I am glad to hear someone savvy here has stuck w/ Heebner. I wonder if anyone is still in FLVCX, and wonder where Soviero will surface.

It was easy. Sorry to sound like broken record. When you buy these funds, don't reinvest distributions and then forget about them unless and until the manager changes. Besides with CGMFX Heebner is shorting bonds. I was thinking of doing so myself a little.
One problem is Heebner is well into is 70s. So, one day...

This is an old article. Look at the date. I sold DEFIX because it became too volatile for me. Was a good decision for a while after which it of course, it did spectacularly. I transferred its holdings into AUXFX. I will wait patiently for years before I buy DEFIX.
ARTVX is closed now.
I own AUXFX, CGMFX, FAIRX, YAFFX, FMIMX.
AUXFX, CGMFX, FAIRX held for years and never sold. FMIMX owned in IRA for years, and as soon as it re-opened, sold in IRA and bought in taxable. YAFFX owned for years in IRA.

I am a FAIRX holder. Till the DEATH! I take my money and run every time. Like I've said before, I've never been to Vegas (which might change this year). I live on the wild side with the house's money in CGMFX and FAIRX.

Well SEARS also got creamed earlier some time. You never know what's happening with SEARS. And FAIRX. And CGMFX. And for some SEQUX.
good for me I have taken my gains out and am playing with the houses money.

Well, since Nov it's been serious rock 'n' roll for him.
I failed to make clear that I bailed on CGMFX because I retired and needed to recalc holdings in all sorts of ways. I also bailed on Soviero then. I was with him too for a good spell, and one of my kids likewise.
I do not much believe in someone 'losing his touch', and like to stick w managers, or so I claim. Though after >8y of subpar, it's often easy to think they have indeed lost it.
I do sometimes get irked at particular decisions (Berkowitz, Herro, Parnassus, ...). Someone here once wrote that whenever he sold FLPSX he soon enough looked back and really regretted it. I also switch following presence of new competition, w say similar selection processes and a lower ER.
A local friend who knows Heebner (a little bit anyway, but the friend works in big finance downtown) says he's famously quite the nerd, spottable in libraries and during visits to various offices sitting alone poring over page and pages of data, pen and paper in hand.
He and Tillinghast (another major biz ops nerd scholar) live like a few blocks apart in the Back Bay. That always fascinated me when I first learned it long ago. What a couple of researchers and memorizers.

Mea culpa. I'm still with CGMFX. The only reason I have stuck with CGMFX and FAIRX is because I have always taken my CapGains and I'm still in the + column. Some day Heebner is going to be right on his short bonds. Hopefully he is still around when he is proven right.

During this period of thanksgiving, I am grateful for Bruce Berkowitz (FAIRX, FAAFX), Scott Barbee (AVALX), Eric Cinnamond (ARIVX ... RIP), Malcolm Fobes (BFOCX), Ken Heebner (CGMFX, LOMMX) and the poker face David Einhorn (GLRE) for convincing me that I should mainly invest in low cost index funds/ETFs, and that I should be extremely cautious with investing in actively managed funds. And if I am tempted to invest in actively managed funds, I need to make certain that the fund is a category killer over the short and long haul (think PRWCX, POAGX, VWIAX) and that I have a disciplined exit plan such as a move below the fund's 20 or 50 day EMA. Get out when the getting is good, and do not hang on hoping that some day off in the distant future I will break even with my investment. Faith is good, but not in investing. Just my opinion.
I realize that most of the chatter on this and most mutual fund forums focus on "hot" funds that have "low assets" and are "emerging" and are "breaking out" and are "must own" and are projected to "beat the market," but ...
SPIVA Is Real
Kevin

I'm thinking of Ken Heebner here, when after his great year, he want Hedgie and started a side gig; before folding that side gig into CGMFX (I think it was).

Not a melt down, but I share everybody's concern of how a fund with Romick's cash component can barely stay even with any index he may want us to consider as a benchmark.
@Mark said on January 17 in Off-Topic
Then I thought of some other fairly noteworthy melt downs involving esteemed managers: Bill Miller (LMVTX), Bill Nygren (OAKLX) and Ken Heebner (CGMFX) who I thought at one time or the other were the sharper tools in the box; and I recalled folks hanging on through the storm and vowing to sell once they got back to the even plateau.
Hence the question - does that work or do you just take your chips off the table and is there any studies that have delved into the matter. I'm quite aware of the sell decision thought process for mutual fund holdings yet sometimes leeway is granted.
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/73903/#Comment_73903
A comparison/alternative ?
Value investing vs value-based investing.I'll take some divinity with that monthly dividend,please ! I started a position with the latter earlier this year.Crescent is top 5 holding in my portfolio.Tend to appreciate @davidrmoran comment "Be aware this may be a classic bailing too soon and not sticking longterm."
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND STRATEGY:
The Fund seeks to generate equity-like returns over the long-term, take less risk than the market and avoid permanent impairment of capital.
PHILOSOPHY:
Absolute value investors. We seek genuine bargains rather than relatively attractive securities.
FPACX
http://www.fpafunds.com/crescent
A young and smaller go anywhere contender .
Investment Objective: The Fund seeks current income while maintaining the potential for capital appreciation. The Fund has significant flexibility to achieve its investment objective by primarily investing in a broad universe of income-producing securities. These securities include debt and equity securities of companies in the U.S. and other markets around the world.
Values-based investing: We aim to analyze each potential investment’s ability to operate with integrity and create value for customers, employees, the environment, and other key stakeholders. While few companies may reach these ideals in every area of their business, these principles articulate the Advisor’s ideal characteristics of good corporate behavior. The Advisor makes no guarantee that fund investments will meet any or all of these characteristics.
ETNMX
http://eventidefunds.com/our-products/#!income
http://eventidefunds.com/wp-content/uploads/Eventide-Multi-Asset-Income-Fund-Fact-Sheet-12-31-2015.pdf

@Old_Skeet: made the mistake of buying, but not selling. I got 3 good years out of CGMFX. Lifetime yield on that investment has been -7%. Was actually up about 4% before the bear reared its head, convincing myself that Heebner's massive short on T's would act as an inflation hedge.
CGM is miserable in a sideways market. And Ken's ego got the better of him after that one massive year.

I owned CGMFX at one time and sold it many years ago. It seems, form review of Morningstar's Performance Report the few making good money, over an extended period of time, were Natixis and Heebner. I bought this fund as a spiff and made money.

FYI: Last week, Financial Advisor magazine published a story announcing that one of the mutual fund industry’s oldest funds, run by one of its most enduring fund managers, Kenneth Heebner, went out of business when Natixis Global Asset Management liquidated its CGM Advisor Targeted Equity Fund.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.etf.com/sections/index-investor-corner/swedroe-star-manager-loses-luster?nopaging=1
M* Snapshot CGMFX:
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/cgmfx/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot CGMFX:
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/Fund/CGMFX?countrycode=US
CGMFX Is Ranked #240 In The (LCB) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
http://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/large-blend/cgm-focus-fund/cgmfx

I wonder if any of these other guys have "hedge Fund" ideas before the Securities and Exchange Commission
Top fund managers can't catch a break
Some formerly hot hands like Legg Mason's Bill Miller have gone cold
Feb 10, 2016 @ 4:23 pm
By John Waggoner
Mr. Miller clawed his way back with Legg Mason Opportunity, driving the fund to a 40% gain in 2012 and a 68% gain in 2013. But the current market correction has clobbered the fund, sending it down 27.9% this year through Monday,
Another big name with big losses: G. Kenneth Heebner, manager of CGM Focus fund (CGMFX), which is down 25.10%. Mr. Heebner, one of the top managers of the 1990s, has had a rotten decade
Baron Partners fund (BPTRX), the eponymous $1.6 billion fund run by Ron Baron since 1992, has shed 23.47% this year.
Federated Kaufman Small Cap (FKASX), overseen by legendary small-cap investor Hans Utsch, has fallen 24.80% this year
Jacob Small Cap Growth Fund (JSCGX), run by former dot-com investing star Ryan Jacob, has plunged 26.79% this year and 40.87% over the past 12 months, according to Morningstar. (Jacob Internet, in contrast, has fallen 22.55% in 2016 and 14.71% the past 12 months).
It's been a rough ride for Jacob. The fund has not risen above the 99th percentile for the past one, three and five years
Messrs Miller, Heebner, Baron, Jacob and Levine could not be immediately reached for comment.
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20160210/FREE/160219987?template=printart

You sever fund strategies from people, which is beyond weird to my mind.
Let us discuss the Pats or the Celts as entities and not makeup by individuals. Not for me as a bettor on their games or season.
>> If a fund measures poorly and it has a single manager for the periods used, then it means the manager's strategy isn't consistent.
Really, that is what it means? Your definition of strategy may be tautological. A good manager is one whose strategy works in all circumstance, and vice-versa.
Without knowing who makes the decisions, measuring 'the performance of a fund' is meaningless. Thinking they somehow have a life of their own is something everyone rejects, innit?
>> None of the metrics on this site or on M* are partitioned to a manager's tenure.
Say what? I want to take over CGMFX, or SMVLX, and keep up the good work!
There is a fair amount of literature on this, team vs individual, which perhaps you are not familiar with.
>> not planning to go in that direction
Whatever will you do if a fund goes from hot to cold or changes from a 85yo veteran to young whippersnapper? After all, it keeps the same letters. Wait for 8y of finely parsed cycles to see?
Ah, you already are dealing w la creme only. Perhaps that answers all my questions here. Grading among various prime cuts only.
Still, new understanding of 'bizarre' and 'obviously' for me.

It is not timing. Everyone wants to buy focused funds like these after they have gone up and got everyone's attention and th n complain later. I have done that as well. I grew up.
Also do not reinvest dividends. Take profits.
Also I would prefer my manager had some principles when he invests. It is a matter of opinion whether one is being anal about it or not. Let's not kid ourselves. Other fund managers have sold BRK using mumbo jumbo finance jingo, but we wouldn't notice unless fund was widely held or popular. Just as we wouldn't care if WGRNX performance hadn't stunk. I would very much like to know the person who sold the fund because Winters sold BRK. Also the person who sold SEQUX when they bought Valeang while we are it.
I bought WGRNX and MXXVX when they were in the dumps. Then with decent return I sold and patiently waiting to buy back. Been waiting to buy a long time, but I am sorry to say my complaint is better then what I am hearing from others.
When CGMFX returned 80%, what did people think? He will keep returning 80%? So now they buy and then waiting for CGMFX to recover? THIS is market timing no? Waiting for fund to return 80% THEN buying? But waiting for fund to stink up the place and then buying is definitely timing. Hah!

I am not sure who thought that. I think it is M* who confuses the issue by summarily categorizing most of what it does not understand as long/short as long as it sees some short in funds portfolio.
Let's take FVALX for instance. It used to be Large Value. IT is now Long / Short. The manager shorts S&P as a hedge during bad markets. It is truly a hedge. And on its fund page, there is not even an indication of FVALX being short anything.
Take HSGFX. It is NEVER net short. It is supposed to hedge. It used to be Long / Short. Now it is Market Neutral.
I have been waiting for M* to put CGMFX and FPACX in Long/Short category forever now. They will do it one of these days for heck of it. Sorry, not for heck of it. I think M* always has some agenda.
Bottom line, we are smart people and we don't "subsume" anything. This is problem created by investment management community it is trying to solve itself and someone now can publish article to fulfill his quota. Fantastic. Make a statement like it is truth, and then address it.
Eating sausage causes cancer. Stop eating sausage.

I have practiced this for a while now. However, you then end up owning many funds. I'm fine with it, some people aren't, and others downright frown on it.
I maintain independent portfolios at all major brokerages. By definition I have multiple funds in same "category". On top of it, I have a smattering of eponymous funds I own, which if I didn't I might own some independent stocks. These last category of funds tend to be very very focused. FAIRX, CGMFX, COBYX are examples. Again, here I'm diversifying in the same "category".

Thanks; fascinating. Serious surprises re CGMFX and PRBLX, for me.

>> Who has beaten that? [15y]
Yeah, not many. Tillinghast and Soviero at Fidelity (FLVCX has not been around the full 15y, a month or so less). CGMFX beats all hugely, but not for shorter spans except for selected. I will have to compare UIs for these four. I imagine investor returns for all three other than FLPSX have been grim because 'stay the course' has been so difficult and unlikely.

I'm heavy in FAIRX and FAAFX. I'm planning to hold. I remember all those investors in Ken Heebner's funds, CGMFX, etc, who sold at the end of a long stretch of underperformance and bought at the end of a long stretch of overperformance.
Berkowitz surely has seen all those studies of Sears and he keeps buying. He sees something we and the rest of the market don't. That's what I pay him for. Maybe his vision is bad, but I plan to give him a couple more years.