The main issue with this asset class when dealing with individual MLPs are the K-1 tax forms that are generated. This does not occur with the funds.
Personally, I owned Salient MLP Energy and Infrastructure, which I think is an excellent and unique MLP closed-end fund (SMF), which can hedge. However, it ran up and I took profit; I think people really piled into this asset class because of the yields and they are overbought. I own BIP (Brookfield Infrastructure) and that's the only single MLP I currently own, as for me that's a unique and long-term holding. I also own TTO (Tortoise Capital), which is a private equity MLP fund that is transitioning to be an infrastructure REIT, and I'm in that to a mild degree as I'm interested in the infrastructure REIT it will eventually transition towards.
I do think MLPs are interesting longer-term, but as a smaller, supporting player investment. In the short-term, I think interest in the asset class is a little overdone, but seems to be calming down since the start of the year.
This is definitely not a conservative asset class, as well - while MLPs provide a big yield, they also went down quite a lot in 2008.

I have discovered that I can buy Steelpath MLPDX.lw with the load waived through Vanguard which seemed an attractive option until I reviewed the Tax Analysis on M* and found the comparison to AMLP and AMJ for example was not so compelling regardless of the 7.38% current yield. In my research there is also mention of paying capital gains on the accrued tax liability when selling the fund which I am not sure how to quantify (there is an estimated 17.05% allowance made in the expense ratio for deferred taxes shown in the Prospectus if realised). Yes, the yield is attractive but are there dangers lurking over and above the general risks associated with this asset class?
I know there have been prior discussions on MLP's but would be grateful for any thoughts on this particular subject. As my first post please take it easy on me until I get up to speed.

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/time-mutual-funds-join-21st-110000412.html

I "hear" you, Scott. Over time, I'll be deliberately working to dilute that heavy concentration in my top three. But at the moment, I don't want to break it up just to break it up. I WANT that PREMX monthly dividend to GROW. I'm reinvesting ALL dividends and cap. gains in ALL holdings. MAPIX, MAINX and DODIX give quarterly payouts. MACSX is twice per year. MSCFX = annually.

Reply to @David_Snowball: Thank you for your comments, David - they are always appreciated. There is the Global Hedge fund holdings ETF, which you mentioned, but there is also an ETF coming called Global X Listed Hedge Funds ETF (The fund holds securities and GDRs of publicly listed hedge funds globally.) This would appear to be a fund of listed hedge funds/hedge fund feeder funds, such as the ones in Europe.
If I'm reading that right, my curiosity is how they're going to fill a fund with maybe a handful of positions at most, unless what qualifies as a "listed hedge fund" (such as Greenlight Reinsurance and its roundabout connection to David Einhorn's Greenlight Capital) covers a wide variety of things.
GTAA manager Meb Faber (who wrote a chapter in his book on these funds) also apparently addressed this fund from Global X the other day:
http://www.mebanefaber.com/2012/03/27/13f-listed-hedge-funds-etfs-on-the-way - and apparently he had tried (and scrapped) his attempt to offer a fund-of-funds ETN for these publicly listed hedge funds in 2008 before the market tumble. His comments on the fund of hedge fund positions is also interesting.

The S&P 400 Mid-Cap Index was up today. I have always recommended the 400 over the S&P 500 long-term. I have about 25% of my capital appreciation portfolio in IJH.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/MID:IND

Reply to @catch22:
Thanks Catch...this could be one reason:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-23/barrick-s-regent-says-gold-miners-losing-capital-to-etfs.html
Eric Sprout has his thoughts too (from an article either you or Scott linked):
"Looking back at the trading data on February 29th, the sell-off in gold and silver appears to have been an exclusively paper-market affair. We were surprised, for example, to note that between the hours of 10:30 am and 11:30 am, the volume of the COMEX front month silver futures contracts equaled the paper equivalent of 173 million ounces of physical silver. Keep in mind that the world only produces 730 million ounces of physical silver PER YEAR. The problem from a pricing standpoint is the simple fact that the parties who were on the selling side of those 173 million paper ounces couldn't possibly have had the physical silver to back-up their sell orders. And the way the futures markets are designed, they don't have to. But if that's the case, how can the silver price be smashed by sell orders that don't involve any real physical?"
Source:
http://sprott.com/markets-at-a-glance/the-[recovery]-has-no-clothes/

Reply to @BobC:
Thanks for the reply. Short of re-balancing when one of my funds has outsized periodic gains or losses I try to dig a little deeper to get a handle on investments that lag for long periods of time.
USAGX is one that has me scratching my head. With gold anywhere above $1100 (the cost of mining) I would think there would be incredible profits for the mining companies. There must be something at work here that I am just not getting.
Here's a price chart of GDX (Miners) vs GLD (Metal) from July 2009 to Apr 2011:

Here's the same 2 year time frame back from today. You can see the two separate in May of 2011:

Finally this one year chart shows the separation clearly. The price ratio at between the two shares at the beginning of this chart (last year) was ($146.74:$62.63) or (2.34:1) today the price ratio is ($162.94:$50.39) or (3.23:1)

I'm thinking either gold drops in price (continued weaken currencies probably won't allow this) or miners revert upwards.

FYI: Very ambitious goal, beating the S&P 500;
Regards,
Ted
http://www.loomissayles.com/Internet/InternetData.nsf/0/618FAE38F0B01A04852579D100478172/$FILE/Capital-Income-Fund-Launch-PR.pdf

I own one CEF - First Trust Strategic High Income 2 (FHY). It trades at a very small premium. It returns about 9% which is virtually all income (i.e. no return of capital, except for a very tiny amount last September.) It invest mostly in corporate bonds. It's also given me about one percent capital appreciation over and above the income distribution since I acquired it 2 months ago.

Reply to @catch22: Hi catch, tried timing market last yr, but only a small portion of my portfolio, got no where so I got 'p*ssed off' and bought more bonds.
So I think it's maybe best just to have a couch portfolio and just watch it over the next 20s+ yrs, then when you are about to retire put everything into bonds. Remember fundamentals? He had a very robust portfolio with constant variables/frequent tradings and much careful analysis. I've compared his portfolio when he was constantly posting few yrs back, guess what? his portfolio has similiar yearly returns of index target funds 2030 @ 3 yrs. I think you are right, just how much you want to gains are how much you can stand and how much maalox you need at night. And if you do plays with all the numbers, you are more likely to belong to the 15% of the guy that keep loosing [since about 84% of funds loose to index over time].
regards

Thanks Mark. As it happens, I use TIBIX, DLTNX AND RNDLX as well. I’m transitioning to an income focus from a strict capital appreciation approach. It sounds like you’re a few years ahead of me. RNDLX is interesting in that it has a closed end fund component that adds an element not found in open end funds. Thanks again for your thoughts.
From a “bucket” perspective, it may still be a good idea to set aside some long term I’m-not’-going-to –touch-this-money and allow it to just grow in value. But as one really begins to think about retirement, the immediate thought is “how do I replace the paycheck I won’t be getting”. That really snaps the income focus into view.

I agree with the "buckets, schmukets" thought. Why make things so complicated? We use a very simple approach. Any dollars you might need from your portfolio over the next 3-5 years should be in cash, CDs or short-term bonds. In good years, we capture gains from our other investments (stock, balanced, longer-term bonds) and use those for cash flow. In down years, the set-aside dollars are used so that sales in down markets are not necessary. This is a very easy strategy to implement. No buckets of separate accounts required.
The other part of this equation is maximizing tax strategy. In other words, don't leave money on the table that could fill up lower tax brackets. For example, if you still have room in your 15% taxable income, consider using IRA (taxable) accounts to max out the bracket (especially the 10% bracket!). Conversely, if your income looks like it could push you above the 25% bracket, you might want to emphasize income from your non-taxable accounts. Manipulating tax brackets is a smart way to maximize your portfolio strategy.

David's comment "look carefully before you leap" should be applied to almost ALL funds. Every manager/management team has periods of under-performance, assuming they do not have authority in the fund prospectus to become chameleons. Investors need to understand when those periods might be for the funds in which they are invested, and either be prepared to move in and out of funds or create enough diversification in their portfolios to offset these time periods. Sometimes correlation is almost all the same (remember 2008-09).
We have used PRPFX for a long time as a core holding in client accounts. Yes, Mr. Cuggino has not had to operate in periods of rising interest rates. But I would be very hesitant to suggest he is incapable of structuring the fund's bond holdings to reduce interest rate exposure. He has already shortened duration over the last few months. And gold, adjusted for inflation, is still below its 1980 price level. Does that mean $2,000 per ounce is around the corner? No, but it tells us that it could have a long ways to go, especially given all the uncertainties in the world, and the fact that many central banks (especially China) are selling dollars and buying gold.
As with any fund that has done well over the last 5-10 years, investors would be wise to capture gains (not get out of these funds, but at least reduce exposure to original investment dollars). That, in itself, could help to reduce potential downside risk.

@Zenergy - I did not. During my mutual fund phase I was looking for capital appreciation and more importantly momentum in the funds I chose. The funds that I hold today that do provide an income stream are TIBIX, DLTNX. RNDLX and HIX. I suppose one could add MAPIX into that mix but it it not as steady or consistent as the others.

Hi Prinx
For expenses, it’s tough to beat Vanguard HY – VWEHX. In addition, MWHYX (Met West HY) is well managed and pays a nice yield. If you want a little stock with your high yield, then FAGIX (Fidelity Capital & Income) is a good choice. AllianceBernstein High Income Advisor, AGDYX, has a little more global reach and has had nice returns and yield.
Are you looking strictly for a high yield bond fund or income? If income, take a look at Allianz Income & Growth, AZNDX. It’s classified as a moderate allocation fund, but pays a very nice distribution with the holdings almost equally divided among equity, bonds and convertible securities. Don’t go by the stated yield at web sites, but take a look at the distribution itself.
I think you have some time before rates rise in any meaningful way, but depending on what you are looking for, these are a few options to explore. Good luck.

We have sold all of our TIP holdings, which is where almost all of our inflation bond dollars were. We have a few dollars at PIMCO and Vanguard in their funds and will sell them this week, too. With yields already at negative levels or close to negative levels, there is no incentive to owning tips. And long-term U.S. treasury bonds are for suckers only.
For dividend income, we like SDY, TIBIX, PAUDX, PFF, WASIX, EM bonds.
FWIW, Gross is really scrambling to retain dollars, at least that is how it appears. The big gains they made on derivatives appear to be history, so the fund is scrambling to find a magic bullet, which may not exist. In the meantime, Arnott looks to have as good a handle on things as anyone. We like what we see with PAUDX, and the dividend is pretty attractive, too.

Reply to @WxByHart:
You asked: "And how do I compare all of the fees within the annuity, including the hidden ones, versus a self directed IRA?"
Request from your agent the contract you would have to sign, including all related documents and to use a yellow highlighter to mark all fees to be incurred by you on an annual basis. The fees list would be totally inclusive as noted by BobC in his reply. Request the agent to list and total all fees and include in the list the surrender charges going out for 8 years or whatever the period may be. Request the agent to sign the document for your records and request the document to be notarized (likely available within the office) at the time of signing.
Or for yourself, have the agent do all of the highlighting so that you are aware of the full, total fees. Have someone else qualified to review this type of contract and offer their opinion of fees and the value of the investment to you. Place the document under your pillow and sleep upon this proposed decision for as long as needed.
Our retirement funds accts., which include Trad/Roth IRA's has an average expense of .73%..........period. The only other expense one might find with a self-directed IRA is an annual dollar fee of $30 or so; if the total acct value is less the $30K or whatever value is set by the vendor. Your total will exceed this.
Your main decision appears to revolve between wanting an annuity with some future insurance payout versus an IRA. Obviously, only you can make this decision; based upon all other variables and assets going into your retirement years.
Our list:
FAGIX Fid Capital & Income
SPHIX Fid High Income
FHIIX Fed High Income
DIHYX TransAmerica HY
---Total Bond funds
FTBFX Fid Total
PTTRX Pimco Total
---Investment Grade Bonds
APOIX 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
TEGBX Templeton Global (load waived)
LSBDX Loomis Sayles
---Speciality Funds (sectors or mixed allocation)
FRIFX Fidelity Real Estate Income (bond/equity mix)
FDLSX Fidelity Select Leisure
FSAGX Fidelity Select Precious Metals
RNCOX RiverNorth Core Opportunity (bond/equity)

Morningstar itself lists a 2% redemption fee AND a "deferred load" of 2%. Look at FPA Capital page on M*. Front Load and 2% redemption fee BUT no deferred load.
I'm happy if you are saying there is no deferred load on FPACX and FPIVX, but then M* stinks - which I know it does for various other reasons. I don't see M* listing deferred load on top of other redemption fees or confusing the two for other funds with redemption fee.
Again, redemption fee is different than deferred load. It is regarding deferred load that I'm concerned. Even in the prospectus, it says "deferred load".

From BobC: "Remember that all managers will have periods of under-performance. When that occurs, use it as a buying opportunity if you are underweighted. And, just like stock funds, don't be hesitant to capture significant gains as they accumulate."
...........Quite. I've simply been "sitting" on my PREMX shares and letting the monthly dividends build.