Update:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/890540/000113542817001085/frost-allocation-funds-497.txt
497
1
frost-allocation-funds-497.txt
THE ADVISORS' INNER CIRCLE FUND II (THE "TRUST")
FROST CONSERVATIVE ALLOCATION FUND
FROST MODERATE ALLOCATION FUND
FROST AGGRESSIVE ALLOCATION FUND (THE "FUNDS")
SUPPLEMENT DATED DECEMBER 1, 2017 TO THE
INSTITUTIONAL CLASS SHARES PROSPECTUS AND THE INVESTOR CLASS SHARES PROSPECTUS,
EACH DATED NOVEMBER 28, 2017 (THE "PROSPECTUSES") AND THE STATEMENT OF
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, DATED NOVEMBER 28, 2017 (THE "SAI")
THIS SUPPLEMENT PROVIDES NEW AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BEYOND THAT CONTAINED IN
THE PROSPECTUSES AND SAI, AND SHOULD BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE
PROSPECTUSES AND SAI.
The Board of Trustees of the Trust, at the recommendation of Frost Investment
Advisors, LLC (the "Adviser"), the investment adviser of the Funds, has approved
a plan of liquidation providing for the liquidation of each Fund's assets and
the distribution of the net proceeds pro rata to the Fund's shareholders. In
connection therewith, the Funds are closed to new investments. The Funds are
expected to cease operations and liquidate on or about December 22, 2017 (the
"Liquidation Date").
Prior to the Liquidation Date, shareholders may redeem (sell) their shares in
the manner described in the "How to Redeem Fund Shares" section of each
Prospectus. For those Fund shareholders that do not redeem (sell) their shares
prior to the Liquidation Date, the Funds will distribute to each such
shareholder, on or promptly after the Liquidation Date, a liquidating cash
distribution equal in value to the shareholder's interest in the net assets of
the Funds as of the Liquidation Date.
In anticipation of the liquidation of the Funds, the Adviser may manage each
Fund in a manner intended to facilitate its orderly liquidation, such as by
holding cash or making investments in other highly liquid assets. As a result,
during this time, all or a portion of each Fund may not be invested in a manner
consistent with its stated investment strategies, which may prevent the Fund
from achieving its investment objective.
The liquidation distribution amounts will include any accrued income and capital
gains, will be treated as a payment in exchange for shares and will generally be
a taxable event. You should consult your personal tax advisor concerning your
particular tax situation. Shareholders remaining in a Fund on the Liquidation
Date will not be charged any transaction fees by the Fund. However, the net
asset value of each Fund on the Liquidation Date will reflect costs of
liquidating the Fund.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.
FIA-SK-046-0100

Hi @Puddnhead, If you are referring to Eric Cinnamond, I believe he was part of the ICMBX team but I don't think he was ever the lead manager. I could be wrong. I think he was lead manager for Intrepid's small cap fund. You know, I was in his River Road small cap fund when it opened when he went out on his own. It really wasn't his deep value theme that turned me away. It was his persistence to be heavy in mining companies and energy when those sectors were collapsing. I believe he succumbed to the term "value trap", which to me is a sin for a mutual fund manager. In any case, below is what I found from M* in a Google search for "ICMBX Cinnamond".

Eric K. Cinnamond
01/28/2010 — 09/02/2010: Mr. Cinnamond serves as Portfolio Manager for River Road’s Independent Value Portfolio. Prior to joining River Road in 2010, Mr. Cinnamond served as Lead Portfolio Manager of Intrepid Capital Management’s small cap strategy, Co-Portfolio Manager and Analyst at Evergreen Asset Management, and Portfolio Manager at First Union National Bank of Florida. Mr. Cinnamond holds a B.B.A. in Finance from Stetson University and an M.B.A. from the University of Florida. He earned the Chartered Financial Analyst® designation in 1996 and is a member of the CFA Institute.

updated:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1217286/000119312517355827/d450598d497.htm
497 1 d450598d497.htm 497 TRUST I
JPMORGAN TRUST I
JPMorgan Tax Aware Income Opportunities Fund
(All Share Classes)
JPMORGAN TRUST II
JPMorgan Tax Free Bond Fund
(All Share Classes)
Supplement dated November 29, 2017
to the Summary Prospectuses, Prospectuses and
Statements of Additional Information dated July 1, 2017, as supplemented
Merger Proposal
At a meeting held on November 15, 2017, the Board of Trustees of JPMorgan Trust I (“Trust I”), on behalf of JPMorgan Tax Aware Income Opportunities Fund (the “Acquired Fund”), and the Board of Trustees of JPMorgan Trust II (“Trust II”), on behalf of JPMorgan Tax Free Bond Fund (the “Acquiring Fund” and together with the Acquired Fund, the “Funds”), approved the merger of the Acquired Fund with and into the Acquiring Fund. The merger will only be completed if approved by the Acquired Fund’s shareholders. This merger was recommended by the Funds’ adviser, J.P. Morgan Investment Management, Inc. (“JPMIM”), based on the belief that the Acquired Fund has limited opportunities for future growth and, as a result, the proposed merger has the potential to take advantage of operational and administrative efficiencies that may result from the reorganization of the Acquired Fund with and into the Acquiring Fund. After determining that (1) participation in the merger is in the best interests of the Funds and (2) the interests of each Fund’s existing shareholders would not be diluted as a result of the merger, each Board of Trustees approved the merger.
Operating expenses vary between the Funds and distribution and service fees differ among share classes. In connection with the proposed merger, JPMIM and JPMorgan Distribution Services, Inc. (“JPMDS”), the distributor for the Acquired Fund and the Acquiring Fund, have contractually agreed to waive their fees and/or reimburse the expenses of the Acquiring Fund, as needed, in order to maintain the total annual fund operating expenses after fee waivers and expense reimbursements (excluding acquired fund fees and expenses other than certain money market fund fees, dividend and interest expenses related to short sales, interest, taxes, expenses related to litigation and potential litigation, and extraordinary expenses) of each class of shares of the Acquiring Fund at or below the level in effect immediately prior to the merger for the corresponding class of shares of the Acquired Fund. These contractual fee waivers and/or reimbursements will stay in effect until May 4, 2019 for the Acquiring Fund. There is no guarantee that such waivers and/or reimbursements will be continued after May 4, 2019. The expenses of the Acquiring Fund’s classes may be higher than disclosed if the expense limitation expires after May 4, 2019.
It is anticipated that the merger will qualify as a tax-free reorganization for federal income tax purposes. Prior to Closing, any net investment income and/or net realized capital gains will be distributed to shareholders of the Acquired Fund and may be distributed to shareholders of the Acquiring Fund in order to seek to avoid any negative tax impact to any of the Funds’ shareholders as a result of the reorganization.
Completion of the merger is subject to a number of conditions, including approval by the shareholders of the Acquired Fund. The merger is not contingent upon the approval of any other merger of JPMorgan Funds. Shareholder approval will be sought at a special meeting of shareholders expected to be held on or about March 28, 2018. If you own shares of the Acquired Fund as of the record date for the special meeting for shareholders, you will receive (i) a Proxy Statement/Prospectus describing in detail both the proposed merger and the Acquiring Fund (including, among other things, any differences in strategies, risks and fees between the Acquiring Fund and the Acquired Fund), and summarizing each Board of Trustee’s considerations in recommending that shareholders approve the merger and (ii) a proxy card and instructions on how to submit your vote.
If the merger is approved by the shareholders of the Acquired Fund, each holder of a class of shares of the Acquired Fund will receive, following the transfer, on a tax-free basis for federal income tax purposes, a number of full and fractional shares of the corresponding class of shares of the Acquiring Fund having an aggregate net asset value equal to the aggregate net asset value of the shares of the Acquired Fund held by that shareholder as of the close of business of the New York Stock Exchange, usually 4:00 p.m. Eastern time, on the closing day of the merger. The merger, if approved by shareholders, is expected to close after the close of business on May 4, 2018 or on another date as the parties to the transaction shall agree.
SUP-TAIO-1117
The foregoing is not an offer to sell, nor a solicitation of an offer to buy, shares of the Funds, nor is it a solicitation of any proxy. The Proxy Statement/Prospectus will be available for free on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website (www.sec.gov), once it is available. Please read the Proxy Statement/Prospectus (when available) carefully before making any decision to invest in the Funds or when considering the merger. For additional information relating to each Fund, please refer to the Fund’s prospectus, which is available by visiting www.jpmorganfunds.com or by calling 1-800-480-4111.
INVESTORS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT
WITH THE SUMMARY PROSPECTUSES, PROSPECTUSES AND
STATEMENTS OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

FYI: Bitcoin exhibited its trademark volatility Wednesday, plunging back toward $9,000 just hours after topping the $11,000 milestone for the first time.
A single bitcoin BTCUSD, -0.94% changed hands in recent action at $9,428.54, according to tracking site CoinDesk, a decline of 4.1% from Monday.
Earlier, bitcoin traded as high as $11,377.33. The move came just a day after the cryptocurrency hit $10,000 for the first time, adding to a rally that saw its year-to-date gains briefly exceed 1,000%. It’s still up sharply from its 2016 finish just below $1,000.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/bitcoin-within-touching-distance-of-11000-just-one-day-after-taking-out-10000-milestone-2017-11-29/print

Hi @MikeM,
Wishing you the very best in your coming retirement.
If my memory is correct from viewing the now removed whoops portfolio the yield was at about 1.56% per my Instant Xray analysis; and, it was geared towards growth over income. Since, I am in retirement myself the yield is a little low for me. I take no more distribution than 1/2 of what my five year average return has been. In this way, my portfolio grows over time. In addition, you can (I believe) get your broker to set your account to where you can take all mutual fund distributions (interest, dividends and capital gains) in cash. This should raise your portfolio's income stream and prevent you from having to, perhaps, sell securities (piecemeal) to raise cash. I have found Morningstar's portfolio manager a good way to track a consolidated portfolio of multiple accounts. And, I have found it to be most reliable in tracking long term investment performance. Sure, it may have some short term glitches but overall it has been a good investment management tool.
Again, wishing you the very best as you approach retirement.
Old_Skeet

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1217286/000119312517353626/d450598d497.htm
497 1 d450598d497.htm 497 TRUST I
JPMORGAN TRUST I
JPMorgan Tax Aware Income Opportunities Fund
(All Share Classes)
JPMORGAN TRUST II
JPMorgan Tax Free Bond Fund
(All Share Classes)
Supplement dated November 28, 2017
to the Summary Prospectuses, Prospectuses and
Statements of Additional Information dated July 1, 2017, as supplemented
Merger Proposal
At a meeting held on November 15, 2017, the Board of Trustees of JPMorgan Trust I (“Trust I”), on behalf of JPMorgan Tax Aware Income Opportunities Fund (the “Acquired Fund”), and the Board of Trustees of JPMorgan Trust II (“Trust II”), on behalf of JPMorgan Tax Free Bond Fund (the “Acquiring Fund” and together with the Acquired Fund, the “Funds”), approved the merger of the Acquired Fund with and into the Acquiring Fund. The merger will only be completed if approved by the Acquired Fund’s shareholders. This merger was recommended by the Funds’ adviser, J.P. Morgan Investment Management, Inc. (“JPMIM”), based on the belief that the Acquired Fund has limited opportunities for future growth and, as a result, the proposed merger has the potential to take advantage of operational and administrative efficiencies that may result from the reorganization of the Acquired Fund with and into the Acquiring Fund. After determining that (1) participation in the merger is in the best interests of the Funds and (2) the interests of each Fund’s existing shareholders would not be diluted as a result of the merger, each Board of Trustees approved the merger.
Operating expenses vary between the Funds and distribution and service fees differ among share classes. In connection with the proposed merger, JPMIM and JPMorgan Distribution Services, Inc. (“JPMDS”), the distributor for the Acquired Fund and the Acquiring Fund, have contractually agreed to waive their fees and/or reimburse the expenses of the Acquiring Fund, as needed, in order to maintain the total annual fund operating expenses after fee waivers and expense reimbursements (excluding acquired fund fees and expenses other than certain money market fund fees, dividend and interest expenses related to short sales, interest, taxes, expenses related to litigation and potential litigation, and extraordinary expenses) of each class of shares of the Acquiring Fund at or below the level in effect immediately prior to the merger for the corresponding class of shares of the Acquired Fund. These contractual fee waivers and/or reimbursements will stay in effect until May 4, 2019 for the Acquiring Fund. There is no guarantee that such waivers and/or reimbursements will be continued after May 4, 2019. The expenses of the Acquiring Fund’s classes may be higher than disclosed if the expense limitation expires after May 4, 2019.
It is anticipated that the merger will qualify as a tax-free reorganization for federal income tax purposes. Prior to Closing, any net investment income and/or net realized capital gains will be distributed to shareholders of the Acquired Fund and may be distributed to shareholders of the Acquiring Fund in order to seek to avoid any negative tax impact to any of the Funds’ shareholders as a result of the reorganization.
Completion of the merger is subject to a number of conditions, including approval by the shareholders of the Acquired Fund. The merger is not contingent upon the approval of any other merger of JPMorgan Funds. Shareholder approval will be sought at a special meeting of shareholders expected to be held on or about March 28, 2018. If you own shares of the Acquired Fund as of the record date for the special meeting for shareholders, you will receive (i) a Proxy Statement/Prospectus describing in detail both the proposed merger and the Acquiring Fund (including, among other things, any differences in strategies, risks and fees between the Acquiring Fund and the Acquired Fund), and summarizing each Board of Trustee’s considerations in recommending that shareholders approve the merger and (ii) a proxy card and instructions on how to submit your vote.
If the merger is approved by the shareholders of the Acquired Fund, each holder of a class of shares of the Acquired Fund will receive, following the transfer, on a tax-free basis for federal income tax purposes, a number of full and fractional shares of the corresponding class of shares of the Acquiring Fund having an aggregate net asset value equal to the aggregate net asset value of the shares of the Acquired Fund held by that shareholder as of the close of business of the New York Stock Exchange, usually 4:00 p.m. Eastern time, on the closing day of the merger. The merger, if approved by shareholders, is expected to close after the close of business on May 4, 2018 or on another date as the parties to the transaction shall agree.
SUP-TAIO-1117
The foregoing is not an offer to sell, nor a solicitation of an offer to buy, shares of the Funds, nor is it a solicitation of any proxy. The Proxy Statement/Prospectus will be available for free on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website (www.sec.gov), once it is available. Please read the Proxy Statement/Prospectus (when available) carefully before making any decision to invest in the Funds or when considering the merger. For additional information relating to each Fund, please refer to the Fund’s prospectus, which is available by visiting www.jpmorganfunds.com or by calling 1-800-480-4111.
INVESTORS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT
WITH THE SUMMARY PROSPECTUSES, PROSPECTUSES AND
STATEMENTS OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

FYI: This weekend, over 100,000 new Coinbase accounts were opened, presumably by people who had an overzealous nephew at their Thanksgiving dinner on Thursday, telling tales of unbridled riches and the wholesale changing of the world that is most assuredly imminent thanks to crypto currency. According to one source, there are now more open accounts on the Coinbase platform than there are brokerage accounts at Charles Schwab (although the Schwab accounts are undoubtedly bigger, for now).
Bitcoin, having soared above $9,000 over the weekend with year-to-date gains of nearly 800%, is now officially an investor mania. Like all manias, when it turns people are going to be wiped out.
Regards,
Ted
http://thereformedbroker.com/2017/11/27/it-just-got-real/

Hi @bee
As we know the markets are sometimes silly, funny and most times difficult to attempt to find proper paths for our money (adjusted for one's risk style). Since the market melt, anticipated and accepted gains have been found in many areas. This is not rocket science (at least in hind sight). :) ........ was one helluva "value" market in March, 2009, yes?.
The following graph is one that I have constructed/viewed previous, is of interest; at least to me, as how areas have changed here and there. This graph are funds I have selected as long term real estate active managed funds for a "fair" comparison. I've also included SPY.
In particular for me, is that the time period for this chart (Sept. 2008 to date) shows very favorable for total return of FRIFX against the other funds, including SPY. However, if one moves the "left" slider adjustment (on the day bar, showing 2,326 days) all the way left to 2003; one will see how different the return of FRIFX was from 2003-early 2009 was during this period and also, overall from 2003 to date showing FRIFX got its butt kicked by other real estate funds. Those who have held the other RE funds since or before the 2003 date are still doing okay.
So, what happened to the other fine managers of RE funds since March, 2009 vs lonely FRIFX? Are the managers having that much difficulty sorting and trying to find where in the world of American real estate they should be invested? Two very different periods of returns, eh?

http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?VGSIX,FRIFX,CSRSX,FRESX,SPY&n=2326&O=011000
FRIFX fund composition has been about 50/50 equity/bonds for as long as I can remember. Although much less showy than other RE funds, this fund just chugs along as of the past 9 years, not unlike PIMIX and other funds out there, of which I am not aware.
Composition: https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/composition/316389865?type=o-NavBar
FRIFX remains a much different RE fund from its peers. I have not plowed through the holdings of the other funds charted here; but FRIFX has some of the same holdings as other funds, with the variance being the bond holdings. There is investment grade, mortgage and junk (a fairly big chunk) bonds.
The only year FRIFX was #1 in the category is 2008. The average RE fund was down about -40% and FRIFX was down -31%. Generally, the fund is always in the last 10% of the category per M*. The current 30 day SEC yield is about 3.8%, average bond duration of 2.55 years and has an annualized 10 year return of 7.34%.
The fund is still about 10% of our total portfolio.
Lastly, a quick look chart which includes FREL. This chart only goes back to Feb. 2015, as FREL is quite new. IYR and FREL travel together at this time.
http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?FRIFX,FREL,IYR,SPY&n=709&O=011000
Well, anyway; I recall @Ted wondering why we weren't playing with the big dogs in the world of RE. The charts speak for themselves at this point in time. We'll see, eh?
This time remains different, IMHO.
I didn't proofread this.....pick my write for errors or omissions.
Take care,
Catch

Regarding cap gains on homes - interviewee (at 5:54) states correctly: "it's also important - always important - for individuals who own their homes to keep great records of the improvements they've put into their homes in order to try to eliminate or reduce part of the gain."
The proposed changes would not make the record keeping tasks any more onerous than they are now or have been in the past. Regardless of how home cap gains are taxed, you always want to show as little gain as possible. Just like stocks, where you keep track of your purchase prices, buying and selling commissions, net proceeds (after other taxes/fees are taken out), you should be keeping track of similar home costs. The purchase price, improvements, additions, special assessments, etc.
A proposed House change to the law would only affect high income people ($250K/$500K per year income). Those people likely own homes that already have big gains that are taxable (more than the $250K/$500K that homeowners can exclude). So this proposed change would have no effect on record keeping needs.
Both House and Senate are proposing requiring people to stay longer in their homes to qualify for the $250K/$500K exclusion. The main people this change would affect are those who are flipping houses to keep their gains under the exclusion amount. They don't get much sympathy for me, and they're probably already keeping detailed records to achieve their objective of avoiding taxation on their home gains.
Longer term, more and more people will need those records. The amount of gain you can exclude, $250K/$500K, was set in 1997. At the time, that sounded like a lot of money. Now, $250K won't buy you an entry level home in some neighborhoods, though it's still above the median price of a home in 80% of the states, including New York ($247K). In another 20 years, lots of people may have taxable gains in their homes.

Thanks, Ted and Bee and msf, for the link and the info.
It seems to me that having the step-up in basis at death is important for two reasons:
(1) the heirs don't owe tax on the the appreciated gain (duh)
(2) the heirs don't have the huge hassle and hopeless task of figuring out the true basis from Mom and Dad's incomplete records of purchases and reinvested dividends.
On the other hand, according to Consuelo's interviewee, such complications are being re-introduced for homeowners who sell their house at an appreciated value after living in it a long time: you'll owe capital gains now.
So trying to go back and find the original price and figure how much capital improvements you made through the years ....... Ugh.
Best to will the house to the kids so they get the step up basis.
Like many other things Congress does, these bills make me want to scream. I don't believe it's fair to pay taxes on taxes, so property taxes and state and local income taxes should all be deductible from Federal tax consideration. I don't care whether it's blue state or red state -- it's just not fair.
The issue that bothers me the most is the elimination of the estate tax. Our ancestors fought for freedom from a system in which an aristocracy based on blood lines ruled over everybody. If huge -- multi-billions of dollars -- can be passed on from generation to generation, we run a huge risk of living under a new aristocracy based on overwhelming wealth.
Maybe I went a little off-topic there.
David

Is this where "re-gifting" finally loses it's negative connotation?

Estate planning moves main stream (...not really):
No way I will ever challenge the present $5M nor the proposed $10M limit, but why not sell assets keeping the new tax proposal (stepped up basis provision for transfer of estate) in mind.
So, if I have 100 shares of xyz stock that I need to sell for income. Instead of selling them from my taxable portfolio and paying the taxes on the capital gain, I instead, gift them "in kind" to my family member first.
-They receive the gift (with a stepped up basis),
-They then sell the xyz stock at the stepped up basis price,
-They pay no taxes on the capital gain since it was eliminated when I first gifted xyz stock to them,
-They then "re-gift" the proceeds back to me (cash proceeds)...minus a steak dinner and a few nights of sleepovers for the grand kids.
This sounds a lot like how a Roth IRA works, but better. It doesn't have pedestrian contribution limits ($20M for a couple), no withdrawal (age) limits, nor any Roth conversion costs (income tax).

FYI: Big gains can be hard to find in the financial markets. Nowadays, though, they seem to be everywhere — and that could change how you feel about taking risks.
Regards,
Ted
http://jasonzweig.com/when-a-10-gain-makes-you-feel-like-a-loser/

Hello,
I do my monthly close on the last Friday of each month with the exception being in December where I use the 31st. My report follows.
For November Old_Skeet's barometer closed the month with a reading of 145 indicating that the S&P 500 Index is overvalued. The barometer consist of three feeds. A breadth feed, an earnings feed along with a technical score feed. At times other technical indicators are used along with a short interest reading. Currently, short interest for SPY is reported at 2.5 days to cover and currently is not a detractor to the reading.
The barometer from a technical basis reflects there are no major sectors within the 500 Index being scored undervalued or oversold. For the month the three best performing sectors were technology (XLK), consumer discretionary (XLY) and real estate (XLRE).
Within my own portfolio I have noticed that my bond duration has fallen from 3.4 years to 3.0 years over the past month. Many may remember my reporting that I have begun to move towards using a good number of hybrid type funds along with some multi sector income funds within my portfolio to make it more dynamic and adaptive to ever changing market conditions. So far, the addition of hybrid funds has now grown to the point where their use has enough influence on the portfolio to make it more dynamic. In addition, based upon a seasonal investment strategy I am overweight equities, at this time by 4%, over what my equity weighting matrix is calling for.
With the overvalued stock market, as measured by Old_Skeet's barometer, for now, I remain in a cash build mode while I await the next stock market pullback. However, with many of my mutual funds making some sizeable capital gain distributions come December I may reinvest some of this money towards the first of the year. One area I plan to look at is hybrid type funds both (convertibles and multialternative).
Listed below are what my five year average investment returns have been by sleeve and for two bogeys. The first percent number is the average yearly return and the second number is the sleeve's current yield. Notice, the higher yielding sleeves generally have lower yearly returns.
Income Area, Income sleeve ... 5.2% ... 3.26%
Income Area, Hybrid Income sleeve ... 7.5% ... 4.15%
G&I Area, Global Hybrid sleeve ... 8.4% ... 3.66%
G&I Area, Domestic Hybrid sleeve ... 9.7% ... 2.95%
G&I Area, Global Equity sleeve ... 11.4% ... 2.31%
G&I Area, Domestic Equity sleeve ... 12.7% ... 2.78%
Growth Area, Global Growth sleeve ... 14.7% ... 0.47%
Growth Area, Large/Mid Cap sleeve ... 17.0% ... 0.21%
Growth Area, Small/Mid Cap sleeve ... 13.8% ... 1.71%
Growth Area, Specialty sleeve ... 11.7% ... 1.18%
Master Portfolio (as a whole including cash sleeves, equity adjustment range +/-5%) ... 9.6% ... 2.5%
Investment Portfolio (without cash sleeves, equity adjustment range +/-5%) ... 11.2% ... 3.0%
Bogey Static 50/50 Index Mix (portfolio with no cash position, rebalance annually) ... 9.0% ... 1.8%
Bogey Active 50/50 Index Mix (portfolio with no cash position, equity adjustment range +/- 20%) ... 9.8% ... 1.6%
A recent Morningstar Instant Xray analysis listed my asset allocation as Cash 17%, U S Srocks 31%, Foreign Stocks 20%, Bonds 25% and Other 7% along with the yield being 2.51%. Five years ago the porfolio's yield was in the 3.25% range with the distribution yield being north of 5%. This year I'm thinking the distribution yield will be around 4% which includes interest, dividends and capital gain distributions.
For those looking for a way to consolidate multiple accounts into a consolidated report I have found Morningstar's Portfolio Mananger a good and accurate way to track investment performance along with other investment and portfolio metrics. Year-to-date both Portfolio Manager and a manual tabulation of account statements are producing the same total return number of 9.6% through Friday November 24th.
Thanks for stopping by and reading.
I wish all ... "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet
Note: Edited with current yield percent on 11/26/2017 and consolidated statement summary on 11/29/2017.

I purchased OSMYX in my retirement account at what was WellsTrade for a fairly low minimum.
Also own ARTJX, which just received some significant capital gains in a taxable account.

There were 35 mutual funds and ETFs that turned 3 years old thru October.
Like it or not, the first 3 year performance mark can be crucial to a fund's commercial success and continued viability, since that's when Morningstar assigns its star rating.
Below please find leaders by AUM and leaders by MFO ratings (risk adjusted return based on Martin).
Three overlap: AQR Equity Market Neutral Fund R6 (QMNRX), SEI Emerging Markets Equity Fund A (SMQFX), and Ivy Mid Cap Income Opportunities Fund N (IVOSX).
Four get MFO Great Owl designations, which also first get determined at the 3 year mark: Leland Thomson Reuters Venture Capital Index Fund I (LDVIX), AQR Equity Market Neutral Fund R6 (QMNRX), First Trust Eurozone AlphaDEX ETF (FEUZ), and Schwab Fundamental Global Real Estate Index Fund (SFREX).

Hi @jerry and others,
I don't track a 60/40 but the 50/50 Index mix that I do track has had the following returns. They follow: 2012/9.96% ... 2013/17.31% ... 2014/5.60% ... 2015/0.54% ... 2016/7.04% ... 2017(ytd)/10.87%. The cumulative return for this period is 53.85% with the average being 8.98%.
The reason I use the 50/50 mix is that now in retirement I only move my equity allocation +/- 5% from its neutral position of 50% unless market conditions warrant otherwise. Years back I'd go +/-10% from the neutral position thus a 60/40 mix might be a better allocation for this adjustment range.
My cumulative return on my own portfolio for the above period has been 57.47% with the average being 9.58%. Some will ask ... Has it been worth it to be active? For me, it has been as it has put a good bit of extra cash in my pocket vs. running with a static 50/50 mix. Plus being a student of the market has been rewarding in of that itself.
In addition, I use American Funds' Capital Income Builder (CAIBX), my third largest holding, as my global hybrid fund bogey because of its global allocation and yield. Its cumulative return is 49.55% for the period with the average being 8.26%. My return over the 50/50 mix is about 6% and over CAIBX about 16%. Generally, I have found, higher yielding hybrid funds offer lower returns. And, my portfolio does kick off a good yield and has a global orientation. I also, use the Lipper Balanced Index as another standard.
In looking at a sampling of some of the funds listed in the article the two I looked at GSOFX & USMYX did not have the history necessary for a compairson. However, I did do one against KCMTX listed by Morningstar as a multialternative fund. I found it's cumulative return for the period to be 67.01% with the average being 11.17%. KCMTX is co-run; and, one of its managers Parker Binion has started posting on our board. Parker's handle is @PBKCM in case you did not, and would like to, know. Interestingly, I was asked (in another thread) by another poster as to why I'd be a buyer of this fund? It is pretty simple ... in spite of its expense ratio ... it is putting up some good numbers for a multialternative fund plus it is currently carrying 5 stars by Morningstar. Folks, it cost money to actively engage the markets. It also reminds me of two other funds I invested in early on (but, no longer own) one being Ivy Asset Strategy and the other being Marketfield. They got to the size where they could no longer effectively position in a timely manner with the ever changing market conditions. So, I let them go as their performance waned.
Below is a link to the Morningstar report on Parker's fund.
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/KCMTX/quote.html
Notice it is ranked in the top 1% on the rolling 1 year return period ... top 2% on year-to-date returns ... top 2% on the 3 year period ... and, top 1% for the 5 year period.
For me, the big question is ... How did a good skilled seasoned writer such as John Waggoner miss by not including Parker's fund? Perhaps, Mr. Waggoner reads the board? And, will kindly make comment.
And, so it goes.
I wish all ... "Good Investing."

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/889284/000119312517349112/d497145d497.htm
497 1 d497145d497.htm STERLING CAPITAL FUNDS
LOGO
STERLING CAPITAL LONG/SHORT EQUITY FUND
SUPPLEMENT DATED NOVEMBER 21, 2017
TO THE CLASS A AND CLASS C SHARES SUMMARY PROSPECTUS,
INSTITUTIONAL SHARES SUMMARY PROSPECTUS,
CLASS A AND CLASS C SHARES PROSPECTUS,
INSTITUTIONAL SHARES PROSPECTUS,
AND STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION,
EACH DATED FEBRUARY 1, 2017, AS SUPPLEMENTED
This Supplement provides the following amended and supplemental information and supersedes any information to the contrary with respect to the Sterling Capital Long/Short Equity Fund in the Class A and Class S Shares Summary Prospectus, Institutional Shares Summary Prospectus, the Class A and Class C Shares Prospectus, Institutional Shares Prospectus, and Statement of Additional Information, each dated February 1, 2017, as supplemented:
The Board of Trustees of Sterling Capital Funds has approved the liquidation of the Sterling Capital Long/Short Equity Fund (the “Fund”). The liquidation is expected to occur on or about January 26, 2018.
As of the date hereof, shares of the Fund are no longer being offered for sale.
Please contact your financial advisor or Sterling Capital Funds at 1-800-228-1872 if you have any questions.
SHAREHOLDERS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT WITH THE PROSPECTUSES
AND STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR FUTURE REFERENCE
SUPPLS-1117

Thanks for this Thread.
Wow...ICMAX...Almost 60% Cash, 20% Bonds...ER=1.4% while the 1 Yr Investor Return was 1.44%.
Another way of putting it is that the fund investors spent $2.475 M in management fees to achieve a CD rate return of 1.44% (or $2.5 M of net gains for the entire fund). What could be more equitable?

In response to an emailed question, here are the US equity funds with the highest Martin ratios over the full market cycle that began in October 2007:
Reynolds Blue Chip Growth (RBCGX), 1.75
Intrepid Endurance (ICMAX), 1.67 (which I own shares of, fyi)
Yacktman Focused (YAFFX), 1.31
Eaton Vance Atlanta Capital SMID-Cap (EISMX),1.25, also a Great Owl
Parnassus Endeavor (PARWX), 1.20, Great Owl
Madison Dividend Income (BHBFX), 1.15, Great Owl
AMG Yacktman (YACKX), 1.14
Monetta Young Investor (MYIFX), 1.12
Brown Capital Mgt Small Cap (BCSIX), 1.11, Great Owl
Prospector Opportunity (POPFX), 1.08, Great Owl
Charles's "Great Owl" designation tracks the consistency with which a fund posts outstanding risk-adjusted returns. Technically, they are "top qunitile funds in their categories based on Martin for periods of 20, 10, 5 and 3 years, as applicable." All of the funds above have records of 10 or more years.
For what interest that holds,
David

My university employer recently sold most of my Fidelity funds (I was limited to TIAA or Fido, I chose Fido) and placed my money in Vanguard index funds (not previously available and probably not the best time to invest in index funds), but all my European and Asian bond funds seemed to become stateside, so I sold the bond funds and went to cash for that amount aside from (over)restoring my investment in FNMIX. Minus 1.3% later, I'm happy with the cash funds.
The only Fido fund of my multiple holdings they held was Contra, FWIW.
Now, i assume they had good consultants, and I really like Vanguard, but I do wish they had access to Primecap and Capital Opp, which I hold in an IRA.
Since I am retiring next year, and since I remember an episode in the late 70's when one of Rukeyser's panelists said the market was a "table pounding buy" (he was correct), I feel confident that people with a long horizon (like Eric Cinnamond, whose blog I read) who aren't trying to time the market, are saving their money.
If you are very (remember that you are competing with smarter people with computer programs) sure you have a have a hot stock, don't buy more than you can afford to lose .