The IEX has been a flash point in the broader debate over technological changes that have altered the basic functioning of the American stock markets over the last two decades. IEX won support — and financial backing — from several large mutual fund companies, which said that the exchange would help them trade more cheaply and efficiently, as well as from hundreds of small investors, many of whom read “Flash Boys” and wrote in to the S.E.C.
Brad Katsuyama, the chief executive of IEX, said on Friday night that the company was “grateful and humbled by the support we’ve received from the investor community, without it, we may have faced a different result.”
In addition to the speed bump, the IEX has said it will not offer the same fees or rebates that other exchanges do to attract traders, a common practice at other exchanges that has been criticized for distorting trading incentives. The IEX also offers fewer complicated ways to enter trades than other exchanges, in an effort to simplify trading.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/18/business/dealbook/iex-group-gains-approval-for-stock-exchange.html?_r=0

FYI: (The Linkster couldn't agree more) !
Jeffrey Gundlach, chief executive officer at DoubleLine Capital, said on Wednesday that Federal Reserve officials are no longer trying to prepare the markets for rate hikes because they are no longer certain they are going to raise them.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-funds-gundlach-idUSKCN0Z12FK

FYI: Jeffrey Gundlach, the chief executive officer at DoubleLine Capital, said Tuesday that investors are dropping risky assets and turning to safer securities including Treasuries and gold because they are losing faith in central banks.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-funds-doubleline-gundlach-idUSKCN0Z02JO

Skill?
A cap gains dividend of $17.24/share. It went ex-div today.
http://www.sequoiafund.com/si-dividends-capital-gain.htm

All the bad news appears to have been priced into emerging market funds, so any good news translates into gains almost immediately.

Other parts of EM besides China are not in good shape either. Think there is more downside risk in the near term.

Dear friends,
Day Two is always a bit challenging.
8: Cliff Asness of AQR and Rob Arnott of Reseach Affiliates riff on "the big picture" questions as the General Session speakers.
9: John Bragg and Steve Scruggs, Queens Road Value and Queens Road Small Cap Value. We'll likely chat about the recent reopening and why you'd do it in a market they're skeptical of.
11: Shannon Ericson, LMCG International Small Cap fund and LMCG Global Market Neutral Fund. The global market neutral fund has a, well, global portfolio, which strikes me as an interesting twist.
12: Mark Travis and Matt Berquist, Intrepid Capital and the Intrepid Funds. Mr. Travis is the firm's founder, president and CEO, as well as a portfolio manager. Matt is one of the marketing/media guys.
1:45: David Marcus, Evermore Global Value. He's a "special situations" investor with roots in the Mutual Series funds. Really thoughtful guy, wonderfully diverse experiences.
2:30: Matt Shaver, Lyndhurst Partners. Lyndhurst is a sort of marketing firm that tries to identify a handful of small, distinctive firms and help them succeed.
3:30: Mike Dzialo, founder of Managed Asset Portfolios and manager for Catalyst/MAP Global Capital App fund and Catalyst/MAP Global Total Return. Tiny, solid 3-year numbers.
5: John Blau, Poplar Forest. Mr. Blau had been president of Oppenheimer Asset Management and now leads to outreach/marketing effort for Mr. Harvey and the Poplar Forest funds. I'll be likely to ask about the relatively new Outliers fund.
7: Dinner with Gregory Nathan, manager of FPA US Value (formerly Perennial) since September 2015. It's been an ugly first year and the fund has surprising low cash holdings (10%) by FPA standards. I'll be interested to hear what he has to say.
In any case, if you have topics you'd like me to pursue with any of these folks, please do let me know. I'll learn what I can on your behalf.
As ever,
David

FYI: (This is a follow-up article)
A big change is coming in how stock indexes measure the market, one that's likely to push tens of billions of dollars into real-estate investments, according to estimates. All that cash could drive further gains for a group of stocks that's already done quite well since the financial crisis. Critics say it could also make an area of the market that they call overvalued even more so.
The deluge of cash is the result of a re-think by index providers about how they see the market's construction. The Standard & Poor's 500 and other indexes have long split the market into 10 main sectors, such as technology companies or utilities or industrials. After the market closes on Aug. 31, S&P Dow Jones Indices and MSCI will carve out real estate to become the 11th sector.
Regards,
Ted
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ebe0d17e6ae747f89df70a400299c2bd/get-real-billions-set-pour-real-estate-investments

Bought this in early Dec.Reinvesting monthly divs.Cut div by 5% in Feb.No history of Roc distributions.Watch for weakness if oil prices drop.Non marginable @Schwab
Babson Capital Global Short Duration High Yield Fund
(Ticker:BGH)
Strategy
Fund will invest at least 80 percent of its managed assets in corporate bonds, loans and other income-producing instruments that are rated below investment grade
Fund may invest up to 50 percent of its managed assets in bonds and loans issued by foreign companies
Seek to maintain a weighted average portfolio duration of three years or less
Weighted Averages
Market Price ($) $88.57
Duration (Yrs) 2.33 yrs
Leverage 23.60%
Global
36.57% non-US
Number of Holdings
130 issuers
as of 4/30/2016
Industry % of Assets
Oil And Gas 14.09%
Chemicals, Plastics And Rubber 9.32%
Healthcare, Education And Childcare 8.16%
Automobile 6.74%
Finance 6.56%
Cargo Transport 4.85%
Containers, Packaging And Glass 4.67%
Electronics 4.27%
Telecommunications 4.26%
Leisure, Amusement, Entertainment 4.23%
http://www.babsoncapital.com/assets/user/media/Babson_Capital_Global_Short_Duration_High_Yield_Fund_Factsheet.pdf
http://www.cefconnect.com/fund/BGH

@msf: Schwab says YTD (as of 5/31) return for WOBDX is 3.16% vs -0.78% for PGBOX yet the only difference between the two seems to be an ER of 0.59% for WOBDX vs 0.76% for PGBOX.
Can that be right? The historic ratings summary for WOBDX is also significantly better than that of PGBOX. How to account for such a difference between two funds with essentially the same makeup?

It's just one fund - simply two different share classes (like Vanguard Investor and Admiral shares). I found the retail class by looking at the M* "purchase" page for WOBDX and picking another share class. So even before looking at the Schwab site, the answer must be "no, that cannot be right" assuming both figures are from 5/31, and the figures reported are purely fund performance.
But they're not. If you look at the Schwab performance page for the A shares, you'll see a little "balloon" to the right of "YTD Return". Mouse over that. It reads:

YTD Return is adjusted for possible sales charges, and assumes reinvestment of dividends and capital gains

This points to something I think Schwab (and other brokers) do wrong. They incorporate the impact of loads into funds that they sell load-waived. It makes the funds look worse than they are. You're seeing this in performance figures that are lower than what you'd get with the load waived.
This problem also shows up in the M* star ratings on their pages. Schwab reports PGBOX's 3 year and 5 year ratings as two-star. But the 3 and 5 year ratings of PGBOX.lw are three-star.

Comparing TGBAX to Barclays Agg makes no sense to me. We use the Citi World Govt Bond Index as a benchmark, and it stacks up well. Under-performs for 1 and 3 year (mostly because of last 12 months), beats 5 years and wallops 10 years. We have captured gains that have accumulated for the last 10 years in client accounts, but continue to hold the fund. We are not blind to its very recent stumbles, however, and are watching and staying in touch with our Templeton connection. Honestly we like smaller funds better, and there was a tone of hot money that came in since 2010. Some of that has left (moving on to the now-hot sector), which is fine by us.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000091580216000164/stickerstonebridgeliquidatio.htm
497 1 stickerstonebridgeliquidatio.htm
FINANCIAL INVESTORS TRUST
STONEBRIDGE SMALL-CAP GROWTH FUND
Supplement dated June 8, 2016
to the
Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information, each dated August 31, 2015,
for the Stonebridge Small-Cap Growth Fund,
a series of Financial Investors Trust (the “Trust”)
The Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Trust, based upon the resignation of Stonebridge Capital Management, Inc. (the “Adviser”), the investment adviser to the Stonebridge Small-Cap Growth Fund (the “Fund”), a series of the Trust, has determined to close and liquidate the Fund. The Board concluded that it would be in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund be closed and liquidated as series of the Trust effective as of the close of business on June 27, 2016.
The Board approved a Plan of Termination, Dissolution and Liquidation (the “Plan”) that determines the manner in which the Fund will be liquidated. Pursuant to the Plan and in anticipation of the Fund’s liquidation, the Fund will be closed to new purchases effective as of the close of business on June 8, 2016. However, any distributions declared to shareholders of the Fund after June 8, 2016, and until the close of trading on the New York Stock Exchange on June 27, 2016 will be automatically reinvested in additional shares of the Fund unless a shareholder specifically requests that such distributions be paid in cash. Although the Fund will be closed to new purchases as of June 8, 2016, you may continue to redeem your shares of the Fund after June 8, 2016, as provided in the Prospectus. Please note, however, that the Fund will be liquidating its assets as of the close of business on June 27, 2016.
Pursuant to the Plan, if the Fund has not received your redemption request or other instruction prior to the close of business on June 27, 2016, the effective time of the liquidation, your shares will be redeemed, and you will receive proceeds representing your proportionate interest in the net assets of the Fund as of June 27, 2016, subject to any required withholdings. As is the case with any redemption of fund shares, these liquidation proceeds will generally be subject to federal and, as applicable, state and local income taxes if the redeemed shares are held in a taxable account and the liquidation proceeds exceed your adjusted basis in the shares redeemed. If the redeemed shares are held in a qualified retirement account such as an IRA, the liquidation proceeds may not be subject to current income taxation under certain conditions. You should consult with your tax adviser for further information regarding the federal, state and/or local income tax consequences of this liquidation that are relevant to your specific situation.
All expenses incurred in connection with the liquidation contemplated by the Plan will be paid by the Fund, and are estimated to be approximately $13,000.
Please retain this supplement with your Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information.

Posted yesterday 7 June, please find all MFO ratings and fund metrics updated on MFO Premium site through month ending May.
I continue to marvel at results of Fund Family Scorecard. How do poor performing fund management companies persist? Could be that absolute return is not a concern, that it's all about risk adjusted return. Could be that some of the funds did well initially, then went south but investors are too stuck to change. Could be that these firms just have strong marketing and, my friend Ed offers, "write good newsletters." Could be that they are just having a run of bad luck and stuck in an uncooperative and "irrational" market ... but given enough time and a return to sanity, the Great Pumpkin will appear.
There are 30 fund families that have failed to beat their peers with every fund they manage ... 135 funds (oldest share class only) that underperform against their category averages on an absolute return basis since inception, measured from first full month of offering through May 2016.
Three of these families each manage assets of $1B or more ... Dunham, Hussman, and Domini.

Dunham & Associates Investment Counsel, Inc. is a San Diego based firm with a line-up of of 16 funds that "...operate on performance-based advisory fees, also commonly known as Fulcrum Fees, and feature objectives ranging from capital preservation to aggressive growth." Average age 9 years. Average annual expense ratio 1.90% (all share classes). These 16 funds have nearly $1B in assets under management (AUM). None of the 16 have beaten their category averages. How can that be ... ? One clue: 1.9% across 9 years represents a drag of 18%.

Another is Hussman Strategic Advisors Inc. Four funds. $1.1B AUM. I suspect in this case, Dr. Hussman would argue it's about risk adjusted return: "Investing for long-term returns while managing risk". Certainly that appears to be the case with its Strategic Total Return Fund (HSTRX), but what about the other three funds? Like, its flagship Strategic Growth Fund (HSGFX) ... it has been underwater for 92 months now and counting.
Here are some risk profile metrics for HSGFX since inception and across various time frames, including the last two business cycles ... something appears to have gone terribly wrong this cycle.


Finally, at $1.7B AUM ... "Invest in a greener, more peaceful future with Domini Social Investments." Three funds. Average age nearly 17 years.

Its front-loaded, 9-year-old International Social Equity A (DOMAX) has done pretty well the past three and five years, so Amy Domini is quick to post its five star status on her web site ...

Here's a closer look ...


As always, if you see anything amiss with this month's update or have recommendations for improvements, please do not hesitate to email us.

Wondering as to how the conversation ever got this far? 1. Placing Muni's in an IRA is an unusual approach. 2. MUB (benchmark) is making all time highs right now. IOW's I believe a better approach to investing for total return in any form of bond funds is thru well managed junk CEF's timed during big selloff's. Yields can go 10-13% (I have seen over 20%) plus cap gains in the 10-15% range on average. My experience has been outperformance compared to other approaches with bond funds. Hard to beat but requires patience. The question was about Muni's but money is money and there are other options.

Trying to make @msf 's point. Muni's can provide tax exempt and possible attractive after-tax returns.Regular I R A 's and 401k type plan withdrawals will be taxed @ your tax rate without any exemption provisions.
From
About PTIMX
Investment Objective
The Fund's objective is to provide a high level of current interest income that is substantially exempt from regular federal income taxes and is consistent with preservation of capital. Performance Trust Municipal Bond Fund can be a highly effective solution for investors seeking attractive levels of tax-free income and long-term after-tax total return potential.
Investment Approach
This provision is probably the norm for most open-end funds.
The Fund invests in, but is not limited to, at least 80% of its net assets in investment-grade municipal securities. The Fund may invest up to 20% of its net assets in below investment-grade municipal securitiesI do not own
http://www.ptiafunds.com/about-ptimx
Presently very low % in below BBB rated securities.
http://www.ptiafunds.com/images/website/documents/fund-documents/ptimx_factsheet.pdf
General Ratings Explanation Linked from https://www.invesco.com/portal/site/us/investors/closed-end/product-detail?productId=30303&ticker=OIA&title=invesco-municipal-income-opportunities-trust
Ratings spelled out from "AAA to Venezuela ? "
http://www.spratings.com/en_US/understanding-ratings#firstPage
In the past week I bought some OIA. Not too "junky" or highly leveraged but a little pricey for a C E F .Premise: Taxes are going to rise.Income inequality ,high student debt the "unfairness of it all" have resonated with enough voters to keep the country leaning to the left of center.There will be a demand for tax advantaged investments and plenty of politicians with ideas to use the money to enhance a state's or city's "livability rating".

FYI: Below is a look at the recent performance of various asset classes using key ETFs tracked by Bespoke on a daily basis. While the S&P 500 (SPY) closed the week up 2 basis points, we saw weakness in sectors like Energy, Financials and Telecom, and we saw strength in Consumer Staples, Health Care, Materials and Utilities. Outside of the US, Brazil and China both posted big gains this week, while Italy, Mexico, Spain, Russia and the UK fell. Oil fell as well, while natural gas saw a big move higher. Treasury ETFs rose significantly on Friday following the weak jobs report. They’re now up solidly on a year-to-date basis as well.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bespokepremium.com/bespoke-report/the-bespoke-report-6316/

Hi Guys,
Comparing women’s skills and contributions against men’s skills and contributions in any competitive industry is always entering controversial and dangerous waters.
Simple explanations are easy, but are often wrong. Complex explanations likely improve the odds of a meaningful answer. On the top of that decision pyramid, informed simple solutions are most likely to provide the best odds and the why insights. Here is my attempt at an informed simple explanation.
Women are an underrepresented population in the financial advisory industry because of 3 interactive reasons: (1) they lacked motivation and opportunity in the past, (2) they lacked the requisite education, and (3) industry adjustment time lags.
This is an informed simple explanation based on a single set of curves that summarized women’s education participation and levels over the last 5 decades. Here is the Link to the data sets that I referenced:
http://www.russellsage.org/blog/rise-women-seven-charts-showing-womens-rapid-gains-educational-achievement
These data sets are quite revealing. Young women have historically done better in High School than young men. Yet, those with advanced degrees, that would make them attractive to the finance advisory industries, have only arrived in sufficient numbers in the last several decades.
The financial industries are tradition bound. They make tons of money with little capital investment, and are reluctant to change this profitable equation. But it is changing slowly, ever so slowly, as more and more women are entering the business, are demonstrating their dedication and skill sets, and are moving up the corporate ladders. Inertia is a powerful drag. It just takes time.
Today, women only compose roughly 10% of the financial wizards in the USA; in some European countries, that percentage approaches 20%. In 2 decades, I predict those percentages will increase to 50% worldwide. I don’t fear long range predictions because nobody worries, nobody cares, and nobody remembers anyway.
As an aside, I was not surprised that girls outscore boys at the High School level. That’s been a truism forever. But I was surprised by the increase in overall grades over the last 50 years. Are we getting smarter? My answer to that question is a sharp “No”. The timeframe is too short. My answer is that the grading system has become softer. That’s not an especially good motivator; a more demanding score keeper will provide stronger incentives.
What do you think? Your comments are encouraged.
Best Wishes.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/918942/000119312516610671/d205847d497.htm
497 1 d205847d497.htm 497
LKCM FUNDS
LKCM Aquinas Small Cap Fund
LKCM Aquinas Growth Fund
LKCM Aquinas Value Fund
(the “Funds”)
Supplement dated June 1, 2016
To the Summary Prospectuses, Prospectuses and Statement of Additional Information
dated May 1, 2016
The Board of Trustees of LKCM Funds (the “Trust”), upon the recommendation of Luther King Capital Management Corporation (“LKCM”), the investment adviser to each Fund, has approved a Plan of Reorganization and Dissolution (the “Plan”) pursuant to which the LKCM Aquinas Small Cap Fund and the LKCM Aquinas Growth Fund (each, an “Acquired Fund” and collectively, the “Acquired Funds”), each a series of the Trust, would be reorganized into the LKCM Aquinas Value Fund (the “Acquiring Fund”), also a series of the Trust (the “Reorganizations”). Consummation of the Reorganizations will be subject to a number of conditions, including approval of the Plan by shareholders of each Acquired Fund.
If the Plan is approved by shareholders of each Acquired Fund, at the time the Reorganizations are completed, it is anticipated that: (1) the Acquiring Fund will change its name to the “LKCM Aquinas Catholic Equity Fund,” (2) the cap on the net expense ratio of the Acquiring Fund (excluding interest, taxes, brokerage commissions, indirect fees and expenses related to investments in other investment companies, and extraordinary expenses) under an expense limitation agreement with LKCM will be reduced from 1.50% per annum to 1.00% per annum, through at least December 31, 2017, (3) the Rule 12b-1 distribution fee rate payable by the Acquiring Fund will be reduced from 0.25% per annum to 0.10% per annum, and (4) certain investment strategies of the Acquiring Fund would be modified.
At the time the Reorganizations are completed, the Acquiring Fund would adopt the following principal investment strategies:
The Acquiring Fund would invest, under normal circumstances, at least 80% of its net assets (plus any borrowings for investment purposes) in equity securities. This policy would be non-fundamental, which means that it could be changed by the Board of Trustees of the Trust without shareholder approval, but the Acquiring Fund would notify its shareholders at least 60 days before it changes the policy.
The Acquiring Fund would primarily invest in companies that LKCM believes are likely to have above-average growth in revenues or earnings, above-average returns on shareholders’ equity, potential for above-average capital appreciation, and/or companies that LKCM believes have attractive relative valuations. The Acquiring Fund would invest in equity securities of small, mid and large capitalization companies.
The Acquiring Fund would seek to invest in equity securities of high quality companies that typically exhibit certain characteristics, including high profitability levels, strong balance sheet quality, competitive advantages, ability to generate excess cash flows, meaningful management ownership stakes, attractive reinvestment opportunities, and/or strong market share positions. These equity securities would include common stocks, preferred stocks, securities convertible into common stock, American Depositary Receipts, real estate investment trusts, rights and warrants.
The Acquiring Fund would continue to practice socially responsible investing within the framework provided by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Socially Responsible Investing Guidelines.
If shareholders of each Acquired Fund approve the Plan, at the time the Reorganizations are completed, shares of each Acquired Fund would be exchanged for shares of the Acquiring Fund with an aggregate net asset value equal to the aggregate net asset value of the shares of each Acquired Fund as of the scheduled close of regular trading on the New York Stock Exchange on the closing date of the Reorganizations. The Reorganizations are expected to be tax-free to each Acquired Fund and its shareholders. No sales loads, commissions or other transaction fees will be imposed on shareholders of an Acquired Fund in connection with the Reorganizations.
Shareholders of each Acquired Fund will be asked to consider and approve the Plan at a special meeting of shareholders scheduled to be held on July 20, 2016. Detailed information about the Plan and the Reorganizations, including the similarities and differences between each Acquired Fund and the Acquiring Fund, will be discussed in a combined proxy statement/prospectus to be distributed to shareholders of record of the Acquired Funds as of the close of business on May 20, 2016.
In the “Potential Changes to the Funds” sections of the Prospectus and the Statement of Additional Information, the fifth word of the seventh paragraph is deleted and replaced with “Acquired.”
* * * * *
Please retain this supplement for future reference.

FYI: Bond investor Bill Gross of Janus Capital Group Inc said on Thursday the historic returns that investors have reaped for over four decades are over, given the near end of falling rates and tremendous credit expansion.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-funds-janus-gross-idUSKCN0YO1DO

I am sure David's Q & A with Seafarer's management will be better than the Yahoo story below:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/seafarer-capital-partners-launches-seafarer-172500423.html

Hi msf,
I appreciate your perspective.
I'm an amateur investor and consequently have huge knowledge holes. I suppose you mean Money Market Funds with your mmf abbreviation. Or perhaps you mean Makes Money Fast. Either is appropriate.
I have zero direct experience dealing with Dreyfus. I learned of their early beginnings from Charles D. Ellis’s book titled “Capital”. I own that volume and dug it up to refresh my memory. Ellis discusses Dreyfus in Chapter 9 of that volume. He is the historian, not me, that I referenced in my earlier post.
Although I started investing in the 1950s, I was totally unaware of the existence of mutual funds in that timeframe. At one point, I foolishly believed that I could invest my paltry savings with George Soros. Dream On!
Best Wishes.