Howdy,
A thank you to all who post the links, start and participate in the many fine commentaries woven into the message threads.
For those who don't know; I ramble away about this and that, at least once each week.
NOTE: For those who visit MFO, this portfolio is designed for near retirement, capital preservation and to stay ahead of inflation creep. This is not a buy and hold portfolio, and is subject to change on any given day; based upon perceptions of market directions. All assets in this portfolio are in tax-sheltered accounts; and any fund distributions are reinvested in the funds. Gains or losses are computed from actual account values.
While looking around.....Mixed Bag of Thoughts.....If we periodically need an excuse related to investment decisions; this study Memory and Doors may cause one to consider staying put in one room for a time period, during crucial investment thinking sessions.
A recent post Bond Funds, Total Return or Equity Hedge?
brought forth fewer responses than I expected. Our house will answer with "Total Return"; as that is always our goal, from whatever market sectors we may use. The original question is in place with the basis thought that the majority of investors have been equity investors for several decades. The new question may be whether this will be the case with new and current investors today. Equity investments surely will not disappear; but will this sector draw and continue to hold the most money?
Lastly, the most common proposition of bonds being used as an equity hedge; may become, "equity investments used as a "bond holdings hedge". All of us have our investment holdings placed, based upon whatever we perceive to be the best place for our money, set within our own risk and reward scale. In one fashion or another, we all have some form of a long/short, equity-income, balanced, flexible or other style of investing when looking at the overall portfolio holdings in place. We manage the managed funds, or at the very least; manage the passive or index holdings of our portfolios. We've all placed our investment mix to form a style box of one type or another, eh?
The data/numbers below have been updated.
As to sector rotations below (Fidelity funds); for the past week: (Note: any given fund in any of these sectors will have varing degrees of performance based upon where the manager(s) choose to be invested and will not directly reflect upon your particular fund holdings from other vendors.)
--- U.S. equity - 1.78% through + 2.2%, week avg. = + .36% YTD = + 15.5%
--- Int'l equity - .33% through + 2.5%, week avg. = + 1.06% YTD = + 13.4%
--- Select eq. sectors - 2.9% through + 3.9%, week avg. = + .51% YTD = + 15%
--- U.S./Int'l bonds - 1.7% through + 0.0%, week avg. = - .31% YTD = + 3.48%
--- HY bonds + .09% through + .50%, week avg. = + .33% YTD = + 11.77%
A Decent Overview, M* 1 Month through 5 Year, Multiple Indexes
You may consider our portfolio to be quite boring, but you may be assured that it moves and bends each and every day; from forces beyond our control.
I have added a few blips related to our portfolio and market observations at the below SELLs/BUYs and Portfolio Thoughts.
SELLs/BUYs THIS PAST WEEK: = Reduced our holdings in FINPX, with the proceeds added to FRIFX and PONDX.

Portfolio Thoughts:
Our holdings had a + .09 % move this past week. If one viewed the market data between the Friday's of Oct. 12-19, the numbers would indicate a so-so market in equity and bond sectors. The fact that large swings in both some equity and bond sectors had taken place between Monday and Friday of the week ending Oct. 19 would not be evident; but there were some very big swings in closing out the trading week. Most equity sectors ended the week in the positive, while many bond sectors were negative in returns. We'll continue to watch; but do not have plans at this time, to enter into equity areas.
Sidenote: The average return of 200 combined Fidelity retail funds across all sectors (week avg = + .40%, YTD + 12.4%). b> Still plodding along, and we will retain the below write from previous weeks; as what we are watching, still applies.
--- commodity pricing, especially the energy and base materials areas; copper and related.
--- the $US broad basket value, and in particular against the Euro and Aussie dollar (EU zone and China/Asia uncertainties).
--- price directions of U.S. treasury's, German bunds, U.K. gilts, Japanese bonds; and continued monitoring of Spanish/Italian bond pricing/yield.
--- what we are watching to help understand the money flows: SHY, IEF, TLT, TIPZ, STPZ, LTPZ, LQD, EMB, HYG, IWM, IYT & VWO; all of which offer insights reflected from the big traders as to the quality/risk, or lack of quality/risk; in various bond sectors.
The Funds Boat is at anchor, riding in the small waves, watching the weather and behind the breakwater barrier. To the high praise of MFO and the members, it is very difficult to find a topic to note here that has not been placed into the discussion boards. Excellence, as usual.
I have retained the following links for those who may choose to do their own holdings comparison against the fund types noted.
The first two links to Bloomberg are for their list of balanced/flexible funds; although I don't always agree with the placement of fund styles in their categories.
Bloomberg Balanced
Bloomberg Flexible
These next two links are for conservative and moderate fund leaders YTD, per MSN.
Conservative Allocation
Moderate Allocation
A reflection upon the links above. We attempt to establish a "benchmark" for our portfolio to help us "see" how our funds are performing. Aside from viewing many funds within the balanced/flexible funds rankings (the above links), a quick and dirty group of 5 funds (below) we watch for psuedo benchmarking are the following:
***Note: these week/YTD's per M*
VWINX .... + .37% week, YTD = + 9.80%
PRPFX .... - .14% week, YTD = + 6.73%
SIRRX ..... + .04% week, YTD = + 6.07%
TRRFX .... + .24% week, YTD = + 10.11%
VTENX ... + .12% week, YTD = + 8.96%
Such are the numerous battles with investments attempting to capture a decent return and minimize the risk.
We live and invest in interesting times, eh? Hey, I probably forgot something; and hopefully the words make some sense. Comments and questions always welcomed.
Good fortune to you, yours and the investments.
Take care,
Catch
---Below is what M* x-ray has attempted to sort for our portfolio, as of June 1, 2012---
From what I find, M* has a difficult time sorting out the holdings with bond funds.
U.S./Foreign Stocks 1.9%
Bonds 93.9% ***
Other 4.2%
Not Classified 0.00%
Avg yield = 3.72%
Avg expense = .55%
***about 18% of the bond total are high yield category (equity related cousins)
---This % listing is kinda generic, by fund "name"; which doesn't always imply the holdings, eh?
-Investment grade bond funds 28.2%
-Diversified bond funds 22.4%
-HY/HI bond funds 14.5%
-Total bond funds 32.4%
-Foreign EM/debt bond funds .6%
-U.S./Int'l equity/speciality funds 1.9%
This is our current list: (NOTE: I have added a speciality grouping below for a few of fund types)
---High Yield/High Income Bond funds
FAGIX Fid Capital & Income
SPHIX Fid High Income
FHIIX.LW Fed High Income
DIHYX TransAmerica HY
---Total Bond funds
FTBFX Fid Total
PTTRX Pimco Total
---Investment Grade Bonds
ACITX Amer. Cent. TIPS Bond
DGCIX Delaware Corp. Bd
FBNDX Fid Invest Grade
FINPX Fidelity TIPS Bond
OPBYX Oppenheimer Core Bond
---Global/Diversified Bonds
FSICX Fid Strategic Income
FNMIX Fid New Markets
DPFFX Delaware Diversified
LSBDX Loomis Sayles
PONDX Pimco Income fund (steroid version)
PLDDX Pimco Low Duration (domestic/foreign)
---Speciality Funds (sectors or mixed allocation)
FRIFX Fidelity Real Estate Income (bond/equity mix)
---Equity-Domestic/Foreign
NONE outright, with the exception of equities held inside of some of the above funds.

Retirement is a place far away for many investors. Today's 30 year old likely has few thoughts about being older someday, or having a plan that far into the future. However, many of us here; have "been there, done that" and know how fast the clock of life moves along. At the very least, even a most modest investment plan into a balanced investment (50/50 equity-bonds), until a younger investor gains more knowledge; would be a prudent choice with a percentage of one's income. Several factors are in place today regarding "retirement monies".
1. traditional defined benefit pensions continue to be removed in the private sector,
2. and are being replaced by defined contribution plans (the individual retirement plan);
3. which leaves Roth IRA's as another choice to build a retirement portfolio.
This is not all inclusive, by any means; but indicates how much an individual will be on their own to establish a retirement plan. The next 20-40 years of retirees will find a much different monetary picture versus today's retiree's.
Aside from your own plan, you should help others you know to understand the future ramifications. First, an emergency money fund; then investments. Start and continue learning about establishing sound household budgets, as well as investing principles. The young ones today need to understand the value of time upon the compounding of their investment returns; as with every day that passes, will be the loss of this one time event that the clock of time will continue to erode.
Lastly, and this will not apply to all households; is the value of your own skills and time related to investments. When one saves money via their own skills, this too is a form of investing; or at least saving money that may be invested.
I have always been inclinced toward the technical side of life. I have earned a good living from these skills. These skills and desire have always been present in daily life, too; related to repairs/maintenance around the house and all related. I have paid myself a very substantial wage from some of this work by eliminating "outside labor", which is generally half of the cost of many repairs. A bonus being that I learned while doing, too. A plumber in our area will need $100 just to arrive at the house; and then the hourly rate and parts clock begins to run. While there may be some who will not be home owners in retirement; for those who are, what you used to "take care of" around the house will find a time when you can not or choose not to be the "fix-it" person. All of this will add up to lots of little piles of expense, that can become a large pile of money flows that will require spending retirement monies that may not have been in the original budget. In spite of the tv and print ads; you may have to postpone that retirement vacation to Bali !!!
For the young ones, don't forget to value your "D.I.Y." time; but also don't forget, that this will end at some point in the future.
Depending upon individual circumstances, of course; there are a larger number of retiree's today who also did not plan on the kids returning home to live, or perhaps monetarily bailing out their children. Things change, eh? One can attempt to prepare; or just say "to hell with it" and take the trip to Bali. To each, their own direction.
Hopefully, others may add some thoughts to this vast area of consideration.
Regards,
Catch

I believe Berkowitz is a top notch fund manager. So for that reason I would hold the fund. I don't own FAIRX, but I do own FAAFX. It's been just as volatile as FAIRX.
What's important in my opinion is how much this fund or other aggressive funds you may own affect your overall portfolio's volatility. In my case, FAAFX is 6% of my 401k portfolio. It's volatile by itself, but I still keep the overall standard deviation of my portfolio as a whole to less then or equal to my bench mark, TRRAX (TRP 2010 retirement fund).
So I guess IMO, I would hold on to a Berkowitz fund but at a percentage you are comfortable with. FAIRX and FAAFX are focused funds that make big sector bets. That makes for inherent volatility. But I believe this manager and fund will be a winner over market cycles.

Howdy MJG,
The original question area was to, "who is this retail investor?"; as is noted in the data posts regarding the transistions away from equity and into bonds and other areas.
I would merely enjoy knowing the data of "retail investor".
I do believe this time is different; aside from too many scholars in print and projected with speech via the television, stating otherwise.
Beginning with early 2009, I found too many of these folks who threw around data about a recovery of this or that; and of course, with their reasons.
On Jan. 1, 2011, the first baby boomers turned 65. And now, every day for the next 19 years, about 10,000 more will cross that threshold, according to the Pew Research Center. By 2030, when all baby boomers will have turned 65, about 18 percent of the nation's population will be at least 65 or older compared with about 13 percent now, Pew said.
The current percentage of boomers relative to the overall population of the U.S. is 26%.
This time is different, if not only from the standpoint of the amount of monies controlled by the boomers; retired or still employed. Boomers will stop contributions to retirement plans; while those boomers a bit older will begin withdraws from personal retirement plans. This will represent hugh money flows for this group; and I can not imagine how this will not affect other investors, to some extent. The various other asides have to do with technology, manufacturing loss in the U.S.; demographics (boomers/aging population), tremendous debt burdens both public and private; and of course, there are many other factors, too.
There is much to be added to the stew pot before the recipe is finished.
You noted: "The problem with the human tsunami into fixed income products is inflation. That too is wealth killer."
Yes, indeed; inflation is a nasty and silence killer of investments for many invested in improper areas. Of course, part of the drive from global central banks for interest rate structuring, is the prospect of deflation. Perhaps this too, is a portion of our investing future.
As to "fixed income" you noted, and the use of the words with investing; we note for our house; that a CD is the nearest form of "fixed income" we view.
All other income that may be brought forth is "floating income". If one is in the right places at the right times; the float will be to the investors favor.
Interesting times indeed. Thank you for the input; and I can agree with you and others as to many folks have left the party; perhaps having regained enough monies to be breakeven from 2008/2009 and knowing or otherwise, may choose to take the chance with inflation and a much lower return on investments. Also, that if the retail investor doesn't know and respect the bond market and what the drivers may be; some may be surprised to the sad side.
Regards,
Catch

Some of the outflows are, I think, statistical anomalies. It appears that some money is flowing from "pure" stock funds to various sorts of hybrid funds (allocation, retirement date, balanced), a category which the Post article seems not to recognize.
The Investment Company Institute has data on global fund flows, sizes and numbers. Since 2010, the number of stock funds has increased by 500 worldwide; the number of hybrid funds has increased by 1200. Assets in "pure" stock funds are down $540 billion, assets in hybrid and "other" funds are up about $110 billion. Net sales of such funds has been positive in 6 of the past 8 quarters while net sales of pure stock funds has been positive in 3 of 8 quarters.
http://www.ici.org/research/stats/worldwide/ww_06_12
Not a complete answer certainly, but perhaps another piece of it.
David

First, there are legitimate reasons to pull some $$ out of stocks. Markets have roughly doubled since March, 2009. Provided you stayed true to your allocation model - meaning you bought during the downturn - you have booked some nice profits over that time and have re-balanced back into cash and other fixed income instruments.
Secondly - to an extent - in some areas of fixed income it's likely a case of the monkey chasing his tail. Small investors perceive bond funds as safe, whereas many such funds hold large amounts of junk bonds or mortgage-backed securities of dubious merit. Investors may not fully appreciate the amount of risk in these securities and by pouring $$ in they further fuel inflated values.
Thirdly, its very likely that panicked retail investors are not so much booking profits as shying away in fear, and in many instances are raidimg retirement savings to compensate for the decline in "real" inflation adjusted income over the past decade and also to compensate for the lost borrowing power their houses once offered. I personally know of workers who pulled every dime out of their 401ks when they reached 59.5, even though they still had years to go until retirement.
Finally, as humans we like what's "hot." (I recently pitched my last "leisure" suit from 1975-:) Though stocks have done very well past 3+ years, they haven't yet caught the public fancy. The local barber no longer mentions the stock market while trimming a few hairs. The cigar shop I frequent no longer displays CNBC on a monitor all day long. Can't recall last time heard folks on a plane or in an airport lounge talking about stocks. Point: It takes time for things to gain favor among the public. Give the bull a few more years - with the Dow flirting at 20k or maybe even 25k - and the retail $$ will begin pouring in again.

Here's the full title for the 1st article - "Investors exit stock mutual funds in Sept at fastest pace of year; Bonds, ETFs hold appeal" - Yikes, more of the same ... Starting to wonder if they took all their money out three months ago and are now employing some sort of leverage? IMHO, if you're under 50 and saving for retirement, that's the wrong move. Of course, short-term anything can happen.

It is interesting paper. But the Contrary Connie results come with bigger spread and believe few people can tolerate that. It is riskier and thus it has a wider range of outcomes. Who wants to expose themselves to such high variability of outcomes that late in life when compensating for unfavorable outcomes becomes increasingly difficult.
Furthermore, the ability to take risk increases if you actually achieved a big enough portfolio and more. Having relieved from the worry of meeting the basic needs of retirement, the more portion can be invested in a riskier way for potentially passing to other generations, charity etc. if that money is never needed.

Reply to @VintageFreak:
WBMIX is definitely available in Firstrade retirement accounts for a $500 minimum with a TF per my actual trade. Also, it appears that this class is available in TDA retirement accounts for no minimum per their web site. Obviously, one would have to verify this with an actual trade.
Kevin

So basically...
When you buy more important than what you buy.
Luck is a big factor.
One should worry about worse case scenario not dream of best case scenario
Buy Camry not Lexus
Err on the wrong side and plan to die with money in the bank instead of fretting about how much you can withdraw in retirement.
In conclusion...
Low interest rates are not incentivizing banks to lend since 4% "free" profit is just fine
Consumers are NOT going to spend and sometimes CAN'T - mortgage interests may be low but who is qualifiying?
We are shit out of luck. No really.
I'm quite depressed.

Own 24 ETF's and 45 mutual funds, for many of Accipiters reasons but also for 2 other important reasons. Even great funds tank. One example is Janus Worldwide. By having multiple "great funds in a similiar class when one tanks or is doing poorly it is sold and the tax hit is much lower than otherwise. It is a great tax planning tool! Capital gains are lowered. Also in retirement it is much easier to sell one position fully and use its proceeds for living expenses than having to choose specific shares in large holdings. My portfolio is very substantial and many may think this is ludicrous but it works for me and I manage it myself with great tax savings.

Reply to @MikeM: "limited" means to existing investors and/or to certain qualified retirement accounts. it is definitely available in one of my 401K and I have been invested in RYSEX for several years.

Windsor was managed for decades by the legendary John Neff, who never managed Windsor II.
You're right about the timing, though - " in May of [1985], at the urging of its star manager, Vanguard closed Windsor to all but existing shareholders in retirement plans such as Keoghs and Individual Retirement Accounts. Money Magazine 10/12/87. Windsor II launched (with James Barrow at the helm from day one through today) on June 24, 1985. (From prospectus.)
What I vaguely remember about Windsor in the 80s is a sterling reputation and a reopening. I took a look at its holdings, which had a hefty dose of American car companies, and passed. I should have tried to understand value investing a bit better.

I'm holding LOTS of PREMX. Yes, your premise makes sense on its face. But since (early) retirement, I'm watching more Bloomberg tv. There are still FOREIGN places where interests rates suddenly, surprisingly, drop. And in some other countries, central banks are EASING, stimulating, like the USA. I saw something along those lines just last night. My other bond holding is domestic, with Uncle Jeffrey Gundlach: DLFNX. He has me convinced that he knows what he's doing.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1444822/000119312512400007/d414641d497.htm
AQR FUNDS
Supplement dated September 21, 2012 (“Supplement”)
To the Class I and N Prospectus, dated May 1, 2012 (“Prospectus”),
of the AQR Risk Parity Fund
This Supplement updates certain information contained in the above-dated Prospectus. You may obtain copies of the Fund’s Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information free of charge, upon request, by calling (866) 290-2688, or by writing to AQR Funds, P.O. Box 2248, Denver, CO 80201-2248. Please review this important information carefully.
Effective at the close of business November 16, 2012 (the “Closing Date”), the AQR Risk Parity Fund (the “Fund”) will be closed to new investors, subject to certain exceptions. Existing shareholders of the Fund will be permitted to make additional investments in the Fund and reinvest dividends and capital gains after the Closing Date in any account that held shares of the Fund as of the Closing Date.
Notwithstanding the closing of the Fund, you may open a new account in the Fund (including through an exchange from another AQR Fund) and thereafter reinvest dividends and capital gains in the Fund if you meet the Fund’s eligibility requirements and are:
• A current shareholder of the Fund as of the Closing Date—either (a) in your own name or jointly with another or as trustee for another, or (b) as beneficial owner of shares held in another name opening a (i) new individual account or IRA account in your own name, (ii) trust account, (iii) joint account with another party or (iv) account on behalf of an immediate family member;
• A qualified defined contribution retirement plan that offers the Fund as an investment option as of the Closing Date purchasing shares on behalf of new and existing participants;
• An investor opening a new account at a financial institution and/or financial intermediary firm that (i) has clients currently invested in the Fund and (ii) has been pre-approved by the Adviser to purchase the Fund on behalf of certain of its clients. Investors should contact the firm through which they invest to determine whether new accounts are permitted; or
• A participant in a tax-exempt retirement plan of the Adviser and its affiliates and rollover accounts from those plans, as well as employees of the Adviser and its affiliates, trustees and officers of the Trust and members of their immediate families.
Except as otherwise noted, once an account is closed, additional investments or exchanges from other AQR Funds will not be accepted unless you are one of the investors listed above. Investors may be required to demonstrate eligibility to purchase shares of the Fund before an investment is accepted.
The Fund reserves the right to (i) make additional exceptions that, in its judgment, do not adversely affect the Adviser’s ability to manage the Fund, (ii) reject any investment, including those pursuant to exceptions detailed above, that it believes will adversely affect the Adviser’s ability to manage the Fund, and (iii) close and re-open the Fund to new or existing shareholders at any time.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR YOUR FUTURE REFERENCE

Reply to @scott: Diversified bond funds, even a lot of just regular ol' intermediate core-ish bond funds, have a fair bit more on the menu than gov't & high-grade corps. One current example of a hot bond sector (in which many diversified and some concentrated bond funds invest) is non-agency mortgages.
The other thing to keep in mind is that there's a perception that practically everything is overpriced, and if that's the case, you're better off with relatively more bonds in a portfolio because of the lower risk of bonds overall. The scare stories about bonds mostly focus on what could happen to long-term Treasuries.
Look at 2005 (actually about mid-04 to mid-06) to see how badly diversified bond funds got whacked when interest rates went up last time. (Right, they didn't at all.) Not to say that it'll be exactly the same next time, but it's an indication of the basic risk of loss in a good bond fund when rates rise. Compare that to what happens to stocks in a correction or bear.
Then there's the retirement angle, which as has been discussed here, is leading people to reduce stock risk in their portfolios.
There's nothing irrational about buying/owning diversified bonds in general.

Reply to @CathyG: PAUDX was down around 7% in 2008, and while past results are not indicative necessarily of future returns, PAUDX is less aggressive than its sister fund, Pimco All Asset, which cannot short.
Manager Rob Arnott is highly regarded, and I think PAUDX is really at the top of my list when it comes to "relatively stable" multi-asset funds for those in/near retirement age.
You can hear Arnott's take on the current economic situation here:
http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/Broadcast/Entries/2012/9/13_Rob_Arnott.html (previous interviews with Arnott are listed on the side) and that may give you a better take on his take going forward in the near-to-mid term.

Hi, VF!
Maybe their real asset ETF: SPDR SSgA Multi-asset Real Return (RLY)? SSgA has a fairly serious and useful discussion of the topic (http://www.ssga.com/definedcontribution/making-retirement-work/our-point-of-view/real-assets.html) but I don't see a particularly clear link from the discussion to the product.
For what it's worth,
David

Thank you so much for your comments, they're greatly appreciated. I don't really want to share the entire portfolio and haven't, because I think one:) It's really a very eccentric portfolio and has risks that I think are beyond or much beyond what I want to recommend those who are in/near retirement age. 2:) A good deal of it is individual stocks, which I really don't recommend because of risk and some of them are not terribly liquid. The stocks are also more reflecting my themes and interests (some of which aren't themes covered by funds/etfs), which understandably may not be someone else's.
I will, however, share some highlights and lowlights on both sides (stocks and funds.) There are more on both sides - this is just a sample.
Stocks:
* Jardine Matheson. This hasn't done a whole lot this year, but it remains a very long-term holding, as I think it remains a compelling, blue-chip play on Asia. A very large conglomerate, this owns everything from the Mandarin Oriental to 7-11s to real estate to IKEAs to car dealerships to...on and on. The company has been around since the 1800's. I really like the Asian conglomerates, although Jardine is - I think - the most consistent. Hutchsion Whampoa (which is much more global, owning everything from a Canadian oil company to infrastructure to ports to a massive health and beauty chain in Europe and Asia) has some really compelling assets, but I dumped it after it didn't fare that well.
* Glencore (D'oh.) This has been a real disappointment, but I'm not selling - Glencore is like the Goldman Sachs of the commodities world - they have a massive trading operation, combined with a massive amount of assets around the world, including buying Viterra earlier this year and being in the midst of taking over Xstrata, which has been one of the most bizarre M & A situations I've ever seen, even requiring Tony Blair to step in and mediate between Glencore and a Sovereign Wealth Fund who was one of Xstrata's largest shareholders. Thankfully I didn't buy at the IPO last year (whose prospectus was a whopping 600 pages), but still a real downer. I still like the company and particularly like the real assets they own, including - In Australia, Paraguay, Russia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, Glencore farms 270,000 hectares of owned or leased land. If the merger/takeover/whatever it is today of the rest of Xstrata goes through, that will result in, as a Bloomberg article put it well, "The combined company would be a vertically- integrated commodities giant, with an interest in the production, transportation and trading of everything from the food on consumers’ plates to the metal used for their utensils."
* Brookfield Infrastructure. A highly unique spin-off from parent Brookfield Infrastructure, this owns literal infrastructure - everything from toll roads in Chile to ports in Europe to rail in Australia. This is sort of public version of a private infrastructure fund, and it is opportunistic; what it owns in five years may look very different than what it owns today. This is an MLP though, so it does produce a k-1 at tax time. It does yield around 4.3%. I also like the parent company, but not as much as BIP.
* Singtel (Singapore Telecom) I particularly like Singtel for what it offers - not only does it offer a play on mobile in the region and a nice dividend, but the company owns stakes in several other telcos in the region, giving it exposure to Thailand, Indonesia, India, Australia, Bangladesh and elsewhere. The company also has a new division that is actively seeking start-ups in areas related to mobile/mobile technology, the main one so far being Amobee, a large global mobile advertising firm, which I think is a pretty fascinating little company (http://www.amobee.com/) and could develop into something really sizable down the road as mobile continues to be such an enormous theme.
As for Amobee, I think this article is a particularly interesting read - "Why Mobile Operators Are Becoming Mad Men": http://techcrunch.com/2012/03/17/mobile-mad-men/ (really good discussion on the future of mobile advertising, which has been such a big thing lately, with Facebook's mobile problems and elsewhere.)
I think my interest in the mobile space is not Apple (although Apple will continue to do well), but to think about and find ideas that benefit from the soaring amount and use of smartphones. What do all these phones in the world lead to in terms of new experiences - mobile advertising, mobile payments, etc. etc. etc. In other words, what develops over the next decade in terms of new experiences from having all these mobile phones in existence. In terms of mobile payments, you're seeing Visa and all the other card companies pushing for it and looking to serve the "unbanked" (their term: "financial inclusion" - see below) , especially in developing markets. Telecom companies are realizing that they have to move beyond just offering plans and look for further ways to engage with and deliver information and experiences to customers.
See Visa's "Currency of Progress" channel on Youtube (http://www.youtube.com/user/CurrencyofProgress?feature=watch), and incredibly slick mini-documentaries, such as this one focusing on Rwanda -
and this one for Visa's "Vision for the Future":

Finally, "Making Mobile Payments a Reality around the World":

Additionally, Visa (which I don't own, but using it as an example of something that's benefiting from the change in payment tech - discussed here http://seekingalpha.com/article/857581-buy-visa-a-secular-growth-story-of-financial-technology?source=feed) is pushing for change in the US to EMV chip payment cards instead of the familiar strip. This has been done already in other parts of the world, but Visa and it's TIP (Technology Innovation Program) is going to force change - "Second, Visa is requiring that all U.S. merchant acquirers and sub-processors must be able to support chip transactions no later than April 1, 2013. Third, Visa is implementing a liability shift for domestic and cross-border counterfeit POS transactions effective Oct. 15, 2015. This means that the liability for fraudulent transactions made in retail establishments that have not installed chip card terminals will fall to merchant acquirers and merchants." (There are many articles above this, but here's one - http://blog.gemalto.com/blog/2011/08/16/the-payment-times-they-are-a-changing/)
It's kind of stunning to me that there is not an ETF dealing with all of the various aspects of mobile - smartphones, mobile payments, etc. There's an ETF for everything else.
* Graincorp - Stategic/real assets. Graincorp is an Aussie company that owns silos, owns the railroad that takes the grain to the ports and owns the port terminal operations to take the grain elsewhere in the world. The also own malting and edible oils operations. From a Bloomberg aricle: "With GrainCorp owning the silos where farmers dump their harvests, railroad cars that carry loads to east coast ports, and the elevators used to load ships, the deregulation gave the company a “virtual, natural monopoly” on the eastern seaboard, according to Justin Crosby, a policy director at the Sydney- based NSW Farmers’ Association, which represents 10,000 members, half of them grain growers." Volatile, but has a very nice dividend policy of returning between 40 and 60 per cent of net profit after tax to shareholders across the business cycle. That's a very nice dividend currently, and hopefully the dividend can improve/be more consistent as the company diversifies the business further, with the edible oils business being an entirely new addition as of a couple of weeks ago.
Funds:
Alpine Global Infrastructure - Yes, it's expensive. No, Alpine is not a great fund house. This is, however, a solid fund in the category with a very nice dividend. I continue to have a lot of investments in various infrastructure plays.
Marketfield. Really fits in with my desire for funds that are highly flexible, which I think will continue to be of importance over the next decade. I've found some of the new "long-biased" long-short funds quite interesting - Whitebox being another.
RIT Capital Partners. This is a UK investment trust chaired by Jacob Rothschild (RIT = Rothschild Investment Trust) This has not had a particularly good year, either, although I have no questions about continuing to hold, given the fund's mixture of internally managed stocks, external funds, private equity (it recently purchased a considerable stake in the Rockefeller Financial Group - http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/05/30/rockefeller-and-rothschild-banking-dynasties-join-forces/) and real assets. It does have an excellent long-term track record. Short-term, not so much, but it is a long-term holding.
EM - MSMLX, MACSX and AZENX. I had Pimco's Multi-Asset EM fund, but boy did it disappoint. I've owned DEM off and on, but a fair amount of EM fund assets went to Jardine.
Ivy Asset - Again, much discussed already.
In the holy (bleep) department - Janus Overseas. Thankfully, only a small position. Added a little bit recently because really, I'm not sure it could get much worse and I'd rather add to an EM/foreign-heavy fund that's done terribly than something that's been doing tremendously well.
Lastly, I had some mild hedges in ultrashort index positions, but have taken those off as of a few days ago.

I did a little checking - the duplicity, though still probably sizable, is nowhere near as large as the raw numbers would suggest. I used M* to look at all unique (just one share class of) funds managed by Fidelity, and how many of those did not have 10 year records. (Typically, though not always I believe, M*'s screener looks at the oldest share class.) I came up with almost the identical number as David.
But around 60 of those are Fidelity Advisor funds, which are often (but not always, e.g. Fidelity Advisor Mid Cap II) clones of noload funds. A spot check showed that both the Advisor fund and the no load equivalent started about the same time, so we can likely remove 40-50 funds as clones (i.e. just as one would not count multiple share classes as different funds, I'm not counting clones either). Then there are the Fidelity Freedom K funds - clones of Fidelity Freedom funds, but with lower expenses and marketed to retirement plans.
Then there are all the target date funds - targeted every five years. These are different funds, using the "same" strategies, but legitimately different in the sense that their mixes are well defined and different. Where there is arguably overlap is that Fidelity started a series of such funds, for retirement plans only (Freedom Index 20xx) that use index funds rather than actively manged funds as their underlying holdings. But index funds vs. actively managed funds seems a fair distinction, IMHO.
In short, a good chunk of the high number is due to multiple share classes (or clones) showing up as "new" funds, and a good chunk is because of target date funds that inflate the figure you're seeing. Not to say that Fidelity didn't launch a whole slew of truly distinct funds, just they didn't create anywhere near 156 different funds.