Charles, you noted: "Has to be most distorted logic ever."
I will presume your statement is relative to continuing stimulus, per the slant of the linked story. Please correct me, if my assumption is wrong.
NOTE: disclaimer/disclosure: I am fighting a nasty head cold, using meds and have just finished a second very large cup of coffee having only 5 hours of restless sleep. Continuing to read what I write here constitutes an electronic "hold harmless" agreement; as I may not know what the heck I'm writing about. :)
One online dictionary meaning for the word logic is below.
Logic:
1. The study of the principles of reasoning, especially of the structure of propositions as distinguished from their content and of method and validity in deductive reasoning.
2.
a. A system of reasoning: Aristotle's logic.
b. A mode of reasoning: By that logic, we should sell the company tomorrow.
c. The formal, guiding principles of a discipline, school, or science.
3. Valid reasoning: Your paper lacks the logic to prove your thesis.
4. The relationship between elements and between an element and the whole in a set of objects, individuals, principles, or events: There's a certain logic to the motion of rush-hour traffic.
5. Computer Science
a. The nonarithmetic operations performed by a computer, such as sorting, comparing, and matching, that involve yes-no decisions.
b. Computer circuitry.
c. Graphic representation of computer circuitry.
Scott noted/linked early yesterday (Wednesday, June 26) the report of GDP at 1.8% versus the forward guess of 2.4%. One may presume this will be adjusted in the future. From my understanding, this number; as well as many other indicators should lead one to believe that the Fed will not reduce the current QE program purchases.
Barring any nasty events, I will also suspect that many bond areas will continue to recover from the recent losses; as well some upward pressure movement in the equities areas, more so in the U.S.
So, yes; distorted logic continues to affect we investors. Europe's status is still shakey, in my opinion; and Japan may indeed get their 2% inflation to the citizens by virtue of killing the value of the Yen and the rising cost of imports. Not quite sure if this is a sane policy or not.
I remain conflicted by what I think I see and know, relative to investment areas. In Michigan, I see signs of economic improvement in some areas. Not unlike anyone else here at MFO, the viewpoint of an improving economy is going to vary widely based upon where one lives and their ability to sort out what they think they see as improvement; and then to ask the proper questions to obtain the proper answers.
A recent MI story indicated 50 new jobs for a "call center"; which plans to expand to 300 jobs in the next few years. The work pays $10/hour with a benefit package for some healthcare provisions. I salute those who want to work; but the wage is pretty tight on the wallet for anything other than to provide the basics of a family life. But, new engineering jobs are also being created in the auto industry in Michigan.
On the other hand, I must also attempt to measure the "old money" that stills resides in Michigan. The "old money" being the hugh population of retired boomers who have benefits from prior union based employment. From the post WWII period in particular, found many moving to MI for the good, union based jobs. The auto industry lead this change and affected many other work positions that were union based for both benefits and wages. Many of these retired folks have enough retirement income and health benefits to continue to spend money in this state. This causes a distortion into what one is able to measure as economic strength at this time. There is indeed a fairly large gap in the have's and have not's, relative to the ability to spend money for whatever. The variables are vast even within our large state; let alone trying to compare the spending abilities as measuread against either Mississippi or Arkansas, as examples. Six hundred miles to the northwest by road; from the fairly well to do outlying suburbs of the greater Detroit area finds a whole different world in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan.
Investing today reminds me of the evolution of the "American" auto industry over the past 20 years. Outsourcing of vehicle parts for the auto industry began to take place as the big 3 auto makers attempted to reduce their "own" factory's production of some parts to other countries.
Today is even more complex. My wife's Chrysler 300 is built in Ontario, Canada; with majority ownership of the company by Fiat of Italy and minority ownership by the UAW health plan; and as Chrysler really wanted to improve the gas mileage of the vehicle, the 8 speed transmission is from Audi, in Germany. Note: 9 and 10 speed transmissions are currently being engineered and apparently will be built in MI in the next few years. And, at 65 mph, with light wind speeds and fairly level driving elevations, the 300 provides 40 mpg all the day long.
The many 1,000's of small machine shops who vendored to the big 3 auto makers 20 years ago are long gone and likely not returning. These changes and the continued changes from technology will continue to impact real working jobs in the future. Announcements of a $500 million upgrade to an auto factory 10 years ago might likely include several hundred new job positions. Today, perhaps only 33 new jobs will be formed.
Well, nothing much new with all of the above words; as it is most difficult to stay ahead of the quality discussions here at MFO; as is the norm, and thankfully so. Our house will continue to attempt to deal with the "distorted logic", as related to investing. Wondering what Star Trek's Spock, with his "logic" would have in a portfolio today.
Lastly, 40%/40%/20%....cash (mostly stable value acct holdings at 1.5%)/mixed bond funds/equity funds. I may place a note about this later...........depending on my head cold, the meds and nap time quality.
Take care of you and yours,
Catch

You are all a bit too sophisticated for me.
In the past weeks/months, based on comments here, bought a bit of MFLDX and WBLRX (but this seems like the ideal day for a positive return for a L/S fund, and Whitebox wasn't positive, which I'd hoped for at that cost.)
The question (beg) is what Fido funds you might buy over the next few weeks. I sent most of my New Markets Income to cash lately, and so have some of the readies, but I can't help thinking that the next decades still favor the EM. My monthly 403b deposits flow into Fido without predetermined destinations.
All advice considered thoughtfully. Must admit that today delayed my retirement several more months.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1014913/000089271213000367/ffi497.htm
Supplement to Prospectus Dated November 1, 2012
Lockwell Small Cap Value Fund (LOCSX)
On June 20, 2013, the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Frontegra Funds, Inc. (the “Company”) approved the liquidation of the Lockwell Small Cap Value Fund (the “Fund”) based upon the recommendation of Lockwell Investments, LLC, the investment adviser to the Fund (“Lockwell”). Lockwell has indicated that it is in discussions to close the firm and thus will no longer be able to serve as the investment adviser to the Fund. After considering a variety of factors, the Board concluded that it would be in the best interest of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund be closed and liquidated as a series of the Company, effective as of the close of business on July 31, 2013 (the “Effective Time”).
The Board approved a Plan of Liquidation (the “Plan”) that determines the manner in which the Fund will be liquidated. Pursuant to the Plan, the Fund will be closed to new purchases and incoming exchanges as of June 27, 2013 (the “Closing Date”) (except purchases made through the automatic reinvestment of Fund distributions, if any, made after the Closing Date). After the Fund is closed to new investments, shareholders will be permitted to exchange their shares of the Fund for shares of the other available Frontegra Funds, or to redeem their shares of the Fund, as provided in the Fund’s Prospectus.
As soon as practicable following the date of this Supplement, the Fund will begin liquidating its portfolio and the proceeds will be invested in cash equivalents such as money market funds until all outstanding shares of the Fund have been redeemed. This process will result in the Fund’s cash holdings increasing and the Fund will no longer pursue its stated investment objective. Any capital gains will be distributed as soon as practicable to shareholders and reinvested in additional Fund shares unless you have requested payment in cash.
Pursuant to the Plan, any shareholder who has not exchanged or redeemed their shares of the Fund prior to the Effective Time will have their shares redeemed in cash and will receive a check representing the shareholder’s proportionate interest in the net assets of the Fund as of the Effective Time, subject to any required withholdings. Shareholders (other than tax-qualified plans or tax-exempt accounts) will recognize gain or loss for tax purposes on the redemption of their Fund shares in the liquidation. Shareholders should consult their tax adviser for further information about federal, state and local tax consequences relative to their specific situation.
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 receive a distribution from an Individual Retirement Account (IRA) or a Simplified Employee Pension (SEP) IRA, you must 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 you receive a distribution from a 403(b)(7) custodian account (tax-sheltered account) or a Keogh account, you must roll the distribution into a similar type of 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) custodian account (tax-sheltered account) or a Keogh account, you may reinvest the proceeds in any way permitted by its governing instrument.
Fund Information
In addition, Lockwell has closed the website from which Fund information could previously be obtained. Accordingly, updated performance information for the Fund and copies of the prospectus, SAI and shareholder reports are available by calling toll free to 1-888-825-2100.
This supplement should be retained with your Prospectus for future reference.
The date of this Supplement to the Prospectus is June 20, 2013.

Hi Guys,
The decision with respect to either a Roth IRA or a Traditional IRA or a conversion is not simple; it is not a no-brainer. Like most investment choices and options, a final decision depends.
The Roth IRA decision is not easy since it is multidimensional with several forecasts as required input. One size definitely does not fit all.
It depends on several factors. I faced this challenge a number of years ago when the Roth option was originally introduced by our government. I did a boatload of calculations that eventually included many random Monte Carlo simulations. I finally decided on a mixed approach since many of the influencing parameters are unknown.
I did not keep a copy of my studies, but I do recall some of the pertinent outcomes.
A Roth only works if the expected taxes at planned withdrawal are below the current tax schedule. A Roth is not attractive if the monies to pay the current tax bill for the conversion or purchase must be extracted from what would be used to buy the Roth itself. It is these extra, auxiliary funds that make the decision in favor of the Roth attractive.
Further, the time scale before planned withdrawals and the expected rate of return for the IRA also enter the decision equation. A Roth is more attractive as the time horizon expands, making it more useful for estate planning objectives. If the anticipated IRA portfolio annual payoff is low, it takes a longer time to recover the initial tax bite for purchasing a Roth rather than a Traditional IRA. Low future portfolio return rates penalize the Roth option.
I’m surely not a tax wizard and the research that I did on this topic is dated. I’m not so sure of the details. So I recommend consulting a tax specialist before making a major commitment.
Here is a reference to a technical study that addresses some of these issues. It documents required future get-even tax rates as a function of time scale and portfolio investment return rates. The paper’s tables help to provide guidance towards any IRA decision:
http://www.academyfinancial.org/10Conference/10Proceedings/(3A)%20Krishnan.pdf
This paper by professor V. S. Krishnan titled “Roth IRA Conversion and Estate Planning” presents some tradeoff studies that illustrate the interactive complexity of time scale and portfolio return when making an option selection. The tables that he includes at the conclusion of the paper show the trendlines.
Also, all the major mutual fund houses provide informative articles on this subject matter. Here is one sample from T. Rowe Price:
http://individual.troweprice.com/public/Retail/Retirement/IRA/Traditional-vs.-Roth
A final decision does demand some committed time to explore the wide ranging likely future outcomes. Roth/Traditional IRA decisions are never easy given future investment return and tax uncertainties.
The Roth gains much of its superiority from its estate planning, pass-through features. Since that is the stated goal of the original post, the Roth IRA option seems to be in a wheelhouse position for Pangolin’s situation assuming that current tax consequences from any conversion can be conveniently handled from other than those funds dedicated to the IRA itself.
Of course, all this discussion assumes that at some juncture, the 401K pot will be converted to IRA status.
I hope this is of some service to you.
Best Wishes.

Reply to @Pangolin: Re: "Am I correct that there are no RMD's for the 401K (regardless of age) as long as she keeps working and contributing to the plan?" ... Not qualified to give tax advice. However, a quick web search appears to confirm your assumption AS LONG AS the employment is with the same plan sponsor.
"Your first RMD Your first required distribution must be made by April 1 of the year following the year when you turned 70½. For example, if you turn 70½ in February 2011, you must take your first RMD by April 1, 2012. The IRS calls this your Required Beginning Date.There's an exception to this rule: If you're still working, you can generally delay RMDs, but only from the retirement plans you participate in with your current employer. In these situations, your first distribution must be made by April 1 of the year following the year of your retirement." Excerpted from: https://www.usaa.com/inet/pages/ret_minimum_distributions?akredirect=true
*** Be sure to check with IRS before taking any actions (or inaction:-) in this regard.
Pangolin - Sounds like you and your aunt have your act together. Great questions. Should you contemplate Rothizing, proceed with caution. IMHO that was a much easier call to make 4+ years ago with world equity markets priced at only about 40% of where they are today. Regards

I am considering establishing a toehold in MAPIX before its close on June 14. I already own MAINX and MACSX, and don’t need 3 income-related offerings from Matthews. Anything in particular I should consider in choosing 2? (Or 1?)
Also, any thoughts on Vanguard’s new Total International Bond Index fund VTIBX/VTIFX (the latter institutional)?
Here’s some language from the Summary Prospectus:
"Investment strategy
The fund employs an indexing investment approach designed to track the performance of the Barclays Global Aggregate ex-USD Float Adjusted RIC Capped Index (USD Hedged), a broad-based measure of the global, investment-grade, fixed-rate debt markets. The index includes government, government agency, corporate, and securitized non-U.S. investment-grade fixed income investments, all issued in currencies other than the U.S. dollar and with maturities of more than one year. The index is capped, which means that its exposure to any particular bond issuer is limited to a maximum of 20%. Additionally, issuers that individually constitute 5% or more of the index may not constitute, in the aggregate, more than 48% of the index. If the index, as constituted based on market weights would exceed the 20% or 48% limit, the excess is reallocated to bonds of other issuers represented in the index. To minimize the currency risk associated with investment in bonds denominated in currencies other than the U.S. dollar, the fund will attempt to hedge its currency exposures.
The fund invests by sampling the Index, meaning that it holds a range of securities that, in the aggregate, approximates the full Index in terms of key risk factors and other characteristics. All of the fund’s investments will be selected through the sampling process, and at least 80% of the fund’s assets will be invested in bonds included in the index."
And a brief squib from the “Product Summary”:
“The fund seeks to track the performance of an index that includes international government, agency, and corporate securities, mostly from developed countries, but also some emerging markets countries.”
Regional allocation —unavailable
Currently 100% in short-term reserves
Vanguard has added this fund to its all-in-one funds, Target Retirement (12) and Life Strategy (4).
Thanks in advance for any comments on Matthews or VTIBX.

I noticed that GLBRX pops up as "James Advantage Funds, James Balanced Golden Rainbow Cl A" (class A); these are "retail class" shares, according to the summary prospectus. What's the source of the "A" class info?
(It's also missing the colon between Balanced and Golden Rainbow - the fund family certainly created quite a mouthful.)
FWIW, M* truncates "Retail Class" to R (which is typically used to designate "retirement plan" shares). Even James Advantage can't get it right - on their "more info" page for the fund, they call these "Investor Shares". Not to worry, it looks like all their filings say "Retail Class".

If she can keep employment and employer is providing health insurance that will be huge savings...
If she is not thinking of retirement, if I were her, most of my funds would be invested in good balanced funds such as VWINX, GLRBX after keeping a reasonable amount for emergencies etc. You can also consider Retirement funds from T. Rowe Price as they provide processional asset allocation with wider diversification.
The two I have mentioned have predominantly US domestic companies but the companies they hold are operational in global space with activities in many countries. So, I do not see it as much as handicap. While my own portfolio is more complex, it does not have to be too complex. Complexity is usually more expensive and does not always lead to success. I will be looking personally to simplification as I get to older ages. I don't think she would want to stay on top of these and instead enjoy her life. Neither someone helping her will want to spend too much time.

Reply to @ron:
Hi ron,
I will soon be joining the ranks of the retired and I have already started celebrating my upcoing retirement. The markets concern me ... esecially, the fixed income area. Bonds unlike stocks are fixed in what they give you. However, good companies should grow thier revenue and earnings over time increasing the dividends that some of them pay out to their share holders. My portfolio, has some good dividend equity holdings that were inherited from my great grandfather, my grandfather and my father.
Years ago, the family decided to sell off farm land and move from growing cash crops from the soil to havesting cash dividends from what some companies pay out. Although I recently reduced some of my fixed income and equity holdings I am still with my great grandfaters master plan. "Let others work for you and collect the dividends through your capital investments." Smart man. And, his great grandson thanks him.
My thoughts ... Think trough this and play the hand as it is delt. Sometimes this is called folding the hand especially when the cards are against you. I think it prudent to respect, value and protect your principal.
My best,
Skeeter

Reply to @Charles:
Hi Charles,
Thank you so very much for your extensive reply. It is thoughtful, seriously researched, and addressed many of the issues that both MFO participant Investor and I independently raised.
There is no need to apologize for any delay in your response. A more careful reply prepared now is far more informative than one generated earlier simply to be speedy. Thank you for investing your valuable and limited time. I never intended to assign any tasks that you did not plan to do yourself.
I did review the references you provided, and especially liked “The Ulcer Index: A better measure of risk” article. It certainly endorsed the Martin method. Also, I was impressed that Peter Martin responded to your query.
It amazes me that these market researchers are often accessible to the general public. About two decades ago professor Sharpe generously answered a series of questions that I asked relative to a Monte Carlo simulation code that I was developing. His comments were encouraging and useful. I did finish the code and deployed it when making my retirement decision.
The principle purpose of my original post was cautionary by design. I did not want you or the excellent MFO team to jump-the-gun and make a premature sorting criteria decision. At this juncture, all the various candidate ratios have both merits and shortcomings. I am not familiar with any research papers that demonstrate a universal advantage of one Ratio over the other. Much depends on the application and on the goals.
In terms of a fund selection tool, perhaps an optimum approach would be to allow the tool user to select the sorting mechanism himself from a set of multiple options. Given the added complexity of permitting user options, I am definitely NOT recommending that you consider the optional route.
None of the proposed Ratios are perfect forecasting tools. They are all grounded in accumulated rearview mirror data sets. The studies that I am familiar with all conclude that the most promising predictor of superior future returns is lower fund costs. Performance changes based on a host of unknowable factors; costs are relatively stable and predictable.
Perhaps I misunderstand some details of your current ranking system, but I have some concern over both the coarseness of the benchmarking and the data collecting period. The Martin Ratio and Ulcer Index seem to have been historically developed for frequent trading, and consequently are best served using daily price entries. Also, scoring a mix of equity funds, international funds, and balanced funds together (as in the sample you included in your posting) might not be so useful when constructing a well diversified portfolio.
Regardless of my present uninformed apprehensions, I have confidence that the MFO team will deliver a reliable and helpful fund evaluation tool. I recommend that you need not rush to a judgment. Even without a ranking, just the Ratio arrays provide fund selection guidance. Let the user decide for himself.
I know you will challenge the robustness of your final format choice based on extensive out-of-sample data testing.
Thank you for your commitment. It’s an outstanding match given your engineering experience, investing curiosity, and talents.
Best Wishes.

My guess is that most of you are not deep into retirement. Like giving up to fixed income.
Feels like a bottom.

Bought some PAAS (love that volatility) to bring my precious metals back up to 5.4% of retirement assets.Mr. Market had trimmed it from 6.8% on Dec 31! With an additional 22 % in non-USA assets ,the year's returns have been somewhat subdued.But core and small cap holdings all within 2 % of all time highs.About 32.4% cash.Looking @ AEM in gold sector,set up AIP in TGLDX (dollar cost average after plunge),still set to purchase Scott's INF as things trend down.Looked @ the above mentioned PDI.Too much leverage for me.Watching Phillippine and Indonesian ETF's on further deterioration.Also considering redeploying funds from MAPIX and MAPTX into MCSMX and MEASX.Have always thought small caps and Acorn Funds proverbial "four baggers"are the key to long term investing success.

When you say yields, you are saying dividends. In taxable account you want capital appreciation more than dividends. In retirement accounts you are right I think.
Also NAVs are adjusted on their dividends. Did you get dividend adjusted NAV from Yahoo. If you got raw NAV then with every distribution - cap gains and dividends - NAV drop will be more pronounced. A lot of times on yahoo, the charts are also not adjusted for distributions so you see unnecessary spikes downward for various funds.
So not saying you numbers are wrong, but they may not be 100% accurate.

I agree, ARDFX looks decent but it certainly is not a gem.
In the microcap space, the leader of the pack continues to be AUMIX, despite its pricey 2.0% net ER. According to a test trade I just made, this fund appears to be available in TDAmeritrade retirement accounts for no minimum plus a TF.
The next best fund among microcap funds that I track is WEIMX which has a much lower ER of 1.22% and more attractive trailing risk parameters. Over the past 3- and 5-year periods, WEIMX has had consistently lower standard deviations, higher sharpe ratios and higher Sortino ratios than AUMIX. WEIMX is available for a low minimum of $250 plus a TF in Scottrade retirement accounts according to their web site. WEIMX would definitely be my pick in the microcap space.
Kevin

http://quotes.morningstar.com/fund/f?t=ASIOX
...I just would not be in this fund at all. As for the question about trimming back one's bond holdings: I'm riding out this downturn, about 50/50 stock funds and bond funds. I toyed with the idea of re-shuffling, taking a bit from bonds and putting it into equities, into a fund where I already have a small position. My bonds are getting hammered lately, but they provide steady income. In two cases, there's a monthly dividend, and in another, quarterly. I'm lucky to be able to re-invest all profits, still. ...Very soon, an item I've been holding for the past 10 years will mature. I want to put it into a retirement account, rather than a regular, taxable account. (I could go Roth rather than Trad. IRA, but have decided upon the latter.) The folks here have been offering input that I'm very grateful to get. Given the latest downturn, I'll be taking that money which is going to come to me soon and put it in an equity fund or "balanced" fund which holds both equities and bonds.
ASIOX is a loser. A quick look shows its risk is too high and its returns are low. It is lagging behind its benchmarks. And compared to its peers, it sits near the BOTTOM of the heap.
If you want, share with us here about what you own, both bonds and equities. Government policies which have been artificially deflating interest rates are responsible for what's going to become a big mess. It is inevitable. The Market is jittery. Anyhow, just don't do anything SUDDENLY--- except to get out of ASIOX.
Bonds? You'll get many different recommendations. I like FNMIX, PREMX, DLFNX and DODIX. I own SOME of those. "Break a leg." Welcome to the party.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/923184/000114420413032182/v346546_497.htm (individual)
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/923184/000114420413032181/v346547_497.htm (institutional)
497 1 v346546_497.htm 497
SUPPLEMENT DATED MAY 30, 2013
TO THE PROSPECTUS OF MATTHEWS ASIA FUNDS
DATED APRIL 30, 2013
For all existing and prospective shareholders of Matthews Asia Dividend Fund - Investor Class (MAPIX)
Effective at market close on June 14, 2013, the Matthews Asia Dividend Fund (the “Asia Dividend Fund”) will be closed to most new investors. The Asia Dividend Fund will continue to accept investments from existing shareholders. However, once a shareholder closes an account, additional investments in the Asia Dividend Fund will not be accepted from that shareholder.
The following section entitled “Who Can Invest in a Closed Fund?” is hereby added to page 74 of the prospectus immediately before the section entitled “Exchanging Shares”:
Who Can Invest in a Closed Fund?
The Asia Dividend Fund has limited sales of its shares after June 14, 2013 because Matthews and the Trustees believe continued unlimited sales may adversely affect the Asia Dividend Fund’s ability to achieve its investment objective.
If you were a shareholder of the Asia Dividend Fund when it closed and your account remains open, you may make additional investments in the Asia Dividend Fund, reinvest any dividends or capital gains distributions in that account or open additional accounts in the Asia Dividend Fund under the same primary Social Security Number. To establish a new account in the Asia Dividend Fund, you must provide written proof of your existing account (e.g., a copy of the account statement) to the Asia Dividend Fund. A request to open a new account in the Asia Dividend Fund will not be deemed to be “in good order” until you provide sufficient written proof of existing ownership of the Asia Dividend Fund to the Asia Dividend Fund or its representative.
In addition, the following categories of investors may continue to invest in the Asia Dividend Fund:
• Financial advisors and discretionary programs with existing clients in the Asia Dividend Fund
• Retirement plans or platforms with participants that currently invest in the Asia Dividend Fund
• Model-based programs with existing accounts in the Asia Dividend Fund
• Trustees, officers and employees of the Funds and Matthews, and their family members
Please note that some intermediaries may not be able to operationally accommodate additional investments in a closed Fund. The Board of Trustees reserves the right to close a Fund to new investments at any time (including further restrictions on one or more of the above categories of investors) or to re-open a closed Fund to all investors at any future date. If you have any questions about whether you are able to purchase shares of a closed Fund, please call 800-789-ASIA [2742].

Yes here:

Cash   Bonds   Equity
January:    43%     22%     35% 
As of 5/24:    50%     15%     34%

Last week I took profits and reduced both bond funds (sharply) and equity positions by approximately 10% in total. I will most likely continue the reduction in increments over the next few weeks, depending on what is happening. As I've mentioned before, I am very concerned with respect to a possibly extended period of instability with respect to the reappointment (or not) of Mr. Bernanke.
These reductions were made in tax-sheltered retirement accounts to avoid tax issues. The fund portfolio has had an approximate 10% gain since January, which is more than enough to keep us well ahead of inflation for the rest of this year, and I'm not comfortable with the risk/reward profile for the next few months.
The distribution shown above shows only a 1% equity difference (January/present) because all of the portfolio gain has been in the equity sector, while the bond sector has deteriorated slightly. In addition to last week's cutback, I've been transferring bond fund resources to equity funds incrementally since the beginning of the year.

Do studies exist defining success/failure of attempts to purchase the new holdings of successful funds and the number of stocks needed to be profitable in markets over a cycle or three? One would always be late, but that might not matter over time, and the management fee would be avoided. I don't really have time to pursue it now, but in retirement, I might. It should be better than the dartboard approach,but I would like to know if there is validation. One would have to attend to the sales, always late also, but the does it avoid reversion to the mean?

While I have not had a Health service Account I assume that the correct advice is somewhat similar to the standard advice for retirement funds which is if you are young be aggresive as you won't need the money (you may of course as accidents happen ) and as you grow older you are more likely to need it and so your asset allocation should be more conservative . This raises the question, can you have more than one fund in the account?.
In any event I think your asset allocation in this account should be whatever your planned allocation for your retirement account will be 5-10 years in the future.
Sorry for the lack of a specific response but other than a few of the Pimco bond funds I am not very familiar with most of these funds

Wish I were 40 again, knowing what I know now.
Investors in their forties should worry about fees; those in their sixties (probably, seventies for sure), about fund managers.
Oracle recommends good funds, but I'm not sure you need to be defensive at 40. If you think you would capitulate and sell out at a bottom, then defensive funds might be best for now, but you will have to become more aggressive in corrections, when index funds become an efficient purchase. This will happen several times before you are sixty. If you doubt your courage, buying after a 5% gain in the index will probably yield a profit.
Cash probably beats bonds for now, although River Park High Yield might be worthwhile.
Look at managers' ages, if you buy funds for the long term. That might make Seafarer appealing. More than half the gains will be overseas in the 20 years.
Currently, read GMO letters. If you can find an ETF in one of their recommended sectors, buy it and sell it when they change their opinion. (WOOD worked for me, but that was 2 years ago). I can't afford their minimums for their funds. While PIMCO may have interesting insights, I gave up and bought a couple of their funds.
If you really don't want to manage the money, pick a good fund family (TR Price, for example, for more "aggressive" investors; Vanguard for the conservative) with target date funds that weight equities at least 60% at retirement (or "cheat" upward on the retirement age if the equity allotment is lower) with low fees, and put the money there.
You may notice that I'm not paying much attention to fees, but I'm not 40. While it may be difficult for you to do, you may be better served by holding cash or River Park High Yield and waiting for a correction. This may be a fairly or overvalued market. Many people expect stocks to decline when the Fed reduces its bond purchases, which should occur in the next 2 years. I assume stocks will decline and that my fund managers will have anticipated this. You don't have to rely on their intelligence. Keep a lot of "powder" dry and pile in at that time.
If you want a presumably good fund manager to guide you, look at ARIVX. He's into cash now. When you see he has bought in, you will be somewhat late, but you're only 40, and he's into capital preservation, so you should be able to ride his coattails. He's fairly young also.