... I personally have decided to use the S&P 500 and stop further in depth allocations such as much discussed finer granular reits, mlp's, utilities etc. S&P500 contains all of the aforementioned within the index. ... The argument can be made for more granularity outperforming the S&P500, but i will live with the simple solution. I like the fact mutual funds can easily reinvest dividends/cap gains if needed while some ETF's cannot (easily). I also like the fact that by the nature of the SP500 index it gradually picks the winners for me and discards the losers. just my 2c.

Hi shipwreckedandalone,
Thanks for commenting. (Worth a lot more than 2c). All valid points. It’s not clear to me whether this represents a portion of your total invested assets or all of them. I suspect it’s the former. That said, I don’t think the argument for real estate or any other granular asset class rests only on maximizing return. There may be other considerations like diversifying assets (and hopefully mitigating risk), increasing income stream, hedging against the unexpected (rampant inflation, depression, war, tax law changes, etc.)
If I were age 25-40 and gainfully employed I’d be inclined to put 100% into growth (even possibly the S&P 500) and let her ride come Hell or high-water. A single fund (2 or 3 at most) would work fine. Even at age 40-50 that might make sense - but would require a stronger risk appetite. At 70 or older (with perhaps a 20-year life expectancy I believe an all-growth portfolio foolhearty, unless one is trying to build assets for posterity (estate planning). In that case, long as your own funding is assured for your lifetime, a 100% growth portfolio might still make sense.
To glean an appreciation of how much a 100% S&P 500 investment can fall in a relatively short time we need go back hardly more than a single decade (from Wikepedia): “The US bear market of 2007–2009 was a 17-month bear market that lasted from October 9th 2007 to March 9th 2009, during the financial crisis of 2007-2009. The S&P 500 lost approximately 50% of its value.”
Now - to sit still and endure the pain for 17 consecutive months while watching your total investment egg fall by 50% takes a great deal of intestinal fortitude. And, remember that on March 8, 2009 after 17 months of free-fall, there was no guarantee the market would reverse direction. History has taught that these downturns can persist for much longer. If an index can tumble 50% in 17 months ... it can just as easily fall 60 or 70% over a longer time. No law says it has to stop at 50%. (It’s likely real estate fared even worse during that period.)
In a nutshell, it depends a great deal on your life situation and ability to endure punishment. I think all of us could do a better job relating our age and years to / into retirement when discussing our allocations. One size does not fit all. Such understanding might benefit the younger newbies - if any.
PS: Just my humble mumble. I am not a qualified advisor. Other points of view welcomed.

FYI: The chances of a recession by the end of 2020 are mounting. And the prospects for the American stock market in the next decade have worsened appreciably.
Those are prognoses, not facts. But they’re not just offhand projections, either. They are the sober assessments of Vanguard, the $5 trillion asset management firm. And they suggest that the current good times may amount to a reprieve: an opportunity to make sure that you are prepared for a storm.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/10/business/vanguard-recession-economy.html

I have gone round and round though the years about the issue of how granular a portfolio should be. I think a REIT allocation is probably good, however I personally have decided to use the S&P 500 and stop further in depth allocations such as much discussed finer granular reits, mlp's, utilities etc. S&P500 contains all of the aforementioned within the index so I will stop there. The SP500 holds 3% reits and utilities so good enough for me. The argument can be made for more granularity outperforming the S&P500, but i will live with the simple solution. I like the fact mutual funds can easily reinvest dividends/cap gains if needed while some ETF's cannot (easily). I also like the fact that by the nature of the SP500 index it gradually picks the winners for me and discards the losers. just my 2c.

Waiting for the cheesy headlines: Weed Stocks Go to Pot or Pot Gains Up in Smoke.

Thanks all for the thoughtful answers, it is most appreciated.
I have been following along this past year, listening to you comments.
To be clear, I am looking through my funds to raise some cash as a defensive move.
Capital preservation is my primary goal at this point -I do not have a need for income.

Part of the "process" in taxable accounts:
Try to:
- Hold tax efficient funds such as index funds
- Hold funds and etfs that have low turnover ratio
- Avoid holding (bond & stock) funds, etfs, and stocks that throw off a lot of short term gains (these are not tax efficient)
- Hold individual stocks for the long term...Long term capital gains and inheriting stock at their stepped up basis...both positives for taxable accounts
- Treat your temporary losers as an opportunity to tax loss harvest their losses...this will offset gains for many years if losses are large enough to "carry over".
I'm sure there are many more...

So you have read and studied the fact sheet along with understanding that it is a dividend strategy fund? It seeks to invest in the highest dividend companies and employees the Dogs of the Dow strategy for about one third of invested assets ... and, the other two thirds is invested choosing high yielding stocks from the broader market. Below is what Sun America states as to the funds objective.
Fund Objective: Seeks total return (including capital appreciation and current income) by employing a “buy and hold” strategy involving the annual selection of up to 30 high dividend yielding common stocks from the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) and broader market.
In addition, Morningstar rates its sustainability to be in the top two percent of its category. My own experience is that it has performed well, in the past, during market downdrafts. Will it continue to do that? Most likely; but, there are no guarantees when it comes to investing.
In checking the funds holdings (again at Morningstar) I am finding its two largest holdings one being Macy's is up ytd 61.35% and the other Darden Restruants is up 16.53%. You might wish to view the Morningstar report on the fund's portfolio holdings while performing your due diligence as it will give you a list of its top holdings along with their year to date returns.
I am not going to debate the attributes of the fund or defend it. It one of three funds that I hold in my domestic equity sleeve found in the growth and income area of my portfolio. The other two funds held within this sleeve are American Funds Fundamental Investor (ANCFX) and Federated Strategic Value Dividend (SVAAX).
Again, I wish you well in doing your due diligence.
I'm thinking if you have great concerns with the fund then perhaps it might not be for you. But, again I'm happy with it for it has generated a good income stream since I have owned it (and now being in retirement that is important to me) paying out last year about $2.00 per share in dividends and capital gains distributions combined. That computes to better than a 10% distribution yield. Plus its ten year (full market cycle) rolling total return is 12.82% putting it in the top one percent for its category.
And again, if you are not happy with it perhaps you will find something more to your liking.

I am loathe to take the gains if its prudent not too, SO aim looking to see where I might lighten up . Any opinion on BPIRX or YAFIX ?

Why sell at all?
"Feeling a bit over your head" is not the right frame of mind to be in when considering buy & sell decisions.
Maybe to start, take what @Old_Skeet describes as:

One of the things that I like about the fund is that it usually kicks off a good bit of income annually (dividends and capital gains).

as "cash" so that you can pay the short term / long term gains yearly.
Take some time to learn the "process". Try not to get ahead of the "process" by making rash decisions.

@newgirl,
I own the A shares of AIG Focused Dividend Strategy (FDSAX) while you have another share class of the same fund with symbol FDSWX. Of late this fund has started to come on pretty strong with it's rolling one week return being listed by Morningstar at 1.21%, one month at 1.88% and 3 month at 9.12%. In addition, Moringstar list its five year rolling total return at 9.43%. AIG Focused Dividend Strategy is a value fund and value has been out of favor for the past couple of years while growth has been the place to be. My position was built over the past ten years, or so, thus it is a long term position for me, held in a taxable account, and has sizeable capital gains exposure (much like you) which would be taxable if I sold. One of the things that I like about the fund is that it usually kicks off a good bit of income annually (dividends and capital gains). Another one is about a third of its equity is positioned in the Dogs of the Dow strategy.
In comparing FDSAX to some other dividend type funds (INUTX, IDIVX, LCEAX & PQIAX) I decided, for me, it was still a keeper.
Wishing you the very best as you perform your own due diligence.

I am having pulling the trigger myself. I just took back an account previously managed by and advisor.
I am having trouble pulling the trigger to sell out of positions, especially those with a capital gain. By the MFO premium analysis FDSWX - looks to be underperforming last 5 years, especially this year. Ditto BPIRX which is a long short - (might this do better in the brewing storm ?). Both are in taxable accounts with gains . Advice on how to proceed is welcome.

Investment News seems to be putting out a bunch of top 12 (or whatever) funds. Here, it's "best-performing", not "some of the best performing". I guess I don't understand their criteria, because ISTM there are several funds that belong among these dozen:
4.5 Fidelity Blue Chip Growth (FBGRX)
5.5 Harbor Capital Appreciation (HACAX)
5.8 Vanguard Primecap (VPMAX)
7.5 Fidelity Growth Discovery (FDSVX)
8.5 Fidelity Trend (FTRNX)
8.8 T. Rowe Price Growth Stock (PRGFX)
(BTW, the ticker for Magellan is wrong - IN's error, not Ted's; should be FMAGX)
From these "magnificent dozen", one can't infer anything.
One can't infer that management skill played any role here, since these are all growth funds. The outperformance might be due to your choosing growth over value in the past year, and may have had nothing to do with the fund managers' skill.
Or skill might have had everything to do with it, and it might be easy for managers to beat the S&P 500. The list of such funds that beat the S&P 500 is clearly larger than twelve. From the information given, you don't know whether there are just six more funds or a thousand more funds that outperformed.
In short, this doesn't really serve as evidence of much of anything. It's just a somewhat random list of large cap growth funds that happened to beat the S&P 500 over an arbitrarily selected time period (ending July 27) with an arbitrarily chosen cutoff ER.

This month David provided an interesting follow-on to the merging of Marsico Flexible Capital and Marsico Global. "Briefly Noted," https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2018/08/briefly-noted-24/#more-11945. He thoughtfully researched possible alternatives to MFCFX and came up with a grid of several balanced/allocation funds. As a result, Provident Trust (PROVX) came to light and he commented, "And if you’re suddenly wondering why we haven’t profiled Provident Trust yet, join the club. I’m wondering the same thing."
I used to own MFCFX and the whole time I wondered how it got categorized as an allocation fund; for me it was a global growth fund whose mandate allowed it to invest in other "stuff." It rarely did and even today it has nothing but stocks and a bit of cash. These days M* has an 85%+ allocation category, the best fit, I think, for a fund that does in fact allocate.
Apparently PROVX would fall into that category, but M* has it pegged as Large Growth. In any event, PROVX today is a highly concentrated (14 stocks) large-cap growth fund with about 10% cash and 5% bonds. Its performance is terrific, from almost any angle, but most assuredly from the perspective of a 85%+ allocation instrument. I would compliment the fund manager on a succinct and rare summary of what he does, has done in the past, and what market conditions prevail now and into the near future. To wit: https://www.provfunds.com/docs/06.30.18 Shareholder Letter.pdf
According to the letter, the fund really has been flexible with respect to its equity allocation. I have not followed it. I guess a small fund could jump in and out of stocks efficiently, but I couldn't imagine FPACX (one of the other balanced funds used as a comparison) doing the same. Provident's turnover ratio is so impossibly low as to confound us. I hope David can profile PROVX as it sounds interesting.

FYI: With Fidelity Investments resetting the fee-war bar with its new zero-cost index funds, we thought it was time to look at the best-performing actively managed mutual funds with expense ratios below 70 basis points.
Culling data from CFRA and Morningstar, the following list includes actively-managed U.S. equity mutual funds with at least $100 million in assets.
The 12-month performance numbers are through July 27 and compare to a 16.1% return by the S&P 500 Index over the same period.
Regards,
Ted
1. PRIMECAP Odyssey Aggressive Growth (POAGX)
2. PRIMECAP Odyssey Growth (POGRX)
3. Fidelity Focused Stock (FTQGX)
4. Vanguard Explorer (VEXRX)
5. Vanguard US Growth (VWUAX)
6. Vanguard Capital Opportunity (VHCAX)
7. Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth (VMGRX)
8. Vanguard Morgan Growth (VMRAX
9. Fidelity Magellan (FAMGX)
10. American Funds Growth Fund of America (AGTHX)
11 .American Funds AMCAP (AMCPX)
12. Fidelity Fund (FFIDX)
http://www.investmentnews.com/gallery/20180803/FREE/803009999/PH/12-low-cost-active-funds-that-are-beating-the-sp-500

Hi @Ted,
I share your feelings on the social and political issue postings and I was close to leaving myself; but, I decided to stay since these type postings have diminished of late. Should you decide to leave know that I have appreciated your many postings through the years (back into fund alarm days) and I have found a good number of these post to be most beneficial to my investing endeavors.
Please know, you will be missed by me and I am sure some others should you decide to leave. I'm thinking the board will become a dull place without you; and, with that said others will also leave. Perhaps, myself as well.
Over the years and of recent one of the things that I found great favor in was that many of your postings gave credence to my own thinking. This post was one of them in more ways than one as well as the one I have linked below.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/42630/investors-move-to-cash-anticipating-democratic-gains-in-u-s-nov-elections#latest
Thanks again, Ted, much appreciated.
Old_Skeet

"Information on closed-end funds is far more limited than
their more popular relatives, mutual funds and exchange-
traded funds," thus reads the first line of a decent summary of sources of information:
http://www.aaii.com/investing/article/web-sites-for-closed-end-funds.pdf
I stopped investing in equity CEFs when ETFs, particularly EM and country-specific funds, became available. I did subscribe to Herzfeld's service for a limited period and I found that even following the recommendations of a service required a lot of time and effort. Patrick Galley at RiverNorth Capital is also an expert on CEFs. He runs fund-of-funds and uses discount/premium arbitrage in the company's MFs.

The premiums are currently crazy on many CEFs, I put out some limit orders that I'll be shocked if fill on PDI and GOF. The thesis of the investment is more focused on income stream and yield than on capital appreciation.
Good sites to peruse as I wait for premiums to return closer to average territory and learn more.

FYI: The likelihood of a Democratic party takeover of at least one house of the U.S. Congress in the midterm elections in November is prompting some portfolio managers to move more money to cash and rotate away from sectors like financials and technology that could see greater regulatory scrutiny.
Fund managers from Federated Investors, OppenheimerFunds, and BMO Global Asset Management are among those who are repositioning their portfolios and seeing cash as more attractive with the Nov. 6 elections less than 100 days away.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-stocks-weekahead/rpt-wall-st-week-ahead-investors-move-to-cash-anticipating-democratic-gains-in-u-s-nov-elections-idUSL1N1UT1NL

Hi @Old_Skeet, I totally agree with you that investing is both art and science, which I attribute to the science of using the past to help understand the likelihood of certain outcomes in an unpredictable future and then the art of choosing among various options not only based on how likely something is but also all the unquantifiable factors that influence your desired outcome.
I don't have any problem with the idea that its worked out for this guy. I just think it doesn't work out that often for that many people. Just like we require ladder companies to warn everyone that you shouldn't put the ladder on ice when that's pretty obvious to most people, or we require McDonalds to warn people that their coffee is hot when most people don't really need that kind of warning, I thought the case was a lot more compelling than the ones I just mentioned that this author should have done a far better job warning his readers that he was advocating something that doesn't work for most people. Those who do get it right a couple times almost always discover the hard way that it was luck rather than skill, which is how I learned as the dot.com bubble burst.
I made a lot of money during the frenzy buying and selling the volatility in semiconductor equipment stocks and I gave it all back because I didn't learn quick enough that my gains had nothing to do with skill. This guy knows that. He knows most people aren't qualified to make the judgments he's advocating and he might even know that a buyout offer 67% above the previous day's closing isn't about skill even if he recognized that it could be a possibility.

@Derf all Long term. I'm not a day trader :-D
I've ranted about WHEN vs WHAT when it comes to investing. I take profits regularly just like I take losses. I never carry a loss over to next year, so I will take some profit somewhere. I always pay capital gains taxes every year. I'm sure I'm not maximizing my profits on paper in the perfect la-la-land world of buying once, holding for 30 years and paying taxes once in your life. I'm happy with my real world situation regarding capital gains taxes.