@MikeW: Thank you for your question(s). Here is how I govern my buys.
I have a good number of positions within my portfolio that I consider to be under construction and which I'll add to these positions as money becomes available from income generation from within the portfolio itself. Usually, I'm buying somewhere monthly. DWGAX is one the twelve funds considered to be under construction and on my open to buy list. Once, a fund reaches a certain size within its respective sleeve then I consider it fully built. While DWGAX is only one fouth complete I have other funds that are close to being fully built with the next buy step completeting the building process. When a fund becomes fully built then it is removed from my open to buy list. I adjust my open to buy list at least annually. When it comes time to buy I simply look at how much money is available at the time and then choose where to invest this money based upon certain guidelines. Currently, my new money focus is on income generation over growth of capital.
An example: In the month of Feburary I plan to buy the second buy step in PONAX and the final buy step in PMAIX. PONAX will remain on my buy list while PMAIX will become fully built and will be removed from the buy list. Come March I'll again look to see how much residual cash I have and then I'll look through my buy list to see where I'll do some buying keeping in mind my income focus goal. As it stands now ISFAX will beome my March buy thus completing its final step buy.
I use my market barometer and equity weighting matrix more to drive my spiff sleeve and to adjust my equity weigting (from time-to-time) based upon the barometer and the equity weighting matrix's reading. Since, I have been moving to a new asset allocation model of 20% cash, 40% income and 40% equity this, new allocation, requires me to reduce my equity exposure by another couple of percent. Remember, equities have had a good run in January. Thus, I have been limiting buys in the equity area of my portfolio and directing new money elsewhere. With this, although DWGAX is on the open to buy list it might be awhile before it sees any new money. This is not because DWGAX is not a good fund but more with I am currently more focused on income generation over growing my capital.
I hope this explains in some detail how I do things and might offer up some ideas for you to consider.
I wish all "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet

@Bobpa: My portfolio was built over many years of investing. From an all equity income fund perspective I have two sleeves that are geared towards equity income genertion with these funds being found in the growth & income area of my portfolio.
The first sleeve is my domestic equity g&i sleeve and holds the following funds with their ttm yield in (y%). The funds held in this sleeve are ANCFX (1.74%) ... FDSAX (3.03%) ... INUTX (3.46%) ... and SVAAX (3.93%). This sleeve as a whole generates a yield of 3.26%. Include fund capital gain distributions and the income generated is much greater and has averaged above 5%. The three year total return on this sleeve is 8.7%.
The second sleeve is my global equity g&i sleeve and holds the following funds with thier ttm yield in (y). The funds held in this sleeve are CWGIX (2.33%) ... DEQAX (2.55%) ... DWGAX (2.28%) ... and, EADIX (3.95%). This sleeve as a whole generates a yield of 2.77%. Include fund capital gains distributions and the income generation is much greater and has averaged above 5%. The three year total return on this sleeve is 7.1%
I have other sleeves that are also geared towards income generation within my portfolio; but, these are the two sleeves that consists of all equity mutual funds.
In doing a Google search on the subject I came up with the below linked article.
https://investorplace.com/2018/02/10-best-dividend-funds-to-buy-now/
Old_Skeet

@tmadell: Dr. Madell, thank you for writting such a fine newsletter. I would encourge you to publish a newsletter model asset allocation (conserative, moderate and agressive) along with perhaps one for income generation with their anticipated returns. I'm thinking some investors might find this of interest. At one time I ran a 70/20/10 (stock/bond/cash) allocation while I was in the building phase of my portfolio. Holding some cash offered me the opportunity to buy pullbacks and/or engage some spiffs (special investment positions) form time-to-time. Then as I approached retirement I began to reduce my stock allocation and began to hold more bonds and cash. Recently, I have switched towads an all weather (20% cash/40% bonds/40% stock) asset allocation model. I'm not quite there yet but well on my way. I'm thinking that this all weather model will provide me ample cash, ample income and ample growth to offset inflation plus a little more. By my math I'm thinking my all weather model should generate an average annual return of somewhere between 4.5% to 6%, on average, possibly a little more, at times. With these anticipated returns I should be able to withdraw up to 4% annually and still maintain and perhaps even grow my principal. Currently, my withdrawal philosophy is to take no more than one half of what my five year average rolling returns have been. In this way, I have over the past five years, since I retired, been able to grow my principal while providing a reliable and steady income stream. Currently, my portfolio yields about 3.4% plus any capital gain distributions and when combined have averaged better than a 5% income stream.
Perhaps, my above comment concerning income generation might provide a topic to write about in an upcoming issue.
Thanks again ... Dr. Madell ... for publishing such a fine newsletter. I have enjoyed reading it.
Old_Skeet

FYI: The Dow Theory is still flashing a “sell” signal. Before this indicator can turn bullish again, the rally that has taken the Dow Jones Industrial Average almost straight up since its Dec. 24 low must end.
That’s why bullishly predisposed Dow Theorists should be hoping for a market pullback.
The Dow Theory is the oldest stock-market timing system in widespread use today. It was created by William Peter Hamilton, the editor of the Wall Street Journal in the first decades of the 20th Century. Its popularity is reason alone to pay close attention, since a buy signal presumably would unleash a wave of new buying in the stock market.
The Dow Theory is also worth following because its long-term track record is enviable. This has been confirmed not only by my Hulbert Financial Digest tracking of Dow Theory newsletters such as TheDowTheory.com (edited by Jack Schannep) and Dow Theory Forecasts (edited by Richard Moroney), but also by academic studies.
Though individual Dow Theorists disagree on the specifics of how to apply the Dow Theory in any particular situation, there is a broad consensus on what it takes to generate a buy signal:
Regards,
Ted
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/dow-needs-to-give-back-some-gains-before-stocks-see-another-big-leg-up-2019-01-25/print

FYI: Jack Bogle’s passing is a timely reason to spend a moment considering the growth of index-based investing, an approach he spent much of his professional life promoting with great success. Like many of you, we have watched indexing go from curiosity (in the 1980s) to limited acceptance (the 1990s) to widespread adoption (now). In terms of his impact on capital markets, Mr. Bogle has few peers in this or any century.
As far as what we can add to a discussion of index-based investing, we have three points to share with you today:
Regards,
Ted
https://ritholtz.com/2019/01/we-come-not-to-praise-indexing-but-to/

For some investors, such as ones who are interested primarily in stocks or ETFs, this may be a fine brokerage. But Merrill Edge doesn't seem to recognize that mutual funds are something different.
It seems to be stuck in the 80s, before fund supermarkets existed and when brokers processed trades only in whole shares. WIth Merrill Edge, one cannot specify a fractional number of shares of a fund to sell. One cannot transfer fractional shares, even between internal ME accounts (e.g. for a Roth conversion). Monthly statements report positions in whole shares, though the fractional amount does appear as a note in the position description as if it were the result of a DRIP purchase.
Even the way it handles closing out a position feels like the way an ETF or stock position might be handled. From a recent communication with ME:
"If you transfer all whole shares of a position out of your account, the fractional shares should liquidate automatically during the third week of the month. This is contingent upon the aggregate sum of fractional shares in our inventory being sufficient to total at least one whole share."
Once a month!? If you're lucky? Sounds like Sharebuilder's investment plan that trades only on Tuesdays.
It lists many funds having a $0 min for additional investments, but the website does not accept amounts under $1. For stocks that trade in whole shares, that doesn't matter (except for penny stocks, and ME blocked a test trade of the penny stock SHLDQ). But it does matter for mutual funds that trade with a granularity as small as one cent.
In one sense (dollars involved) none of this is a big deal. In another sense it's significant - rather than making mutual fund operations easy, it forces the investor to conform to its way of handling mundane requests. That's not fund-friendly.

FYI: Global stocks started the week under pressure after data showed that China’s economy grew at its slowest pace in nearly three decades last year, the latest sign that the world economy is decelerating.
The Stoxx Europe 600 fell 0.4% in early morning trade, dragged down by banks and utility companies. Asian markets finished mostly higher, though they trimmed gains after the Chinese data release.
U.S. markets are closed Monday for Martin Luther King Jr. Day. Futures for the S&P 500 were down 0.4%.
The world’s second-largest economy grew 6.6% in 2018, the slowest annual pace China has recorded since 1990, official data showed Monday. The economic downturn, which has been sharper than Beijing expected, deepened in the last months of 2018, with fourth-quarter growth rising 6.4% from a year earlier.
The Chinese figures come amid a bruising trade fight with the U.S. and, coupled with lackluster numbers for the American and European economies, paint a picture of a slowing global economy.
Regards,
Ted
WSJ:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/global-stocks-weaken-as-chinas-growth-slows-11548060008
Bloomberg:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-20/asian-stocks-to-advance-as-global-rally-builds-markets-wrap?srnd=premium
IBD:
https://www.investors.com/market-trend/stock-market-today/dow-jones-futures-netflix-stock-microsoft-stock-salesforce-stock-visa-stock-adobe-stock-market-rally/
Reuters:
CNBC:
Europe:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-stocks/european-shares-stumble-after-weak-chinese-gdp-data-idUSKCN1PF0P6
Asia:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/asian-markets-rise-despite-slower-economic-growth-in-china-2019-01-20/print
Bonds:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/18/us-treasurys-bond-investors-monitor-trade-with-china-and-shutdown.html
Currencies:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/21/forex-markets-dollar-china-economic-data-in-focus.html
Oil:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/21/oil-markets-china-economy-opec-in-focus.html
Gold:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/21/gold-markets-the-fed-in-focus.html
Current Futures:
https://finviz.com/futures.ashx

Here are some additional clarifications:
1. A syndicate can be a group of borrowers and/or a group of lenders; there is even a loan syndication association which created rules on how to manage a syndication : https://www.lsta.org/

Of course a syndicate can bring together lenders and/or borrowers. I never said otherwise. Though most likely there would be a syndicate of borrowers and a syndicate of lenders, but not a single syndicate comprised of "a group of borrowers and/or a group of lenders."
What I did say is that syndication is an action. So "rules on how to manage a syndication" would be rules on how to manage the process of syndicating a loan.

2. Repo, Reverse Repo and Securities lending are ALL very similar in essence, here are the evidences:

The evidences are somewhat lacking with regard to securities lending.

3. Accounting rules which recognize the similarity - The accounting standard board called FASB recognizes that similarity in their FIN 41 clarification, see Note #2 at the bottom of page number FIN41-2: https://www.fasb.org/jsp/FASB/Document_C/DocumentPage?cid=1175801626916&acceptedDisclaimer=true
"For purposes of this Interpretation, a REVERSE REPURCHASE AGREEMENT (reverse repo) refers to a transaction that is accounted for as a collateralized lending in which a buyer-lender buys securities with an agreement to resell them to the seller-borrower at a stated price plus interest at a specified date or in specified circumstances. The “receivable” under a reverse repurchase agreement refers to the amount due from the seller-borrower for the repurchase of the securities from the buyer-lender. IN CERTAIN INDUSTRIES, THE TERMINOLOGY IN REVERSED; THAT IS, ENTITIES IN THOSE INDUSTRIES REFFER TO THIS TYPE OF AGREEMENT AS REPO".

Sure, in a repurchase agreement one side sells, one side buys. One side calls it a repo and the other side a reverse repo. Maybe these terms get reversed. But one side always "buys securities with an agreement to resell them" to the other side.
Nowhere is there mention of a loan of securities absent a sale, though as the note indicates, the mechanics/accounting look like a collateralized loan. Which is why I previously analogized it to a "mortgage". (Closer mechanically to a deed of trust and promissory note.)

4. Legal wording of the agreement – all those agreements (Repo, Reverse Repo and Securities lending ) are standardized agreements created by SIFMA and are very similar in their essence : https://www.sifma.org/resources/general/mra-gmra-msla-and-msftas/

"Wording" and "essence" are virtually antonyms. One refers for form, the other to substance. "Letter" and "spirit" if you prefer.
The legal wordings of the master repurchase agreement and the master securities loan agreement are structurally very different. So you might want to describe a bit more about the "essence" of these agreements.
Certainly as far as mechanics go, there's little difference between selling something with an agreement to repurchase, and lending something (so long as one grants all rights inherent in ownership). Though the master loan agreement draws a distinction between the treatment of government securities (clearly relevant here) and other securities, while the master repo agreement does not.
Where they part is precisely in essence. The motivation, or essence if you will, of a securities loan is the interest of the borrower in possessing the security temporarily. That is, the borrower in this transaction is the one taking possession of the security (and giving collateral).
The motivation of a repo agreement is found in the seller who wants cash temporarily. That is, the effective borrower in this transaction is the one getting cash by giving up possession of the security (which serves as collateral - see your FIN-41 note 2 above).
Borrower is the one wanting something; borrower pays.
International Capital Markets Association, FAQ #13: What is the difference between repo and securities lending?

If you feel more comfortable with a brand name you should go over there, this discussion is interesting but no one is trying to make anyone invest in this fund.

It's not that I'm more comfortable with brand names; I often seek out boutiques. Rather it is that I'm less comfortable with this specific fund.
To make me comfortable with a fund that is newly formed, that uses a management company that has never managed a fund before and couldn't launch an ETF, that employs a manager who has never managed a fund before, it's going to take more than a one year record built on leverage. Especially when 30% of assets are at risk with a single counterparty with even less history.
Seafarer this ain't. Though to mirror your comment, no one is trying to make anyone divest of this fund.

FYI: (Fund is closed to new investors.)
In a WEALTHTRACK exclusive, 5-star manager David Giroux explains why more companies’ businesses are at risk.
Regards,
Ted
https://wealthtrack.com/david-giroux-on-growing-secular-risks-in-companies-exclusive-with-fund-manager-of-year-winner/
M* Snapshot PRWCX:
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/prwcx/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot PRWCX:
https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/fund/prwcx
PRWCX Is Ranked #19 In The (50-70/% E) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
https://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/allocation-50-to-70-equity/t-rowe-price-capital-appreciation-fund/prwcx

FYI: (Fund is closed to new investors.)
Regards,
Ted
January 17, 2019
Dear WEALTHTRACK Subscriber,
How concerned are you about stock market risk? Have occasional eight hundred point drops in the Dow, corrections in various indices, presidential tweets and trade disputes had you reaching for your Pepto-Bismol or Valium?
Market volatility has definitely picked up in the last year or so. Not an unusual occurrence. There have been many rocky periods, plus several euphoric highs and nail-biting lows during the long bull market that began in 2009. But those are not the risks that this week’s guest is focusing on. He is looking at much more fundamental, structural changes that he says are affecting the long-term future of specific companies, lots of them.
He is David Giroux, Portfolio Manager and Chairman of the Investment Advisory Committee of T. Rowe Price Capital Appreciation Fund which is a Morningstar Gold Medalist and carries a Five-Star rating. Giroux was named Morningstar’s Allocation and Alternatives Fund Manager of the Year in 2017, the second time he was so honored and has been nominated for the award several other times.
It is Giroux’s role as Head of Investment Strategy at T. Rowe Price that is the focus of much of today’s conversation because he is leading research projects across T. Rowe Price’s investment platform and asset classes. One of his major efforts is identifying secular risk in companies and avoiding companies that have it. He and his team estimate that over a third of S&P 500 companies are facing risks that will result in lower performance over the next ten years and that their numbers are increasing.
As always, this week’s program is available to our PREMIUM subscribers right now. In our exclusive EXTRA feature with David Giroux you’ll learn about a book that he says has improved his and his team’s productivity significantly.
Thank you for watching. Have a lovely weekend and make the week ahead a profitable and a productive one.
Best regards,
Consuelo
Video Clip:

M* Snapshot PRWCX:
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/prwcx/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot PRWCX:
https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/fund/prwcx
PRWCX Is Ranked #19 In The (50-70/% E) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
https://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/allocation-50-to-70-equity/t-rowe-price-capital-appreciation-fund/prwcx

@JoeD,
The telephone number on the website seems to be to the actual office of the fund rather than the transfer agent's office.
There was a post on M* (under "Bond Squad" with STATX) that resonates the same sentiment about the telephone number to Las Vegas and how the inquiry was handled.
Here is the link to M* discussion on STATX:
http://socialize.morningstar.com/NewSocialize/forums/p/385173/3953084.aspx
M* listed VG as the only brokerage to trade STATX.
I believe the prospectus mentioned something about paying dividends at least twice a month:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1679960/000116204418000223/state485bpos201803.htm
FUND DISTRIBUTIONS
The Fund distributes substantially all of its net investment income to shareholders in the form of dividends. The Fund intends to declare and distribute income dividends every two weeks to shareholders of record. In addition, the Fund distributes any net capital gains it earns from the sale of portfolio securities to shareholders no less frequently than annually. Net short-term capital gains may be paid more frequently. Dividend payments are made through DTC participants and indirect participants to beneficial owners then of record with proceeds received from the Fund.

Just received an email about the soft opening of funds:
Grandeur Peak
to Soft Open Several Funds
January 14, 2019
RE: Grandeur Peak will Soft Open the Global Opportunities, International Opportunities, Global Reach strategies on January 14, 2019.
Dear Fellow Shareholders,
With the recent global market selloff, we are re-opening the Global Opportunities, International Opportunities, and Global Reach Funds to existing shareholders as of today for those interested in taking advantage of the selloff to purchase additional shares. We, of course, have no idea whether the selloff will continue, and if so, for how long, but we think the current prices make this an interesting long-term entry point regardless. As Robert mentioned in his recent annual letter: “growing assets is not a priority for us, but with the recent market selloff and our investment style being somewhat out of favor this past year, it feels like an interesting time to be investing in our style and niche.”
The soft re-opening is likely to be for a limited time, as we remain committed to keeping assets tightly limited in our small and micro-cap funds, but the time frame will depend on where the market goes from here and the level of additional investments received. Besides re-opening these Funds to existing shareholders, we will also allow new shareholders to purchase these Funds if they buy them directly from Grandeur Peak Funds (www.grandeurpeakglobal.com). Financial advisors and retirement plans with clients in one of these Funds will be able to invest in the Fund for both existing as well as new clients.
The Emerging Markets Opportunities Fund, which is currently open only to existing shareholders, will now also be open to new shareholders purchasing the Fund directly from Grandeur Peak Funds.
Outlined below is the revised status of the Grandeur Peak Funds as of today.
Open to existing fund shareholders and new Direct shareholders:
Emerging Markets Opportunities (GPEIX/GPEOX)
Global Opportunities (GPGIX/GPGOX)
Global Reach (GPRIX/GPROX)
International Opportunities (GPIIX/GPIOX)
Remain open to new and existing shareholders (no change in status):
Global Stalwarts (GGSYX/GGSOX)
International Stalwarts (GISYX/GISOX)
Remains Hard Closed (no change in status):
Global Micro Cap (GPMCX)
Thank you for being an investor in the Grandeur Peak Funds. If you have any questions, don’t hesitate to reach out to me, Mark Siddoway, or Amy Johnson.
Best Regards,
Eric Huefner
President & COO
801-384-0003
The objective of all Grandeur Peak Funds is long-term growth of capital.
RISKS:
Mutual fund investing involves risks and loss of principal is possible. Investing in small and micro cap funds will be more volatile and loss of principal could be greater than investing in large cap or more diversified funds.
Investing in foreign securities entails special risks, such as currency fluctuations and political uncertainties, which are described in more detail in the prospectus. Investments in emerging markets are subject to the same risks as other foreign securities and may be subject to greater risks than investments in foreign countries with more established economies and securities markets.
An investor should consider investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses carefully before investing. To obtain a prospectus, containing this and other information, visit www.grandeurpeakglobal.com or call 1-855-377-PEAK (7325). Please read it carefully before investing.
Grandeur Peak Funds will deduct a 2.00% redemption proceeds fee on Fund shares held 60 days or less. For more complete information including charges, risks, and expenses, read the prospectus carefully.
Grandeur Peak Funds are distributed by ALPS Distributors, Inc (“ADI”). Eric Huefner, Mark Siddoway, and Amy Johnson are registered representatives of ADI.
Robert’s Chairman Message 2018
GPG000742 12/31/19
OR-----
link to GP website:
https://www.grandeurpeakglobal.com/documents/grandeurpeakglobal-pr-20190114.pdf

@Starchid, Thanks,
I don’t have an answer as to whether this fund is the optimum choice for you. But I think if you could close your eyes for 15-25 years and not look at it, you’d be quite pleased with the compounded return. Trouble is, most of here like to look often. That leads to the inevitable comparisons to other types of investments. And from time to time one type or another will outperform (over shorter 5-10 year periods).
That .14% ER allows Vanguard to keep more of your contribution compounding for you rather than paying fund expenses. It’s refreshing to hear from someone still contributing to a plan. Take the advice / musings of us “oldsters” with a grain of salt. At 70+ capital preservation starts to become a paramount concern.

Here is the inflation adjusted prediction made by John Rekenthaler. It seems to result from well reasoned, middle of the road crystal ball gazing. The buildup to the prediction is worth a look.

my stylized outlook is to accept the experts' view of 1% in average inflation-adjusted annualized gains over the next 10 years, then 6% annualized for the succeeding 20 years. If so, that would make the annualized average for the full, 30-year period 4.3%. Per this prediction, U.S. equities from 2019 to 2048 will have annual real returns that are about 1 percentage point less than my parents' generation, and about 2 percentage points behind what I have enjoyed.
It's good to be me. That said, while the initial few years may be rough, this column's back-of-the-envelope analysis suggests that stocks should remain the purchase of choice for the patient, long-term investor, particularly if that investor suffers losses calmly. Some might be forthcoming.

FYI: Most mutual-fund managers were more than happy to bid farewell to 2018.
With the S&P 500 index wrapping up the year with the worst December since 1931, and a 6.2% loss for the full year, the average manager overseeing a diversified U.S.-stock fund saw a total return of minus 7.73% in 2018, according to Thomson Reuters Lipper. Nor were international stock funds any refuge: On average, they fell 15.52% for the year.
But amid all that gloom, a handful of managers emerged as big winners, posting double-digit gains for the year.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-best-stock-fund-managers-of-2018-11546830721?mod=article_inline

FYI: U.S. stocks edged higher Wednesday, boosted by optimism over trade talks and signs that the Federal Reserve will stay flexible with its interest-rate increases.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average was recently 90 points, or 0.38%, at 23,878 while the S&P 500 also added 0.41%. A fourth consecutive climb for the benchmarks would be the first time since Sept. 14 they have both risen that many sessions in a row. They entered the day up more than 9% from their Dec. 24 lows but still off more than 11% from their 2017 records.
The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite climbed 87.%.
Major indexes had briefly dipped alongside oil prices and Treasury yields in midmorning trading before stabilizing.
Seven of the eleven S&P 5000 Sectors led by Energy, and Tehnology have positives numbers for the day.
Regards,
Ted
WSJ:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/stocks-climb-as-u-s-china-trade-talks-enter-third-day-11547024876
Bloomberg Evening Briefing:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-09/your-evening-briefing
Bloomberg:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-08/asian-stocks-to-climb-as-trade-thaw-optimism-grows-markets-wrap?srnd=premium
IBD:
https://www.investors.com/market-trend/stock-market-today/apple-leads-dow-stock-market-win-streak/
Reuters:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-stocks/wall-street-aims-for-fourth-day-of-gains-on-trade-hopes-idUSKCN1P31FL
CNBC:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/09/stock-market-futures-higher-as-us-and-china-conclude-trade-talks.html
U.K.:
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/prices-and-markets/stocks/indices/summary/summary-indices-chart.html?index=UKX
Europe:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/european-markets-climb-despite-german-slowdown-optimism-grows-over-uschina-trade-2019-01-09/print
Asia:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/asian-markets-rally-on-optimism-over-us-china-trade-talks-2019-01-08/print
Bonds:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/09/bond-market-treasury-yields-climb-as-us-china-trade-talks-conclude.html
Currencies:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/09/forex-markets-us-dollar-us-china-trade-in-focus.html
Oil:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/09/oil-markets-us-china-trade-in-focus.html
Gold
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/09/gold-markets-us-china-trade-the-fed-in-focus.html
WSJ: Markets At A Glance:
https://markets.wsj.com/us
Major ETFs % Change:
https://www.barchart.com/etfs-funds/etf-monitor
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:
https://finviz.com/futures.ashx

FYI: U.S. stocks jumped Monday, boosted by rallying technology shares, as officials from Washington and Beijing kicked off their latest round of negotiations over trade policy.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 98 points, or 0.42%, to 23,531, wiping out early declines. The S&P 500 jumped .70% and the Nasdaq Composite gained 1.2%.
Investors are beginning the week with their focus on the U.S. and China’s negotiations, something many hope will help bring the two countries closer to a resolution in their trade fight.
Investors are beginning the week with their focus on the U.S. and China’s negotiations, something many hope will help bring the two countries closer to a resolution in their trade fight.
The fact that policy makers in the U.S. and China have agreed to meet is a positive sign, said Felix Lam, a portfolio manager at BNP Paribas Asset Management. Still, the key question is whether the two countries will reach a trade deal, Mr. Lam said.
“Any positive outcome from the trade talks would have a more long-lasting impact on the earnings trajectory of corporations in Asia,” he said, adding that delays, on the other hand, could hit corporate profits.
A broad rally in shares of rapidly growing technology companies pushed major indexes higher Monday.
Amazon.com , Netflix and Advanced Micro Devices jumped more than 3%, with Amazon’s gains putting it on course to end the day as the largest publicly traded U.S. company.
Those advances helped offset the latest slide in Apple , which retreated further for the year Monday. Worries about slowing iPhone sales and a dimmer revenue forecast sent the company’s shares sharply lower last week.
Nine of the eleven S&P 500 Sectors, led by Consumer Discretionary, finished in positive territory, only Utilities and Consumer Staples ended lower.
Regards,
Ted
WSJ:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-stock-rally-buoys-markets-in-asia-11546838162
Bloomberg Evening Briefing:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-07/your-evening-briefing
Bloomberg:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-06/stocks-in-asia-to-rise-on-fed-china-policy-lift-markets-wrap?srnd=premium
IBD:
https://www.investors.com/market-trend/stock-market-today/stock-market-netflix-fuels-nasdaq/
Reuters:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-stocks/wall-street-higher-as-u-s-china-trade-talks-begin-idUSKCN1P115J
CNBC:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/07/stock-markets-dow-futures-move-higher-as-us-china-trade-talks-resume.html
U.K.:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/london-markets-drop-as-brexit-fears-return-2019-01-07/print
Europe:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-stocks/european-shares-fall-as-economic-growth-concerns-derail-rally-idUSKCN1P10N2
Asia:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/nikkei-leaps-amid-broad-gains-for-asian-markets-2019-01-06/print
Bonds:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/07/us-bonds-treasury-yields-move-lower-as-trade-war-talks-continue.html
Currencies:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/07/forex-markets-the-fed-sino-us-trade-china-monetary-policy-in-focus.html
Oil:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/07/oil-markets-us-china-trade-crude-supply-in-focus.html
Gold
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/07/gold-markets-the-fed-stock-markets-in-focus.html
WSJ: Markets At A Glance:
https://markets.wsj.com/us
Major ETFs % Change:
https://www.barchart.com/etfs-funds/etf-monitor
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:
https://finviz.com/futures.ashx

I think Ed's argument might reflect his work with folks whose annual compensation runs into the tens of millions. For most of us, a $20,000,000 payday is hypothetical; for some in the upper tier of the investment industry, that amount can be quickly followed by a list of names.
The SEC's (antiquated) insider investment ranges top out at $100,000 for directors (some of whom "earn" $300,000+ for their part-time job) and $1,000,000 for managers (some of whom earn, through salary, bonuses, and equity stakes in their firms, tens of millions). With a million dollar investment in their fund, an exceptional year might add $100,000 to their net wealth - i.e., the market plus 1000 bps - or might detract a similar amount.
And really, how consequential do you suppose that is? And really, how do you suppose the star manager's time gets allocated between the $100 million of personal money in his private partnerships, venture capital investments and his derivatives account versus the $1 million in his mutual fund?
So the policy with many small equity firms is, you need to have 100% of your equity investments in your employers products. Alternately, some require 100% of investable liquid wealth. Some require all employees, including clerical, to invest and then offer bonuses on the form of fund shares. I've spoken with a lot of managers over the years and I've yet to hear of a stupid policy; that is, Seafarer does not require their employees to invest exclusively in emerging markets which would be disastrous both for the employee and for the adviser, who'd find it impossible to attract talent.
msf is certainly right about the symbolic importance of such policies. It's sometimes referred to as "the Caesar's wife" problem: it's not enough that you be blameless, you must be known to be blameless. Many of the advisers (i.e., the presidents of firms) I've spoken with are spectacularly dense on all symbolic matters, they persist with the "our job is to invest and let the results speak for themselves." (Fools. There are 8000+ options, each chirping out "look at me," and they think investors will automatically here the $100 million fund's voice clear and sweet about the tumult.)
Had I mentioned that I just spent the better part of an hour at the gym lifting heavy pieces of metal? Hmmm ... perhaps I need a longer cool-down period.
David

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/791107/000093247119000011/convertiblesecurities.htm
497 1 convertiblesecurities.htm VANGUARD CONVERTIBLE SECURITIES FUND
Vanguard Convertible Securities Fund
Supplement Dated January 3, 2019, to the Statement of Additional Information Dated March 27, 2018
Important Changes to Vanguard Convertible Securities Fund
On December 21, 2018, the board of trustees for Vanguard Convertible Securities Fund (the Fund) approved a proposal to dissolve and liquidate the Fund on or about March 19, 2019 (the liquidation date). In anticipation of the dissolution and liquidation, the Fund is closed to new investors effective immediately. The Fund will be closed to new investments from existing investors effective March 6, 2019.
On the liquidation date, the Fund will redeem all of its outstanding shares at the net asset value of such shares. On this same date, all outstanding shares of the Fund will be canceled and the Fund will cease operations as a mutual fund.
In order to provide for an orderly liquidation and satisfy redemptions in anticipation of the liquidation, the Fund may deviate from its investment objective and strategies as the liquidation date approaches.
Prior to the liquidation date, the Fund will declare and pay its shareholders of record one or more dividends and/or other distributions of its investment company taxable income, if any, and net realized capital gains, if any, for the current taxable year through the liquidation date.
The liquidation and dissolution is not expected to result in income tax liability for the Fund. The Fund may pay more than one liquidating distribution in more than one installment. Distribution of liquidation proceeds, if any, to Fund shareholders may result in a taxable event for shareholders, depending on their individual circumstances. Shareholders should consult their own tax advisors about any tax liability resulting from the receipt of liquidation proceeds.
Additional Change to the Fund
Effective December 31, 2018, Abe Ofer has retired from Oaktree Capital Management, L.P., and he no longer serves as a portfolio manager to the Fund. Stuart Spangler, Andrew Watts, Jean-Pierre Latrille, and Petar Raketic remain as the portfolio managers of the Fund. All references to Mr. Ofer in the Statement of Additional Information are deleted in their entirety.
© 2019 The Vanguard Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
Vanguard Marketing Corporation, Distributor.
SAI 82A 012019

FYI: There are more than 4,000 religions in the world. The biggest, with a little more than 2 billion adherents, is Christianity. Next, with a little less than 2 billion followers, is the Islamic faith, which is also the fastest-growing. By around the year 2060, if estimates hold, Islam will grow 70% and be the world’s dominant religion.
Most major religions are expected to grow by midcentury, too, just not as much: The number of Christians is expected to grow 34%; Hindus, 27%; and Jews, 15%.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.fa-mag.com/news/putting-faith-in-investing-42422.html?print
Saturna Capital Website:
https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=X_AtXO7hAsSCjwS1pKT4Bw&q=Saturna+Capita&btnK=Google+Search&oq=Saturna+Capita&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0l10.3868.3868..5896...0.0..0.82.151.2......0....1j2..gws-wiz.....0.h4oboqgP6QY