymore . Did place trade on O and another oil preferred stocks last week

I think they should not.IMHO only a small percentage will know enough about these markets to make a sensible decision to risk retirement dollars but a number will invest in the name of 'diversification" where their idea of diversification is to invest in every fund offered by the plan.

The mutual fund firm Vanguard, in its column “IRA Insights,” said that approximately 20 percent of its investors who take RMDs move the money to a taxable account because they do not need to spend it. (from article provided by @msf)
That’s a curious statement for Vanguard to make. How do they know that? I guess they must have conducted some sort sort of study in which they queried their investors. Reason I’m curious is because at Price I routinely have RMDs (and all other IRA distributions) transfered first into a cash equivalancy non-sheltered account on which I can write checks or otherwise transfer from at a later time. (I use their ultra-short fund for this purpose.) There’s a lot of reasons for doing this. Most importantly, I feel that should the distribution process somehow get “muffed” (perhaps by incorrectly withholding Michigan’s pension tax against my instructions), it would be a lot easier to resolve the issue with Price while the money is still under their umbrella.
Now to the crux of the issue here. Sometimes the RMD or other funds I take from a sheltered account are actually “needed” right away. But much more often they’re simply “rolled” into an annual household budget and may not actually be spent for up to a year. At still other times the purpose of the money is simply to “replenish” depleted cash reserves after an unusually large / unexpected household expenditure. So tracking the actual purpose to which withdrawals from an IRA are ultimately applied would seem to be a difficult (near impossible) undertaking.
Just my H/O on this one ... But I’ve long felt that way too much is made of being “forced” (author’s word) to withdraw a small percentage of sheltered funds annually upon reaching RMD age. There are some great tax efficient stock funds which have been discussed here over the years. Munis are a possibility as well. Recently while I was using Price’s high yield muni fund (PRFHX), it seemed to be consistently outperforming their Spectrum Income fund (RPSIX) which I hold inside an IRA. Risk level appeared about the same too. My thinking on this, however, might be warped, as have about 65% of retirement monies inside a Roth.

@VF, approaching retirement, iirc. I should check when I bailed out. I think the graph shows that what I wrote cannot be true (x30). Maybe I started w/ LOMMX somewhere near 1982 and then switched to CGMFX when it began, '97 or so.

FYI: When it comes to where Americans put their money, few firms have the name recognition, loyalty, and track records that Fidelity Investments and Vanguard Group do. Both came to prominence in the 1970s, and have dominated America’s savings since then. Vanguard has more than $5 trillion in assets under management; Fidelity directly manages $2.5 trillion, and has nearly $7 trillion under administration (in its brokerage, retirement plans, and other accounts).
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/sizing-up-fidelity-and-vanguard-managers-1530889346

Well, every Vanguard Target Retirement fund is a combination of the three funds in the article plus Total International Bond so... they already kind of do?

Sorry, but exactly "how aggressive" someone is investing in retirement NEEDs information regarding how much cash that individual holds.

No it doesn't. Look, my point is @Ted simply stated his investment allocation. He didn't suggest it be used by anyone else. He didn't ask for advise. He didn't ask for comments. In fact, I'm sure most of the suggestions and comments are quite amussing him, rightly so.

Bottom line, if subject line says "here's my asset allocation", then it should say something like...

So he didn't follow what you would have expected (or obviously many here). Hang the bastard... :)

Agree with jojo. I think Ted laid it out pretty well for a general overview of investments.

Sorry, but exactly "how aggressive" someone is investing in retirement NEEDs information regarding how much cash that individual holds.
If I have 90% cash and 5% in PONCX and 5% in ETFs, is not aggressive. That's like saying if you take a photo of me at exactly certain latitude and longitude, at a certain distance, in a certain light, and wearing glasses that cloud vision, I look like Brad Pitt.
I think people know I don't do bonds except for RPHYX and RSIVX, but they are a smattering of my total investments. If I simply total up whatever I've invested and not in VMMXX, then I will also be an aggressive investor. Fact is I am a wimp.
Bottom line, if subject line says "here's my asset allocation", then it should say something like
40% Cash (i.e. FDIC insured)
20% Money Markets (e.g. VMMXX, etc. etc.)
20% Domestic (e.g. VTMSX)
10% International (e.g. VTPSX)
10% Fixed Income (e.g. PONCX)
Then there is also no need to say "its' aggressive" or "its not aggressive", yeah?
A post such as above would not need so many more posts following it to ask questions. But I do understand we are all bored and this is so much better than Effbooking eh?

I've mentioned before the work of Pfau and Kitces suggesting that one should get more aggressive as one progresses through retirement. Here's a reasonably digestible article, followed by a more detailed writeup. (I believe I've linked to the latter before.)
https://retirementresearcher.com/use-rising-equity-glide-path-retirement/
https://www.onefpa.org/journal/Pages/Reducing Retirement Risk with a Rising Equity Glide Path.aspx

FYI: Retirement plan advisers who thought Washington had ditched the idea of requiring Roth 401(k) savings instead of traditional 401(k)s should think again.
Those who closely follow retirement policy say senior legislators on Capitol Hill are again whispering about so-called Rothification. The idea could re-emerge, perhaps to make up for tax-revenue shortfalls related to other retirement legislation being floated, observers said.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=rV0zW970C8vHjwSs5KDgBA&q=Push+to+require+Roth+401(k)+savings+over+traditional+plans+may+re-emerge&oq=Push+to+require+Roth+401(k)+savings+over+traditional+plans+may+re-emerge&gs_l=psy-ab.3...4303.4303.0.6152.3.2.0.0.0.0.66.66.1.2.0....0...1.2.64.psy-ab..1.1.67.6..35i39k1.67.5c8n6pMyLlc

@DavidMoran
OK, you're right- I (we?) didn't read down to that part. Note that it states that each couple "have a minimum household income of $75,000 or at least $100,000 in investable assets". Well hell, that's your average American "couple" for sure.
Here's some of what Fidelity actually said:
"Fidelity® Couples Study Uncovers Disconnects on Retirement Expectations"
"43 percent, up from 27 percent in 2013) couldn't correctly identify how much their partner makes—and of that, 10 percent were off by $25,000 or more. Which begs the question: if so many couples can't get this most basic item in their financial lives correct, what other disconnects exist that are unknowingly causing cracks in their financial foundation"
"When asked how much they will need to save to maintain their current lifestyle in retirement, nearly half (48 percent) have "no idea"—and 47 percent are in disagreement about the amount needed. This level of disagreement is highest among those who are closest to retirement—Baby Boomers (born 1946-64)."
"74 percent say they worry about being able to afford unexpected health care costs in retirement, up from 70 percent in 2013. More than half (51 percent) worry about outliving their savings in retirement, a number that is significantly higher than what was reported in 2013."
"Despite these concerns, only 21 percent have developed a retirement plan to ensure they do not outlive their savings"