"Like others here, I own a slice of GLFOX which invests in infrastructure and, for whatever reason, stays mainly in Europe. It has returned a big zero this year. Not a concern to me. I can be content with some holdings rising and some falling. If everything were rising together I’d be very worried."
The optimal portfolio is only known in hindsight.
Diversification means always having to say you're sorry about some investment in your portfolio!

Your best observation ever. And no need for hindsight.
I have concentrated in the right categories since 1995. See (link).
Just a small example: since 11/2023, I have posted many times to own US LC tilting growth and not diversifying. See my post from 11/1/2023 (link)
"You can just play it simple: no diversification, no predictions, no narrow range funds, looks like tilting LC growth is here to stay which = SPY/VOO or you can gamble and use some QQQ."
Why I posted the above? my system told me. See the chart(https://schrts.co/MWCuZUMV)
One of my fundamental rules is never to hold a fund that is not performing well. It doesn't mean #1, it means in the top 30% based on risk-adjusted performance. It's much easier when you have 3 funds, it's a lot harder with 10-15 funds.

"Like others here, I own a slice of GLFOX which invests in infrastructure and, for whatever reason, stays mainly in Europe. It has returned a big zero this year. Not a concern to me. I can be content with some holdings rising and some falling. If everything were rising together I’d be very worried."
The optimal portfolio is only known in hindsight.
Diversification means always having to say you're sorry about some investment in your portfolio!

I was surprised by Zakaria’s claim that Britain’s per-capita GDP is lower than that of any of our 50 states.
Like others here, I own a slice of GLFOX which invests in infrastructure and, for whatever reason, stays mainly in Europe. It has returned a big zero this year. Not a concern to me. I can be content with some holdings rising and some falling. If everything were rising together I’d be very worried. But I suspect others may not share that level of patience..
Not to be overlooked, the dollar’s persistent strength has also dinged investments in Europe and elsewhere.

More NSRGY at under $100 / moved it from spec to long term hold. Added a little to GLFOX and LCORX. Both down recently.

Don't look now but a utilities fund I follow (UTG) is up 6.5% over the last 3 weeks. Hopefully Giroux is on to something.

Yep. FSUTX is the first place I looked in trying to detect the likely culprit here. But it is up nearly 12% YTD. GLFOX isn’t a utilities fund - but holds a lot of them. It’s been in a funk most of this year, but has begun to move up in recent days. (Strong dollar also impacting this one)

Since this post has been bumped . . .
Prof. Snowball's thesis in his column:

in every measure of returns, more equity is better. In every measure of risk and of risk-adjusted returns, less equity is better. Several earlier MFO essays on the discreet charm of stock-lite portfolios found the same relationship is true for periods dating back 100 years. Lightening up equity exposure reduces your volatility by a lot more than it reduces your returns, so it always seems like the best move for risk-conscious investors.

And he chose four "Great Owls", which included FAGIX and FPACX as well as OSTIX and RSIVX, as great alternatives to only equities. All four buy more, or less, junk. I chose to run PV against FAGIX because I am not comfortable buying most bond funds whether they're buying junk, or agencies.
If David Giroux wants to buy junk, well, that's why I bought his fund. Let him worry about it. I don't need to pay above average fees to FPA.I can load up on cash myself. YMMV.
In this PV I'm looking at GLFOX versus FAGIX and FPACX. I think of GLOFX as a global version of Electric Company, Waterworks, and the railroads. So, Widows & Orphans take a ride on The Reading . . .
For those that don't follow links, GLOFX has the better standard deviation, Sharpe, and Sortino numbers, a better compound growth rate, lost less money in the worst year of holding, has less correlation to the market, and the lowest beta and highest alpha.

And here is the original W&O versus FPACX. Since July 1993 FPACX is the winnerin returns, while W&O beat FAGIX.
Here are some runs against what MFO Premium calls The Great Normalization (TGN), which they date from January 2022

First: W&O versus FPACX and FAGIX. My take away is that the fund with the best SD, Sharpe, and Sortino numbers also had the worst CAGR, worst yearly loss, and highest market correlation. YMMV
And here is W&O Ride the Rails. And it looks to me like the fund with the worst Sharpe and Sortino numbers has lost the least amount of your money. But I don't always spot things correctly. Let me know if you see something different.
Why did I run these numbers? It's the kind of thing I like to do when people say things like every. I like to dig a little deeper.

If one likes energy company prospects but does not like the high volatility of energy equities, one can look into finding funds with a portfolio that combines utility and energy stocks. GASFX is one such fund, which I never owned and have not research into but it has an M* analyst rating of Negative. I used to own GLFOX many many years ago. I treat GLFOX as a downstream vertical; whereas, GASFX as a upstream vertical.
I currently own SWX in my trading account.

@hank, the higher sum is from January to June, as I said in my post. The more time that goes by, the more the disparity grows. Start the comparison from 2021 and the disparity is now 164 bucks.
Where you start and stop your year also matters. For example, at M* you can chart the two against each other for the past year,and the difference is 57 bucks. Take a look at the chart in the new link I posted. At the end of December 2021, the discrepancy from January is 63 bucks.
The difference of .25 is not just a drag on the upside. It also sinks the fund deeper on the downside. As you can see in the link, at the end of January 2021, GLFOX is 13 bucks behind. And it will never catch up. It will fall inexorably behind.
I don't need to take IRA distributions for six years. If I back test the two funds for six years the CAGR for GLIFX is 8.63 vs, 8.35 for GLFOX. And the difference in dollars is 562 if 20K were the amount invested.

I’m not sure how you’re coming up with the higher sum for 1 year. Don’t read the numbers on the far right. They are for a longer time period. The chart is truly interactive. So, you can tap anywhere along the horizontal lines representing each fund and pull up the values on any date you want.
What you need to do is tap along the two colored lines about 2/3 of the way across. Dates and corresponding total investment amount will come up for each fund. The chart begins with 12/31/23. If you tap on the line where “12/31/22” pops up you will get the correct values for that date.
Initial amount: $20,000 / Start date: 12/31/21
Values on 12/31/22
GLIFX $19,741
GLFOX $19,689
Difference from 12/31/21 to 12/31/22: GLIFX +$52.00

@hank. Read all about it. As they used to say.
BTW. Check the tab for monthly returns,and you can see how it happens.

Due to a couple of bone-headed moves, I ended up with both institutional (TF) and retail (NTF) of the same fund at Schwab (not Lazard). I asked to have the retail shares, which carried a much higher ER, converted to institutional. The Schwab rep figured out how to do so I would have no taxable event, but they did charge me 49.95 as if I had bought the institutional shares in the first place. The size of the consolidated position and the difference in the ERs made it worthwhile for me. It is true that I would get nicked again if I want to add to the position. Seems that GLFOX and GLFIX are NTF and TF, respectively, chez Chuck.

de nada @hank. FYI I sold GLFOX the same day I bought GLFIX, so you shouldn't have any problems.
Having delved into this with some test buys at Fido, the only problem I see is that GLFOX is NTF while GLIFX carries Fido’s customary $49.99 transaction fee. Assuming an initial purchase can be done thru conversion / other no-fee process, that still leaves one a bit restricted if buying additional shares in the future. (Just trying to cover all the bases.)

de nada @hank. FYI I sold GLFOX the same day I bought GLFIX, so you shouldn't have any problems.
Unlikely there will ever be any sabrage for GLIFX, but ya never know.

Ask Fidelity to convert the GLFOX shares GLFIX. Assuming that Lazard will allow it, the transaction should go through without a transaction fee since you're not buying shares, just converting them. (I've done this type of transaction a couple of times at Fidelity.)
Likewise, it may not count as a sale (60 day NTF restriction) since you're not selling the shares. But check with Fidelity to be sure.
And it was @WABAC who highlighted the 25 basis point savings.

Thanks @msf .25 BP difference! That’s significant. I recently ramped up GLFOX so it is well over the 10K minimum for IRAs. But probably need to wait near 60 days to make the move. Chances Fido might grant an exemption probably slim … than there’s the additional question of frequent trading at Lazzard if I do it too soon.
OK - I reread @msf’s post. Looks like with over 10K at Fido you can get the reduced ER on GLFOX / GLFIX. Do you know what the initial investment in GLFIX might be? I probably could start moving a sizable chunk Monday. For GLFOX Fido’s minimum is $2500.
Nice thing to know.

The best suggestion of a specific fund I’ve received (for my needs) from this board came from @BenWP a couple + years ago. That’s GLFOX. It’s the first new fund I purchased after moving to Fido’s brokerage. Thanks Ben. It is technically an infrastructure fund. M* lists it as slightly over 50% utilities. Most of the holdings are X-USA (primarily Europe), which partially explains an ER north of 1%. The fund isn’t for everyone. And, as noted, isn’t a “utilities” fund. You can probably find better infrastructure or utility funds depending on your needs for a portfolio fit - especially how much foreign exposure you need or want.
Lazzard, itself is a giant in the global investment banking business. There’s been upheaval at the top with a new CEO in recent months. Like most of the big houses, there’s cost-cutting going on. I read somewhere there’s a soft close on institutional ownership of GLFOX, but that it is still open to individual investors. Strikes me as opposite what T. Rowe is doing by closing PRWCX but allowing those with hefty initial investments in.
Of course, Fido’s “Select Utilities” (FSUTX) with a lower .74% ER is a star performer in utilities.

In my case. . . COTZX or TWEIX, and maybe GLFOX.

The OP was December 2021 by @catch22. Using his EFT Global link we can see a lot has happened that is still red and only a few buys recommendations. Interestingly India stand out as global standout (beyond US equities).

Some funds that seems to be steaming along:
GLFOX
GASFX
VUIAX (VPU)...not a bad short and long term total return (results below are for VUIAX)

@WABAC: I agree with you on water. I have a decent amount in FIW, and I have stuck with it despite drops since late 2021. The fund holds companies whose business extends beyond water per se, but I think they are solid industrial companies. Lots of good companies’ stocks have been gored for no good reason other than a bad market environment. I’m hoping that quality will rise to the surface and receive investors’ (i.e., stock pickers’) attention. I also have a position in GFLOX which holds water-related businesses.

GLFOX? Love the dividends.
Our Water Works basket include PIO, FIW, and CGW.

I also have a position in GFLOX which holds water-related businesses.

Try GLFOX @BenWP :)