Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
  • What are the Fidelity Flex funds?
    Interesting find.
    An apparently little known fact is that several fund families, notably Fidelity, offer funds with performance based fees. AllianceBernstein is doing something a bit different in making nearly all of its fee performance based. Usually the performance adjustment is just a few basis points. Fidelity has 76 funds with these fees.
    With luck, you'll be able to read this Barron's article via google: AllianceBernstein Fires the Latest Shot in the Fee Wars
    As ibartman noted, these funds are available only to certain fee based accounts. More specifically, to accounts that pay for their "investment advisory and administrative services". It sounds like clean shares, with a twist.
    http://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/33008/will-the-fiduciary-rule-shrink-the-ever-expanding-world-of-share-classes
    The twist is that the Fidelity flex funds charge no management fee either. Obviously no performance adjustment to 0.00%.
    I'm guessing that Fidelity is making its profit by charging retirement plans a fee to offer their funds. For example, here's an excerpt from the fee section of a Fidelity service. The service is called "Fidelity Portfolio Advisory Service At Work. Like its retail PAS service, this manages your portfolio for you (for a fee), but the portfolio is your retirement plan.
    If you have enrolled in the Service through a retirement plan that makes available Fidelity Flex mutual funds as the eligible investment options for the plan, you will not be charged an annual net advisory fee and will not receive a Pricing Supplement, because your plan sponsor has agreed to a single program fee with Fidelity that will be paid at the plan level.
    "Plan sponsor" is your employer. It sounds like Fidelity is making its money from running the plan (that the employer is paying for), and offering the underlying funds "for free". Like offering a fund of funds with no separate management fee to entice people into an investment (here the retirement plan) where other fees are collected.
    I'm still not entirely clear how Fidelity gets paid, especially if these funds show up in non-Fidelity run retirement plans. Still trying to "follow the money".
  • Ben Carlson: The Biggest Risk For Most Retirees
    Hi Guys,
    I know. Yes, I know I'm a broken record on a tool that is extremely useful when discussing long term planning and decision making. That's because I've been retired for almost two decades and have experienced many of its issues and problems.
    A key worry and real problem is running out of money. Knowing that likelihood, and some discipline, are critical elements in this arena. To the surprise of no MFOers, the tool I constantly endorse is Monte Carlo,analyses. The primary outputs of that now user friendly tool are a portfolio survival odds estimate and a value range of those end-of-period probabilities.
    Here is an MFO internal reference to a post that I submitted a few days ago on this very topic:
    http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/34976/monte-carlo-investing#latest
    It provides Links to 2 very good, free Monte Carlo simulators that are easy to use. Please give them a test.
    Doing just a few what-if scenarios will give you a feeling for many potential retirement shortfalls. These tools also are easily exercised to explore how rather small changes can have a dramatic impact on portfolio survival odds. That's where the do-it discipline enters the equation. Good luck to everyone.
    Best Wishes
  • Despite Misleading Ads, Annuities Can Be Critical For Lifetime Income Planning
    FYI: (Click On Article Title At Top Of Google Search)
    If you're in the annuity industry, a client has probably walked into your office with preconceived notions about annuities for retirement planning, partly due to some critics' opinions on annuities that may not consider the needs of everyone. Critics believe variable annuities aren't right for anybody, and they convince people lifetime income retirement strategies are available elsewhere. For many people, that's not true
    Regards,
    Ted
    https://www.google.com/search?q=Despite+misleading+ads,+annuities+can+be+critical+for+lifetime+income+planning+investment+news&oq=Despite+misleading+ads,+annuities+can+be+critical+for+lifetime+income+planning+investment+news&gs_l=psy-ab.3...4410.8785.0.9089.16.16.0.0.0.0.97.1279.15.15.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..1.0.0.AZVNd1E4y_U
  • M*: A Downgrade For This Foreign-Stock Fund: (TBGVX)
    It's an interesting question whether a 72 year old manager faces imminent retirement in 2017. People are living longer and can work a lot longer than they used to especially if they're wealthy and have access to the best doctors and treatments. It strikes me as a bit ageist to assume this manager, Will Browne, is leaving soon if he hasn't said that he is. He may love the work and could still be good at it for quite a while. There is an element of uncertainty to it but then he has younger comanagers helping him out. So I'm not sure this downgrade is justified on those grounds. The fees and currency issues may be more relevant.
  • Tibble v. Edison 401(k) Fee-Case Decision Offers 3 Lessons
    People might think, isn't this old news? Wasn't this already decided by the Supreme Court in 2015?
    I was contemplating linking to articles on the actual rulings since that SC ruling. (The article linked to above is a commentary on the most recent subsequent court ruling.)
    But then I thought, Ted must have done that already. A week ago (for this lower court ruling), last December (for the full 9th Circuit ruling that sent it all the way back down to the trial court, and even April 2016 (for 9th Circuit ruling against employees recovering losses).
    Rather than be the object of scorn, I'll just ask what those links were. Then I can make sure not to repost them. The only ones I know about pertain to the SC ruling I mentioned in my opening sentence.
    http://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/21152/does-your-401-k-use-high-cost-funds
    http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/21282/chuck-jaffe-what-the-supreme-court-s-fixes-for-retirement-savings-may-do-to-your-401-k
    https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/16315/the-supreme-court-and-the-evil-or-stupid-fiduciary
    (jerry's original link in 2014 while the case was on the way up to the SC)
  • Your Mutual Fund Manager Just Doesn’t Matter Much Anymore
    Vinik took over from Morris Smith (FMAGX). If you're talking about taking over Fidelity "flagship fund" status, as I recall Contra's AUM passed Magellan during Stansky's tenure.
    Stansky is a prime example of what the report is talking about. Vink's performance had disappointed investors (Vinik was early, not wrong, but that didn't seem to matter), so Stansky was moved in. Stansky had manged FDGRX very well for its first decade before moving over to Magellan. But he tempered his style at Magellan, which was marketed to retirement/pension plans, and gradually became an underperforming closet indexer.
    https://www.advisorperspectives.com/pdfs/newsltr08-2-4-3.pdf
    Single, good manager moved from one LCG fund to another, and did poorly. Hard to predict even with single-manager-run funds and managers with long track records.
  • GMO White Paper: The S&P 500: Just Say No
    @BobC. Not so sure. I lost half my portfolio in dot com bust. I lost 22-23% in Financial Crisis. Only because I sold.
    It is true I also didn't enjoy the gains after 2008 that one would have done simply buying and holding. However, I'm not sure I am worse for it. I'm more objective now because I was more "active". Sometimes that's better than deer caught in headlights.
    I need to read the whole GMO paper. I'm not going to say anything about people's ability to predict. However I do manage my allocations systematically. I was a 100% invested until last week in my retirement accounts, now I'm not. One doesn't have to make 100% on/off moves, but for me taking some money off the table and trying to deploy it somewhere else or gradually putting it back in does make sense.
    Also, sometimes I keep a list of things I "want" (not "need") and if I take gains, I will go buy something. After all, that's why we invest.
    Best.
  • Investors Cloud The Crystal Ball
    Recently, mfs posted one of Old_Skeet's portfolio's dating back to December of 2015 that was linked back in 2016. For easy reference I am providing this same link beow.
    http://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/24926/old-skeet-s-new-portfolio-asset-allocations-2016
    As there has been a good bit of changes in the holdings since then I am linking through this post the most current portfolio's holdings. A good bit of money has been moved left within the portfolio (since December of 15) into more conserative investments as the stock market has become more richly priced. Some sleeves and their holdings have been increased while others have been reduced. The growth area of the portfolio is where I am the most active with positioning naturally some takes place within the other sleeves as well. In tracking my portfolio through Morningstar Portfolio Manager it has had an investment return (excluding cash) year-to-date through July 2017 of 9.1% and for my bogey (The Lipper Balanced Index) 8.4%.
    So, where did the money go?
    From the reduction in the number of funds held in the growth & income area, the domestic equity sleeve was reduced from six funds to three funds. In the growth area funds were reduced from six to three in the global growth sleeve and from four to three in the large/mid cap sleeve. These monies were used to expand the holdings in the income area form thirteen funds to eighteen along with restablishing my CD ladder. So, indeed a good bit of money was moved left within the portfolio while some was added to current positions in the growth & income and growth areas plus there were also a holding change made within the global hybrid sleeve and some funds were moved from one sleeve to another. So, with this one can see Old_Skeet had indeed been active.
    Sleeve Management System ... Here is how it works.
    Now being in retirement here is a brief description of my sleeve management system which I organized to help better manage the investments held within mine & my wife’s combined portfolios. Currently, the master portfolio is comprised of two taxable investment accounts, two self directed retirement accounts, 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 plus a special investment (spiff) sleeve. Each sleeve (in most cases) consists of three to nine funds 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 landscape 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 along with using a market barometer that drives an equity allocation weighting matrix as an aid to help set the stock allocation weighting. All funds pay their distributions to the cash area of the portfolio with the exception being those in my 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 (if necessary) with the residual being left for new investment opportunity. Generally, in any one year, I take no more than a sum equal to one half of my portfolio’s average five year return. In this way, principal builds over time. In addition, most buy/sell trades settle from, or to, the cash area with some net asset value exchanges between funds taking place between funds.
    Last revised: 07/31/2017 Master Portfolio
    Here is how I have my asset allocation broken out in percent ranges, by area. My neutral allocation weightings are cash 20%, income 30%, growth & income 35%, growth & other assets 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, according to Morningstar Instant Xray, I am about 20% in the cash area, 25% in the income area, 35% domestic stock area, 15% foreign stock area & 5% in the other asset area. In addition, I have the portfolio set up in Morningstar’s Portfolio Manager by sleeve and as a whole for easy monitoring plus I use brokerage account statements along with some other Morningstar reports for information and tools helpful in managing the portfolio.
    Cash Area (Weighting Range 15% to 25% with neutral weighting 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 neutral weighting being 30%)
    Fixed Income Sleeve: BAICX, CTFAX, FMTNX, GIFAX, LALDX, LBNDX, NEFZX, THIFX & TSIAX
    Hybrid Income Sleeve: APIUX, AZNAX, CAPAX, DIFAX, FISCX, FKINX, ISFAX, JNBAX & PGBAX
    Growth & Income Area (Weighting Range 30% to 40% with neutral being 35%)
    Global Equity Sleeve: CWGIX, DEQAX & EADIX
    Global Hybrid Sleeve: CAIBX, PMAIX & TIBAX
    Domestic Equity Sleeve: ANCFX, FDSAX & SVAAX
    Domestic Hybrid Sleeve: ABALX, AMECX, DDIAX, FBLAX, FRINX, HWIAX & LABFX
    Growth Area (Weighting Range 10% to 20% with neutral weighting being 15%)
    Global Sleeve: ANWPX, SMCWX & THOAX
    Large/Mid Cap Sleeve: AGTHX, SPECX & VADAX
    Small/Mid Cap Sleeve: PCVAX, PMDAX & TSVAX
    Specialty & Theme Sleeve: LPEFX, PGUAX & NEWFX
    Spiff Sleeve: None at this time.
    Total Number of Mutual Fund Positions = 46
  • Vanguard International Explorer Fund adds another manager
    https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1004655/000093247117004797/whitehallmergedsupps.htm
    497 1 whitehallmergedsupps.htm WHITEHALL 497E
    Vanguard International ExplorerTM Fund
    Supplement to the Prospectus and Summary Prospectus Dated February 23, 2017
    Restructuring of the Investment Advisory Team
    The board of trustees of Vanguard International Explorer Fund approved adding TimesSquare Capital Management, LLC (TimesSquare Capital) to the Fund’s investment advisory team.
    Effective immediately, TimesSquare Capital will manage a portion of the Fund’s assets.
    TimesSquare Capital and the Fund’s other investment advisors—Schroder Investment Management North America Inc. and Wellington Management Company LLP—each independently select and maintain a portfolio of common stocks for the Fund. The Fund’s board of trustees determines the proportion of the Fund’s assets to be managed by each advisor and may change these proportions at any time.
    The Fund’s expense ratio, investment objective, principal investment strategies, and principal risks are not expected to change.
    Prospectus and Summary Prospectus Text Changes
    The following is added under the heading “Investment Advisors”:
    TimesSquare Capital Management, LLC (TimesSquare Capital)
    In the same section, the following is added to the list of Portfolio Managers:
    Magnus S. Larsson, Senior Vice President and Portfolio Manager of TimesSquare Capital. He has managed a portion of the Fund since August 2017.
    (over, please)
    Prospectus Text Changes
    The following is added to “Security Selection” section under More on the Fund:
    TimesSquare Capital Management, LLC (TimesSquare Capital) employs a bottom-up investment process driven by fundamental equity growth research conducted by its investment analysts, with a particular emphasis on the assessment of management quality, an in-depth understanding of superior business models, and valuation discrepancies.
    TimesSquare Capital invests the Fund’s assets in a diversified portfolio of stocks that it believes, based on its research, will generate superior risk-adjusted returns. TimesSquare Capital’s research process begins with a collaborative team of skilled and experienced analysts, which identify superior growth businesses with market capitalizations less than $5 billion at the time of purchase. Once a company is identified, rigorous fundamental analysis is performed, projected growth rate and return potential is calculated, and the company’s valuation is assessed on a relative and absolute basis. A company’s relative value is compared to industry peers, as well as firms with similar business models and at a similar point on the value chain. TimesSquare Capital’s sell decisions are based on the same research process, and securities would generally be sold when, among other things, there is no longer high conviction in the return potential of the investment, or when the advisor identifies a significantly more attractive investment candidate.
    The following is added to the “Investment Advisors” section:
    TimesSquare Capital Management, LLC, 7 Times Square, 42nd Floor, New York, New York 10036, is a registered investment advisor that specializes in small- and mid-cap growth equities. TimesSquare Capital’s institutional partner, Affiliated Managers Group, Inc. (AMG), a publicly traded global asset management company, indirectly holds a majority equity interest in TimesSquare Capital, with the remaining portion owned by TimesSquare Capital principals. As of June 30, 2017, TimesSquare Capital managed approximately $17.2 billion in assets for AMG funds, corporations, public funds, unions, endowments and foundations, retirement plans, and other institutional accounts.
    In the same section, the following is added to the list of portfolio managers:
    Magnus S. Larsson, Senior Vice President and Portfolio Manager at TimesSquare Capital. He has worked in investment management since 1995, has managed investment portfolios since 2000, has been with TimesSquare Capital since 2012, and has managed a portion of the Fund since August 2017. Education: B.S., B.A., University of Orebro, Sweden.
    © 2017 The Vanguard Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
    Vanguard Marketing Corporation, Distributor.
    PS 126A 082017....
  • Investors Cloud The Crystal Ball
    Hi folks,
    Old_Skeet did not have any intentions what-so-ever to start a riff in this thread. But, know it seems one might be forming (let's hope not). In addition, I have a few comments.
    I am not a day trader by any means; however, form time-to-time I will position my portfolio to take advantage of what I am finding to be the faster moving currents within the markets and weight accordingly and to reduce risk as well when I feel it is warranted. In today's time it is hard to beat (from my perspective) the flash crowd through day trading activity although a few might be successful most, by my thinking, will fail. I have seen a good number of what I consider to be relative smart people lose a good bit of money day trading with some experiencing life changing events (and not for the good). Day trading is not for me and I have never ventured into any form of activity that might be considered day trading. Asset positioning is something very different. My high school engineer buddy was a day trader that lost a considerable amount day trading. Today, he is an indexer.
    Since, some of my portfolio holdings have changed since December 2015 that was recently posted for reference by mfs, I'll update it with current positions and post it under the thread "What Are You Buying Selling and/or Pondering?" in the near future. Know, since my retirement I have been moving towards expanding my footprint in hybrid type funds for more than one reason. From my thinking this is making my portfolio more adaptive to the ever changing market conditions and increasing the portfolio's capacity to generate income. For those that might be able to do a look back to some of the old published portfolios I am sure you will easily find there has indeed been some holding changes.
    Peace ... and, it's time to move on.
    Skeet
  • An Epic Winning Streak On Wall Street — Then One Ugly Loss: (SEQUX)
    FYI: The financial whizzes cocooned in the serene offices of the Sequoia Fund atop one of New York’s iconic office buildings seem far removed from the noise of the city far below.
    But the 47-year-old mutual fund known as much for its ties to billionaire Warren Buffett as for its uncanny stock picks that created massive wealth for clients — retirement funds, pension funds, university endowments and regular-Joe investors — has had to descend from its lofty perch in the past two years and rescue its good name.
    Regards,
    Ted
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/capitalbusiness/an-epic-winning-streak-on-wall-street--then-one-ugly-loss/2017/08/11/137fc2dc-7637-11e7-8839-ec48ec4cae25_story.html
    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 #245 In The (LCG) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
    https://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/large-growth/sequoia-fund/sequx
  • Researching financial advisor

    Here is a Link that discusses " a dirty little secret " about investment advisors that is not very secret whatsoever:
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertberger/2016/12/19/the-dirty-little-secret-investment-advisors-dont-want-you-to-know/#afaf3bc6f966
    Each year you post conclusions from Dalbar's QAIB study, e.g.: 2011, 2012 (where you acknowledged that "perhaps hiring a financial advisor would provide some needed relief"), 2013, 2015 (okay, Ted posted this one), 2016 (where you wrote that "Given the huge disparity between market Indices and individual investor actual performance, a case can be made for consulting a financial planner.")
    I'm no enthusiast of the Dalbar reports. See, e.g. Prof. Snowball's comments in the 2015 link, or this 2017 analysis by Wade Pfau: "Investors may behave badly. But the DALBAR study does not demonstrate this empirically. Its calculations are wrong and the financial services profession should stop using it as a way to market the value of financial advice."
    But Dalbar is where you've chosen to hang your hat. In doing so, you have you acknowledged that a 1% advisor fee can generate net positive results for average investors (directly contradicting Forbes' "dirty little secret").
    Regardless of your comments about the Dalbar conclusions, that conclusion easy to extract directly from the Dalbar data (to the extent that one trusts Dalbar's methodology). The 2016 version (the latest version that seems to be available "for free") states that "Voluntary investor behavior underperformance" amounts to 1.50%. That is more than enough to overcome a 1.00% fee paid to an advisor who helps an investor correct this bad behavior.
    Even Vanguard has published a series of papers stating that "Paying a fee for advice and guidance to a professional who uses the framework described here can add meaningful value compared to the average investor experience." That's from the 2016 version of Vanguard Advisor’s Alpha®
    If the whole paper's too long to read, here's a Marketwatch column ("Vanguard: When advisers add value") from 2013 discussing the Vanguard report.
  • When Brokers Want To Move Your Money Out Of A Very Good Thing
    It's not just federal employees who are hoodwinked by annuity salespersons. It truly is everyone. Often done under the guise of "retirement planning", the annuity people have all the great lures, but seldom disclose all the facts. It only takes one question to put them off track. Ask everyone you might work with, including the persons you currently work with, if they will provide a written document attesting to their fiduciary status (must include a phrase similar to "act solely in the best interests of each client"), and ask them to personally sign it. Ours is included in our Code of Ethics document. If the person you are talking to cannot comply, end the meeting.
  • When Brokers Want To Move Your Money Out Of A Very Good Thing
    Obamacaring retirement is a great idea, without question.
    Ted, you read the whole piece, right?
  • When Brokers Want To Move Your Money Out Of A Very Good Thing
    It is important that TSP participants to educate themselves early in their career so that they won't be fool into rollover over their 401(k) money into expensive annuity. This sort of stuff happens more frequently than reported with inurances companies in disguise. My wife work for the federal government and received invitations frequently from these companies for their retirement services. The use of scare tactics and out-right lies is what they do to sell annuity products.
  • When Brokers Want To Move Your Money Out Of A Very Good Thing
    FYI: So far this year, here’s what our friends in the federal government have done for — and to — citizens who hope to find simple ways to save enough money for retirement without anyone robbing them blind.
    Regards,
    Ted
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/04/your-money/401ks-and-similar-plans/when-brokers-want-to-move-your-money-out-of-a-very-good-thing.html?ref=business
  • What Will You do When the Bear Arrives?
    Hi folks,
    Good discussion on the reporting of cash held within a portfolio. For years I counted cash as a part of my portfolio and factored it in with portfolio performance reporting since cash is an asset class. My brokerage firm still reports performance with cash being considered. However, Morningstar's portfolio manager does not factor cash into portfolio performance reporting. So, with this, it is very easy for me see both ways what the cash drag or its benefit is and by how much. Thus, I started tracking portfolio performance reporting with and without cash. If I report portfolio performance it is for everthing held (including cash) and for investment returns it is for everything held without cash. Because I am holding about 20% cash within my portfolio returns as a whole are currently about 20% behind investment returns. However, should we get into a market downdraft I'm thinking the amount of cash held will help soften the performance decline.
    In addition, I do not factor cash as a part portfolio principal to compute retirement withdrawals. This is done on invested assets only. Generally, I take no more than one half of my five year average investment return. In this way, principal grows over time.
    So, when the "Bear Comes Calling" ...
    By keeping a good store of cash and the fact I've not overdrawn my portfolio in retirement I should be OK when the bear comes calling with an ample amout of cash "on hand" to invest for the rebound. And, my dividend and interest payments should (for the most part) keep rolling on in. In addition, my asset allocation is also something for me to consider and will also play a role in how I fair in a bear market.
    Skeet
  • What Will You do When the Bear Arrives?
    Well ... If everyone buys, than the market won't go down. Will it?
    ---
    Edit: The above was a quick shoot from the hip reaction to the thread. No intent to disparage anyone.
    Truth is, you really don't know what you'll do until it happens. In '08 the picture was bleak. Hank Paulson, Treasury Secretary, was on TV trying to reassure a panicked public. Lehman Brothers - a giant financial institution - had crumpled in days. Money market funds, previously considered safe, were on the ropes and might well have collapsed without emergency government backing. As bad as it was here, international markets plummeted even more. I saw people who were retired and thought they were smart investors literally in tears after watching their retirement nest egg disintegrate 50% in a year's time.
    There are options other than simple buy or sell. If you think the sell-off is overdone consider rotating out of conservative funds and into more aggressive ones at a slow and steady pace. Also, if your money is in Traditional IRAs, consider converting to a Roth while markets are depressed. Personally, I'm mostly buy and hold, but do adjust cash position upward or downward a bit as markets evolve (risk on/risk off). Generally, cash stays between 10% and 25% - so there's not a lot of leeway there to buy equities.
    Just some rambling thoughts.
  • Pimco Has A Manager Who Tops Dan Ivascyn. His Name? Dan Ivascyn
    Not at all --- sorry, yes, 70, ~25% of total retirement (if you leave out SS as bond equivalent). Actually some of that is cash, so a little less than a quarter.
  • Fidelity Global Balanced Fund to close to new investors
    https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/354046/000137949117005298/filing694.htm
    497 1 filing694.htm PRIMARY DOCUMENT
    Supplement to the
    Fidelity® Global Balanced Fund
    December 30, 2016
    Prospectus
    Effective the close of business on August 11, 2017, new positions in the fund may no longer be opened. Shareholders of the fund on that date may continue to add to their fund positions existing on that date. Investors who did not own shares of the fund on August 11, 2017, generally will not be allowed to buy shares of the fund except that new fund positions may be opened: 1) by participants in most group employer retirement plans (and their successor plans) if the fund had been established (or was in the process of being established) as an investment option under the plans (or under another plan sponsored by the same employer) by August 11, 2017, 2) by participants in a 401(a) plan covered by a master record keeping services agreement between Fidelity and a national federation of employers that included the fund as a core investment option by August 11, 2017, 3) for accounts managed on a discretionary basis by certain registered investment advisers that have discretionary assets of at least $500 million invested in mutual funds and have included the fund in their discretionary account program since August 11, 2017, 4) by a mutual fund or a qualified tuition program for which FMR or an affiliate serves as investment manager, 5) by a portfolio manager of the fund, and 6) by a fee deferral plan offered to trustees of certain Fidelity funds, if the fund is an investment option under the plan. These restrictions generally will apply to investments made directly with Fidelity and investments made through intermediaries. Investors may be required to demonstrate eligibility to buy shares of the fund before an investment is accepted.
    GBL-17-02
    1.855563.122 August 1, 2017