@Sven, I agree that SFGIX/SIGIX is a safer EM play than GVAL. Also, GVAL has inadequate average daily trading volume for our portfolio. We continue to own a small position in SIGIX.
@MikeM, I agree that FMIJX is the best LC Foreign fund out there at this time. At this time, DSEUX is worth watching but not buying.
@hank, Donald to Vladimir: "Большое спасибо !! "
@davidrmoran, Like you, I am intrigued by the CAPE methodology and I am convinced that it is the real deal in terms of beating the markets. I just kept searching CAPE and came up with the DL fund. Personally, I will wait for a track record to develop, and if it performs, then I will buy. FMIJX is really the fund to beat in the LC Foreign space.
Kevin

@kevindow
Wow, thanks so much for finding this 3-week-old fund. Where and how did you do that? I have had a difficult time doing so, for over a month. I had a long interesting chat a couple weeks ago w/ Fidelity brokerage and fund experts who even had trouble finding the CAPE EU version, and kept coming up with the European version of US CAPE instead.
Fido data for the funds are still not loaded --- searching lists nominal result at first, but then goes to 0 results. I am IMing w someone as we speak.
I am interested in jumping in now. A little. With DT increasingly making out with the Euro right, and also Brexit, what could go wrong ? :)

Here are two sites that I follow for global valuations:
Global Stock Market Valuations and Expected Future Returns
Global Stock Market Valuation Ratios
The following article demonstrates how CAPE and P/B reliably predict future market returns and market drawdowns in both domestic and foreign equity markets:
Predicting Stock Market Returns Using The Shiller Cape

Excellent excerpt from this last article:
"Existing research indicates that the cyclically adjusted Shiller CAPE has predicted long-term returns in the S&P 500 since 1881 fairly reliable for periods of more than 10 years. Furthermore, the results of this paper indicate that this was also the case for 16 other international equity markets in the period from 1979 to 2015, and in addition to this, CAPE also enabled equity market risks to be gauged. In this manner, low market valuations were not only followed by above average market returns but also lower drawdowns. On the contrary, high market valuations led to lower returns and faced higher market risks."
As far as investing, what does all this mean to me. Since CAPE matters globally, I am inclined to consider the ETF CAPE (however, average daily trading volume is too low for me), the ETF GVAL, and the mutual funds DSEEX/DSENX and DSEUX/DLEUX.
In our portfolio, I am confident in using CAPE and P/B for investment selection, and have an 18% position in DSEEX and a 10% position in PXH.
Kevin

According to the prospectus, it was backtested to hold up especially well in a downturn. For me, if it passes that test, it will be a buy and forget about it fund, at least until its success becomes watered down by imitators. The CAPE calculations are public and easy to imitate, though of course Gundlach's portion will remain his special domain.
I suspect I'll get my test soon enough.

Compare it with CAPE and you can see that the global-bond sauce augments it quite differently from (to a worrisome degree, some might suggest) a balanced fund. Thus far.

All good --- SSHFX was bruited by Consumer Reports some years ago --- but having today closely reviewed 3y+ outperformance and risks via MFO, M*, and Lipper, I predict beating them all of them in that LV space via DSENX / DSEEX / CAPE, and am moving even more moneys into DSEEX as we speak.

I have been a DL investor. I noted the buzz here on this board when this fund opened. It's certainly doing spectacularly. I read the short version of what this fund is about on the DL page. I understand the description, but not all the implications. Is this a fund that a rank amateur should be considering? DSEEX Cape-Schiller.

The Shiller Barclays CAPE US Core Sector Index -- underlying index for the CAPE ETN --has had attractive backtested returns during periods of both growth dominant and value dominant markets. So I am adequately confident to hold DSEEX in varying market conditions. In fact, last week I increased my DSEEX position from 15 to 18%. And like @davidmoran, I am confident that Gundlach will enable his mutual fund to have a higher upside/downside ratio relative to the CAPE ETN. But of course, the future is unknown.
Growth vs. Value
Backtested Returns of CAPE Index

CAPE vs. DSEEX
Kevin

Yeah, you mentioned that concern before. All I care about is that it continues to seriously outperform SP500, whose value components surely will dip at some point, yes, and all its div etfs.
With considerably less risk and downside movement (as analyzed for Sharpe / Sortino / Martin ratios and Ulcer Index per MFO, plus M* and Lipper's quintile rankings), CAPE alone has outperformed SP500 significantly, if I am reading the M* data right, by:
15% in '14
331% in '15
51% in '16
DSENX / DSEEX has improved on the above by another percent or so, amazingly, owing to Gundlach's secret global-bond sauces.
We have not had real testing dips, of course, but it does less badly whenever we have had the little ones the last 3+ years.
I learned about this consistent engine from Snowball / MFO writeup. (So hopefully sometime this year I should be able to do more in return than just the Amz thing.)

All good --- SSHFX was bruited by Consumer Reports some years ago --- but having today closely reviewed 3y+ outperformance and risks via MFO, M*, and Lipper, I predict beating them all of them in that LV space via DSENX / DSEEX / CAPE, and am moving even more moneys into DSEEX as we speak.

A striking spread between VIG and DVY, 12% vs <22%, the other usual suspects mostly in between. CAPE >18%.

Hi @VintageFreak
@JoJo26 noted: "Most overrated, BY FAR = Fidelity", @sma3 noted: "Fidelity Most too big too identical" and your notation of ditching your RiverPark and moving the monies to Eaton; I will note.....
>>>One must consider what might be found at a "fund house", sort what you find of value for your investing needs, quality of timely and accurate data processing and ease of use of the existing structure.
Fidelity has had a long list of mutual fund choices for a number of years, including what were first of a kind choices for the "common folk" investors with the introduction of the "select" funds. Fidelity also helped beat down the cost of investing from the full "load" fees charged by the big retail houses of the earlier period for mutual fund investing.
We use Fidelity (since late 1970's) as a portal for investments. There is nothing written stating that one's brokerage account is restricted to Fidelity offerings.
The portal is as flexible as needed by this house.
Over the years, from the point of Fidelity fund choices; we have traveled into these choices (may be a few that escape memory at this time):
FCNTX FDGRX FLPSX FAGIX FSPHX FLBIX SPHIX FRIFX FNMIX FINPX and several of the select funds.
The majority of our holdings today are not Fidelity funds; with the brokerage portal allowing travel to........well, everything, to which, we desire access.
If one can't find an investment path(s) within this fund house; I can't offer another solution.
Our 2 cents worth.
Catch

Sorry --- forget DSE_X, since that introduces bonds; I shoulda just asked about CAPE.
FT's lexicon defines quant as 'using computer-based models to inform their decisions on whether to buy or sell securities.'
>> ... the more discretion there is held by humans, the less quantitative the fund is [@msf].
Why I asked. Since there is no discretion for CAPE, seems to me it's as quant as can be. Hence in answer to your 'overrated' query, since for the last 4y it matches or outperforms (depending on timeframe) about all other SP500 constructions, it seemed to me that maybe it was the opposite of overrated. - ?
@MikeM ---
>> what 4 of the 10 sectors of the S&P the fund is invested in at any given time?
No. This is as recent as I have uncovered:
http://www.etnplus.com/US/7/en/details.app?instrumentId=174066

Wow. rforno alludes to a spectrum of quant funds ("quant-lite") and you ask me whether these funds fit the definition of quant funds. Especially since there doesn't appear to be a clear definition.
Okay, FWIW. First let's deal with a technical item. Even assuming that CAPE is a quant fund, IMHO DSEEX would not be because its objective and technique is to beat the model by using leverage and bonds. It does this in a manner similar to an equity-linked note that provides index exposure by buying index options and downside protection by using the remaining assets to purchase debt. DSEEX uses the latter to provide upside potential as opposed to downside protection. (It also amplifies exposure with leverage.) Besides, where's the model for the bonds?
My take on what a quant fund is includes two axes, a major one and a minor one. The major one is how static the model or models are. If they never change, what you've got is a fundamental index. The models may be updated often, in which case you've got a quant fund. What I care about is how good the team is in continually improving the models, recognizing that markets don't literally repeat. (For example, the "January effect" is thought to have gradually diminished over the years.)
The other axis is human intervention in security selection, as opposed to model design. ISTM that the more discretion there is held by humans, the less quantitative the fund is.
The CAPE ETN seems to operate the same way as any other fundamental index fund or note. It has a fixed set of rules that it uses to select securities and periodically "resets" its portfolio. Fundamental indexes may use a set of rules as simple as equal weighting or as complex as those in any fund. Call them quant funds if you wish, but then borrowing from rforno's sense of lite-ness I'd call them consomme, clear and nearly colorless.

@msf,
Are not CAPE / DSEEX / DSENX quant?

Hi Guys,
This Adam Robinson, the subject of the article, seems like one strange guy with a philosophy and an occupation that appear to conflict with each other.
These days he earns his living as a financial advisor to a number of International hedge funds. Yet he thinks the world is so complex that it is impossible to logically understand or explain. The explaining only comes after the fact. The understanding may escape us forever.
He said: " explanation is impossible. The world is simply too complex to understand, so I don’t bother trying." But he likely draws a heavy salary for recommending investments to take advantage of perceived economic and market trends. How honest is that?
My simple interpretation of his complexity perspective is that an investor would be wise to invest in broad Index products. If an understanding is impossible, covering the waterfront seems like a prudent strategy.
Pete Seeger said: “Any darn fool can make something complex; it takes a genius to make something simple.” I'm not that genius with respect to investing so I do the default Index option.
Best Holiday Wishes.

DLFNX is my only core (core-plus) dedicated US bond fund. It's just 2.51% of portfolio. But I think I can make better use of the $3,700.00 that's in there, particularly after the seismic shift following the election. I make few changes to my portfolio along the way because I do a lot of digging before choosing a fund. Originally, I wanted Gundlach's know-how at the helm, and I also did not yet have a domestic bond position at all. But such a fund as DLFNX, though respectable and reliable, will not help to get me where I want to go, in this changed landscape in 2017 and beyond.
Three-quarters of my stuff is with TRP, and if any change resulted in consolidating (and ergo simplifying) by putting more $$$ into TRP, that suits me. PRHYX is closed to new investors. What about RPIHX? I also see a very new fund: PTTFX which charges investors $20.00 above and beyond the ER if the balance is below $10,000.00--- but I could manage to initiate a starting position with $10K. ..... Seems to me that PTTFX is ostensibly the same sort of fund as MWTRX. "Total Return." But I can't even find a portfolio within that fund anywhere, even at the TRP website. ... I don't like RPSIX because it's a fund of funds.
.......Or, shall I just liquidate DLFNX? It's one of just 2 funds I own that are in a regular, taxable, investment account, rather than IRA. I could use the proceeds to step-up the size of my stake in PNM, an electric utility. PNM is in a transition, shedding nuclear and coal-fired plants but everything I look at tells me I should definitely commit more money to it. (It's less than 1% of portf. right now.)
Do I NEED a US domestic core-plus bond fund, after all? I am otherwise very well diversified. No question about THAT. Thanks for your responses. They are always helpful.

Inflation protection has been a recent topic on the board. I have linked below an article from M* and what they have to say on the subject.
"Surveying the fund & ETF landscape, from direct hedges like TIPS to indirect inflation-fighting plays such as floating rate loans and commodities" are covered in the article.
http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=783695
In addition, I have linked the M* fund report on PRDAX as it is one of the more diversified inflation fighting funds that M* writes about in the article.
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/PRDAX/quote.html
After reading the article and study of the above fund along with my review of a recent Xray report of my portfolio I have discovered that about a good third of my portfolio in some way offers inflation protection.
Perhaps, you will find the article of benefit as I did.
I wish all ... "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet

Hi Guys,
It would certainly improve the health of any portfolio if some pattern recognition would emerge from the countless historical investment studies that have been made. These studies have basically failed to yield lasting investment rules. Investment category returns are not persistent on an annual,basis. Here is one of many Links that visually demonstrate the commonplace marketplace vicissitudes:
https://www.mfs.com/wps/FileServerServlet?articleId=templatedata/internet/file/data/sales_tools/mfsvp_20yrsb_fly&servletCommand=default
If a pattern exists in these data, it surely escapes me. What is illustrated is that a rapid elevator is in operation. What is up will certainly go down, and in an unpredictable manner. Good luck on trying to time these events. I suppose that this is the data that supports the standard advice to broadly diversify and to be a patient investor by staying the course.
That conventional advice tilts the odds just a little. I am reminded of a famous saying by Damon Runyon: "The race is not always to the swift or the battle to the strong, but that is the way to bet". Going against market momentum is a tough way to consistently earn a decent return. The failures far outdistance the few success stories. The trend is your friend.
But getting down to the individual fund level, some winners do exist and persist. Good luck at identifying them early in their success cycle. Also, these outliers don't persist forever. Warren Buffett is a recent example of falling from grace. And that too is changing today as Buffett seems to be benefitting from Trump's election. Unlikely events do happen.
Best Wishes.

I suppose it is possible that Gund's secret bond sauce may suffer and the fund may just track CAPE. Not sure.
But while it did slump last Jan, like everything else (still less than SP500), it was flat prior, through the last rate mini-hike, from mid-Oct '15 onward until last early Jan slump.
Still outperformed SP500 at every interval.
So it may be largely unreactive.
I am wondering how PONDX will do. But then I trust that smarties like Gundlach and Ivascyn know what they are doing and that this next hike is baked in or planned for....

I can tell you that when an American Fund rep visited us when the F-class shares were introduced, he said they wanted to penetrate what they saw as a growing RIA landscape, access fee-based accounts (that term is such a crock), with lower-expense options. Unfortunately the expenses for many F-class shares are higher now than they were ten years ago.