The two funds that I own which track closest to the S&P 500 index would be FCNTX and YAFFX. Both were not even close.

GASFX = 21%
MINDX = 64%
VGSIX = 30%
GLFOX = 17.6%
OAKLX = 15.4%
TOLSX = 18%

@Old-Skeet: The S&P 500 Index returned 13.69%, 11.39% raw, and 2.3% in dividends. I own 7 funds, of the seven the following 4 beat the S&P 500:
1. FBTCX: 33.35%
2. PRHSX: 31.44%
3. QQQ: 19.16%
4. PFF: 14.10%
----------------
5. SPY: 13.46%
6. VWELX: 9.82%
7 FTHCX 9.62%
Regards,
Ted

ACMVX up 14.65%.

Yes: POAGX, FSPHX, VGHCX (this should be fun - hope you are referring to SPY with 13.75% from Yahoo or 13.46% from M* :-) ).

Personal Best and Worst Mutual Fund (per M*):
MINDX = 62.53%
PRLAX & FAIRX = -13%

Of the forty funds which I own, some of them being hybrid type funds, and fall outside of the income area of my portfolio ... I had five funds that bettered the S&P 500 Index over the past twelve months. They were THOAX, TOLLX, BWLAX, VADAX & IACLX. This means that only 12.5% of the funds that I own were able to beat the cap weighted S&P 500 Index. Granted, many of these funds are benchmarked against something else so this is perhaps not a fair analysis; but, it is what it is. In my large mid cap sleeve which consist of six funds, fifty percent of them (three) bettered the Index. They were BWLAX, VADAX & IACLX.
Did you own funds that bettered the Index? And, if so what were they?
Have a great new year ... and, I wish all "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet

An ominous way to start 2015.

For the most part I think Fidelity is spot on. I also see continued strength and leadership in the technology and health care sectors and betting on a rebound in the energy sector and energy stocks is (imho) a good call. With gasoline prices ultra-cheap for much of 2015, the consumer discretionary sector in general and leisure stocks in particular should also be winners in 2015.
That certainly is how I plan to invest in 2015.
Europe? Emerging markets? Japan? China?? No, thanks. Ditto for the financials sector, basic materials/ industrials, and home builders .

The top capital gains (and qualified dividends) rate of 20% only applies to those in the top ordinary income tax bracket - 39.6%. Between 25% and there, there are 28%, 33%, and 35% brackets.
You might be thinking about the Medicare surtax of 3.8% on investment income, to the extent that it raises one's MAGI over a certain threshold. For MFJ, that's $250K, for singles, that's $200K.
So, if you are single, and your MAGI, excluding cap gains, is $190K, and you have $30K in cap gains, then the last $20K (the portion over $200K) gets taxed an extra 3.8%.

It appears to me than any attempt to have a pure European play means small caps. Looking at the holdings of FEU, they are mostly global corporations and many are companies most of us have in our funds already like Glaxo, Nestle, etc, these being the Euro licensed corporations of such.
It would be interesting to figure out what percentage of the SP500 other indexes have European exposure built into them.
Link to FEU's assets:
http://portfolios.morningstar.com/fund/holdings?t=FEU&region=usa&culture=en-US

I have a question in regard to RMD (Required Minimum Distributions).
Tax deferred (IRAs) requires distributions at age 70.5 due to RMD. What dynamic does this play in the 4% rule?
I can imagine that if RMD is anywhere near 4% of my overall portfolio then possibly 1% of this 4% will be going to the IRS (25% tax bracket).
So, in terms of after tax dollars, I might need to live on 3%, me thinks

At ETF.com, Dave Nadig lists deutsche X-trackers MSCI Europe Hedged Equity ETF (I think symbol is DBEU?) as one of his top 3 eTfs for 2015.

Hi Guys,
I agree with the many earlier posters.
As a generic rule of thumb, the 4% retirement drawdown is an excellent departure point. But like all general rules, it depends. Adjustments must be made depending on specific circumstances like age, wealth, lifestyle, inflation, flexibility, expected market rewards, and portfolio asset allocation comfort zone.
Let’s put the 4% withdrawal recommendation in its proper historical perspective.
The original work is called “The Trinity Study" because it was completed by three Trinity University professors: Philip L. Cooley, Carl M. Hubbard and Daniel T. Walz . The title of a 6-page readable summary is “Retirement Savings: Choosing a Withdrawal Rate That Is Sustainable”. Here is a Link to this now classic work:
http://209.31.88.154/journal/article/retirement-savings-choosing-a-withdrawal-rate-that-is-sustainable
The Trinity study contains market data through 1995. It manipulated the historical market return outcomes in the sequence that it was actually recorded using different starting times to test portfolio survival rates. So it has definite limitations with respect to all market possibilities.
To a large extent, modern random Monte Carlo simulations address these limitations. They can do thousands of possible Market outcomes in a matter of seconds using statistical distribution data sets.
Monte Carlo methods were developed to support the design of the Atomic bomb in World War II. The uncertainties of market returns are precisely what Monte Carlo was designed to handle.
I suggest, if you are even slightly interested in retirement portfolio survival likelihoods as a function of expected returns, inflation, asset allocation, and time scale, that you give Monte Carlo computer codes a try. It’s a super tool to add to your investment toolkit.
Here is a Link to an easy to use Monte Carlo simulator from the Portfolio Visualizer website:
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/monte-carlo-simulation
Here is a Link to a similar Monte Carlo formulation from the MoneyChimp website:
http://www.moneychimp.com/articles/volatility/montecarlo.htm
Please do some what-if scenario test cases on both resources. Inputs are easy and results are almost instantaneous. It’s fun and you’ll learn something with each case examined. Since these are Monte Carlo analyses that use randomly selected numbers, results will vary with each completed exploration, but the trendlines are firm. Good luck.
Some folks will be happy with a 95% portfolio survival rate while others will be uncomfortable with a 97% survival projection(a 3% portfolio failure probability). Like almost everything else in life, it all depends.
Best Wishes to all for the coming year and beyond.

Mike said: "It's based on earnings return of 4% plus inflation."
The inflation rate is key here. Whose numbers? We all know the government's are highly suspect. The Social Security Administration put the inflation rate at around 1.4% in determining benefits for retirees in 2015. It's been in that very low area several years now and may be accurate for some.
It's also very situation dependent. If you own a home or make fixed mortgage payments you'll probably experience lower inflation than renters. If you drive an electric car or subcompact or live in a warmer climate, the drop in oil isn't having the same inflation lowering effect as for others. If you've become more health aware in recent years, your food expenses are much higher. Lower cost starches and red meats are out. More expensive veggies , fruits, nuts and fish are in.
-
We've been fortunate to only have to pull maybe 4-5% annually to supplement our pension for many years. But, I wouldn't be adverse to taking up to 7% if the need arose.

I would be inclined to used a currency hedged fund as well, as @AndyJ noted.
For whatever the "magic" reason (we may call it intervention by the powers), the Euro has finally began its decline against the U.S. dollar. Not just that the dollar is so strong, but during the past several weeks the Euro is being allowed to devalue against the dollar.
---FEU YTD= - 6.6%,vs +6.1% for HEDJ
--- " E.R.= .29, vs .58 for HEDJ
---FEU yield=2.7% SEC (trailing 12 month is 5.4%) HEDJ = 0%
FIDO compositon view for HEDJ Other details may be selected from the list on the left edge.
To each there own, of course; regarding currency hedging.
We remain U.S. centric for equity and bond holdings. But, watching......yes, I do believe 2015 is going to be very interesting....Euro (more decisions), cheap energy, Russia, change of power in the Saud family???, huh, even problems in Libya has not placed a dent in crude pricing, continuing problems in parts of South America. Others for this list, too.
All of this should drive Josh Brown partially crazy for 2015, based upon the post regarding Mr. Brown.
Take care,
Catch

I have a couple of related questions. Wisdom Tree's hedged ETFs for both Europe and Japan, HEDJ and DXJ, respectively, are focused on dividend paying companies, so a value tilt I guess, but also on companies that derive more than 50% of revenue outside of Europe and at least 20% of revenue outside of japan. Both ETFs weight their holdings based on dividends rather than market cap.
First question is whether you'd be concerned that you're not getting a real European investment if the companies have to be big enough to derive more than half their revenue elsewhere. I guess the good side is that if you're betting on the ECB then exporters will get the benefit of a weaker EUR.
The approach Wisdom Tree takes also favors big companies, but if you use the US as a proxy for QE then you'll find the Russell 2000 has done better than the S&P 500 from the start of 2009 until the end of 2013. Clearly small-caps have not kept up this year, but the better performance has come from the smaller companies. I'm not sure the difference is significant enough for the effort it would require to hedge small-cap investments in Europe or Japan, but wondered what others thought about small-cap vs. large-cap in the context of QE for Europe and/or Japan.
There are also hedged ETFs that are market cap based as an alternative to dividend weighting, but I guess that is a separate discussion based on what you believe about the sectors that tend to pay more dividends.

FYI: Coffee soars 58% in 2014; oil, Russia left behind.
Regards,
Ted
Best and worst performing 2014 investments

Hi Mark,
FEU is invested in the largest of large companies in Greater Europe(split about a third to the UK and the rest to Europe). I was indeed surprised with it's dividend, Wow! And, it is currently selling towards its 52 week low. For me, I'd position cost average into the position. First, I'd determine how much I currently have in equities along with how much I already have invested in Greater Europe. Currently, within my own portfolio I am weighted a little better than the 20% range in Greater Europe ... and, if I wanted to raise this exposure to say about 25% then I'd ease into FEU until I reached my desired allocation. In this way, if some of my global equity and global allocation fund managers also move towards Europe then I could possible wind up with more than I first wanted if you load with a one time bulk purchase. After all, what are you going to do if it is a while before Europe starts to move or even continues to decline? So again, I'd average in. Indeed, you are catching a good dividend while you build the spiff out and while held.
Old_Skeet

How would you play this if you felt his thesis had any merit? I'm thinking FEU where at least I can gather a dividend of 5.6% while I wait.