FYI: DoubleLine Capital, which oversees some $90 billion in assets, is shutting down its three-year old DoubleLine Equities Growth Fund, a spokesman said on Wednesday
Regards,
Ted
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-funds-doubleline-idUSKCN0W42TR
M* Snapshot DDEGX:
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/DDEGX/quote.html

Better to Inquire about investment ideas @ M F O than some of these advisors !
There's a phrase no one wants to read in a sweeping report about the financial advisers who handle their savings: economy-wide misconduct.
By Bloomberg News | March 1, 2016 - 4:28 pm EST
A new working paper by business school professors at the University of Chicago and University of Minnesota found that 7% of financial advisers have been disciplined for misconduct that ranges from putting clients in unsuitable investments to trading on client accounts without permission. That's a troubling mark for an industry that relies on the trust of clients. And some large, well-regarded firms have misconduct records that far exceed the average.
Many fired advisers end up moving to firms that have higher rates of misconduct than their previous employer did, and they become repeat offenders. "Prior offenders are five times as likely to engage in new misconduct as the average financial adviser," the study found.
"This is eye-opening and suggests not only that some firms have a high tolerance for misconduct on the part of their employees, but that their very business model is to attract the broker who can generate high revenue at the cost of repetitive disciplinary violations," said John Coffee, a professor at Columbia Law School in New York. "FINRA needs to focus on this."
Many cases of misconduct arose around the issue of the "suitability" of investments. That would mean, for instance, that an adviser should not suggest that a 75-year-old client put most assets in a high-fee, aggressive-growth mutual fund. Often, the report found, investments involved in reported misconduct cases were insurance products.
The first-of-its-kind study names names, listing 10 advisory firms with the highest misconduct rates, as well as those with the lowest.

http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20160301/FREE/160309989?template=printart
@Shostakovich
I own this fund in the Global Bond space you mention.DHGAX
Assets for the Fund
$2,133,975,285
Holdings
206
Dividend Frequency
Quarterly
Morningstar Category
World Bond
Lipper Category
Global Income
Average Maturity
8.30 Years
Duration
6.83 Years
30-Day Yield (as of
1/31/16)
Class A 1.27%
Class I 1.62%
TOP TEN SECURITIES1
Australian Govt 3.25% 10/21/2018 10.04%
Australian Government 3.25% 04/21/
2025 4.43%
Canadian Government, 2.25% 06/01/
2025 3.79%
Japan (30 Yr Issue) 1.7% 09/20/2044 3.47%
Buoni Poliennali Del Tes 2.36142% 09/15/
2024 2.66%
France (Govt Of) 1% 11/25/2025 2.57%
Canadian Government, 2.5% 06/01/2024 2.45%
Canadian Government 1% 08/01/2016 2.11%
U.S. Treasury Note 1.75% 12/31/2020 2.04%
Buoni Poliennali Del Tes 1.05% 12/01/
2019 2.03%
https://public.dreyfus.com/documents/compliancedocs/factsheets/monthly/6940.pdf

@davidmoran - not that you shouldn't but I'm unwilling to hang my hat on a 6-mo performance record but even more important to me is the yield generation, the persistence thereof and the growth of same over time. Capital gains are a nice add-on but too dependent on the collective whims of market participants. Just my own opinion.

The demand for safe assets dominated asset flows in February. The main beneficiary of the risk-off trade last month: foreign government bonds in developed markets. Citigroup’s World Gov’t Bond Index ex-US surged 4.0% in February (unhedged US dollar total return). The gain also pushed this slice of the fixed-income market into first place for the trailing one-year period with a 1.7% increase.
Bonds generally were in high demand last month. The only corner of fixed income that didn’t deliver a gain in February: foreign junk.
As for equities, all the broad categories lost ground last month.

http://www.capitalspectator.com/major-asset-classes-february-2016-performance-review/
Also. Returns from M*
SPDR® Nuveen S&P High Yield Municipal Bond Etf HYMB
1 mo +0.62 Ytd +0.76 1 Yr +3.54 3 Yr +3.76
Alerian M L P Etf AMLP
1 mo +0.77 Ytd -13.03 1Yr -34.75 3 Yr - 9.60
U.S. Gasoline & Crude Oil Prices Move Higher
BY TOM MOELLER MARCH 1, 2016 @haver.com
Petroleum prices stabilized last week following steady declines since the June highs. Regular gasoline averaged $1.78 per gallon last week (-27.9% y/y)
Prices for natural gas continued to decline last week to $1.78 per mmbtu (-42.2% y/y), and were $1.62 yesterday.
More Weekly Energy Prices as of 02/29/16 @ below link

http://www.haver.com/comment/comment.html?c=160301A.html
Related.New markets for American Nat Gas

The Asia Vision LNG carrier ship sits docked at the Cheniere Energy Inc. terminal in this aerial photograph taken over Sabine Pass, Texas, U.S., on Wednesday, Feb. 24, 2016. Cheniere said in a statement last month. Cheniere Energy Inc. expects to ship the first cargo of liquefied natural gas on Wednesday to Brazil with another tanker to be loaded a few days later, marking the historic start of U.S. shale exports Photographer: Lindsey Janies/Bloomberg via Getty Images
The United States is shipping gas overseas for the first time in decades, but private companies sell to the highest bidder — and not just to the countries Washington might want for geopolitical reasons.
BY KEITH JOHNSONFEBRUARY 29, 2016
http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/02/29/americas-natural-gas-exports-wont-be-enough-to-blunt-putins-energy-weapon/
Oil News
ExxonMobil’s record bond sale. ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM) made a big move with a $12 billion bond sale, its largest on record. The world’s largest publically-traded oil company could use the cash to buy up assets on the cheap. Exxon held its cards close to the vest, saying that the proceeds would be used for “funding for working capital, acquisitions, capital expenditures, refinancing a portion of our existing commercial paper borrowings and other business opportunities.” ExxonMobil still has a AAA credit rating, one of the few companies in existence to have the highest rating possible, but S&P issued a “negative” rating in early February.
Saudi cash reserves fall. Saudi foreign reserves continue to dwindle as the OPEC nation tries to shore up its finances and maintain its currency peg. In January, Saudi Arabia’s foreign exchange dipped below $600 billion for the first time in four years, according to the latest estimates. The government is burning through cash reserves at a rate of about $14.3 billion per month.
http://oilprice.com/newsletters/free/opintel01032016

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

Hi @DavidV,
Thank you for your question.
I do care about portfolio allocation in each account that makes up the master portfolio that I have detailed above. Naturally, the asset allocation does varry from account-to-account along with the holdings. For example, in my health savings account about one third is currently invested in only one fund (American Balanced Fund) and the other two thirds is currently held in cash which is much more than I need from an annual health care perspective. It is one of the accounts that I throttle form time-to-time by adjusting it's allocation as how I am reading the markets. Currently, with high equity valuations and anticipated interest rate increases I have rolled back my exposure to both stocks & bonds not only in this account but in all of my accounts. All the accounts get throttled from time-to-time but not all get throttled at the same time as I make changes (rebalance) over time. For example, I have been raising my cash allocation and lowering my allocation to both stocks and bonds for the past couple of years due to higher than normal price to earnings ratios for stocks and anticipated rising interest rates which will effect most bond valuations.
Generally, when I make a buy, I buy with the intent to hold the asset for at least a year. When selling something, in my taxable account, I generally take profits form long term positions while letting the shorter term positions ride until their profits (or losses) will be taxed as long term capital gains (or losses). For me, investing centers more around time in the markets over timing the markets. Trading centers around timing the markets. Generally, I hold more equities (towards the high range of my allowable allocation) when they have become oversold and their valuations are reasonable ... and, I'll hold less when their valuations have increase with higher than normal price to earnings ratios thus becoming overbought.
Most of these accounts have been in place for a good number of years as I am now retired and began investing when I was a teenager in FKINX (which was my first mutual fund purchased and still remains my largest single position at about six percent of my portfolio). Interestingly, form my late fifties, up to my full retirement at age 67, I made more from my investing endeavors than I made from working.
Thanks again for the question. I hope the above provides you with some insight as how I govern my portfolio and answers your question.

He's filling space with this piece - nothing new unless you've just fallen off the turnip truck: "It is my belief that once you design and implement a portfolio to match your long-term investment goals and risk tolerance, you should preserve its structural integrity. And the best way to preserve your ideal asset allocation is to rebalance regularly, even when markets are volatile."
-
There's good arguments on both sides and many different ways to approach rebalancing. Some are repulsed at the thought of selling a winner and buying a loser. Others see regular rebalancing as a way to lock-in gains on a regular basis.
One approach I use is to set broad percentage ranges for different categories in advance, much as asset allocation funds do. Keep hands-off unless a range is breached either on the upside or downside. Another common way is to rebalance back to norm on a chosen date each year. Some people use their birthday. If you're already in the draw-down stage, taking distributions from your winners is a natural way to rebalance.
A few chosen funds I exclude from rebalancing for a variety of reasons - small speculative positions in OPGSX and PRLAX for example. These are long-term bets in highly volatile areas and I'm willing to let them run for now in hopes of outsized gains. Neither has disappointed since purchase.

Hi Shostokovich,
As President James A. Garfield noted: “Man cannot live by bread alone; he must have peanut butter”.
Similarly, an investor cannot survive on a simple one-dimensional model to capture stock market movements like CAPM is, but a fuller explanation demands a more eloquent model, perhaps like the Fama-French 3-factor formulation. The modeling became even more complex when a Momentum component was added, and still more complex when Fama-French contributed yet more elements.
The initial CAPM (Capital Asset Pricing Model) was developed by Bill Sharpe who received a Nobel award for his inspiration. Beta was his modeling parameter of choice. Later he ruefully said that he is fortunate that the Nobel community does not rescind their awards.
Fama and French expanded the pricing modeling to three parameters: Beta, Size differences, and Price-to-Book ratios. Momentum was added by Carhart to transform the three factor into a four factor model. Models are just simplifications and are never perfect. Neither was the four factor model, so Fama-French added more elements.
The goal was to develop a complete model that fully projected stock returns with a minimum of residual unexplained component. That residual (Alpha) can be interpreted as a fund manager’s skill or luck contribution when evaluating mutual fund performance. If the residual Alpha remains positive over an extended timeframe, then skill is the likely interpretation; if it does not persist, luck is the most probable interpretation.
The accumulated empirical mutual fund evidence is that luck is the predominant factor, but some limited cases of skill are identifiable. The Swedroe work finds skill within the American and Vanguard fund groups. The Vanguard finding is consistent with a claim reported in a recent MFO posting. Here is an Internal Link to that article:
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/26202/finding-active-managers-to-beat-the-market
By way of full disclosure, I own a substantial number of Vanguard products, both passively and actively managed.
I agree with your basic observation that the research would be better served with some acknowledgement of standard deviations. That’s always a necessary element when reporting statistical work.
When generating an Alpha for a fund, the standard deviation of that Alpha for an extended time period is also needed to formulate a test of its significance. The Swedroe paper did not include that data. The Alpha standard deviations are needed to calculate a “t” test value which is a measure of how meaningful the statistical results really are.
A “t” test value of plus or minus 2 or greater is the usual criterion for a statistically meaningful finding. These were likewise missing in action from the Swedroe document. Still, I congratulate him for his project. I concluded that his work is useful. It tells us where to search if Alpha is a singular selection criterion. It is not so for me.
I hope this is helpful. Please understand that I’m not a statistician, just an investor with an interest in statistical data.
Best Wishes.

FYI: (It would be nice to know which ones ?)
Jeffrey Gundlach, the co-founder and chief executive officer of DoubleLine Capital, said on Friday that his firm purchased some U.S. stocks two weeks ago after their rocky start in January.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.reuters.com/article/doubleline-gundlach-idUSL2N1651GF

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1217286/000119312516478119/d149787d497.htm
497 1 d149787d497.htm JPMORGAN TRUST I
J.P. MORGAN INTERNATIONAL EQUITY FUNDS
JPMorgan Asia Pacific Fund
(All Share Classes)
(a series of JPMorgan Trust I)
Supplement dated February 25, 2016
To the Prospectuses, Summary Prospectuses and Statement
of Additional Information dated March 1, 2015, as supplemented
NOTICE OF LIQUIDATION OF THE JPMORGAN ASIA PACIFIC FUND. The Board of Trustees of the JPMorgan Asia Pacific Fund (the “Fund”) has approved the liquidation and dissolution of the Fund on or about April 6, 2016 (the “Liquidation Date”). Effective immediately, the Fund may depart from its stated investment objective and strategies as it increases its cash holdings in preparation for its liquidation. Unless you have an individual retirement account (“IRA”) where the State Street Bank and Trust (“SSBT”) serves as the custodian, on the Liquidation Date, the Fund shall distribute pro rata to its shareholders of record all of the assets of the Fund in complete cancellation and redemption of all of the outstanding shares of beneficial interest, except for cash, bank deposits or cash equivalents in an estimated amount necessary to (i) discharge any unpaid liabilities and obligations of the Fund on the Fund’s books on the Liquidation Date, including, but not limited to, income dividends and capital gains distributions, if any, payable through the Liquidation Date, and (ii) pay such contingent liabilities as the officers of the Fund deem appropriate subject to ratification by the Board. Capital gain distributions, if any, may be paid on or prior to the Liquidation Date. If you have a Fund direct IRA account where SSBT serves as custodian, your shares will be exchanged for the corresponding class of shares of the JPMorgan Liquid Assets Money Market Fund as specified below, unless you provide alternative direction prior to the Liquidation Date. For all other IRA accounts, the proceeds will be invested based upon guidelines of the applicable Plan administrator.
Share Class of JPMorgan Asia Pacific Fund Share Class of JPMorgan Liquid AssetsMoney Market Fund
Class A Shares Morgan Shares
Class C Shares Morgan Shares
Select Class Morgan Shares
Upon liquidation, shareholders may purchase any class of another J.P. Morgan Fund for which they are eligible with the proceeds of the liquidating distribution. Shareholders holding Class A Shares or Select Class Shares will be permitted to use their proceeds from the liquidation to purchase Class A Shares of another J.P. Morgan Fund at net asset value within 90 days of the liquidating distribution. They may also purchase other share classes for which they are eligible. If Shareholders of Class C Shares purchase Class C Shares of another J.P. Morgan Fund within 90 days of the liquidating distribution, no contingent deferred sales charge will be imposed on those new Class C Shares.
FOR EXISTING SHAREHOLDERS OF RECORD OF THE FUND AS OF FEBRUARY 29, 2016, ADDITIONAL PURCHASES OF FUND SHARES WILL BE ACCEPTED UP TO AND INCLUDING MARCH 15, 2016 AFTER WHICH NO NEW PURCHASES WILL BE ACCEPTED. FOR ALL OTHER INVESTORS, PURCHASES OF FUND SHARES WILL NO LONGER BE ACCEPTED EFFECTIVE MARCH 1, 2016.
INVESTORS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT
WITH THE PROSPECTUS, SUMMARY PROSPECTUS AND
STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

Andrew Foster dropped a note in my mailbox this afternoon to inform me that the 4th Qtr Portfolio review for SFGIX has been posted. As most know, Mr. Foster worked in Asia for some time before his days at Mathews and reacts (and doesn't react) to Asian events in uncharacteristic ways. Always worth a glance, IMO, even if one isn't prepared to have him work with your money just yet.
http://www.seafarerfunds.com/fund/portfolio-review
His current stance on Asia--- and on emerging market stocks in general--- has taken a turn, and I think it's worth a smoke in the pipe:

February 2016 – In his latest portfolio review, Andrew Foster discusses a shift in the Fund’s composition, away from the Asian region, and toward larger stocks at the expense of smaller ones. Next, he speculates as to the cause behind the collapse in China’s capital markets. While he does not offer a definitive explanation, he does suggest that circumstances may be serious enough to warrant attention from investors.

heezafe,
Thanks for the information.
It sounds like you know a bit about the Matthews Funds as well a Seafarer Overseas Growth and Income.
If my research is correct and current, MAPIX is about 30% Japan and 35% China/Hong Kong, MACSX is about 36% China/Hong Kong and 6% Japan, and the last I looked SFGIX was about 17% China/Hong Kong and 3% Japan, with a total of 52% in Asia, so it is more diverse in the Asia space than MACSX or MAPIX. Also, SFGIX had a 13% position in Emerging Europe, 21% in Latin America, and 5% in South Africa.
Currently I own MACSX (seems to be the least risky of the three) in a retirement account and I am trying to figure out if owning SFGIX and or MAPIX gives me added diversification, or I just would be collecting funds.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Mona

Interesting argument. There's always overvalued areas. However, for natural resource producers it's hard to make that claim. Gas is overpriced at $1.25 (excluding tax)?
Tech is nearly impossible to value anyway. If you're building 8-track decks you're overvalued. If your aeorspace division is about to receive a big contract from NASA to supply the space station or ferry payloads to the moon, you might be undervalued.
Central banks and lawmakers will do what they will do. But it would be rare indeed for a paper currency to maintain or increase in purchasing power over extended periods. This begs David's question a bit I suppose. But, even nominal gains in equities are preferable to little or no gain in cash.

Fortunately OSTFX had the smarts to dump Valeant, unlike Sequoia and some others (Vanguard was also very late to dump, BTW). Perhaps the most important thing to keep in mind is that Osterweis started as a firm that managed money for ultra-high net worth families. Capital preservation was and is a high priority. The funds came along as an offshoot of the private money management, sort of a "what can you do for out grandkids" response. As a result, OSTFX has never been flashy, never been a style-box fund (it is most definitely not a midcap blend fund, another M* mistake), and strives to provide good returns over the long haul. Everyone of us has owned at least one fund that stumbles once in a while. Prior to last year's crappy number, you have a 10-year average return of that is very close to the S&P 500 with less risk. We are willing to give the team a little slack here. There has been very little turnover on the team, with Berler and Kovriga there since 2006. Are there concerns? Yes, there are always concerns with actively-managed funds.
If OSTIX is compared to the Non-Traditional Bond category (which is where we believe it should be), it is a bracket buster. Are there concerns? Yes, but the YTD number is not because the team decided to take dumb pills. Like OSTFX, we are giving them some slack, but nothing suggests there is any flaw. Which reminds me again that I seldom read M* analyst commentary for a good reason.

Andrew Foster dropped a note in my mailbox this afternoon to inform me that the 4th Qtr Portfolio review for SFGIX has been posted. As most know, Mr. Foster worked in Asia for some time before his days at Mathews and reacts (and doesn't react) to Asian events in uncharacteristic ways. Always worth a glance, IMO, even if one isn't prepared to have him work with your money just yet.
http://www.seafarerfunds.com/fund/portfolio-review
His current stance on Asia--- and on emerging market stocks in general--- has taken a turn, and I think it's worth a smoke in the pipe:

February 2016 – In his latest portfolio review, Andrew Foster discusses a shift in the Fund’s composition, away from the Asian region, and toward larger stocks at the expense of smaller ones. Next, he speculates as to the cause behind the collapse in China’s capital markets. While he does not offer a definitive explanation, he does suggest that circumstances may be serious enough to warrant attention from investors.

Objective & Overview
The Hennessy Cornerstone Mid Cap 30 Fund seeks long-term growth of capital by investing in 30 Mid Cap companies, screening for undervalued stocks with above-average growth potential.
Investment Strategy
The Hennessy Cornerstone Mid Cap 30 Fund formula marries value with momentum, seeking growth at a reasonable price. Stocks for the portfolio are selected by strict adherence to the following time-tested, quantitative formula:
Market capitalization between $1 and $10 billion, excluding foreign stocks/ADR's
This market cap spread allows for inclusion of a broad range of mid-cap companies. Foreign stocks/American Depositary Receipts, or “ADR's” are excluded as they do not generate additional returns for the additional associated risk.
Price to sales ratio below 1.5
This value metric helps to uncover relative bargains. The formula chooses sales as its guide because sales figures are more difficult for companies to manipulate than earnings and frequently provide a clearer picture of a company's potential value.
Annual earnings higher than the previous year
While sales may be the best indicator of a company's value, the formula considers improvement in earnings as an indicator of a company's financial strength.
Positive stock price appreciation, or relative strength, over 3 and 6-month period
Historically, relative strength has been one of the most influential variables in predicting which stocks will outperform the market.
Select the 30 stocks with the highest 12-month price appreciation
Limiting the portfolio to 30 stocks allows just the top performers to be included, while providing ample diversification
The portfolio is rebalanced once annually, generally in the Fall
https://hennessyfunds.com/funds/equity/individual/f_3/sc_investor/cornerstone_mid_cap_30_fund/p_Quarterly/overview.fs

FYI: (Click On Article title At Top Of Google Search)
This year’s market has not been good for anyone’s health. After the rockiest start ever to a new year, the volatility has continued such that even the recent three-day rally still has stocks down more than 6% as of Thursday. Health-care stocks, after five years of market-beating gains, have been hit particularly hard, down 8.6% for the year so far. The only sector in worse shape is financials, down 12.3%.
In our Jan. 30 cover story, Barron’s told readers it was “Time to Buy Bank Stocks.” Investors would be wise to look at health-care funds as well.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/#q=Two+Top+Health-Care+Funds+Barron's

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1141819/000089418916007712/collins-tpm_497e.htm
497 1 collins-tpm_497e.htm SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS (497E - STICKER)
Filed pursuant to Rule 497(e)
Registration Nos. 333-62298; 811-10401
Collins Alternative Solutions Fund
A series of Trust for Professional Managers (the “Trust”)
Supplement dated February 19, 2016
to the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information dated June 28, 2015
The Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of Trust for Professional Managers (the “Trust”), based upon the recommendation of Collins Capital Investments, LLC (the “Adviser”), the investment adviser to the Collins Alternative Solutions 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 a series of the Trust effective as of the close of business on February 19, 2016.
The Board approved a Plan of 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 February 19, 2016. However, any distributions declared to shareholders of the Fund after February 19, 2016 and until the close of trading on the New York Stock Exchange on February 26, 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 February 19, 2016, you may continue to redeem your shares of the Fund after February 19, 2016, as provided in the Prospectus. Please note, however, that the Fund will be liquidating its assets as of the close of business on February 26, 2016.
Pursuant to the Plan, if the Fund has not received your redemption request or other instruction prior to the close of business on February 26, 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 February 26, 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.
The Adviser will bear all of the expenses incurred in carrying out the Plan.
Shareholder inquiries should be directed to the Fund at 1-855-55-ALT-MF.
Please retain this Supplement with your Prospectus and
Statement of Additional Information for reference.

Fund now has $6B in assets, all classes. the A shares OSMAX is available load waived as NTF. I own OSMYX, institutional version. I called them and if fund is held with financial advisor, can still add. Nice fund.
January 29, 2016
OPPENHEIMER INTERNATIONAL SMALL-MID COMPANY FUND TO SOFT CLOSE ON APRIL 1, 2016
Dear Oppenheimer International Small-Mid Company Fund Shareholder:
In an effort to continue to provide our shareholders with a long-term strategy for success, we are placing limitations
on certain investor purchases into Oppenheimer International Small-Mid Company Fund. We believe
these new limitations will help position the Fund for continued sustainable long-term growth.
Effective as of the close of the New York Stock Exchange on April 1, 2016, the Fund will no longer accept
purchase orders from new investors and existing Fund shareholders will no longer be able to purchase new
shares or exchange shares of other funds into the Fund, subject to certain exceptions including:
• If you own shares in certain types of employer-sponsored retirement plans you can continue to purchase
shares and exchange into the Fund.
• If you own shares through an OppenheimerFunds Portfolio BuilderSM account you can continue to purchase
shares and exchange into the Fund.
• If you own shares in any 529 Plan that currently includes the Fund within one or more of their investment
options, those existing 529 portfolios are not affected.
Distribution and capital gains set to reinvest in Oppenheimer International Small-Mid Company Fund will continue
to reinvest after the close date. If you have automatic purchases established for this Fund and one of
the above exceptions does not apply, your auto purchase feature will be turned off before the effective
date. This will include purchases you make through Asset Builder, exchanges from another Oppenheimer fund
into this Fund (including dividend exchanges) and other automatic purchase methods. If you wish to continue
your automatic investments after the effective date, you will need to choose a different investment to receive
the purchases. Your financial advisor can help you make changes to your account.
We will continue to monitor the Fund to determine if we need to further modify these restrictions on investment
purchases. Please see the prospectus supplement, which is available on our website at oppenheimerfunds.com
for additional details on these and other changes to the purchase restrictions for the Fund.
If you have any questions, please speak with your financial advisor or contact us at 1 800 CALL OPP (225 5677)

My best guess on the very recent PTIAX loss is that it's munis to a small degree, but mainly the HY mortgages -- and if they've ramped up IG corporates since the Dec 31 report, that might be part of the mix too.
I'm basing that WAG on 1 wk return figures: PTIAX is -0.86%, versus only -0.2/-0.3% for the muni funds I follow. HY mortgages have been hit much harder; for two examples of pure HY mtg funds, look at DBSCX (Gundlach) at -0.95% and DMO (cef, 34% leverage) at -2.05% on its NAV. As for corporates, VFICX (73% IG corps) is -0.53%.
No change (yet) for me, Mona. It's not that significant yet compared to accumulated gains. But if HY mortgages stay weak for longer, I'd prob'ly shift some shares.
Edit: Forgot about the taxable munis that as of 12/31 were more than half the muni sleeve. Assuming they're on the order of BAB, that could be a significant loser for the fund the last week: BAB's NAV is down 1.19%. So it's probably HY mtg and taxable munis doing the damage.

Lipper puts VBINX in the Growth Allocation category. There are 113 such funds in its database ending January 2016, at least 10 years old, oldest share class only, open and closed.
VBINX stacks up pretty well. Here is list from top, sorted by 10 year annualized total return (APR), which includes expenses, reinvested dividends, and any max front load. (As always, no accounting for category drift or survivorship.)

It beat out Dodge & Cox Balanced DODBX, which has delivered 5% APR, placing it 41 out of 113.
Here is same list based a Martin Ratio, which is the risk return adjusted metric used to computed MFO Return Group ratings. Martin is excess total return over 90 day TBill divided by Ulcer Index, as described in the paper by Peter Martin, entitlded: An Alternative Approach to the Measurement of Investment Risk & Risk-Adjusted Performance.

If we look across all the asset allocation categories, VBINX ranks even better.
MFO groups the following categories as Asset Allocation (AA) type: Target Today, Target 2010, Target 2015, Target 2020, Target 2025, Target 2030, Target 2035, Target 2040, Target 2045, Target 2050, Target 2055+, Conservative Allocation, Moderate Allocation, Growth Allocation, Aggressive Growth Allocation, Absolute Return, Convertible Securities, Flexible Portfolio, Retirement Income.
There are 470 such funds ending January 2016, at least 10 years old, oldest share class only, open and closed.
Here's how VBINX stack up on that list, again, by APR: