THE OAKMARK SELECT FUND Report from Bill Nygren and Henry Berghoef, Portfolio Managers

THE VALUE OF A $10,000 INVESTMENT IN THE OAKMARK SELECT FUND FROM ITS INCEPTION (11/1/96) TO PRESENT (3/31/07) AS COMPARED TO THE STANDARD & POOR’S 500 INDEX3
		Average Annual Total Returns (as of 3/31/07)
	Total Return Last 3 Months*	1-year	5-year	10-year	Since Inception (11/1/96)
Oakmark Select Fund (Class I)	-2.12%	8.45%	7.09%	16.09%	17.58%
S&P 500	0.64%	11.83%	6.27%	8.20%	8.71%
Lipper Multi-Cap Value Index8	0.81%	12.23%	9.03%	9.45%	9.87%
The graph and table do not reflect the deduction of taxes that a shareholder would pay on fund distributions or the redemption of fund shares.
Expense Ratio as of 9/30/06 was 0.99%.
The performance data quoted represents past performance. The above performance information for the Fund does not reflect the imposition of a 2% redemption fee on shares held for 90 days or less to deter market timers. If reflected, the fee would reduce the performance quoted. Past performance does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value will fluctuate so that an investor’s shares, when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Current performance may be lower or higher than the performance data quoted. Average annual total return measures annualized change, while total return measures aggregate change. To obtain most recent month-end performance data, visit oakmark.com.
* Not annualized

The Oakmark Select Fund lost 2% last quarter. The S&P 500 eked out a gain of a fraction of a percent, so our small loss was also disappointing on a relative basis. With one large exception, our winners and losers largely cancelled out each other. Our top performer, up nearly 20%, was Discovery Holding. Discovery reported good financial results for 2006, driven by higher viewer ratings. Further, last month they announced a value added share repurchase transaction. (As an aside, to get the most from your HDTV, try watching Discovery’s new “Planet Earth” series.) Two other strong performers, Liberty Interactive (owner of QVC) and Dun & Bradstreet, both posted double-digit price gains due to continued strong fundamental performance. Those positives were offset by losses in Pulte Homes, H&R Block and Gap Stores. We continue to like the long-term positioning of large homebuilders, such as Pulte, and we believe that H&R Block’s tax preparation leadership is underappreciated. The turnaround at Gap has stagnated, but we believe the business will either be reignited by new management or will be sold. The loss that was not offset was Washington Mutual, down 10% in the quarter. We have regularly reported that Wamu had the greatest effect on quarterly portfolio performance— not because it was our most extreme performer, but because it was our largest position. As explained in the opening letter, we continue to believe Wamu stock is very attractive, and expect that in future reports we’ll again be reporting on its positive portfolio impact.

During the quarter, we completed the sale of our Mattel shares, and we established a position in Sprint-Nextel. Mattel was a good holding for the Fund, purchased for just under $10 in 2000, when investors had lost interest in non-Internet consumer businesses. Through expense reduction and good capital allocation, business value grew, despite disappointing sales for their largest product, Barbie. No longer priced at a discount to most consumer product companies, we believed the valuation was no longer compelling. Observing the personal trading of Mattel’s management, they don’t seem to disagree. In the first two months of 2006 there was one transaction, a purchase at $17. This year, there were no purchases, and 10 individuals sold stock or options at prices averaging $26. Despite some contrary examples, we’ve found stocks tend to do better when management’s economic alignment with shareholders is increasing rather than decreasing.

Schedule of Investments—March 31, 2007 (Unaudited)