From the WSJ
"Stock pickers missed out on the first-quarter rally, failing to extend their recent winning streak.
Only one in three actively managed large-cap mutual funds beat their benchmarks in the first three months of the year, the worst performance since the three-month period ended December 2020, according to data from Bank of America Global Research.
That marked a shift from last year when 57% of large-cap mutual funds raced ahead of their benchmarks in a market rocked by red-hot inflation, rising interest rates and worries over a potential recession. More funds beat their benchmarks in 2022 than in other any year since 2007, when 71% of them did so, according to data compiled by Goldman Sachs Group Inc."
Link

James Anderson chaired Baillie Gifford's international growth portfolio construction group
in addition to managing Vanguard International Growth and two other U.S. mutual funds.
He was instrumental in developing/implementing the firm's successful global growth investing strategy.
However, Baillie Gifford (BG) has a deep bench and Mr. Anderson's succession was well-planned.
Thomas Coutts (joined BG in 1999) has managed the fund alongside Anderson since 2016.
Lawrence Burns (joined BG in 2009) was added as a fund manager in 2020.

I've been planning to liquidate our holding in Matthews Pacific Tiger (MAPTX) and was going to put that money into Artisan International Value (ARTKX), but have discovered it is closed to new investors; bummer!
What alternatives would you suggest? My priorities:
1. Long-term, sustained outperformance versus a relevant benchmark
2. stable management
3. low fees (expense ratio); no-load
4. low turnover
5. available from our Vanguard brokerage account
6. invests primarily overseas; we already have plenty of US-based investments
Thanks for any suggestions!
Randy

Have you considered Vanguard International Growth?
1. Top-decile 10 Yr and 15 Yr fund category returns (period ending 03-31-23)
2. Schroder Investment Management advised since 1981; Baillie Gifford advised since 2003
3. Expense Ratio: VWILX - 0.34% ($50K min.); VWIGX - 0.45% ($3K min.)
4. Turnover: 2019 - 13%; 2020 - 20%; 2021 - 25%; 2022 - 15%
5. Available via Vanguard brokerage
6. 87% foreign; 13% U.S. (as of 01-31-23)
Vanguard International Growth is a volatile fund with a standard deviation of 25.16 as of 03-31-23.
M* classifies the fund as high risk relative to the Foreign Large Growth fund category.
VWILX performance in 2022 was terrible - it declined 30.79%.

Excerpted from a CityWire article published on 04/07/2023.
"James Velissaris, the founder, former CIO and lead portfolio manager of Infinity Q Capital Management, was sentenced to 15 years in prison and ordered to pay an unspecified amount of restitution by US District Judge Denise Cote on Friday afternoon in Manhattan."
"Velissaris, 38, of Atlanta, pleaded guilty in November 2022 to one count of securities fraud in a deal with federal prosecutors in the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York that dropped several other felony charges and required him to forfeit $22m. The charges came about as a result of his role in a $1bn fund overvaluation scheme, with federal officials publicly levying their accusations in early 2022."
Link (paywall)
I'm glad that Mr. Velissaris received a lengthy prison sentence for the serious crimes he committed.
Hopefully, this case will deter others in the financial industry from engaging in fraudulent schemes.

Thanks Yogi. Can’t confirm - but I get the impression Forsyth enjoys time away from that duty. It’s a demanding role. Must take a toll on one over time.
PS - The (alleged) comments Serwer attributes to NYC real estate magnates comparing their professional lives today as existing inside a “fishbowl” or “goat rodeo” are hilarious. :).
And then there’s Jack Hough: “My car seems to be beating the stock market.” - LOL
Hough’s whole article is a riot. Worth the price of the publication alone … Well, also somber if you’re in the market for a new car. New car prices are up 21% since September 2020. (Used car prices even more.) “Sub-$20,000 models” are “nearly extinct” - with those priced at under $25,000 “next in line” for extinction.
Agree with others - it’s an excellent article on International Funds by @LewisBraham. Very extensive and comprehensive look at opportunities in various corners of the international markets and the related trade-offs.

Interesting “Up & Down Wall Street” column this week written by Andy Serwer (whom I can’t recall ever reading before). Writes with a nice flair.
Extended excerpt: “To my mind, Dimon is essentially making the point that no amount of regulation can ever anticipate or mitigate humankind's ability to make mistakes and get into trouble—intentionally or not. And that got me thinking about John Maynard Keynes and his notion of animal spirits:
‘Most, probably, of our decisions to do something positive, the full consequences of which will be drawn out over many days to come, can only be taken as a result of animal spirits—of a spontaneous urge to action rather than inaction, and not as the outcome of a weighted average of quantitative benefits multiplied by quantitative probabilities.’
In other words, we human beings act irrationally, which makes for bursts of creativity in the arts and, yes, even on Wall Street, but inevitably precipitates overexuberance in capital markets and bank runs. It also means that there is probably some limit on the marginal utility of incremental units of regulation, I suppose.” *
-
Put in that context, the recent bank run has the scent of the great toilet paper run of only a few years ago. Both an outgrowth of human irrationality. Now, which inflicted more hardship?
*Source: Barron’s April 9, 2023 (Print Edition)

I had a hard time finding one "do eveything fund" Most focus on futures or energy, or follow a broad index, usually overweight energy.
I looked at most of the Agriculture ETFs and decided that MOO was best diversified stock focused Agriculture ETF. There are many ETFs that buy ag futures but I use DBA.
XME has 41% steel, 17% Coal 13% Gold 10% diversified mining 9% aluminum 5% Silver and 5% Copper
RTM is equal weight Basic Materials but has some consumer stocks as well
GRHAX focuses on Natural resources but depending on the manger's outlook can become heavily invested in certain sectors. Currently 65% in energy mostly oil and gas. I don't think it is available at Fido. There I have some of wife's money in DNLAX, although the portfolio managers changed in 2020. They try to predict what commodity/ economic cycle is coming up an weight accordingly.
I don't think this is exactly what you are looking for, but I hope it helps.

April 7, 2023:

Banks, private capital, real estate. Summers on collecting arrears from the wealthy.

Started a position in OMFL. No good reason other than it has beaten the S&P500 for total return over the last 5 years.

Interesting...OMFL has beaten the S&P 500 in each 1 of those 5 calendar years.

Year OMFL S&P 500
2018 -2.57% -4.52%
2019 35.58% 31.33%
2020 20.96% 18.25%
2021 28.96% 28.53%
2022 -13.97% -18.23%
2023 (YTD) 8.78% 7.46%

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1511699/000089418923002492/aquixsupplement-liquidation.htm
(I can see the one liners with this one)
97 1 aquixsupplement-liquidation.htm 497
Ecofin Sustainable Water Fund
Supplement dated April 6, 2023 to the Fund’s
Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”),
each dated March 31, 2023, as amended
Based upon a recommendation by Tortoise Capital Advisors, L.L.C. (the “Adviser”), the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of Managed Portfolio Series (the “Trust”) has approved a plan of liquidation for the Ecofin Sustainable Water Fund (the “Fund”), a series of the Trust, pursuant to which the Fund will be liquidated on or around April 21, 2023 (the “Liquidation” or the “Liquidation Date”). The Adviser has determined that the Fund has limited prospects for meaningful growth. As a result, the Adviser and the Board believe that the Liquidation of the Fund is in the best interests of its shareholders.
In anticipation of the Liquidation, effective as of the close of trading on the New York Stock Exchange (“close of business”) on April 11, 2023, the Fund is closed to new investments. In addition, effective immediately, the Adviser may begin an orderly transition of the Fund’s portfolio securities to cash and cash equivalents and the Fund will cease investing its assets in accordance with its investment objective and policies.
Shareholders may voluntarily redeem shares of the Fund, as described in the Fund’s Prospectus, before the Liquidation Date. Shareholders remaining in the Fund until the Liquidation Date may bear increased transaction fees in connection with the disposition of the Fund’s portfolio holdings. If the Fund has not received your redemption request or other instruction prior to the close of business on April 21, 2023, your shares will be automatically redeemed on the Liquidation Date.
Prior to the Liquidation Date, the Fund may declare one or more dividends to all holders of record as of a date or dates to be determined consisting of any undistributed income and capital gains (net of available capital loss carryovers) of the Fund.
Prior notice of any such dividends will be posted to the following website: https://etp.ecofininvest.com.
If you take no action prior to the Liquidation Date, your shares will be automatically redeemed on the Liquidation Date. Remaining shareholders as of the Liquidation Date will receive a liquidating distribution in an amount equal to the net asset value of their Fund shares, less any required withholding. For shareholders that hold their shares in a taxable account, the redemption of Fund shares will generally be treated as any other redemption of shares (i.e., a sale that may result in a gain or loss for federal income tax purposes).
If you hold your shares in an individual retirement account (an “IRA”), you have 60 days from the date you receive your proceeds to reinvest or “rollover” your proceeds into another IRA and maintain their tax-deferred status. You must notify the Fund’s transfer agent at 855-TCA-FUND (855-822-3863) prior to April 21, 2023 of your intent to rollover your IRA account to avoid withholding deductions from your proceeds.
If the redeemed shares are held in a qualified retirement account such as an IRA, the redemption proceeds may not be subject to current income taxation. You should consult with your tax advisor on the consequences of this redemption to you. Liquidation proceeds will be issued to all shareholders of record as of the close of business on the Liquidation Date.
Please retain this supplement for future reference.

@yogibearbull -
I don’t dispute your historical data on gold or gold miners. (Silver actually peaked sometime in the 70s at double where it is today.) However, in the context of the broader markets, gold’s surge in 2020 wasn’t as remarkable / noteworthy as today, The prior year, 2019, the S&P 500 had risen 29%. And in 2020 it gained another 16%. As your investor sentiment on the stock market shows predominately bearish sentiment today, it might be enlightening to look at sentiment numbers during 2020. Suspect they were higher.
So I believe gold’s advance back then was somewhat overshadowed by the big gains in equities and bullish sentiment among investors. That is far from the case today following a series of rapid Fed rate hikes coupled with a poor prior year (2022) for both stocks and bonds.

Both gold-miners (majors GDX, majors/minors GDXJ) and gold bullion (GLD, lower ER IAU) peaked in July 2020; another attempt was in early-2022.
Now, gold is approaching those highs, but gold-miners are still far from those highs. Chart shows GDX and GLD (bottom panel) for 1-yr (default) - can change timeframes.
https://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=GDX&p=D&yr=1&mn=0&dy=0&id=p53247840045

I don't get fascination in yield for its own sake. Why would one pay (in the form of negative total return) just to get some of one's own money back as divs?
Lifetime total return of TSLY (using Yahoo's adjusted NAV figures) -1.6%
Nov 23 - Apr 3, 16.45/16.72 - 1 = -0.0161 = -1.6%
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/TSLY/history?p=TSLY
Lifetime total return of OARK (using Yahoo's adjusted NAV figures) -5.1%
Nov 25 - Apr 3, 14.46 / 17.35 - 1 = -0.0513 = -5.1%
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/OARK/history?p=OARK
A very quick glance at OARK suggests it is using a strategy similar to principal protected (structured) notes, but with additional risks.
It clearly isn't achieving its stated goal of providing long exposure to ARKK via derivatives while generating income with covered calls. ARKK is up about 11% Nov 25 - Apr 3 (36.00 to 39.58, price movement). OARK not only failed to capture any part of this gain, it lost money even after generating income with "covered" calls and Treasuries.
Even YTD, OARK is up 4.57% (total return). ARKK (price) is up over 25%. (OARK's gains are capped; how much of the shortfall is explained by this cap, and how much by its strategy and/or poor execution?)
Gut feeling is that its failure to meet objectives is due in part to daily pricing as opposed to point-to-point pricing generally used by structured notes coupled with a volatile underlying security. But that's really just a superficial reaction.
Note: the subject line has a typo: TSLY, not TSLS

The price cap is no longer a real cap if the 2nd richest economy needs an exception.
GDP as a whole is a meaningless number. GDP per capita is the meaningful number.
Is that Liechtenstein (World Bank 2020 data) or Ireland (Visual Capitalist, 2023), or some other 2nd richest economy importing Russian oil?
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/worlds-richest-countries-2023-gdp-per-capita/
When it comes to impact of sanctions, what matters is the absolute amount of the "leak", not whether the importer has a rich economy, either per capita or on an absolute basis. As the WSJ reported, "Russia exports millions of barrels of oil a day, making Japan’s purchases a minuscule share of total Russian output." At least if we're talking about Japan's imports.
But it makes for an eye-catching headline.

Good article from Schwab that Tom Mandell linked
https://www.schwab.com/learn/story/why-go-long-when-short-term-bonds-yield-more
Recommends intermediate bonds
Authers at Bloomberg has a very interesting article pointing out that the hopes that bank crisis will precipitate Fed easing also seem to require recession. Not good for earnings!
He thinks the potential for that scenario is overdone, and the Fed could continue to raise rates to control inflation while continuing QT.
"In the short term, the risks are that markets will continue to shift away from the position of the last few weeks, and perhaps begin to put some credence in the Fed’s claim that it won’t be cutting rates this year. A barrage of data that is about to hit for the beginning of the month should enlighten us further. While the banks’ crisis might not hurt economic activity that much, tighter money can be expected to have a big effect, with a lag. The most important place to look for that could be the corporate sector.
As Torsten Slok, chief US economist of Apollo Management, shows in this chart, capital expenditures (capex) have started falling. That can be expected to have a negative multiplier effect over time, which would be good for defeating inflation, but not so great for economic activity, or corporate revenues and profits:
And on the subject of profits, the latest National Income Profit Accounts data, compiled as part of the process of calculating gross domestic product, came out last week. This is a measure of corporate profits that eschews the smoothing that goes with the GAAP accounting used to publish companies’ accounts. They’re typically published, as below, with adjustments both for inventory valuation (IVA) and capital consumption (CCAdj). Over time, NIPA profits and S&P 500 GAAP profits do tend to move roughly together, because there are limits to the creative accounting that companies can do. But in the short term they can differ. It’s therefore not a great sign that NIPA profits took a dip in the final quarter of last year:
There are reasons for concern about the remaining three quarters of this year, many of which are not yet reflected in market pricing. For now, however, it looks as though the damage done by the banks has been overpriced. Absent big surprises in the new data — or fresh external shocks like the Opec+ agreement to limit oil production that spurred a rise of 8% for Brent crude at the Asian opening — it’s best to brace in the near term for bond yields to rise from where they are now, while more speculative investments give up ground. "

My old ( 30 years) retirement account at VOYA has ITCSX ( TPR Capital Appreciation Pt SVC) open and available at least to existing accounts.
I don't have a lot of money in this account, but might add to ITCSX at next market swoon.
Still law of big numbers makes his previous outperformance harder to continue

Good point - PRWCX is closed to most new investors.
The fund is closed to new accounts other than investors whose accounts meet any of the following criteria:
• Participants in an employer-sponsored retirement plan where the fund already serves as an investment option;
• Direct rollovers from an employer-sponsored retirement plan to a new T. Rowe Price IRA;
• Accounts held directly with T. Rowe Price that qualify through participation in certain T. Rowe Price programs;
• T. Rowe Price multi-asset products (such as funds-of-funds);
• Discretionary accounts managed by T. Rowe Price or one of its affiliates;
• Wrap, asset allocation, and other advisory programs, if permitted by T. Rowe Price.
T. Rowe Price submitted an SEC filing (dated 03/22/2023) for Capital Appreciation Equity ETF.
David Giroux will be the portfolio manager.
The new ETF will normally invest at least 80% of its net asset in equity securities.
PRWCX normally invests at least 50% of its total assets in stocks while the remaining assets
are generally invested in corporate/government debt and bank loans.
Consequently, this ETF will not be a clone of PRWCX.
MFO Link

Mr. Braham:
Thanks for your insightful comments.
You are quite correct that nothing in life is riskless, least of all in investing.
"Riskless" is a financial term of art that can mean several things, most commonly that if these vehicles fail to deliver, which they well might, then you've got far bigger problems than your investment portfolio. In other words, financial economists use the term in the same way that a physicist might use the term "spherical cow." Trust me, the AdvisorPerspectives audience well understands these usages, and I doubt that any of them regard any human operation, investing or otherwise, as "riskless" as defined by the OED or Merriam Webster.
As long as you've got me going: Yes, my backgound is in the sciences, but I view investing as half math and half Shakespeare, and if you only master the former, the latter will surely get you. (See "Long-Term Capital Management.")
I'm also fond of pointing out that if we take the half-millennium survival of the Roman Empire as a starting point, that gives the average person about a one in six (Russian Roulette) chance of falling victim to such an event during their lifetime.
And that's before we consider that several times in the past half century mankind came withing a hair's breadth of nuclear annihilation.
Not to pile on here, but I don't write that much about the sciences, and David might tell you that I have been known to write about history.
So, just to reassure you, I don't view any investment activity, or even tying my own shoelaces, as "riskless" in the literal sense you're using it.
Take care,
William Bernstein

Great article that summarizes David Giruox’s many interviews he gave in last several years. In light of this large asset base ($47.4) fund, he manages to move and to execute very well in his portfolio in order to deliver this remarkable results over the tenure as the fund manager.
Giruox also written on a book on “Capital allocation” and is available at Amazon that describes how companies can execute successfully in their business.
https://amazon.com/Capital-Allocation-Principles-Strategies-Shareholder/dp/1264270062