Well of course it depends on when you got in as many stocks had high peaks and low lows. If you got into any stock with substantial amount of money at a major peak then you're toast for quite some time.
So in the post 2008-2009 era - Yes AIG stock declined 50+% in 2011 but don't forget that was after a 90+% climb in 2010. So far in 2012 it's up around 48% even during an extremely shaky global economic backdrop....And there's still much much more potential room for recovery and gains in the future.
FAIRX: +37.80% YTD
===
Berkowitz estimates that AIG is going to generate $5 or $6 per share in cash on a forward basis and that an additional $15 billion to $20 billion more of assets could be sold. The stock is trading in the low- to mid-30s, which is approximately half of book value, so a large portion of the proceeds from asset sales could be used to buy back stock at 50 cents on the dollar. With some continued reason¬able capital allocation, Berkowitz sees AIG as potentially having a book value in excess of $70 a share in 2013. Given the current buy-back process, Berkowitz says, “AIG could be done with the government by the end of first quarter of next year, which is three years ahead of schedule.” Berkowitz believes investors won't return to the stock until the Treasury's remaining ownership is at least close to zero, at which point he believes the stock price should appreciate and converge with book value. This doesn't include any expectation of the stock returning to a mid-single-digit multiple of book value, a level at which the company has traded at in the past. As for figuring out whether investors will return to the company after the government is completely out or before that, Berkowitz says, “I don't know, I've never been good at that . . . All I know is that we've got something that's worth over $60 today, and it's going to be worth over $70 sometime next year, in my opinion, and I can't see how price doesn't eventually meet book value.”

I agree with Bee entirely. I also strongly questioned the appeal of Sears when it was over $100. Even if it gains from being broken up or other plans, I strongly doubt it'll ever see those levels again. From the article - "Sears does just enough, so they're not breaking the terms of their very long lease.” It's not that there isn't value there, but the company (especially one that whose turnaround strategy is apparently doing "just enough" and hiring a new CEO with no retail experience) will likely end up selling off parts and pieces - and it's thanks to Lampert's poor handling of the company. He deserves no praise for what he's done to an iconic American company.
This article from last year - I think - still fits: http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2011/05/12/eddie-lampert-dementor/
St Joe looks like it's coming back nicely.
I'll also say that I don't like the company, but think Ted made the entirely correct decision going with the preferred. Additionally, although Ted and I have occasionally had disagreements - I'll offer him a genuine congrats on a very nice investment/trade.

---The original bailout; past all of the nasties of financial institutions and associated, being their practices and morals, was likely needed to prevent full blown financial chaos, meaning and including, limited access to your electronic investment dollars, which are a series of 1's and 0's residing within a server.
Central bankers, governments all around the globe and companies.....growth, growth, growth.
Is economic growth a substitute for having a happy family and a quality life; full of gotta have it things? Some amount of wealth surely can contribute to an individuals/family opportunities to advance their position in society. The marketing folks, which include more than those at QVC, HSN, Walmart and related, are found happily at their work in many U.S. federal positions, too. The congressional folks are always marketing this or that; and this would include the current actions of the Federal Reserve; and the chairman, more so. And a U.S. president thinks they have power, eh?
So, is the pure mandate of an economy and those involved; to shape policy for, growth at any cost? Has such a model provided much benefit in reducing poverty or adding equality among population groups? While this may seem an "off-the-wall" note related to investing; many of these actions on a large enough scale or as a cumulative cluster of monies always affects people and for we here, the investing cycles. One must consider whether this grand experiment in current monetary policy may indeed, "Burn down the house" in the name of growth and a lower unemployment rate that may have entered a phase of economic cycle that is "now normal". Japan is still working on this model; although most of their debt is internally owned, unlike the U.S. The Federal Reserve and Treasury are working on this, too; and may indeed own most of whatever resembles the U.S. government credit markets, going forward.
The dog, spinning in a never-ending circle, we know; never really may catch it's tail, regardless of the size or speed of the dog. A continued "bark, bark" does not help.
Perhaps the ultimate goal of a central bank, in the developed countries; should be to determine (if this is possible) how much monetary stimulus could help a given economy during times of stress, and merely issue monies, tax free to each and every citizen who is of legal status to that country. Based upon data believed to be correct; during the past 4 years about $3.2 trillion of Fed. Reserve actions have been put in place, against a U.S. population of about 316 million. The math indicates about $10,127 per capita or a family of 4 receiving a little over $40,000 during the last 4 years. Yes, some of this money would be wasted from poor decisions; but much of it would have been spent properly and likely generating income for businesses, who in turn may have hired more folks; and all involved would have paid more in taxes at a federal, state and local level.
Alas and meanwhile; the dog chases it's tail.
Final notes, and not all inclusive; by any means, in no particular order.
--- 1995 brought NAFTA, GATT and the World Trade Organization via a lame duck congressional session.
--- Mr. Clinton.
Mr. Clinton publically declares that Glass-Steagall is no longer relevant.
--- Grant money. Check around your community/state for projects pending or in place; and review how much of the funding monies are in the form of a federal grant. Yes, work is created; and numerous projects are valid, but too many are not. When a community (a true event from about 3 years ago in MI) could not support 10 local and private art "centers", then the local economy has spoken. However, the U.S. district congress person was able to "enable" grants monies to help extend the dying entities. A news story on the same day noted that the local food bank was "empty". Money, not well spent; for the sake of the arts, in my opinion.
--- Silly spenders. Ah, congress and the government. One may not deny that there are those with the truest of hearts and intentions roaming around the streets of D.C. But, they do seem to become derailed in clear thinking, sometimes. I will only note two items. Fuel from corn and/or bio-products is one such area. The cost and benefit, from my knowledge is to the downside. Okay, a new market for corn is in place and some jobs have been created. The downside of the E85 blend is problems with use in older engines of all types (sludge formation, causing numerous problems) and take a look at a new vehicle sticker to find the mileage notation when using an E85 fuel, versus traditional unleaded fuel. Say what, it is lower MPG; can't be. Lastly, and an example that crosses many people and places over very many years and not solely directed at this person; is the "bridge to nowhere in Alaska". Come on D.C. people, why don't you all just act properly? Oh, wait there is more.............I almost forgot about the lobby folks in D.C. Talk about stimulating the economy. Well, at least in D.C., for the restaurants and hotels.
--- FASB.
Hey, let us change the rules for bad assets....cool, let's do it
--- Derivatives.
A few trillion among friends, all is well; don't worry, be happy
But, wait; there's more, the infommercial stated
--- Bernanke, May, 2007.
Mr. Bernanke, FRB speech, May, 2007
Mr. Bernanke statements, May, 2007....."But I believe that, in the long run, markets are better than regulators at allocating credit."
"All that said, given the fundamental factors in place that should support the demand for housing, we believe the effect of the troubles in the subprime sector on the broader housing market will likely be limited, and we do not expect significant spillovers from the subprime market to the rest of the economy or to the financial system. The vast majority of mortgages, including even subprime mortgages, continue to perform well. Past gains in house prices have left most homeowners with significant amounts of home equity, and growth in jobs and incomes should help keep the financial obligations of most households manageable."
--- Fight fire, with fire ? Los Alamos, NM got lucky with a best guess method. Hoping QE's to the Nth power may be as fortunate.
May, 2000
May, 2011
--- Free market capitalism. Ah, words that are uttered by some on the great television tube and in print. There are some folks who do reside in free market capitalism. Those being the reported 30 million nomadic peoples of the planet and those who are in, or moving to the underground/barter economic systems in developed countries. The reminder of peoples are moved and stroked by sometimes perverted and corrupt monetary and political methods.
--- Low interest rate environment. We know the low interest rate environment is face slapping the many who previously relied upon the world of CD's and related money markets to generate some extra income. The side effects, not unlike the medication commercials on tv are too numerous to mention. A few areas of the negative side are: The aforementioned CD/money market downside. Pension funds and insurance companies that have to alter their plans going forward; and moving to the "riskier side" with investments (hedge funds, private equity, etc.) One side effect is that many long standing policies/insurance companies that provided long term health care plans are no longer offering such policies, either to companies for employees or to private citizens, as investment returns can no longer match the growth rate of health care. Hot money moving into whatever, many times being commodities and resulting price increases; whether the price increase should really be driven with pure and natural demand. Two side effects of this are higher prices for the consumer and perhaps lower earnings for companies who at least trail with price increases; and if they do not, their profit margins suffer.
The end results of low interest rates, may be the opposite of any implied benefit.
No, part of this is not a Mr. Bernanke bash. In theory, he fully expects this grand money experiment to have a happy ending; in order, that history may judge him in a favorable position.
And you are correct, you did not volunteer for this experiment either.
Our house wishes all well going forward with the investment pursuit.
I am finished.
Regards,
Catch

I did a Google search. I have found references of SSgA real asset fund in several company 401k summary. It does not look like a mutual fund with a ticker you can query at mutual fund sites. This seems to be one of those funds specifically designed for 401k use. Your plan administrators should be able to provide info about it.
Update:
The following PDF has some info on its composition at the time the PDF is prepared.
http://www.esghr.com/Portals/2/hrp_pdf/401k Materials_3-9-2011 8-53-02 AM.pdf
SSgA Real Asset (6/09)
Managed by State Street Global Advisors Funds Management
30% Wilshire DJ REIT, 25% S&P GSCI Commodity, 25% MSCI World
Natural Resources Stocks, 20% Barclays Capital Inflation Notes
This fund has ER=0.5% but seems to be a fund of funds with underlying funds ER=0.3% So, you are paying about 0.8% for this mix in total.
Here is another plan document that includes this fund:
https://fulfillment.lfg.com/CF/LFG/EF/26198/DIR-INV-BRC007_Z12_VIEW.pdf
SSgA Real Asset Non-Lending Series
Seeks to match the returns of a composite benchmark of the REIT
Index (30%), S&P GSCI Index (25%), capitalization-weighted MSCI
World Natural Resources Stocks Index (25%), and Barclays Capital
Inflation Notes Index (20%).
In this document underlying fund ER is 0.22 so total ER=0.5+0.22=0.72%

Thank you so much for your comments, they're greatly appreciated. I don't really want to share the entire portfolio and haven't, because I think one:) It's really a very eccentric portfolio and has risks that I think are beyond or much beyond what I want to recommend those who are in/near retirement age. 2:) A good deal of it is individual stocks, which I really don't recommend because of risk and some of them are not terribly liquid. The stocks are also more reflecting my themes and interests (some of which aren't themes covered by funds/etfs), which understandably may not be someone else's.
I will, however, share some highlights and lowlights on both sides (stocks and funds.) There are more on both sides - this is just a sample.
Stocks:
* Jardine Matheson. This hasn't done a whole lot this year, but it remains a very long-term holding, as I think it remains a compelling, blue-chip play on Asia. A very large conglomerate, this owns everything from the Mandarin Oriental to 7-11s to real estate to IKEAs to car dealerships to...on and on. The company has been around since the 1800's. I really like the Asian conglomerates, although Jardine is - I think - the most consistent. Hutchsion Whampoa (which is much more global, owning everything from a Canadian oil company to infrastructure to ports to a massive health and beauty chain in Europe and Asia) has some really compelling assets, but I dumped it after it didn't fare that well.
* Glencore (D'oh.) This has been a real disappointment, but I'm not selling - Glencore is like the Goldman Sachs of the commodities world - they have a massive trading operation, combined with a massive amount of assets around the world, including buying Viterra earlier this year and being in the midst of taking over Xstrata, which has been one of the most bizarre M & A situations I've ever seen, even requiring Tony Blair to step in and mediate between Glencore and a Sovereign Wealth Fund who was one of Xstrata's largest shareholders. Thankfully I didn't buy at the IPO last year (whose prospectus was a whopping 600 pages), but still a real downer. I still like the company and particularly like the real assets they own, including - In Australia, Paraguay, Russia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, Glencore farms 270,000 hectares of owned or leased land. If the merger/takeover/whatever it is today of the rest of Xstrata goes through, that will result in, as a Bloomberg article put it well, "The combined company would be a vertically- integrated commodities giant, with an interest in the production, transportation and trading of everything from the food on consumers’ plates to the metal used for their utensils."
* Brookfield Infrastructure. A highly unique spin-off from parent Brookfield Infrastructure, this owns literal infrastructure - everything from toll roads in Chile to ports in Europe to rail in Australia. This is sort of public version of a private infrastructure fund, and it is opportunistic; what it owns in five years may look very different than what it owns today. This is an MLP though, so it does produce a k-1 at tax time. It does yield around 4.3%. I also like the parent company, but not as much as BIP.
* Singtel (Singapore Telecom) I particularly like Singtel for what it offers - not only does it offer a play on mobile in the region and a nice dividend, but the company owns stakes in several other telcos in the region, giving it exposure to Thailand, Indonesia, India, Australia, Bangladesh and elsewhere. The company also has a new division that is actively seeking start-ups in areas related to mobile/mobile technology, the main one so far being Amobee, a large global mobile advertising firm, which I think is a pretty fascinating little company (http://www.amobee.com/) and could develop into something really sizable down the road as mobile continues to be such an enormous theme.
As for Amobee, I think this article is a particularly interesting read - "Why Mobile Operators Are Becoming Mad Men": http://techcrunch.com/2012/03/17/mobile-mad-men/ (really good discussion on the future of mobile advertising, which has been such a big thing lately, with Facebook's mobile problems and elsewhere.)
I think my interest in the mobile space is not Apple (although Apple will continue to do well), but to think about and find ideas that benefit from the soaring amount and use of smartphones. What do all these phones in the world lead to in terms of new experiences - mobile advertising, mobile payments, etc. etc. etc. In other words, what develops over the next decade in terms of new experiences from having all these mobile phones in existence. In terms of mobile payments, you're seeing Visa and all the other card companies pushing for it and looking to serve the "unbanked" (their term: "financial inclusion" - see below) , especially in developing markets. Telecom companies are realizing that they have to move beyond just offering plans and look for further ways to engage with and deliver information and experiences to customers.
See Visa's "Currency of Progress" channel on Youtube (http://www.youtube.com/user/CurrencyofProgress?feature=watch), and incredibly slick mini-documentaries, such as this one focusing on Rwanda -
and this one for Visa's "Vision for the Future":

Finally, "Making Mobile Payments a Reality around the World":

Additionally, Visa (which I don't own, but using it as an example of something that's benefiting from the change in payment tech - discussed here http://seekingalpha.com/article/857581-buy-visa-a-secular-growth-story-of-financial-technology?source=feed) is pushing for change in the US to EMV chip payment cards instead of the familiar strip. This has been done already in other parts of the world, but Visa and it's TIP (Technology Innovation Program) is going to force change - "Second, Visa is requiring that all U.S. merchant acquirers and sub-processors must be able to support chip transactions no later than April 1, 2013. Third, Visa is implementing a liability shift for domestic and cross-border counterfeit POS transactions effective Oct. 15, 2015. This means that the liability for fraudulent transactions made in retail establishments that have not installed chip card terminals will fall to merchant acquirers and merchants." (There are many articles above this, but here's one - http://blog.gemalto.com/blog/2011/08/16/the-payment-times-they-are-a-changing/)
It's kind of stunning to me that there is not an ETF dealing with all of the various aspects of mobile - smartphones, mobile payments, etc. There's an ETF for everything else.
* Graincorp - Stategic/real assets. Graincorp is an Aussie company that owns silos, owns the railroad that takes the grain to the ports and owns the port terminal operations to take the grain elsewhere in the world. The also own malting and edible oils operations. From a Bloomberg aricle: "With GrainCorp owning the silos where farmers dump their harvests, railroad cars that carry loads to east coast ports, and the elevators used to load ships, the deregulation gave the company a “virtual, natural monopoly” on the eastern seaboard, according to Justin Crosby, a policy director at the Sydney- based NSW Farmers’ Association, which represents 10,000 members, half of them grain growers." Volatile, but has a very nice dividend policy of returning between 40 and 60 per cent of net profit after tax to shareholders across the business cycle. That's a very nice dividend currently, and hopefully the dividend can improve/be more consistent as the company diversifies the business further, with the edible oils business being an entirely new addition as of a couple of weeks ago.
Funds:
Alpine Global Infrastructure - Yes, it's expensive. No, Alpine is not a great fund house. This is, however, a solid fund in the category with a very nice dividend. I continue to have a lot of investments in various infrastructure plays.
Marketfield. Really fits in with my desire for funds that are highly flexible, which I think will continue to be of importance over the next decade. I've found some of the new "long-biased" long-short funds quite interesting - Whitebox being another.
RIT Capital Partners. This is a UK investment trust chaired by Jacob Rothschild (RIT = Rothschild Investment Trust) This has not had a particularly good year, either, although I have no questions about continuing to hold, given the fund's mixture of internally managed stocks, external funds, private equity (it recently purchased a considerable stake in the Rockefeller Financial Group - http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/05/30/rockefeller-and-rothschild-banking-dynasties-join-forces/) and real assets. It does have an excellent long-term track record. Short-term, not so much, but it is a long-term holding.
EM - MSMLX, MACSX and AZENX. I had Pimco's Multi-Asset EM fund, but boy did it disappoint. I've owned DEM off and on, but a fair amount of EM fund assets went to Jardine.
Ivy Asset - Again, much discussed already.
In the holy (bleep) department - Janus Overseas. Thankfully, only a small position. Added a little bit recently because really, I'm not sure it could get much worse and I'd rather add to an EM/foreign-heavy fund that's done terribly than something that's been doing tremendously well.
Lastly, I had some mild hedges in ultrashort index positions, but have taken those off as of a few days ago.

Howdy Charles,
Bernanke bashing? Perhaps ecomomic theory bashing? For a sidenote, Paul Krugman noted yesterday, Sept. 12 ;that the "new" Fed. plan was not enough.
Do you find any problems with the continued Federal Reserve plans and policies; or do you feel these plans are needed and will be helpful going forward?
From the report: "In a similar vein, between 1924 and 1927, an easy monetary policy of low
interest rates, with the goal of stabilizing the wholesale price level while stimulating economic growth, led to excessive capital investments in industrial goods industries
and eventually, to investment speculation."
Regards,
Catch

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20120913/us-mutual-fund-flows/
Dan Winer tackles strategy and fund picks
http://investorplace.com/2012/09/audio-dan-wiener-tackles-strategy-vghcx-and-fund-picks/
new vehicle: Target bond etf
http://www.mfwire.com/article.asp?template=article&storyID=41261&wire=MFWire&wireID=2&bhcp=1
getting fatter yield w/ bank loan funds
http://www.thestreet.com/story/11702076/1/getting-fatter-yields-with-bank-loan-funds.html?cm_ven=GOOGLEN
marc faber commentary about qe3 and gold
http://247wallst.com/2012/09/14/marc-faber-warns-of-bernanke-qe-warns-on-how-to-own-gold-too-gld-sgol/
oil/middle east on fire
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/oil-futures-extend-fed-inspired-gains-2012-09-13?cid=djem_sm_dailyviews_h
investing 101: What is a cef
http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=567775
also 10 questions newbies should ask
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/09/14/10-questions-beginning-investors-dont-know-to-ask/

Hi Scott,
A spiff position is a special investment position that is put in play with some type of goal in mind. It is usually not a long term position although I have had some that I held for more than a year. I usually use an index fund or a well diverisfied fund for this although I have used some hybrid type funds to. One was IVY Asset Strategy, WASAX. Currently, I have cashed out all my spiff positions and if I continue to trim back my equity allocation, as the market continues its upward march, I'll have to trim some core positions. However, I feel it is better to book gains this year rather than next year from a tax perspective.
Also, I perfer to trim in an updraft rather than a downdraft. If I have not trimmed by the time the downdraft gets here, from my thoughts, I have waited too long. In this way I don't have to right size my portfolio when everybody is selling bacause I am already right sized.
Let me ask you this. Where do you feel corporate earings and revenue are headed over the next twelve months or so? And, if earnings and revenue are flat ... and, the market continues it upward march it is simply because investors are willing to pay more ... price to earnings ratio expansion ... for a dollars worth of earnings. As of the market close today, I compute the S&P 500 Index is selling on a trailing price to earnings ratio of about 16.2 and a forward price to earnings ratio of about 13.6. Its getting kinda of pricey form my thinking ... although I admit ... it can go higher depending on what investors are willing to pay for earnings. Should the S&P 500 Index get to a trailing price to earnings ratio of about 16.7 (1500, S&P 500 Index), I plan to scale back equities some more ... and, I'll do it again should it reach a trailing P/E Ratio of about 17.6 (1585, S&P 500 Index) in the near term.
In addition, the Index is making new fifty two week highs ... and, for it to continue to make new highs it will need more fuel (earnings and revenue).
I am making good money with my system ... and, I am happy.
Thanks for the question ... and, I hope the above response has provided the answer you sought.
Good Investing,
Skeeter

Morn'in Hiyield007,
One sided to bonds at this house, too. Our portfolio chugs along, not receiving the gains of equity sectors YTD; but we sleep okay with this. One may suspect there are some 20% portfolio gains among members here YTD. I do hope that they are able to maintain this until year end; but I remain doubtful.
We retail investors continue to reside within a most perverted monetary and economic scenario. There still remains, a lot of dirt that has been swept under the carpet, by others.
The large players continue to cause some to wonder what to chase next.....
A short summary of the current environment may be noted here:

Take care,
Catch

LINK: http://quote.morningstar.com/fund/f.aspx?pgid=hetopquote&t=mscfx

Reply to @fundalarm:
Fidelity periodically sends out email like:

Your Account Profile Confirmation contains the most current information we have on file about you and your Fidelity account. To ensure that we have the correct information, please review it carefully by going to Fidelity.com.
No action is required if the information on your Account Profile Confirmation is correct. If any of the information is missing or incorrect, you can update it at any time by doing one of the following:
- Visiting Fidelity.com/YourProfile ...

I spoke with a Fidelity rep years ago when they started doing this, and they said that they take the "suitability" requirements seriously, whatever that means.
Here's Schwab's Update Account form. Item 3 (Investment Profile) asks for the level of your investment experience, annual income, and liquid net worth. Item 4 asks for your investment objective (which may be a broad indicator of asset allocation) - capital preservation, income, growth, speculation. The form includes a disclaimer that "Schwab has no obligation to determine whether a particular transaction, strategy, or purchase or sale of a security is suitable for you." That doesn't seem to waive a possible obligation to ensure that your portfolio as a whole is suitable for your investment objectives and experience level.

Reply to @Charles: The US has dusted itself off and is going along better than anyone else (although that's still only just muddling along, with heavy discussion of another QE), but at what cost for what growth there is?
Europe is a mess and you have officials who will try to keep the status quo by any means necessary (again, it becomes a matter of at what cost, both short-term and long-term) rather than face reality. Europe will kick the can, I guess it becomes whether Germany will continue to go along with it or go their own direction.
Emerging Markets are all over the place - Brazil seems to be coming back a bit (and I still like BRAQ, although I don't own it at the moment), and while China has done terribly , other areas in Asia (Indonesia, Singapore) have fared much better. I think Singapore REITS are best performing asset in the last year - http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-04/singapore-reits-yield-world-s-best-returns-southeast-asia.html "Singapore’s $38 billion REIT market has returned an average 37 percent in 2012, twice the gains in the U.S., U.K. and Japan, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Australia, the largest REIT market in the Asia-Pacific region with $86 billion, advanced 24 percent."
There are some patches of European stocks that are going crazy - French co's Gemalto and Ingenico (related to mobile payment boom) are up something like 88% and 55%, respectively (and the latter doing far better than its US counterpart, Verifone, which is -12%). In Singapore, look at Starhub - up nearly 40% and big dividend. Tower Bersama - big Indonesian cell tower company - up 88%.
I hate to quote Cramer, but in terms of his "there's always a bull market somewhere", look at mobile, but the thing is, you can't limit yourself to the US - so many interesting plays on it in other parts of the world. Health/Supplements - look at Schiff Nutrition up 121% in the US, or a company like CHR Hansen in Denmark, up 60% or German co Symrise (although that's more flavor and fragrance) up nearly 50%. Infrastructure, too - Brookfield Infrastructure (BIP), which I've discussed on here in the past, up 42%
I'm not *as* bullish on the US as some, although I do think it's likely the best house, cleanest shirt, whatever one would like to call it, in comparison. I do think there are a lot of interesting opportunities around the world, and even though Europe has its problems, some sectors or individual companies are doing well or really well.
I'm to the point where it becomes more about what you're looking for than where you're looking for it. I still think people have to be globally diversified, whether they're looking for funds or specific plays on specific themes.

Hi Soupkitchen,
First, I agree with hank; that given near equal fund types, to gain the value of the lower ER to your benefit.
Two questions about this bond area. Do you have other bond funds that already have exposure to this area; and what is the purpose you desire to achieve with GNMA/mortgage type funds?
We hold numerous managed bond funds and do have a few that are more focused: TIPs, emerging market and high yield/income; while one bond fund is more slanted towards the mortage area.....OPBYX.
Our list are these:
---High Yield/High Income Bond funds
FAGIX Fid Capital & Income
SPHIX Fid High Income
FHIIX.LW Fed High Income
DIHYX TransAmerica HY
---Total Bond funds
FTBFX Fid Total
PTTRX Pimco Total
---Investment Grade Bonds
ACITX Amer. Cent. TIPS Bond
DGCIX Delaware Corp. Bd
FBNDX Fid Invest Grade
FINPX Fidelity TIPS Bond
OPBYX Oppenheimer Core Bond
---Global/Diversified Bonds
FSICX Fid Strategic Income
FNMIX Fid New Markets
DPFFX Delaware Diversified
LSBDX Loomis Sayles
PONDX Pimco Income fund (steroid version)
PLDDX Pimco Low Duration (domestic/foreign)
---Speciality Funds (sectors or mixed allocation)
FRIFX Fidelity Real Estate Income (bond/equity mix)
No bond expert here; but we do keep a keen eye to this area, at this time.
I'll check back tomorrow, as 6 a.m. will be here too soon.
Regards,
Catch

Howdy,
A thank you to all who post the links, start and participate in the many fine commentaries woven into the message threads.
For those who don't know; I ramble away about this and that, at least once each week.
NOTE: For those who visit MFO, this portfolio is designed for near retirement, capital preservation and to stay ahead of inflation creep. This is not a buy and hold portfolio, and is subject to change on any given day; based upon perceptions of market directions. All assets in this portfolio are in tax-sheltered accounts; and any fund distributions are reinvested in the funds. Gains or losses are computed from actual account values.
While looking around..... Fund Tools, here at MFO and Google Finance. MFO's Accipiter has graciously provided 2 wonderful tools for our use. Both tools, Falcon's Eye and Navigator may be found at the main, large, blue title bar at the top of each page here, but I will only define my use of Navigator. At "Resources", hover the mouse for a drop down menu, and select "Navigator". Accipiter has written a nice "how-to" at this page. This note regards finding funds by name title, to help sort a fund list for special fund types of interest. A good example, which will allow you to discover the value of this tool; is to type the word "unconstrained" in the "fund" box. This word example is used to find any fund that is likely an "unconstrained bond fund" by vendor name. You will discover a full list to be generated, at which point you may click upon the fund name, which will allow you to study this fund via a number of selectable sources (M*, etc.). NOTE: If one uses a very generic name, as "total"; the generated list may be too large, and can not fill to the end of the alpahbetic naming list. Also, as you begin to type a naming; you will likely find an intuitive list begin to generate; which may or may not be what you intended to search.
Google Finance: You do not need to be signed in or a registered user of any Google function to use this method.
At the search box, try "high yield" for a test of this feature. An intuitive drop list will begin to form. Ignore this list and click the "blue spyglass" to generate a list of the words searched. Upon loading your search, you will discover a "company" and a "mutual fund" header list generated. As you scroll down, the "company" list may contain various types of funds (etf's, index, etc.). Further scrolling will provide the "mutual fund" list. IN BOTH LISTS, if the list is large, you will find a "more" highlighted at the end of the list. For high yield, 100's of mutual funds are noted; but keep in mind, and not unlike "Navigator", some of these are redundant listings for various classes of a same fund. After selecting more, arrow keys appear at the list end to move through the list.
I believe all of these procedures are proper steps. If I missed something, please let me know.
The data/numbers below have been updated.
As to sector rotations below (Fidelity funds); for the past week: (Note: any given fund in any of these sectors will have varing degrees of performance based upon where the manager(s) choose to be invested and will not directly reflect upon your particular fund holdings from other vendors.)
--- U.S. equity - 2.4% through + 3.8%, week avg. = + 2.4% YTD = + 16%
--- Int'l equity - .4% through + 4.0%, week avg. = + 2.5% YTD = + 11%
--- Select eq. sectors + .9% through + 5.6%, week avg. = + 2.7% YTD = + 15%
--- U.S./Int'l bonds - 2.4% through + .6%, week avg. = - .26% YTD = + 3.2%
--- HY bonds + .2% through + 1.1%, week avg. = + .65% YTD = + 10.3%
An Excellent Overview, M* 1 Month through 5 Year, Multiple Indexes
You may consider our portfolio to be quite boring, but you may be assured that it moves and bends each and every day; from forces beyond our control. We retail investors will find many interesting investment periods to ponder, as usual, in the coming years.
I have added a few blips related to our portfolio and market observations at the below SELLs/BUYs and Portfolio Thoughts.
SELLs/BUYs THIS PAST WEEK: = NONE

Portfolio Thoughts:
Our holdings had a + .27 % move this past week. Sidenote: The average return of 200 combined Fidelity retail funds across all sectors (week avg = + 1.75%, YTD + 12%). The equity markets, while having been very happy recently, still appear a bit on edge; so our portfolio will stay in place for now. This coming week may indicate any further actions by the Fed. Reserve, relative to "stimulus". We will review one particular holding (PLDDX) based upon a Fed. plan going forward. As for Europe's grand plan to buy every sovereign bond in sight to help stablize some country bond issues; well, I am not waving a victory flag for this project just yet. Still plodding along, and we will retain the below write from previous weeks; as what we are watching still applies.
--- commodity pricing, especially the energy and base materials areas; copper and related.
--- the $US broad basket value, and in particular against the Euro and Aussie dollar (EU zone and China/Asia uncertainties).
--- price directions of U.S. treasury's, German bunds, U.K. gilts, Japanese bonds; and continued monitoring of Spanish/Italian bond pricing/yield.
--- what we are watching to help understand the money flows: SHY, IEF, TLT, TIP, STPZ, LTPZ, LQD, EMB, HYG, IWM, IYT & VWO; all of which offer insights reflected from the big traders as to the quality/risk, or lack of quality/risk; in various bond sectors. These areas may also reflect towards directions of various equity sectors; as if some bond types get the cold shoulder, so will some equity areas, regardless of perceived quality or value.
The Funds Boat is at anchor, riding in the small waves, watching the weather and behind the breakwater barrier. To the high praise of MFO and the members, it is very difficult to find a topic to note here that has not been placed into the discussion boards. Excellence, as usual.
I have retained the following links for those who may choose to do their own holdings comparison against the fund types noted.
The first two links to Bloomberg are for their list of balanced/flexible funds; although I don't always agree with the placement of fund styles in their categories.
Bloomberg Balanced
Bloomberg Flexible
These next two links are for conservative and moderate fund leaders YTD, per MSN.
Conservative Allocation
Moderate Allocation
A reflection upon the links above. We attempt to establish a "benchmark" for our portfolio to help us "see" how our funds are performing. Aside from viewing many funds within the balanced/flexible funds rankings (the above links), a quick and dirty group of 5 funds (below) we watch for psuedo benchmarking are the following:
***Note: these week/YTD's per M*
VWINX .... + .2% week, YTD = + 8.56%
PRPFX .... + 2.05% week, YTD = + 7.01%
SIRRX ..... + .13 % week, YTD = + 5.29%
TRRFX .... + 1.24% week, YTD = + 9.39%
VTENX ... + .95% week, YTD = + 8.56%
Such are the numerous battles with investments attempting to capture a decent return and minimize the risk.
We live and invest in interesting times, eh? Hey, I probably forgot something; and hopefully the words make some sense. Comments and questions always welcomed.
Good fortune to you, yours and the investments.
Take care,
Catch
---Below is what M* x-ray has attempted to sort for our portfolio, as of June 1, 2012---
From what I find, M* has a difficult time sorting out the holdings with bond funds.
U.S./Foreign Stocks 1.9%
Bonds 93.9% ***
Other 4.2%
Not Classified 0.00%
Avg yield = 3.72%
Avg expense = .55%
***about 18% of the bond total are high yield category (equity related cousins)
---This % listing is kinda generic, by fund "name"; which doesn't always imply the holdings, eh?
-Investment grade bond funds 28.2%
-Diversified bond funds 22.4%
-HY/HI bond funds 14.5%
-Total bond funds 32.4%
-Foreign EM/debt bond funds .6%
-U.S./Int'l equity/speciality funds 1.9%
This is our current list: (NOTE: I have added a speciality grouping below for a few of fund types)
---High Yield/High Income Bond funds
FAGIX Fid Capital & Income
SPHIX Fid High Income
FHIIX.LW Fed High Income
DIHYX TransAmerica HY
---Total Bond funds
FTBFX Fid Total
PTTRX Pimco Total
---Investment Grade Bonds
ACITX Amer. Cent. TIPS Bond
DGCIX Delaware Corp. Bd
FBNDX Fid Invest Grade
FINPX Fidelity TIPS Bond
OPBYX Oppenheimer Core Bond
---Global/Diversified Bonds
FSICX Fid Strategic Income
FNMIX Fid New Markets
DPFFX Delaware Diversified
LSBDX Loomis Sayles
PONDX Pimco Income fund (steroid version)
PLDDX Pimco Low Duration (domestic/foreign)
---Speciality Funds (sectors or mixed allocation)
FRIFX Fidelity Real Estate Income (bond/equity mix)
---Equity-Domestic/Foreign
NONE outright, with the exception of equities held inside of some of the above funds.

I would hate to think how much smaller my capital (aka retirement nest egg) would be had I adhered to this ridiculous maxim over the past 25 years+.

Wintergreen (WGRNX) qualifies as a "new fund"? Uhhh ... 2005? $1.6 billion in assets. If Morningstar's database is to be believed, there are 4465 newer funds.
Some of the funds in the essay were profiled here some while ago (Grandeur Peak Global, RiverPark Long/Short). Two of the others (GoodHaven -what's up with this insistence on jamming words together but maintaining the capital letter in the middle? chip attributes it to some arcane programming convention -- and RiverPark Large Growth) strike me as perfectly serviceable and likely to be strong long-term performers but not ones defining any new or distinctive niche.
As ever,
David

AQR has one current risk balanced fund (AQRIX) and two more on the way (Medium Volatility - MV and High Volatility - HV). They have different levels of annualized targeted volatility:
AQRIX: 10%
MV: 10%
HV: 15%
I am curious if there are any insights about what is the optimal level of targeted volatility for someone who plans to hold the fund for a long time and is interested in capital appreciation rather than current income? To what extent does the risk associated with the higher volatility strategy lead to higher returns? If so, does the expected return rise proportionately as targeted volatility increase?
Thanks in advance!
BWG

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-pimcos-gross-beats-the-average-bond-fund-2012-09-04?reflink=MW_news_stmp
risks in MM
http://www.azcentral.com/business/articles/20120903vanguard-founder-bogle-risks-money-markets.html
RBC Wealth Management
Michael D. Ruccio, AAMS
Senior Vice President -Financial Advisor
25 Hanover Road
Florham Park, NJ 07932-1407
(p) (866) 248-0096
(f) (973) 966-0309
[email protected]
michaelruccio.com
Market Week: September 4, 2012
The Markets
With the exception of the small caps of the Russell 2000, equities continued to slump on low trading volumes. The S&P 500 remained tantalizingly close to its year-to-date high, and the Dow and Nasdaq were only a little over 1% away from hitting theirs. Meanwhile, the Global Dow benefitted from last month's promises that the euro would be preserved at all costs. Oil and gold ended the month higher, helped by a somewhat weaker dollar.
Market/Index 2011 Close Prior Week As of 8/31 Week Change YTD Change
DJIA 12217.56 13157.97 13090.76 -.51% 7.15%
Nasdaq 2605.15 3069.79 3066.96 -.09% 17.73%
S&P 500 1257.60 1411.13 1406.57 -.32% 11.85%
Russell 2000 740.92 809.18 812.09 .36% 9.61%
Global Dow 1801.60 1885.92 1869.92 -.85% 3.79%
Fed. Funds .25% .25% .25% 0 bps 0 bps
10-year Treasuries 1.89% 1.68% 1.57% -11 bps -32 bps
Equities data reflect price changes, not total return.
Last Week's Headlines
The U.S. economy grew at an annual rate of 1.7% in the second quarter rather than the 1.5% previously estimated by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. That's slightly higher than previously thought, but also slightly lower than Q1's 2%. Corporate after-tax profits were up 1.1% from the previous quarter, and up 3.3% from a year ago.
Consumer spending, which accounts for 70% of the U.S. economy, was up 0.4% in July after falling in June and being flat in May. According to the Commerce Department, it was the biggest increase since February. Unfortunately, the spending increase outpaced gains in income, which rose 0.3% for the third consecutive month. As a result, the savings rate edged downward to 4.2% of income after reaching a year-long high the month before.
June was the second straight month of higher sales prices for new homes; the 2.3% gain in the S&P/Case-Shiller 20-city index, which followed a similar gain in May, left it 6% higher than the recent low seen in March. Though the index is still more than 30% from its 2006 peak, all 20 cities in the index saw increases, which ranged from Charlotte's +1% to Detroit's +6%. Even better, the year-over-year change in the index (+0.5%) was positive for the first time in almost two years.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke defended the Fed's quantitative easing measures and said the Fed is ready to do more if needed. However, he stopped short of promising to supply additional measures at the Federal Open Market Committee's September 13 meeting.
Eye on the Week Ahead
Light summer trading volumes will likely increase as traders begin to position themselves for the end of the quarter. Unemployment data will likely get extra attention because its release date is so close to the next FOMC meeting, and the European Central Bank's September 6 action on interest rates could be of interest.
Key dates and data releases: U.S. manufacturing sector, construction spending (9/4); labor productivity/costs (9/5); U.S. services sector, European Central Bank meeting (9/6); unemployment/payrolls (9/7).

Reply to @scott: Thanks scott, as always. I just downloaded "The Quants" on Audible. Here is summary for others:

Publisher's Summary
In March 2006, the world's richest men sipped champagne in an opulent New York hotel. They were preparing to compete in a poker tournament with ­million-dollar stakes. At the card table that night was Peter Muller, who managed a fabulously successful hedge fund called PDT. With him was Ken Griffin, who was the tough-as-nails head of Citadel Investment Group. There, too, were Cliff Asness, the sharp-tongued, mercurial founder of the hedge fund AQR Capital Management, and Boaz Weinstein, chess "life master" and king of the credit-default swap.
Muller, Griffin, Asness, and Weinstein were among the best and brightest of a new breed, the quants. Over the past 20 years, this species of math whiz had usurped the testosterone-fueled, kill-or-be-killed risk takers who'd long been the alpha males of the world's largest casino. The quants believed that a cocktail of differential calculus, quantum physics, and advanced geometry held the key to reaping riches from the financial markets. And they helped create a digitized money-trading machine that could shift billions around the globe with the click of a mouse. Few realized that night, though, that in creating this extraordinary system, men like Muller, Griffin, Asness, and Weinstein had sown the seeds for history's greatest financial disaster.
©2010 Scott Patterson, Random House