FYI:
Regards,
Ted
June 21, 2018
Dear WEALTHTRACK Subscriber,
We are celebrating the launch of our Fifteenth Season on Public Television this week! Talk about long-term investing. We are delighted that you are here to share it with us.
Our goal when we started the show was exactly as it is now - to help our viewers build long-term financial security through disciplined, diversified investing, with advice from some of the top professionals in the business. We are continuing that tradition this week.
One of the hallmarks of Great Investors and Financial Thought Leaders is independent thinking. In order to beat the market you have to do unconventional things. This week’s guest is a prime example. He is known for his rigorous research and ability to create strategies that are either non-correlated with market behavior, i.e., they zig when the market zags, or add alpha, a performance edge over the market using more conventional strategies.
We’ll be joined by Cliff Asness, Co-Founder, Managing Principal and Chief Investment Officer of AQR Capital Management, a global money management firm he launched in 1998. It now has $225 billion dollars under management in hedge funds, as well as other alternative and more traditional strategies for clients and its family of mutual funds, which it started in 2009. One of the oldest, the AQR Managed Futures Strategy Fund, which has so far achieved its goal to be non-correlated to the market is co-managed by Asness and has a Morningstar Bronze analyst rating.
AQR stands for Applied Quantitative Research. The firm uses proprietary computer models to forecast returns for a wide variety of assets and geographies using a heavy application of old fashioned human brainpower, which it has in abundance. At last count 11 of the firm’s 26 principals have doctorate degrees and 5 are current or former professors.
Asness is a PhD in Finance from the University of Chicago where he was Nobel Laureate Eugene Fama’s teaching assistant for two years. He has won numerous prestigious awards for his own research including the CFA Institute’s James R. Vertin Award in recognition of his “body of research notable for its relevance and enduring value to investment professionals”.
AQR is known for its value orientation but Asness is quick to point out there are other key strategies employed. During this week’s interview, we’ll discuss the four core strategies AQR has identified over the years that can add a performance edge to portfolios.
If you miss the premiere show of our new season on air this week, you can always watch it on our website. It’s available to our PREMIUM viewers right now and to everyone else over the weekend. We also have an EXTRA interview with Asness about his research on a seldom used but highly effective ice hockey strategy that has investment applications.
Also, if you're looking to take WEALTHTRACK with you on your commute or travels, you can now find the WEALTHTRACK podcast on TuneIn, Stitcher, and SoundCloud, as well as iTunes. Find out more on the WEALTHTRACK Podcast page.
Thank you so much for watching. Have a great weekend and make the week ahead a profitable and a productive one!
Best regards,
Consuelo
Video Clip:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/63210/000119312518199483/d770939d497.htm
497 1 d770939d497.htm THE GAMCO MATHERS FUND
Filed Pursuant to Rule 497(e)
Registration No. 002-23727
The GAMCO Mathers Fund (the “Fund”)
Supplement dated June 21, 2018 to
the Class AAA Summary Prospectus and Prospectus dated April 30, 2018 (the “Prospectus”)
The Board of Trustees of the Fund has approved a Plan of Liquidation for the Fund, pursuant to which the Fund will be liquidated (the “Liquidation”) on or about August 31, 2018 (“Liquidation Date”). This date may be changed without notice at the discretion of the Fund’s officers. All capitalized terms used but not defined in this Supplement shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the registration statement.
Suspension of Sales. Effective the close of business on June 20, 2018, the Fund will no longer sell shares to new investors or existing shareholders, including through exchanges into the Fund from other funds in the Fund Complex.
Mechanics. In connection with the Liquidation, any shares of the Fund outstanding on the Liquidation Date will be automatically redeemed as of the close of business on the Liquidation Date. The proceeds of any such redemption will be equal to the net asset value of such shares after the Fund has paid or provided for all of its charges, taxes, expenses and liabilities. The distribution to shareholders of these liquidation proceeds will occur as soon as practicable, and will be made to all shareholders of the Fund of record at the time of the Liquidation. Additionally, the Fund must declare and distribute to shareholders any realized capital gains and all net investment income no later than the final Liquidation distribution.
Other Alternatives. At any time prior to the Liquidation Date, shareholders of the Fund may redeem their shares of the Fund and receive the net asset value thereof, pursuant to the procedures set forth under “Redemption of Shares” in the Prospectus. Shareholders may also exchange their Fund shares for shares of the same class of other funds in the Fund Complex.
U.S. Federal Income Tax Matters. For tax purposes, with respect to shares held in a taxable account, the automatic redemption of shares of the Fund on the Liquidation Date will generally be treated as any other redemption of shares (i.e., as a sale that may result in gain or loss for federal income tax purposes). Instead of waiting until the Liquidation Date, a shareholder may voluntarily redeem his or her shares prior to the Liquidation Date to the extent that the shareholder wishes to realize any such gains or losses prior thereto. See “Tax Information” in the Prospectus. Shareholders should consult their tax advisors regarding the tax treatment of the Liquidation.
If you have any questions regarding the Liquidation, please contact the Fund at 1-800-GABELLI (1-800-422-3554).
Please retain this Supplement with your Summary Prospectus and Prospectus for future reference.

Did not sell much past yr, some Corp bonds just matured and gain capitals back to buy more Corp bonds.
For taxes the boa or schwab just send us 1099misc and its pretty simple to do w turbotax and automatically filled
Will look at the performance little later on

Tax treatment of bonds, even vanilla ones, is pretty complex. My impression is that nearly everyone gets it wrong. I've a relative who, a few years ago, went to a lawyer (don't ask) to have the relatively straightforward tax return prepared. Even this lawyer made a common error in her handling of market premium of a muni bond (not discussed below - special rules for munis).
The good news is that the brokerages (actually the clearing brokerages) seem to have gotten much better in providing accurate information in the past couple of years. At least that's my experience.
You might buy a bond on the secondary market at less than face (par) value, i.e. at a discount. At maturity, you get the par value. The way this is treated is that each year, it is as though you received interest, i.e. the interest "accrues". At maturity, the total accrual equals your "gain". But you must declare this accrual as interest, not cap gains. (You have the option of declaring the interest annually, but by default it's declared all at once, at maturity.)
You might buy a bond on the secondary market above face value, i.e. at a premium. You may choose to amortize this premium. That means that each year, a little piece of the interest you receive is a partial return of the premium. So when the bond matures, there's no premium left to claim and no capital loss. But each year, since some of the "interest" you received was just return of principal, only part of the interest was taxed. If you don't amortize, then you get to take the capital loss at maturity. Simpler, but from a tax perspective worse, since reducing taxable interest is more valuable than taking a capital loss.
It gets even more complicated when there's original issue discount (OID) involved. Or it can be very simple if you just buy retail Corporate Notes at par and hold them until maturity.
Generally speaking, you should receive1099-INTs along the way (for interest payments), a 1099-B when you sell (automatic at maturity), and possibly 1099-OIDs. I haven't dealt with the latter, since I invest in munis where you don't get these. I don't know when a 1099-MISC would be issued for a bond.
Assuming you're holding to maturity, the easiest way to figure out your return is to look at your purchase confirmation. That should show the yield to maturity. That's the effective yield you get every year, after taking into account discounts, premiums, and coupons.
Here's a good IRS FAQ page. Questions 7 and 8 explain what I wrote above regarding market discount. Questions 9 and 10 explain what I wrote above regarding market premium. The fact that there are so many other questions is a clue that things can be even a lot more complicated.
https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/cost-basis-reporting-faqs

Here’s the full story which is much better than the reformed broker one:
https://bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-06-13/gundlach-sees-6-yield-in-3-years-anyone-else
I and almost every analyst think Gundlach’s wrong, but if he’s right there’d be no point owning either stocks or bonds in 2020. Both markets would tank. Meanwhile Japan despite all the austerity shills has survived with large deficits and ultra low rates for decades. In fact it was priming the pump even more that got that country’s equity market moving again in recent years. It’s true the tea party nuts may push back as Gundlach says, but how fast would they roll over if markets and their beloved portfolios started to tank as rates went higher? I think Gundlach is increasingly sounding more like one of them than viewing the situation with the appropriate level of detachment.

Hey wait. I called this long time back. In middle of Trump's 2nd term.
And hindsight is always 2020. Pun very much intended.

More often than not, I do like one manager, it is usually the reason I am drawn to a fund, assuming he/she has enough analysts doing the grunt work. However, when it comes to an allocation or balanced fund, I like a team, since the equity side and bond side take very different talents. Regarding new or existing funds with new managers, I like new managers who have a strong record elsewhere before, such as AOFAX, which I recently added after seeing posts regarding her record at Brown Capital mentioned by Old_Skeet.

FYI: Fidelity Investments started a new mutual fund and tapped two of its most successful managers, William Danoff and Joel Tillinghast, to run it. There’s just one catch: it’s only available to Canadian investors.
Fidelity Global Growth and Value Class fund marks the first time the managers will run a fund together. The new product aims to achieve long-term capital growth by investing in companies anywhere in the world, according to a news release issued Thursday. It was created by Fidelity Investments Canada, which operates independently of the U.S. fund giant.
regards,
Ted
https://www.fa-mag.com/news/fidelity-brings-together-firepower-of-star-managers-for-new-fund-39225.html?print
M*Canada:
http://news.morningstar.com/all/printNews.aspx?article=/CNW/20180614C4204_univ.xml

FYI: Jeff Gundlach upped the rhetoric on DoubleLine’s webcast last night. The famed bond manager is now talking about a spike in 10-year yields to as high as 6% (from 3% currently) and the potential for a recession in 2020
Regards,
Ted
http://thereformedbroker.com/2018/06/14/gundlachs-bond-call/

FYI: The Goldman Sachs JUST U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (JUST) just had the biggest-ever launch for a socially responsible ETF.
On Wednesday, its first day of trading, JUST took in $250 million in net inflows. Meaning that, after just one day of trading, the fund is already the ninth-largest socially responsible ETF.
Most of these flows are likely from "BYOB" assets from Goldman Sachs Asset Management, and effectively function as the ETF's starting seed capital, says Dave Nadig, managing director of ETF.com.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.etf.com/sections/features-and-news/just-takes-250m-its-first-day

You're going to be taxed on the distributions whether you reinvest or not. So from a tax perspective, you're sitting with a tax bill (from the distributions), some cash, and fund shares. The question is: what do you do with the cash that was distributed?
If you need the cash (either for spending or rebalancing), then you might as well keep it. That's what you seem to be implying by saying that you'd have to sell shares to pay the taxes owed.
So the question might be viewed instead as one of where to park that cash for the short term - say six months until your tax bill comes due. If you park it in a MMF or bank account, you'll get more divs (MMF) or interest (bank). So while keeping the cash may appear simpler, because, well, it's just cash, that approach still generates more report-able distributions.
If you park the cash in your bond fund (say, by reinvesting divs), then you've got cap gains (when you sell) as well as more divs from the bond fund. Slightly more complex, but not fundamentally different.
A couple of additional thoughts:
- For tax efficiency, it's usually better to sell specific shares than use average cost. That lets you pick shares with the highest cost, generating the lowest cap gains or possibly even losses. (Of course you pay for that in the future, because your remaining shares have the lowest cost, hence the highest gains when you ultimately do sell them.)
- Some bond funds declare daily, and pay monthly. For these funds, the share price doesn't drop when there's a distribution, because the daily dividends are not incorporated into the share price. (If you liquidate your position in the middle of the month you get not only the value of the shares but the accrued dividends through the partial month.)

I happen to own USA as a small percentage (<2.0%) of my dividend growth portfolio. I couldn't afford to buy many of their top holdings outright so I saw this as a way to gain a foothold while getting a little back in return. The author stated that it is run by 5 managers however the company website says: "Multi-managed fund that allocates its portfolio assets on an approximately equal basis among several independent investment organizations (currently three in number) having different investment styles and/or strategies recommended and monitored by ALPS Advisors, Inc., the Fund's investment advisor."
As Lewis noted nearly all of the return comes from LT capital gains. The last time it returned capital was in 2014 and that was roughly $0.07/share.

Scenario:
I own a income bond fund in a taxable account that distributes monthly dividends. These dividends may either be directed to cash or used to repurchase additional share of the income fund. My brokerage calculates this dividend distribution as a loss in share price for the fund, but my total return has remained the same since (I have more share or cash in addition to the remaining shares albeit at a lower price).
If I repurchase share with the dividends:
My ACB (Average Cost Basis) of all shares should be theoretically lower since these dividend distribution adjustmented the share price lower and the subsequent repurchase of additional shares were bought at this lower price, but these dividends are also report-able as income in a taxable account.
This added income tax may prompt a decision to sell shares to pay the taxes on the dividends (since this cash was used to to repurchase shares). This selling adds another layer of report-able distributions (which may be either short or long term capital gains) for tax purposes. This seems inefficient.
Wouldn't taking dividends as well as long or short term capital gains in cash be a better way to managed (tax wise) these distributions?

The title said it all and investors should ask how and where does that level of dividend come from. Even in open end mutual funds there are years where the sizable year-end distribution came from capital gain, even though they may be long term CG. CEFs are less transparent on this matter.

Actually, I'm looking at recent years for these funds and it seems like recently most of the dividend has come from distributed capital gains, not return of capital. Still, at the end of day all that matters is the total return regardless whether that return is paid out as a distribution or not, assuming one is unconcerned about taxes. If taxes are a concern, then the distribution could actually lower one's total return.

Neglects to mention that some if not most of this dividend income may be from return of capital, so while your income is payed out, the value of the underlying investment decreases by the amount of capital required to pay you the dividend. There is a Ponzi-ish dimension to return of capital dividends, even though these may in fact be good funds in other regards.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1535174/000119312518191657/d602674d497.htm
497 1 d602674d497.htm 497
SALIENT MF TRUST
Supplement dated June 13, 2018
to the Salient Adaptive Growth Fund Class A, Class C and Class I Prospectus and Salient Adaptive Growth Fund
Statement of Additional Information
each dated May 1, 2018, as supplemented
NOTICE OF LIQUIDATION OF SALIENT ADAPTIVE GROWTH FUND
On June 8, 2018, the Board of Trustees of Salient MF Trust (the “Trust”), including all of the Trustees who are not “interested persons” of the Trust (as that term is defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended), approved the liquidation of the Salient Adaptive Growth Fund (the “Fund”), a series of the Trust. The Fund will be liquidated pursuant to a Board-approved Plan of Liquidation on or around August 13, 2018 (the “Liquidation Date”). On the Liquidation Date, the Fund will distribute pro rata to its respective shareholders of record as of the close of business on the business day preceding the Liquidation Date all of the assets of the Fund in complete cancellation and redemption of all of the outstanding shares of beneficial interest, except for cash, bank deposits or cash equivalents in an estimated amount necessary to (i) discharge any unpaid liabilities and obligations of the Fund on the Fund’s books on the Liquidation Date, including, but not limited to, income dividends and capital gains distributions, if any, payable through the Liquidation Date, and (ii) pay such contingent liabilities as the officers of the Trust deem appropriate.
IN LIGHT OF THE PLANNED LIQUIDATION, EFFECTIVE ON JUNE 14, 2018, SHARES OF THE SALIENT ADAPTIVE GROWTH FUND WILL NO LONGER BE OFFERED TO NEW INVESTORS OR EXISTING INVESTORS (EXCEPT THROUGH REINVESTED DIVIDENDS) OR BE AVAILABLE FOR EXCHANGES FROM OTHER FUNDS OF THE TRUST.
PLEASE KEEP THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE
****
SUPP ADP GRWTH LIQ 06132018

FYI: U.S. stock benchmarks retreated slightly Wednesday afternoon as the Federal Reserve’s raised benchmark interest rates by a quarter of a percentage point, as expected, and signaled that the domestic economic growth outlook warrants further rate increases.
Regards,
Ted
Bloomberg:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-12/asian-stocks-set-to-slip-as-central-banks-meet-markets-wrap
Bloomberg Evening Briefing:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-13/your-evening-briefing
Reuters:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-stocks/wall-street-flat-as-fed-decision-awaited-idUSKBN1J91HI
MarketWatch:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-stock-futures-climb-ahead-of-key-fed-decision-2018-06-13/print
IBD:
https://www.investors.com/market-trend/stock-market-today/tech-stocks-gains-fade-fed-raises-interest-rates/
CNBC:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/13/us-stock-futures-dow-data-fed-decision-and-politics-on-the-agenda.html
Bonds:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/13/bonds-and-fixed-income-investors-turn-to-fed-rate-decision.html
Currencies:
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-global-forex/dollar-mixed-ahead-of-feds-interest-rate-decision-idUSKBN1J902K
Oil:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/12/oil-markets-prospect-of-rising-supplies-in-focus.html
Gold:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/12/gold-markets-fed-decision-in-focus.html
WSJ: Markets At A Glance:
http://markets.wsj.com/us
SPDR's Sector Tracker:
http://www.sectorspdr.com/sectorspdr/tools/sector-tracker
SPDR's Bloomberg Sector Performance Pie Chart:
https://www.bloomberg.com/markets/sectors
Current Futures: Mixed
https://finviz.com/futures.ashx

Agree with above. Price was my first mutual fund manger ever in 1989. I stuck with them thru Mutual Series and switched to MDISX. My capital gains now are such that while I am disappointed it hasn't continue to excel, it hasn't done badly so I sell a little every year.
I was excited to follow Winters to WGRNX but his performance has been really dissapponting so I sold years ago and haven't looked back

I suppose that this qualifies as a "Fund Discussion" as there are surely many funds which might provide such bonds.
There's a recent article in The Economist which has an interesting perspective on the subject. It suggests that "there is a large class of investors for whom long-dated Treasuries have an almost unique virtue. It may even include people who believe that 3% is far too low for a sensible long-term interest rate. It consists of holders of other riskier assets, such as stocks, houses (real estate generally??) or high-yield corporate bonds, who wish to hedge against falling prices in the event of a recession."
The article then mentions a few other more exotic possibilities, but goes on to say that"...buying Treasuries is less fiddly for no-nonsense investors. And this insurance policy pays 3% a year."
"Long-dated bonds offer the prospect of a bigger capital gain should recession strike." In the event of a recession and intervention by the Fed, "ten-year yields could plausibly fall to 1%, or so. Those who had bought at yields of 3% would secure a 17% capital gain. Not only would that cushion a fall in the price of stocks, it would provide the means to buy them while they are cheap."
I have to admit that I had never looked at this situation from that perspective, and I'd love to hear what anyone else on MFO has to say regarding this.

FYI: Wall Street has ridiculed passive investing for decades. The reason is obvious: Its profits—and for many firms, their very survival—are at stake. The criticism reached an absurd level when a team at Bernstein called passive investing “worse than Marxism.” The authors of the note wrote: “A supposedly capitalist economy where the only investment is passive is worse than either a centrally planned economy or an economy with active market led capital management.”
Regards,
Ted
http://www.etf.com/sections/index-investor-corner/swedroe-passive-investing-demonized