What is his record for calling turns in markets? Not great is my guess.
http://www.thinkadvisor.com/2017/06/30/gmos-grantham-higher-stock-prices-arent-permanent?eNL=595122ed160ba02930baf14f&utm_source=TA_PortfolioBuilder&utm_medium=EMC-Email_editorial&utm_campaign=07032017

Hi guys!
I will say only this: in our retirement package, you had to be 55 with 10 years of employment. Also, it was not offered to office people. Also, not to engineering personnel. At our plant (we have 20 worldwide), this is the second time in 10 years they have done this with us. Other plants have had packages also, so it must be something they can do at their discretion to pare down production as necessary. 'Cause we're non-union? Who knows?
God bless
the Pudd

I really like my equally weighted S&P 500 Index fund (VADAX) as it is cost effective for me to buy through Invesco's nav exchange and purchase program. When I choose to load equity ballast within my portfolio this is the fund I most often use. It is probally not for everyone but it has worked well for me through the years. Currently, it makes up about 5% of my large/mid-cap sleeve found in the growth area of my portfolio. Should we get a nearterm pullback in the market I will most likely become a buyer of this fund as all of the other eleven funds held in the growth area currently are at full allocation accounting for about thirty percent of my portfolio's equity allocation.
From a style orientation it consist of a mix of about half large caps and half mid caps stocks and at times a slight representation to small cap stocks. Year-to-date it trails the cap weighted S&P 500 Index; but, over longer periods of time has out performed it. Plus, it rebalances every quarter something the Index itself does not do being cap weighted.

Fidelity targeted about 7 percent of its workforce, all of them employees who were age 55 or older and had been with the company for at least 10 years.

Isn't that constitute age discrimination?

That makes it more compelling to me. I am not one for market-cap weightings.
RSP now gets added to BRLIX (.15) on my list for possible 'broad market' places to throw money.

FYI: More than 1,500 workers with Fidelity Investments, most of them long-time employees, have taken a voluntary buyout package, the first the company has offered in its history as it braces for dramatic shifts in money management.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2017/06/30/more-than-fidelity-workers-take-buyouts/IyiNQtFLaZo8V5VD2MdjKK/story.html

Oh, sorry. What I've done is to use the SPDR etfs for the sectors the fund is in as of the most recent info I can get and I just allocate 25% to each even though that isn't completely accurate. For the bonds, I either use nothing because I'm reviewing something that is focused on equity or I just use DLSNX, their Low Duration Bond fund, because the bond information in the X-ray tool is pretty limited and it has a duration and credit quality that is close enough for my purposes (based simply on reviewing the statistics available on the Doubleline website). I allocate the same amount to the bonds as the equity and the total, if I'm using amounts rather than percentages, is double what I actually have invested in DSEEX. This gives me percentages that are based on a larger portfolio than I actually have, because the money in DSEEX is counted twice. I tried once to input a short money market position to reflect the effective leverage of the swaps but the X-ray tool wouldn't allow it.

FYI: The bond market is flashing warning signals that bad times may be ahead for the stock market and the economy.
That is probably not what most people want to hear — stock investors especially. In the first half of the year, after all, stocks have performed spectacularly. The Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index returned 9 percent through June, churning out gains so regularly that it may seem churlish to note that clouds are appearing on the horizon.
Yet like a long-range forecast about a possible storm, an old and trusted financial indicator is telling us that trouble may be looming.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/30/your-money/clouds-are-forming-over-the-bond-market.html

@expatsp: good question ... especially since I am in the middle of a portfolio re-organization (for myself and my wife) to better reflect how likely we are to rebalance and etc. !
Some background...
In general, before I buy into a fund, I do a lot of research. I consider my asset allocation, role in portfolio, etc. I don't look at simple average returns without also considering downside / upside capture and cumulative returns. I used to go so far as to do a correlation and simulation exercise to determine if the candidate fund would add bang to buck while acting differently than my core 4-5 funds. I like managers who know how to hold cash.
Before moving out of a fund, I try to be very sensitive to my own biases and put the breaks on any temptation to jump in and out of funds. I want stuff I can buy and hold; I don't want to fall into the trap of "OMG I should be doing something all the time" and thus getting low investor returns because I can't leave well enough alone. I remain sensitive to the fact that solid active managers will underperform. I have held funds that have underperformed over 3 year intervals for example, and have gone on to deliver long-term above-average results. So, I want something more than just a bad stretch to make a move. I don't mind a concentrated portfolio, and philosophically am skeptical of crowd phenomena.
FAIRX fulfilled all of my buy criteria when I first became a shareholder in 2007. I resisted the temptation to go all-in during its heyday, and kept it at 5% of my portfolio, in a sleeve that I consider alternate approaches. I have not rotated into or out of the fund, and have made money on it since I bought in. Oddly enough, however, in holding FAIRX I would have done no better since 2007 than if I had bought and held a decent bond fund...
So, all that said...
I guess I have held on to FAIRX in large part because of the biases and philosophy noted above, and its small share of my total portfolio. But also I made a career change in 2011, and have increasingly had much, much less time for investing (because I have less time for anything). I was also insufficiently sensitive to the issues that LewisBraham notes above. I always had more of an emotional attachment to the FAIRX philosophy, then to Bruce himself. That said, I was ticked off by Bruce's AUM and publicity spree, as well as what might be considered flaws in personal judgement (Barron's piece), but just never got around to making a move, because I bought into his theses. Now, silly as it seems, the issue is identifying the suitable fund to rotate into given my current portfolio.
D.S.

Hi,
I most likely will add to my single state muni fund (FMTNX) when the US 10 Year reaches a yield of 2.5%, or thereabouts, with current yield at about 2.3%. Remember, generally bond prices fall as their yield rises. I hold this fund as part of my infrastructure theme along with PGUAX since muni bonds fund a lot of local government infrastructure projects. Plus, the fund is both state and federal tax exempt, for me, unless it has capital gains to disburse.

I have no idea if the firm will be proven right or wrong but it would obviously be more useful to know what to invest in rather than being told what won't work. I personally don't anticipate ever investing in a cd paying less than 2% but might invest in a lower paying investment with excellent liquidity.One possible approach for the next 10 years invest in a relatively high paying safe investment such as a 5 year cd with a low penalty for early closeout i.e with decent liquidity and close it out when the market drops 25% which is something that will probably occur at least once in the net 10 years.Yes, i recognise that this strategy might not work but would be pleased with other suggestions

@davidmoran, I take it you mean the price today, the 30th? Strong possibility it was just buyers helping it catch up with the premium narrowing of the 29th, when the NAV was up 1% and price flat. None of the other Pim MS CEF NAVs were up nearly that much - second highest was 0.2% for PCM, and most of the others were flat. So the NAV jump must have been something specific to PDI, but what, who knows?
Might also have been a bit of the T dip buying involved, which bumped some CEFs today, including some munis. PCI, which did well on price today too, not so great on NAV yesterday, had been lagging a bit for a while, so maybe PCI also caught a bid based on the combination of those two things - recent lag, T dip buying.
Couldn't find any news of July dividends being declared - the month's divs are usually announced on the first biz day of the new month, same day as the previous month's payout, if I'm recalling the schtick correctly, e.g., here.

I believe I read where VG is the largest holder with holding divided into 4 or 5 funds.
Derf

Hi @David_Snowball
Yes, I recall the fund you mentioned and Mr. Arnott; with the connection to Pimco.
I watched this fund for a few years wondering where it was traveling to and why it held the chosen investment sectors. I don't watch anymore.
This link = composition and other choices:
https://nb.fidelity.com/public/workplacefunds/composition/OSBX?fundId=OSBX&planId=50405
This link charting PAAIX against PONDX:
http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?PAAIX,PONDX&n=2576&O=011000
I couldn't recommend this fund or advisement from this organization; as I don't find performance of consequence.
I wondered in the past where the managers have their monies invested.
Regards,
Catch

Research Affiliates are Rob Arnott's group. They've been around 15 years and specialize in smart beta and asset allocation strategies; to their great credit, they've been warning that smart beta strategies (low vol, for instance) got too popular to actually generate decent returns. Arnott's argument is that only three smart beta factors, including size and value, are likely to have any enduring virtue.
About the best real-world test of their approach is PIMCO All Asset Fund (PAAIX) which is the go-anywhere fund they manage for PIMCO. Four-star, $20 billion, analyst rated as Gold, top 4% over the past decade despite a bad slump from 2013-15. By MFO's measures, since inception it has substantially higher returns, lower volatility, smaller max drawdown, quicker recovery time and better Sharpe/Sortino/Martin ratios than its Global Macro peer group.
On whole, they're responsible for about $200 billion and are well-respected though certainly not right all the time about everything.
If they're marketing anything, I'd guess it's their free asset allocation tool. It's so complex that Charles swooned in delight when he first saw it. I mostly backed quietly away.
Cheers,
David

While the fund has no symbol, here is the last prospectus
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1496315/000116204416002645/gpif485bpos.htm

FYI: Over the next decade, the traditional 60-40 portfolio will post average lower annual returns than many online bank accounts do today, according to a web tool from Newport Beach, Calif.-based Research Affiliates.
A portfolio consisting of 60 percent equities and 40 percent bonds will post average annual real returns of just 50 basis points over the next decade, said Jim Masturzo, Research Affiliates’ senior vice president, asset allocation, on a Wednesday webcast.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.fa-mag.com/news/over-the-next-decade--a-60-40-portfolio-could-return-less-than-a-savings-account-33535.html?print

@MFO Members: For a couple of years, 1998-1999, Grand Prix Mutual Fund was the hottest thing since sliced bread, and investors were willing to pay a front-load of 5.5% and an expense ratio of 2.5%. Bob Zuccaro's fund returned 111.8% in 1998, followed up with a 147.8% return in 1999. The fund was up 70% until March of 2000 when the Nasdaq crashed and died
Regards,
Ted
Grand Prix's Big Mo:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2000-05-28/grand-prixs-big-mo
Bob Wins The Bobby Prize:
https://www.forbes.com/forbes/2004/0920/246.html:
NY Times Article: (Roy Weitz, FundAlarm Founder, comments.)
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/09/business/mutfund/for-a-few-tech-stars-time-for-a-second-act.html

Funds often have multiple share classes designed with additional fees to be sold NTF.
T. Rowe Price has "advisor class" shares, e.g. PAVLX (the 12b-1 version of TRVLX). Years ago I purchased $5K of an advisor class fund (costing me an extra $12.50/year, pre-tax) from a bank's brokerage in order to qualify for some service I wanted. I figured $9 bucks/year wouldn't break me. It still sells this share class.
This time, TRP is offering its "normal" retail shares NTF. ISTM that TRP might choose to absorb the platform costs because: (a) it may give them more AUM (could still be profitable, though less so than selling directly), (b) larger fund companies cut special deals with brokerages to reduce platform fees, and (c) there is some small cost savings for TRP by servicing a single omnibus account from each brokerage as opposed to servicing all the underlying accounts separately.
If you haven't seen Fidelity charge more than Schwab for the same fund, you haven't looked at N&B funds. Fidelity offers N&B "trust" shares NTF. These shares have an extra 10 basis point 12b-1 fee (and may add extra expenses on top of that), vs. the investor shares you'd buy directly from N&B or from Schwab NTF. For example, NBSSX is NTF at Schwab. If you want to avoid a transaction fee, at Fidelity you'll have to buy NBFCX; NBSSX carries a transaction fee.