@Crash, on web search, I found 2 numbers for GQG:
Common (754) 218 5500 https://gqg.com/contact-us/
Less common (866) 362 8333 https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/gqg-475c
The number you mentioned has 1 digit off. It's "362", not "372".

Thanks, yogi.
I guess someone needs to get their shit together, and correct that. LOL. They're not paying me. And I'm done trying to figure it out. I clicked on the two links you posted. The same erroneous number comes up on both for me: 866.372.8333.
(WTF, eh?)

I won’t change your mind, and you won’t change mine, I simply shared an episode from years ago, Personally, I’m standing clear. Lots of other places to invest. It’s your money to do what you want with. A year ago folks were salivating all over about 5% money market funds following a 18% fall in the S&P and a drop of 33% on the NASDAQ the year before. I thought that the clamor for cash was a bit excessive as well.

"The NASDAQ did not again rise to its 2001 peak until 15 years later”
I wonder how many of the stocks in the NASDAQ at it's 2001 peak are in it today.

I stay as far away as I can from them.
Dot-com bubble of 1999-2000
“During the late 1990s, the values of internet-based stocks rose sharply. As a result, the technology-dominated NASDAQ Composite Index (NASDAQINDEX:^|XIC) surged from 1,000 points in 1995 to more than 5,000 in 2000. But in early 2001, the dot-com stock bubble started to burst. The NASDAQ peaked at 5,048.62 points on March 10. The index would go on to plummet by 76.81% until it reached a low of 1,139.90 points on Oct. 4, 2002. The primary cause of this crash was overvalued internet stocks. Many investors speculated that dot-com companies - even those without revenues - would one day become extremely profitable. As a result, they poured money into the sector, driving up the valuation of every company with "dot-com" in its name. The stock market bubble burst when the Federal Reserve Board tightened its monetary policy, constraining the flow of capital. The NASDAQ did not again rise to its 2001 peak until 15 years later”
Source
I have vivid memories of that period. Wasn’t pretty for those that had drunk the Kool Aid.
Most dangerous words in investing: “This time it’s different …”

@Crash, on web search, I found 2 numbers for GQG:
Common (754) 218 5500 https://gqg.com/contact-us/
Less common (866) 362 8333 https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/gqg-475c
The number you mentioned has 1 digit off. It's "362", not "372".

One thing I didn't mention in the portfolio story, by the way, was the correlation matrix that I ran through MFO Premium. It did a 56 month matrix since that's the age of the youngest fund.
Only two funds have a correlation of 0.9, and no one is above that. I never would have guessed the two closest: FPA Crescent and Seafarer Overseas. I checked three time frames and the two were close to 0.9 in each.
The consistent second correlation is FPA Crescent and Leuthold Core, typically in the upper 80s. I've asked Chip to play with the data in Excel a bit.
For what interest that holds.

@crash, for the hell of it, I tried calling 1 (754)-218-5500, the number on the website you linked. It went through, no problem.

Weird.
The number that appears TO ME on the page I linked is:866.372.8333.
"Not a working number," says the recording. Anyhow, if they're making it so difficult for me to talk to someone, I'm already done with them.
I have paperwork coming from Weitz. Already spoke to them.

Thanks Yogi. People seem to love or hate the fund in its various guises. Morningstar takes aim at it for any number of reasons … Franklin’s Desai in this year’s Barron’s Roundtable recommends it as a top pick. (obviously a biased source ). What she said in Barron’s:
Desai: - ”I will stick with the Franklin Income fund, which I have recommended in the past. It has a 12-month yield of 5.66% and has paid dividends for 70 years. The fund invests across multiple asset classes. Its current equity allocation, 35%, is among the lowest in its history, and tilted to value names that have lagged behind the broader market. That could provide upside potential.”
It’s a weird fund in that it seems to have a risk / reward profile closer to an equity fund than an “income” fund. About 30% equities at present and 65% bonds. The bonds appear evenly split between investment grade and BBB and below.
Added: Not a recommendation. But before buying the OEF discussed above, I’d take a look at less than 1-year old INCM. Same managers. Very similar allocation. ER much lower at .38%

@crash, for the hell of it, I tried calling 1 (754)-218-5500, the number on the website you linked. It went through, no problem.

Franklin has 6 classes - A, A1, Adv, C, R, R6.
For Franklin Income - FKIQX, FKINX, FRIAX, FCISX, FISRX, FNCFX
Franklin RENAMED the old class A as A1 and then closed A1 to most investors in 09/2018. The new class A was started in 09/2018, so general retail investors now have to buy FKIQX; it is also no-load/NTF at Fido and Schwab.
But there may be a problem in finding data for FKIQX as its inception is only 09/2018. Some services substitute/fill-in prior record by using another fund class, but not everybody does that.
@Bud used FKINX for PV run, I used FISRX for StockCharts (that is the only class it recognized*). Besides minor differences in fees, they are the same Franklin Income fund. So, -30.5% decline in 2008 if verified from 2 sources - PV and StockCharts.
*StockCharts doesn't recognize all fund classes, and the trick is to figure out which class is recognized by searching on fund name, not ticker.

Initiated new position in BIZD and ETRN in my income (and some growth) portfolio.
Shifted some stuff around to consolidate positions a bit as well, but nothing major.

Ron,
ETRN is an interesting midstream co. M* FV is about 50% above current price, though its FV estimate is marked as highly uncertain. One thing that caught my eye in M* report is that they give a “poor” grade for capital allocation - I have to look into this.
Is this a trade or a long term hold buy? Anything you are able to share why you chose this company would be appreciated. Thanks.

M* doesn't factor into my thinking. This just seemed like an interesting play on a new pipeline (not many of them) due to open soon that could easily be snapped up by another larger player in the area (eg, WMB). If that happens, sure, I will 'sell on the news' whenever (or if) that happens as I do whenever a merger is announced on something I hold. Otherwise will be happy to watch, maybe trade around it, and presumably pocket a solid dividend along the way.

Using PV shows that the fund name had been FKINX and in 2008 the return was -30.51%.
At least that's how I took it.

Could be. Fido shows FKINX closed to new investors. Modest $1,000 min. and a slightly lower ER (.60) vs. FKIQX’s .70
Yes. That would explain why Yahoo only went back to 2008. I know it holds plenty of junk. But, even I am surprised at that number.
I checked at yahoo & Bud’s number is right. FKINX lost 30.5% in ‘08, but gained 35% in ‘09!
PRWCX lost around 27% in ‘08 for comparison. LCORX lost 27.44%.
Thanks Yogi & Bud.

Initiated new position in BIZD and ETRN in my income (and some growth) portfolio.
Shifted some stuff around to consolidate positions a bit as well, but nothing major.

Ron,
ETRN is an interesting midstream co. M* FV is about 50% above current price, though its FV estimate is marked as highly uncertain. One thing that caught my eye in M* report is that they give a “poor” grade for capital allocation - I have to look into this.
Is this a trade or a long term hold buy? Anything you are able to share why you chose this company would be appreciated. Thanks.

From Stockcharts -30.5%.
It's among the most aggressive conservative-allocation, really moderate-allocation.

Using PV shows that the fund name had been FKINX and in 2008 the return was -30.51%.
At least that's how I took it.

This thread is intended to be a food for thought thread and an exploration of just how much we each have in Mag 7 stocks. I'm NOT trying to say anything positive or negative about my portfolio, or yours, if you post your data.
It's just an exercise in attempting to determine what I (maybe we all) have in Mag 7 stocks, if we think those (perhaps previously unknown) stock allocations are representative of the Total Market (see NOTE below), and if they are right for each of us individually based on our respective strategies and risk profiles.
So here we go...
I think we've all heard and read a bunch of times and places that virtually all fund investors have an allocation to the Mag 7 (formerly it was FAANG) and the prevailing notion seems to be that the respective allocations are possibly overweight because SO MANY many funds own them. I think I've always accepted that notion but had never carved out just how much I do have in them respectively. The results were somewhat surprising.
As background, I maintain a port of about a dozen OEFs and one recently added individual stock, GOOGL. The port is tilted to domestic LCG, about 70% Active/30% passive, with about 12% Foreign. The one other notable dashboard item is my LT FSELX holding, which currently has ~24% allocation to Mag 7 component NVDA. YMWV!
As the bogey for this discussion, here are the respective Mag 7 allocations in a Total Stock Market Index OEF, using for this thread VTSAX:
AAPL 6.1%
AMZN 3.0%
GOOGL 3.3%
META 1.7%
MSFT 6.0%
NVDA 2.5%
TSLA 1.4%
Total 24.0%
Here are my respective allocations (Note: I only have one OEF that does NOT have at least one Mag 7 holding), but I'm still about 3% UNDER the VTSAX Total:
AAPL 3.5%
AMZN 3.0%
GOOGL 3.8%
META 1.0%
MSFT 6.0%
NVDA 3.3%
TSLA 0.5%
Total 21.2%
Here are my respective allocations without my two outlier positions of FSELX and GOOGL, which in Total are notably LOWER than the VTSAX Total (EDITED per post by @msf - Thank You!):
AAPL 3.8%
AMZN 3.2%
GOOGL 2.8%
META 1.1%
MSFT 6.5%
NVDA 2.2%
TSLA 0.6%
Total 20.1%
NOTE: To make these comparisons apples-to-apples with VTSAX, an all stock OEF, the two lists of my Mag 7 allocations use the amount of stocks in my portfolio as the denominator. And IMO that makes a lot more sense as all of us have varying Stock/Bond/Cash allocations.
So the items of note from my first cursory review of this data:
MSFT is the one Mag 7 stock that many domestic OEFs (or, at least the ones I hold) provide the highest allocation, as much as 2x the next group.
It's likely that we all do get a representative allocation in the 2%-3% range, of AAPL, AMZN, GOOGL and NVDA via typical OEF holdings.
It's likely that we all wish we had a higher allocation to NVDA (which we have effectively increased to 3.3% from 2.1% by our FSELX holding).
It's likely that we all do NOT get anywhere near as much of META or TSLA through typical holdings.
For my port, my holding of GOOGL stock, and FSELX with its large NVDA allocation, are appropriate outlier holdings FOR ME, and bring my respective Mag 7 allocations more in line with my strategy and risk profile.
Here's hoping that others either know, or take the time to carve out their respective allocations, and share them here. Your findings may be surprising to you and just may cause this thread to be of some importance and perhaps even actionable.

Remember, T+3 changed to T+2 only in 2017 (not that long ago). And before T+3 was T+5.
Anyway, we should welcome T+1 on 5/28/24. This change was announced a couple of years ago, but firms were given a window of time to get ready for it.
https://www.finra.org/investors/insights/understanding-settlement-cycles

About time,, when did computers come on the scene... 1970-80? Only took 40 years to get to T+1

No kidding. Progress, right? While T+3 was needed when things were paper-based, I suspect it's probably stuck around so long b/c brokerages liked having T+3 and T+2 days to collect interest on unsettled funds? I guess the SEC finally said, "no, this is bad for investors."

The Week in Charts (02/05/24)
The most important charts and themes in markets, including...
00:00 Intro
00:20 A Blowout Jobs Report
02:45 Say Goodbye to the March Rate Cut (FOMC Meeting)
06:54 A Year of Central Bank Easing
08:38 Money Making Machines (Earnings)
14:37 The Iron Rule of Financial Markets (Ark vs. Berkshire)
17:10 No Recession in Luxury Goods (Ferrari)
21:59 Rising Residential vs. Crumbling Commercial
27:34 The India/China Divergence
31:22 Weight Loss Drug Boom (Eli Lilly)
33:19 More Affordable Rents
Video
Blog

Anyone considering EMs needs to study the Callan Chart (below), and unless they are the amongst the world's best market timers, think again, and Just Say No!
Click on the 2023 PDF Chart at
https://www.callan.com/periodic-table/

In another thread, you've mentioned Rajiv Jain and GSIHX. Be aware that it holds about ~25% EM country equities. Much lower than his EM fund though.

Yeah, thanks. I never BUY a fund without reviewing a lot of stuff including of course its composition. Most of its EM is in India and Brazil and I am more than fine with those exposures, especially since I have negligible, I mean negligible, other EM exposure in my other funds.
I should have been clearer in my prior post. My comments were intended to be about dedicated Diversified Emerging Market funds. As others have noted, if you have a Foreign or Global stock fund, it's likely going to have at least some EM. GSIHX has a bit more than I'd prefer, but as stated, I have very little in my domestic dominated port.