GLFOX is on the chopping block - The Trump effect had little positive impact on this Global Infrastructure fund since the election.

Top 1/3 (34/99) over the past year (though dismal YTD). Here I am, again sounding like a broken record: this fund is currency hedged, so it will underperform as the dollar sinks. A likely event with Mnuchin talking down the dollar.
I unwind taxable positions slowly. It takes me a long time to decide to give up on a fund, and even then, I'm just as likely wrong as right. Some funds never regain their "magic", others do as conditions change. So far, GLFOX wouldn't even be on my sell list - a few (really) bad months under adverse conditions don't tell me its best days are past. Though my thinking is more oriented toward broad based funds and not sector funds. One might want to rotate out of a sector regardless of how good or bad an individual fund is.
As a long term investor, for me it's not so much a matter of taking losses as minimizing gains. So I sell just the highest cost shares at first, gradually selling more if a fund continues to prove to be past its prime.
I just liquidated one fund (at the beginning of 2018) that had continued to underperform. Yet another fund I own (and had sold some of the higher cost shares), has come back to 4 stars, meaning that it's outperformed recently (to recover its stars) and even long term has provided solid returns.
If the market takes a nosedive and I do have underwater shares in a fund on my "unwind" list, I sell them quickly, but in order to swap into a preferable fund, not to hold cash. I don't try to time these things.

FYI: The Dow Jones Industrial Average wiped out all of its year-to-date gains for 2018 as the stock market unraveled on fears of rising bond yields. The Dow DJIA, -4.35% shed 1,500 points at its low and was recently off 1,055 points, or more than 4%. That intraday move erased all of its gains, pushing it negative, down 1% for 2018 after boasting a return of nearly 6% at the end of January. The Dow was down 838 points, or 3.3%, at 24,695, while the S&P 500 index SPX, -3.88% was off 2.7% at 2,688. The broad-market benchmark was still up 0.6% for the year, but had erased much of its more than 5% gain in January. The Nasdaq Composite Index COMP, -3.53% was off 2.1% at 7,088, retaining a 2.7% return.
Regards,
Ted
Bloomberg:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-04/asia-stocks-brace-for-selloff-bond-rout-deepens-markets-wrap
Reuters:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-stocks/wall-street-lower-as-losses-in-energy-bank-stocks-weigh-idUSKBN1FP1OR
MarketWatch:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-stocks-poised-for-fresh-selloff-as-dow-futures-slide-120-points-2018-02-05/print
IBD:
https://www.investors.com/market-trend/stock-market-today/stocks-derail-big-oil-leads-losses/
CNBC:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/04/us-stocks-interest-rates-futures.html
AP:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/F/FINANCIAL_MARKETS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Bloomberg Evening Briefing:
https://www.bloomberg.com//news/articles/2018-02-05/your-evening-briefing
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: Negative
https://finviz.com/futures.ashx

Thanks Charles for shedding some light on the inner workings of Garrison Point Capital. Such a detailed article and well written - it was an enjoyable read.

Leuthold (usually bearish [edited], iirc) contrasts interestingly with this from Marvin Schwartz of NB; really makes you want to check his history:
\\ For 20 years, the average price/earnings ratio has been 19.3. If you go back 50 years, it’s 15.6 times. In periods where inflation grew 3% or less—which is 22 of the past 50 years—the P/E of the market was 19.7. Now, at 17 for 2019 and 15.9 for 2020, P/Es don’t look particularly stretched.

I am not concerned if its 2006 as it gives me a year to sell. While Ted is correct that 2006 was followed by 2008 most of us if asked would say 2006 was followed by 2007
By the way after 9 up years selling may generate lots of capital gains so selling some this year may not be wrong. We on this site all know about the bulls,the bears and the pigs.

The numbers in the article for the Schwab robo seem accurate based on my own Intelligent Portfolio. Maybe a little higher then my actual return. My portfolio is about 62:26:12, eq:bonds:cash. I continue to bench mark my robo to make sure it is doing what I hoped. In comparing my own 2016 and 2017 return to some other balanced and target funds, it's doing just fine.
Comparing 2 year return as the article did, my robo beats the TRP 2020 retirement fund, Fidelity Balanced, Vanguard Balanced Index and the venerable Vanguard Wellington.
2016 2017 accumulative
VFINX 11.8 21.7 33.5
my robo 11.7 15.1 26.8
TRRBX 7.4 15.7 23.1
FBALX 7.0 16.5 23.5
VBINX 8.6 13.8 22.4
VWELX 11.0 14.7 25.7
So far so good :)

I got to read the whole article through google, this google search may or may not work for you.
You're right that the cost of lending just got lower for high tax states. He doesn't discuss this. What he says is that Connecticut and NJ are losing their tax base as high income earners flee (at least in NJ this has been happening for some years thanks to NJ's rising property taxes).
The loss of SaLT deductions, effectively hiking taxes for these states, accelerates the trend. This in turn lowers property values (reducing state & local revenue) and income tax revenue, putting bond ratings at risk. For good measure, he threw in Illinois.
Completely separate, he's predicting a GDP growth of 2.5%, up from 2%, due to companies being able to immediately write off of capital expenditures (instead of amortizing).

FYI: Time is running out for the bull, says Scott Minerd, a founding managing partner and global chief investment officer for Guggenheim Partners, the New York-headquartered investment firm, which manages $295 billion. Minerd sees upside for U.S. stocks, before a recession arrives in late 2019 or 2020 that will derail this mighty market and prove painful for bonds, as well.
Minerd, 58, based in Guggenheim’s Santa Monica, Calif., office,oversees client accounts invested in a broad range of fixed-income and equity securities. Guggenheim’s taxable fixed-income mutual funds are in the top decile of their respective Morningstar categories for the trailing three- and five-year periods.
In a recent chat with Barron’s, Minerd also explained the perils facing municipal bonds, given the new tax law’s restrictions on deductibility of state and local taxes. Two things he’s bullish about: international stocks and active management, especially in fixed income.
Regards,
Ted

FYI: The stock market’s hockey stick-like rise in January, up 7.5% at one point before dropping back to a 5.6% increase, has already put paid to the Barron’s strategist outlook from mid-December (“Outlook 2018: The Bull Market’s Next Act,” Dec. 9).
Regards,
Ted
http://www.cetusnews.com/business/Pundit’s-Delight--A-Year-of-Stock-Gains-in-a-Month.HJxSd-RzLz.html

KEY TAKEAWAYS
-Innovation and disruptive change continue to benefit a relatively small group of mega-
cap companies. Despite recent gains, valuations for these stocks still appear reasonable.
Technologies such as electric vehicles and autonomous driving suggest that the transportation industries could be next in line for rapid transformation
-For the first time since the global financial crisis, the world economy is in a synchronized
expansion, driving steady earnings growth in most markets.
Among developed equity markets, Europe and Japan appear more attractive than the U.S. based on improving economic fundamentals, diminished political risk, and potential upside for corporate earnings. Valuations are also modestly cheaper in Europe compared with the U.S.
-Barring unpredictable political or economic shocks, the global earnings recovery should
continue in 2018. However, year-over-year comparisons will grow more challenging.
-Whether recent low market volatility persists in 2018 remains to be seen, but we do not
believe low volatility in itself predicts that a significant correction is imminent

link to report:
2018 Global Market Outlook

FRA= full retirement age. Eagerly waiting. Could have done at 62, but did not want to get into ACA. No way I am going to France. Not even getting out of Chicago...like it.
PRHSX 9.8% is in taxable (direct at TRP=7.7% since 2010 or so) and traditional IRA( 2.1% at vanguard since 3 years just before closing of fund). Actually instead of getting dividend, and paying regular tax, planning to use long term cap gains++soc security for the monthly expenses.

But there's no rational basis to make a decision! How can a fund which holds equities maintain a constant price?
Unless it's gone to all cash.
In which case they should tell me.
It really seems strange to distribute cap gains right before a liquidation.

I think they did tell you. The prospectus supplement contains the usual boilerplate for liquidations:

In anticipation of the liquidation of the Fund, the Adviser may manage the 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 the Fund may not be invested in a manner consistent with its stated investment strategies, which may prevent the Fund from achieving its investment objective.

They said they'd go to cash. That cap gains distribution is what one might expect right after they sold off virtually all their securities.
I think I've seen funds in rare cases say that they're reducing the management fees because they're really only managing cash leading up to the fund closure. But most funds seem to just chug along, collecting their fees for a virtual MMF. That strikes me as a good reason to get out sooner rather than later.

As previously noted on this board, FMSVX is being liquidated next month.
I invested some money in this small cap value fund some years ago, probably because I read some positive comments here. It has been run by First Manhattan Co and I don't think it even had a ticker symbol for awhile. I was enchanted by the idea that this New York investment firm was running a small fund for its clients and whomever else wanted to join in.
Surely they knew what they were doing and things would go well.
They did for a little while.
I plead guilty to not paying attention to how it has done lately: but it's only up 1.74% for the last year, - 2.65% for the last three years and +3.16% for the past five years. I would have thought those numbers impossible in the booming market we've seen.
The fund made a large cap gains distribution in December, is making another one now (payable Feb 6, who knows how much??) and is maintaining a CONSTANT SHARE PRICE of $20.
I called today to see how the liquidation process works. I could cash in now (at 20), or wait until the mid-February final demise. One factor in the final distribution amount is the cost of carrying out the execution.
But there's no rational basis to make a decision! How can a fund which holds equities maintain a constant price?
Unless it's gone to all cash.
In which case they should tell me.
It really seems strange to distribute cap gains right before a liquidation.
Lesson to be learned -- PAY ATTENTION to your holdings.
I'll not buy anything again which is so far under the radar that information is hard to find.
At least I think I made a little profit on it.
David

I paid a load to buy Oppenheimer’s new fangled commodities fund back in ‘96 or ‘97. It did very well for several years (double digit gains) before crashing and burning. Now it’s long since eliminated from their store of funds. I’m left with some Class A shares there spread out currently among 5 different funds (kind of like a breakfast buffet at a mid-priced hotel chain) - a little bit of everything. I can’t recommend the company or its funds. But I cling to my A shares 20+ years after buying them direct. I’ll say one thing about Oppenheimer: They do have some unique fund offerings in areas many companies don’t care (or dare) to venture into. Just one perspective. FWIW.

I used to suggest that people don't move money out of load families once they've paid the load. It's a sunk cost; you might as well get something out of it (the ability to do exchanges at NAV). But as I noted above, many families, including Oppenheimer, are making (most of) their front end load funds available NTF through supermarkets.
Unless their unique offerings are not available NTF elsewhere, you might consider transferring your holdings to a brokerage for convenience. Not that you need to, but with the NTF option, a compelling reason to stay put (access to A shares without a new load) has disappeared.

I paid a load to buy Oppenheimer’s new fangled commodities fund back in ‘96 or ‘97. It did very well for several years (double digit gains) before crashing and burning. Now it’s long since eliminated from their store of funds. I’m left with some Class A shares there spread out currently among 5 different funds (kind of like a breakfast buffet at a mid-priced hotel chain) - a little bit of everything. I can’t recommend the company or its funds. But I cling to my A shares 20+ years after buying them direct. I’ll say one thing about Oppenheimer: They do have some unique fund offerings in areas many companies don’t care (or dare) to venture into. Just one perspective. FWIW.

I sold my positions in Berwyn and the income fund when Chartwell acquired the Berwyn family a couple of years ago. It was time to take my gains (or losses) and walk away.

Hi @Ted,
Thanks for making comment.
Yep, I guess much like Puerto Rico did. If I remember correctly Franklin and Oppenheimer plus some others took some pretty good sizeable positions in Puerto Rico's tax free muni's. And, What happened? Puerto filed for bankruptcy with many not getting paid and the securities becoming just about worthless.
So, I can understand the Illinois' pension funds wanting the state to make good on pledged pensions; but, they are wanting investors to assume liability through the capital markets by buying questionable securities that have a good chance of going into default. Then what? Another government bailout?
For me, I going to stay as far away from this type of investing as I can get.

@Junkster
Have you looked at SEMMX in any detail? Thoughts?

Too mundane and groupthink for me. But that is not a criticism. It has been one smooth upward ride with little to no volatility. I can understand its appeal and why it is so loved. I try for double digit bond gains annually and that is why it is not a good fit for me.

Hey Ted, since you opened the door to cherry-picking data points, how about this one from 2015:
SPX +1.38
QLENX +16.79
The 15%+ difference was a lot of money!
This isn't a bad point for a retail or any other investor to be looking for hedged equity exposure, depending on circumstances. (For example, not everybody is a fed retiree, and capital conservation can be a very reasonable objective for those with crummy or non-existent pensions.)

Catch, A great write-up. Thanks.
- Catch said: I've become more of a technical investor with a big dose of leftover "what are the fundamentals of this investment world today"?
I never understood technical analysis, but respect those who invest based on moving averages, etc. and appear to do well. Fundamentals is hard to access. However, Europe seems to have pulled out of its multi-year slump. Japan is finally seeing some inflation and stock market rebound following a decades long bear market. Interest rates remain low at home and abroad. Larry Summers, speaking on Bloomberg recently, suggested some of the global market gains are due to people shifting money out of the U.S. due to our current banana republic political atmosphere. (Things like pledges to arrest / imprison your opponent if you win the election).
- Catch said: Does the market place remain a hugh pile of other folks money seeking profits, or does some real value exist, somewhere? Is this just a chase, chase, chase?
My sense, having invested for 50 years, is that there’s a whole lot of “chase chase” going on. That doesn't mean the equity markets can’t continue to spiral upwards for many more years. It does mean that as a 70+ year old retiree, I’m not willing to put a large amount of money at risk. So much depends on one’s situation and time horizon.
- Catch said: It is apparent that the really big money does much care one way or another about what is going on in politics, in general, yes? The U.S bombing North Korea or North Korea bombing Guam; well, that might change a few things for a week or so, eh?
Catch lists more potential black swans than I care to dissect. Most have been out there for years. But don’t you love “The law of unintended consequences” ? So many threats emanating from Washington to reign down fire and fury on the Korean Penninsula that it has driven the two nations there closer together. Some real dialogue is taking place between the two adversaries. Some revolves around the 2018 Winter Olympics in South Korea. Neither country wants to partake of all out nuclear war on their peninsula.
- Catch said: Interest rates (still touchy/feely as to central bank actions) remain low, inflation remains low and the yield spread between the 10 and 30 year Treasury's has continued to shrink.
The HY spread doesn’t surprise me. There is often a strong correlation between the equity and junk bond markets. What happens to rates depends on the health of the world economy. Low rates have boosted the global markets higher following the near depression in ‘08. As the punch bowl is gradually taken away, do we achieve orbit or careen back to earth in flames? Nobody knows for certain. However, higher short term rates could actually help longer dated bonds if a recession were to occur as a result. For that reason I’m averaging a bit into a GNMA fund - the equivalent of taking a parachute along with you on a flight. A lot of dead weight - but priceless in an emergency.