Paul, in the past I've used the Wellstrade site for this information:
Enter Symbol
Select "Get Mutual Fund Profile"
Total Net Assets By Year
Kevin

Kevin, for the fund I looked up, here's what I saw under Total Net Assets By Year

I wasn't able to tell what the actual AUM were. Just a general idea whether they were increasing or decreasing.
This was with Internet Explorer. Maybe with Chrome or Firefox you see something different.
Perhaps I missed a link that you saw?

David-
I think the OP wanted historical assets under management, not historical prices.
George..

Yes, that's certainly what I'm interested in, historical AUM.
I've known about the Yahoo Finance historical prices for quite some time.

Can someone please post a brief tutorial on how to use the below three buttons (red arrows) when posting? [Code; Image; URL buttons]
I have seen a couple of message boards that have "practice threads." On the practice threads, posters can practice using some of the tools, such as the three buttons above, attaching graphic images like the one I'm about to attach, etc. Might be good to have a practice thread at MFO.

Also, today I saw a post where the following words (in quotations) were a clickable link, "Japan, monetary policy and recession?" I've posted words as clickable links on another message board using HTML code. I have a feeling that the C button above can do that, but don't want to "practice" and mess up a post. Is that done by using standard HTML code, or the C button?
thanks

A bit more conservative this year: 50% stock (20% EM), 30% bond, 20% cash.

Jlev,
Vanguard does have performance-based fees for its active funds, but these adjustments are usually relatively small in either direction so that Vanguard still has the edge over many ETFs. Also, it is in most cases a win-win situations because the fees only go up if a fund is beating its benchmark, which is usually the benchmarks the ETFs are tracking--so either the fund has a performance advantage if fees are higher or a fee advantage if performance is lower. The only way investors would lose out in such a situation would be to buy the active fund aftera hot streak when fees are higher and then sell too soon as performance cools, thus paying the higher fee and missing the performance edge. With these funds it makes sense to buy and hold or if you're more of a risk taker to buy after the funds lag and get the lowest fees, hoping the fund will bounce back.
I don't have an opinion really on the law suit yet as I haven't read the brief. But in my experience law suits against fund companies even when they have merit rarely go anywhere. The industry has very good, powerful lawyers. It also seems doubtful that that the argyment that charging consumers less for management services is a form of tax evasion will hold up in court in a lengthy appeal process. Where Vanguard does seem more vulnerable is in the $1.5 billion cash reserve, which could appear as a slush fund to the right judge. Although I haven't read the brief, I think it's high time Vanguard's bonus system for its executives be examined more closely as evidence that the firm really isn's a "non-profit" as it often claims. But that is another story....

Interesting interview.
He said something that caught me off guard, at the 8 minute mark.
Something to the effect that since 10 year Treasury bonds have a yield of 2.5%, that is equivalent to a stock with a P/E ratio of 37.5, and he said Apple has a P/E of only 14 and the S&P 500 has a P/E of about 16.5 in comparison, so bonds are very expensive.
Do you buy into that line of reasoning that bonds yielding about 2.5% are equivalent to stocks with P/Es of 37.5, and therefore bonds are very expensive?
Not sure where he got that 37.5 P/E figure.
Any idea?
2.5 x 37.5 = 93.75, so that's not it.
Do you ever equate the 10-year Treasury yield to a given P/E?
I just viewed that segment a couple of more times, and am now convinced that he just made a mistake on his math. He said 37.5 P/E, but should have calculated it to be a P/E of 40. But I'm not sure I buy into this idea that a 10-year Treasury yield equates to a P/E of 40 in a stock.
Is that a logical way to look at it?
I know people will look at the inverse of the P/E: the E/P is the earnings yield, and people compare that to a bond. So if a stock has a P/E of 20, it's earnings yield is 5, and they then compare that to the yield on bonds

Causeway International Small Cap Fund:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1156906/000119312514295671/d769174d485apos.htm
Causeway International Opportunities Fund:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1156906/000119312514295634/d769169d485apos.htm

Book link:
The House that Bogle Built
@LewisBraham It has been my understanding that some number of the Vanguard actively managed funds have ER's that depend on performance, does that affect these calculations? do these not apply to these sector funds? or if it does do the ER's always remain below comparable ETF's? Also, any thoughts on their recent law suit?

My Portfolio Is 55% Stocks - 33% Bonds - 12% Cash

As a sidebar, I have a question for you. Is your Mrdarcy moniker a reference to the Mr. Darcy character in Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice” book? If so, do you see yourself in the dual roles that characterized Mr. Darcy’s overarching behavior, initially a charming cad and later a romantic hero, on this panel? Yours is a puzzling name choice for these MFO discussions. Please respond.

I'm a little unclear if this is an honest question or backhanded. I'll assume the former.
There is nothing particularly insidious or deep, it just happens to be my own name (hence the different spelling). Any romanticism or feigned arrogance is entirely a joke (well, sometimes), as is the ridiculous picture. I really don't even like Austin, though Thug Notes has a pretty funny take:

Andy,
JW was corrected. Fairholme was down 0.1% last week while most of high yield bond funds were down 1.5 - 2.0%.
Eaton Vance Bond fund was down 2.0%, but it also hold higher stock allocation that were also down even more. Dan Fuss's Loomis Sayles bond fared much better with only 1% loss. Also notice that the cash position has been increasing over the last 3 months.

I plan to stay diversified but I have gone conservative this year going from 80/20 stocks and fixed income to 65/35 at the moment. If the situation gets dire I may shift more to fixed.

@MikeM After some years of purchasing mutual funds during periods that a manager is outperforming his benchmarks then being indecisive during the often inevitable underperfomance, I've decided that, rather than worry about whether my fund will deliver downside protection just because it did last time, I'll just settle for the mean (more and more ETFs).
In another thread, I saw a lot of familiar places; I'm off route 250

@mrdarcey
Finger Lakes? you're joking right. (straight from Ithaca :)
the Catskills supplies much of the water. e.g. Schoharie Reservoir. Ashokan, etc.
I remember pizza for 10 cents a slice in the south bronx and 15 cents in manhattan, equal to the subway fare. Most of the best pizza places then were run by Greeks. And then there was Rays. I don't know if its water or the knowledge of making good sauce, good mozarella, and good crust, as well as getting good ingredients vs. cutting corners and cost.
Bagels went down hill when they started adding eggs and storing them in plastic bags and trying to extend shelf life.

I look forward to David's commentary every month. I love good content even if it is long. Thank you, David and the other authors.
Having a Table of Contents at the top with links to the topics discussed in the commentary will help those who don't want to browse through the entire commentary.
About the "Flash Boys" book mentioned in this month's commentary...
Do read the 50+, 1 star reviews (and dozens of comments for each review) that are quite well written, insightful and point out multiple issues with the author's understanding of the system and raise counterpoints to provide the other side of the story:
http://www.amazon.com/Flash-Boys-Michael-Lewis/product-reviews/0393244660/ref=cm_cr_dp_qt_hist_one/175-7024129-0346416?ie=UTF8&filterBy=addOneStar&showViewpoints=0

Hi Scott!
The buy was made because of thoughts of .... get this!....inflation! Yep! How 'bout that? Because the Fed will be behind the curve....yep! That's why. And I believe that now as then. How long will it take to bite, who knows? But we've thrown everything at this economy we have, and we're not going to make a mistake now (my view). To the dump point, I have very little cash....can't take advantage of declines.....I'm all in. I also thought I was cutting edge with this infrastructure stuff......silly me. Sometimes, I amaze myself.
the Pudd

You're not going to find someone on this board (probably) who agrees with you more in regards to inflation.
I think it's going to vary with the specifics, but I do think that sectors of infrastructure provide fine inflation hedges.
"Global infrastructure includes securities of companies that own, operate, or build
infrastructure assets, such as toll roads, energy distribution, ports, or water
utilities. As with real estate, the replacement value of the infrastructure assets
increases with inflation. Moreover, because many global infrastructure companies
are highly regulated, the contracts they sign often call for adjustments to prices in
response to changes in the local inflation rate. Since global infrastructure covers
many sectors, it can help position a portfolio to target specific sources of inflation,
such as rising energy prices." (http://www.nuveen.com/Home/Documents/Viewer.aspx?fileId=51014)
In terms of replacement value, think of an Archer Daniels Midland and the amount of grain/transport infrastructure/assets, which includes 26,000 railcars - a number comparable to class 1 railroads. Add to that port facilities, terminals, storage, silos and more. You have one of the largest logistics companies in the world and that doesn't begin to take into account all of the other aspects of ADM's business. Whatever one thinks about ADM, how could one begin to replace the supply chain network they've created and at what astronomical cost?
Kinder Morgan has something like 70,000 miles of pipeline in the US and delivers something like a third of the consumed nat gas.
Of course, there's also energy and real estate, among other things.

@MFO Members: The Pizza Cono !!
Regards,
Ted

Here's Real Pizza From Chicago:
https://www.google.com/search?q=pizzeria+due&tbm=isch&imgil=u_tWr7qECIBeUM%3A%3BcUsKIjAriADCQM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fchicago.seriouseats.com%252F2011%252F08%252Fchicago-essential-pizzeria-due.html&source=iu&usg=__uLTkcGRJEViYjrkoVC5sxlVVdos=&sa=X&ei=1ZPeU9iNO5KiyATkqIJ4&sqi=2&ved=0CGcQ9QEwBw&biw=1600&bih=731#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=u_tWr7qECIBeUM%3A;cUsKIjAriADCQM;http%3A%2F%2Fslice.seriouseats.com%2Fimages%2F2011%2F08%2F20110817-166110-Chicago-Pizzeria-Due's-Uno's-Sausage-Slice.jpg;http%3A%2F%2Fchicago.seriouseats.com%2F2011%2F08%2Fchicago-essential-pizzeria-due.html;500;375

I guess my point is I don't care about an obligatory index comparison.
My own personal preference is that guy who focuses on principle protection. I don't care if he beats the S&P500. I don't want to be invested in the S&P500.
I'm comfortable with a fund manager who explains his or her process and sticks with it. If you understand and are comfortable with that manager, stick with him. Maybe the perfect example of that guy, for me, is Romick and FPACX. Is it the best performing balanced/allocation fund out there? No, but I like and understand the process and his conservatism.
Damn the manager who's sole purpose is to beat and index. Give me the mix of funds that will get me to my goals with the least amount of turbulence.
(sorry I got to rambling, and I know my opinion doesn't fit all.)

That's good MikeM. That's why my favorite fund manager was always Jean Marie Eveillard, of First Eagle Global Fund. Principal protection. Getting to the goal "with the least amount of turbulence." I still like SGENX, but nowhere near as much as when Eveillard was the manager. He was one of those rare managers that you could actually fully trust with your money. It even went beyond his skill as an investor, to his personal qualities that engendered trust.

I'm in the process of moving GPROX directly to them in a Roth wrapper to avoid that.
I'm not 100% sure what the status of this would be in a taxable account, but one possible solution might be to move your holdings and then start an AIP. I know that means you have to hold directly, but they allow automatic investments over any period from weekly to yearly for as little as $50 a pop.

All these fancy schmancy annuities. I still think if you go that route nothing beats an immediate fixed annuity. I mean it sounds crazy (at least to me as a 67 year old male) for a 65 year old male to buy something that doesn't kick in until they turn 85 in 20 years. I don't know many 85 year old males. Albeit one guy in my Asheville hiking group is 84 and still goes on 10+ mile hikes several times during the week.