Thanks @Mark. Per the Jen Rubin article you linked:
"As University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers told me this week, “President Trump is more effective than the COVID virus at creating chaos.” He continued, “Why did financial markets respond so badly to Liberation Day? It wasn't just because of the tariffs. It was because it showed that this is an utterly incoherent administration with no serious advisers, completely unwilling to face trade-offs or reality.
Trump observers know that, for all his bluster, he remains a coward—unable to stand the heat. Whether on China tariffs or firing the Federal Reserve Chairman, you can bet he will blink. He pretends he is in talks with China, but lets on that “I’m going to lower [tariffs against China] because otherwise you could never do business with them.” (Then word comes we are in discussions to begin talks.) Why would China’s leaders make any move to appease Trump? If they just wait, he may well retreat on his own."

”Fund flows are kind of funny”
I’ll say. I’m having trouble finding a common thread. It does look like bond funds have generated more interest over the past year - perhaps partially owing to the very high stock valuations and folks locking in gains. Perhaps in part a flight to safety owing to the political / financial chaos. Additionally, some of the bond inflows could be from disappointed cash investors reaching for yield as rates for cash have fallen over the past year.
The bond flows went both ways. Franklin’s Western Asset, especially, lost assets owing to the Ken Leech allegations. Equity funds look like a mixed bag. It appears value stock funds did well in asset flows. Since when did retail investors take a liking to deep value? :)
I’m curious whether more of these flows (in total dollar terms) were initiated by individual “Mom & Pop” investors (you and me) acting on their own or whether more of it was at the direction / behest of financial advisors / plan sponsors acting in their clients’ best interest?
Hate to ask - But has PRWCX continued to draw money? Or has some of the recent inflow reversed? Last I looked it was about flat YTD.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000139834425008823/fp0093421-4_497.htm
Target funds:
Emerald Insights Fund
Emerald Financial and Banking Innovation Fund

Reason for confidence:
As of March 31, 2025, 67% of total liquid assets
represented deposits placed with the Federal Reserve Bank of New
York (“FED”), and 23% of total liquid assets represented deposits
placed with highly rated U.S. banks.
The Bank obtains deposits from central banks, as well as from
multilaterals, commercial banks and corporations primarily located
in the Region. Total deposits amounted to $5,859 million at the end
of 1Q25 (+8% QoQ and +24% YoY), representing 57% of total
funding sources, compared to 52% a year ago, highlighting the
change in the funding structure towards increased reliance in
deposits.
As of March 31, 2025, the Bank’s Yankee CD program totaled $1,065
million, or 11% of total funding sources, providing granularity and complementing the short-term funding structure and long-standing
support from the Bank’s Class A shareholders (i.e.: central banks and
their designees), which represented 35% of total deposits at the end
of 1Q25.
https://mcusercontent.com/6632e94d6daa1bdbf46f55a23/files/df5aa1c9-b39c-71c5-956c-82580004e8e7/PR1Q25_Eng_Full_Report.pdf
**************************************************
About Bladex:
Bladex, a multinational bank originally established by the central banks of Latin-American and Caribbean countries, began operations in 1979 to promote foreign trade and economic integration in the Region. The Bank, headquartered in Panama, also has offices in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, the United States of America, and a Representative License in Peru, supporting the regional expansion and servicing of its customer base, which includes financial institutions and corporations. Bladex is listed on the NYSE in the United States of America (NYSE: BLX), since 1992, and its shareholders include: central banks and state-owned banks and entities representing 23 Latin American countries, commercial banks and financial institutions, and institutional and retail investors through its public listing.

May 2nd Episode:

Global financial thought leader John Lipsky explains how new US tariff policies are upending world trade and affecting the global financial system, economy and growth.

Key Points

• A widespread technology outage has disrupted online banking, ACH payments, and services like Zelle for dozens of banks across the U.S.
  
• Customers have reported being unable to access accounts, missing direct deposits, and inability to transfer funds or use online bill pay.
  
• The outage raises broader concerns about the risks of dependence on third-party technology providers for core banking operations across multiple banks.

https://thecollegeinvestor.com/57421/banking-outage-leaves-customers-without-account-access/
See also, e.g. https://www.tomsguide.com/news/live/zelle-down-outage-5-2-25
Fiserv advertises that it helps its clients "manage single points of failure". Physician, heal thyself.
In the meantime, it would seem to be a good idea to have multiple checking accounts (those could include brokerage accounts) to protect against outages. And keep a handy dandy paper checkbook in a nearby desk drawer just in case the whole electronic world goes down.

Today is a momentous day in the history of U.S. financial markets.
On May 1, 1975, the SEC abolished fixed commission rates for stock transactions.
Trading costs decreased significantly and the discount brokerage industry was subsequently unleashed.
https://jasonzweig.com/the-day-wall-street-changed-forever/

”comments aside -- despite my errors, the question I posed above moving OEFs to ETFs remains. Note Tweedy, First Eagle, Oakmark (others) doing the same .”

I’d enjoy a good thread / discussion comparing the benefits of OEFs / CEFs. I think it’s a lot more complicated than just the low fee & ease of trading paradigm usually cited by proponents of etfs.
I found Jared Dillian’s “No Worries - How to Lead a Stress Free Financial Life” to be an interesting read. The author strongly recommends OEFs over etfs. The main reason seems to be the “detachment” they offer from minute by minute changes in value which may induce knee-jerk and unprofitable trading.
I somewhat agree. I’ve gone with OEFs for my 4 core holdings (65-70% of portfolio) but also own one sleeve of CEFs / ETFs for the (opportunistic) trading they allow. My suspicion is that OEF investor bases will prove a bit more stable in any big prolonged sell-offs. All speculation of course … .

Nicholas Sargen says Trump’s tariff policies are of historic proportions with lasting consequences for the global economy and financial markets.

Global Shocks author Nicholas Sargen says Trump’s tariff policies are of historic proportions with lasting consequences for the global economy and financial markets.

https://youtu.be/29N3ttSKXqU

For those who have joined MFO relatively recently (i.e. any time after 2011)-
I realize that this is going to sound a little strange, but many parts of the MFO platform were designed by a fellow who called himself Accipiter, if I remember correctly. He worked from a remote geographical location with only a dial-up modem for communication. His record shows that he had made 2,350 visits to MFO before 2015, and most of those "visits" involved his programming work here.
2,350 visits, via a glacially slow dial-up modem to construct the underpinning of MFO. Who among us would have the dedication or patience to do something like that?
He was positively brilliant and worked his butt off for a very long time to design many of the MFO features which we still use today. Due to the wear and tear of time, there have been changes in web addresses and such which have rendered some of his gadgets somewhat flaky.
Remember that MFO is pretty much a volunteer operation, and has only the resources available which can be supported by our infrequent financial contributions. It's a real wonder that MFO is still here at all.

Well, he starred on the Apprentice for many seasons. He is fully qualified, but for what "office" I don't know. Maybe he should have been on the Office TV series.
It takes a special brand of con man to file so many bankruptcies and STILL be considered a great financial negotiator...at least, in the eyes of some poor souls.
We get almost 4 more years of the Accordian.

TRUTH!!
-----
BREAKING: Billionaire MAGA megadonor Ken Griffin incinerates Donald Trump over his disastrous tariffs and says that America has "has become 20 percent poorer in four weeks."
Even hardcore Republicans supporters are running for the hills now...
"The United States was more than just a nation. It’s a brand. It’s a universal brand, whether it’s our culture, our financial strength, our military strength …. America rose beyond just being a country," Griffin said at the Semafor World Economy Summit. "It was like an aspiration for most the world. And we’re eroding that brand right now."
Griffin, the founder and CEO of the hedge fund Citadel, said that it can take "a lifetime to repair the damage that has been done" to our nation's reputation.
"If you think of your behavior as a consumer, how many times do you buy a product with a brand on it because you trust that brand?" he said. "In the financial markets, no brand compares to the brand of the US Treasuries — the strength of the US dollar and the strength and creditworthiness of US Treasuries. No brand came close. We put that brand at risk."
Griffin compared America to a luxury brand dressmaker who destroys their company by sinking into scandal.
"You know, you can buy like a similar dress with no name for less money, but you want the dress that you think is going to not fall apart in two weeks,” Griffin said. "It can take a very long time — a very long time — to remove the tarnish on a brand."
He went on to say that the deflation of the U.S. dollar coupled with chaotic and unpredictable economic policy and Trump's attacks on Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell is a recipe for disaster.
Griffin then directly criticized Trump's destructive tariffs, saying that they will not lead to any kind of victories but will force those involved to "tread water and not drown."
He also destroyed the absurd claim that the tariffs will somehow magically bring manufacturing back to the United States despite the Trump administration failing to incentivize such reshoring with robust subsides.
"I’ll tell you what’s not going to happen is, people are not going to raise [money] to build manufacturing in America because with the policy volatility, you actually undermine the very goal you’re trying to achieve," said Griffin.
He went on to point out the damage being inflicted on our relationships with our closest allies—
"How does Canada feel about our country today versus two months ago? How does Europe feel about the United States today versus two months ago?" Griffin asked.
"And some people scream, ‘Well, it just doesn’t matter.’ But you know what? It matters for a very profound reason. The entire Western world is engulfed in a debt crisis," he added.
This is what happens when you elect an incompetent egomaniac with no understanding of geopolitics or the complex economic systems that hold the world together. Donald Trump operates on instinct and his instincts are always wrong.
Please like and share!

Please find the link for CrossingBridge’s 1Q25 Investor Commentary entitled “One Fall Can Change It All”
https://blog.crossingbridgefunds.com/blog/q1-2025
Feel free to share widely – it’s not just for financial folks.
Healing,
David Sherman

Tornado touchdown today in Arkansas and Trump refused to send FEMA aid.

The Trump administration denied Republican Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders’ request for individual and public assistance following an outbreak of severe storms and tornadoes that also affected neighboring Mississippi and Missouri and left more than 40 people dead.
The denial follows executive orders signed by Trump seeking to shift the burden of disaster response and recovery from the federal government onto states, as extreme weather becomes increasingly destructive and costly in a warming world. It is unclear how states will fill the financial void, which for decades has been viewed as a federal responsibility given the wide-reaching, multi-state nature of disasters.

https://msn.com/en-us/news/us/tornado-victims-blocked-from-federal-recovery-aid-after-trump-denied-request/ar-AA1Du68j?ocid=BingNewsSerp
Hurricane season is just around the corner. Several southeastern states are susceptible to them. See what this administration will do for you. Unfortunately many people will suffer needlessly.
To Sarah Huckabee, what have you done for me lately? Probably not enough in order to get my help.

WIth all due respect, you seem to have a bee in your bonnet regarding Schwab. I can appreciate someone liking one's financial institution (e.g. USAA) and being upset when it is bought out by another company. I've had enough of my banks bought out from under me.
M&As happen all the time. Customers of acquired institutions are then serviced by the acquiring institutions, which may be better or worse. But customers don't get paid for the transition. I didn't expect to see an extra interest payment in my bank account when it was acquired. And when my pharmacy was acquired, I didn't expect to see an extra dozen pills in my refill order. We're customers who can vote with their feet (as you did), not owners.
In a literal sense M&As reduce competition (by taking one institution out of the market) but they rarely have an impact on pricing let alone attract antitrust attention from the government. When Schwab took over USAA brokerage accounts it increased the size of its client assets by not much more than a rounding error, just 2% ($80B out of $3,800B).
That's not the kind of acquisition that provides monopolistic power. OTOH, the Ameritrade acquisition was in a whole 'nuther league: adding $1.3T in client assets to Schwab's existing $3.77T. Over a quarter of the combined company's client assets came from Ameritrade.
Regarding robo trading, that's a different matter. Schwab is a big player (#2), but it's not the elephant in the room. That would be Vanguard, with 3x AUM of Schwab, and 4x the number of customers.
Schwab's robo-advisor pricing structure is legal. What Schwab did wrong was falsely advertise it. As the SEC wrote in its PR headline: "Schwab Subsidiaries Misled Robo-Adviser Clients about Absence of Hidden Fees".

"Schwab claimed that the amount of cash in its robo-adviser portfolios was decided by sophisticated economic algorithms meant to optimize its clients’ returns when in reality it was decided by how much money the company wanted to make," said Gurbir S. Grewal, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. "Schwab’s conduct was egregious and today’s action sends a clear message to advisers that they need to be transparent with clients about hidden fees and how such fees affect clients’ returns."

https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2022-104
Schwab originated NTF fund transactions. IMHO a similar deception, but one legitimized by most brokerages copying it. "Fund marketing history tells us that 'assets are never given away and, eventually, the shareholders pay,' said William E. Donoghue, publisher of Donoghue's Money Letter, in Ashland, Mass.
NYTimes, Mutual Funds; A Commission Break From Brokers, July 26, 1992.

Following are excerpts from a current report in The Guardian:
Carriers also asked to stop purchases of aircraft-related equipment and parts from US firms, report says

China has reportedly ordered its airlines not to take any further deliveries of Boeing jets, the latest move in its tit-for-tat trade war with the US. The Chinese government has asked carriers to stop purchases of aircraft-related equipment and parts from American companies, according to a Bloomberg News article, which cited people familiar with the matter.
The order was reported to have come after the country raised its retaliatory tariffs on US goods to 125% on Friday in response to Donald Trump’s levies on Chinese imports totaling 145%. Beijing was also said to be considering ways to support airlines that lease Boeing jets and are facing higher costs.
About 10 Boeing 737 Max jets are being prepared to join Chinese airlines, and if delivery paperwork and payment on some of them were completed before Chinese ”reciprocal” tariffs came into effect, the planes may be allowed to enter the country, sources told Bloomberg.
The restriction marks a serious blow for Boeing and other manufacturers trying to navigate the escalating trade war between the world’s two biggest economies.
The group chief executive of the budget airline Ryanair, Michael O’Leary, has said his company could delay taking deliveries of Boeing aircraft if they become more expensive. He told the Financial Times that Ryanair was due to receive a further 25 aircraft from Boeing from August but would not need the planes until around March or April 2026. “We might delay them and hope that common sense will prevail,” O’Leary said.
Shares in Boeing have been buffeted by worries about the impact of trade tariffs, as well as complaints from some shareholders that the company has underinvested in its engineering. The company has lost 7% of its market value since the start of the year, and in March its chief financial officer, Brian West, said tariffs could hit availability of parts from its suppliers.
The rival European plane manufacturer Airbus said on Tuesday that it was watching the evolving situation on trade tariffs. Its chief executive, Guillaume Faury, told shareholders the company was having problems receiving components from the American supplier Spirit AeroSystems, which was weighing on the production of its A350 and A220 jetliners.
Boeing was approached for comment.

Comment: Boeing has lost 7% of its market value since the start of the year, with potentially a lot worse to follow. @FD1000 notwithstanding, this would seem to qualify as an investment consideration.