Well, that's unambiguous. The Vanguard page cited in that piece gives another downside to the transition. Instead of being able to purchase funds directly from an outside bank account, you must first move the cash into a brokerage account and from there purchase shares of the target fund. Sales work the same way in reverse.

one Vanguard investor holding physical mutual fund shares was told to return them or his shares would not be eligible for transition to the new platform

What exactly does that mean? That the physical shares remain valid (like old stock certificates) and can still be redeemed directly with the fund? I suppose that works, meaning no change for this shareholder.
I had physical shares of a fund years ago. When I couldn't locate the certificate for several months, I checked with the fund company. They offered to reissue the shares but I'd have to pay some outrageous percentage fee to "insure" that they were really lost. Not long afterward the fund converted purely to book entry and I didn't have to return my certificate or pay a fee.
I subsequently found the certificate and keep it in a scrap book.

Well. I won't argue with the numbers, then. Yes, my two junk funds are TUHYX and PRCPX. The former is two and a half times bigger than the latter. And I also hold Investment Grade WCPNX. I got into my junk just exactly at the wrong time, before the Fed's rate hiking cycle. I rode the buggers down, then back up. Reinvested all profit. I'm ahead of the game by now. Since 2018, there have been 2 terrible years, one of them being the historically putrid year of 2022. And PRCPX: right now having its worst year since 2015.
Funny, how Morningstar's performance charts don't look like they match the actual sadistics. But it's Morningstar, so... I've looked and looked for similar yields elsewhere. I'm not married to these two, but I want to discover something else that looks better to me, before I make a move. If The Fed reduces rates again, I suppose these two will benefit, like all the others.

@Crash - you don't name your two funds here. But the only taxable bond fund with a 2.49 year effective duration (per M* screener) is TUHYX. The only bond funds with a 2.68 effective duration are PRCPX, RNOTX, and MHCAX.
Ultra low volatility? Five year figures are:
RPHIX: 1.00
FLRN: 1.98
WEFIX: 2.47
FPNRX: 2.52
BBBMX: 2.56
MHCAX: 8.25
RNOTX: 8.28
PRCPX: 9.28
TUHYX: 10.41
Max drawdowns? Again over five years:
RPHIX: 1.09%
FLRN: 3.31%
WEFIX: 4.34%
FPNRX: 4.24%
BBBMX: 4.07%
MHCAX: 12.62%
RNOTX: 13.58%
PRCPX: 13.98%
TUHYX: 17.60%
How about churn? Current turnover figures are:
MHCAX: 20%
BBBMX: 22%
PRCPX: 36.20%
WEFIX: 37%
FLRN: 40%
FPNRX: 50%
RNOTX: 75%
TUHYX: 87%
RPHIX: 372%
BBBMX looks better and better.

Shall I be the contrarian? Seems to me that ultra-low duration only serves to churn the portfolio. BBBMX shows less than a year, effective duration; and for your trouble, you get a 4.74% yield. My considerable holdings in junk offer, on a weighted average basis, a bit more than 7% yield; effective duration in the two OEFs is 2.68 years and 2.49 years. That's still not far at all along the curve. And my chosen funds have been ultra-low in terms of volatility. A nice item to tuck into your pocket.

I listened to a very tiny little bit of it. They were talking about how the 2014 predictions said small cap were going to do better than large cap over the next 10 years LOL. I then closed it.

backtesting is so often comical

Nice find. It looks like you hit the sweet (or target) spot - high risk relative to ultra short bond funds (of which it is one based on duration), but low risk relative to short term bond funds.
A fund that's somewhat similar in performance and risk to WEFIX is FPNRX. FPA New Income focuses on preservation and then beating cash. I was happy to see it go no-load several years ago. More recently, it added this investor class so that it could be sold NTF. Unlike many NTF funds, New Income retail class adds only 10 basis points of expenses to its institutional class FPNIX. That may make it worth the cost if you buy frequently and/or in small amounts.
You'll find several funds with short durations and higher yields that invest primarily in ABSs. These look good on paper but come with risks that don't manifest too often. But sometimes they do. Check March 2020.
Almost everyone lost money then, but ABS funds tended to lose more. DHEAX is such a fund. Great three year volatility. Less great five year figure. Max drawdown (March-April 2020) was 9.74%. BBBMX was 4.07%, FPNRX was 4.24%, RPHIX was 1.09%. (All from M*)
It depends on what types of risks you're concerned with and how long you're willing to wait for recoveries.

I listened to a very tiny little bit of it. They were talking about how the 2014 predictions said small cap were going to do better than large cap over the next 10 years LOL. I then closed it.

The Week in Charts (10/25/24)
The most important charts and themes in markets and investing, including:
00:00 Intro
00:35 Topics
02:00 How Everything Could Change over the Next 10 Years
17:52 The AI-Driven Multiple Expansion
28:29 Reaching for Yield Like It's 2007
35:00 Rise of the Bond Vigilantes
44:06 Stock Picking Is Hard, Netflix Edition
46:09 Are Workers Today Better off Than 50 Years Ago?
Video
Blog

Is selecting THOPX performance chasing and I am going against my original criteria-low risk?

I sold THOPX earlier in the month as the volatility began eating into my gains. At around the same time I sold WSHNX and WCPNX. But they were nice funds when rates were dropping. Pretty much depends on where you think rates are heading from here.
If you're interested in the David Sherman touch, I'ld look at his Crossing Bridge funds before RPHIX. I ended up buying CBLDX, and it has been touch and go. I Still have some cash that might go into CBUDX. Everything else went into VRIG, PULS, and USFR for the time being.
For my short-term bond fund watch list at M* I've added calendar years 2020 and 2022. These days I am ideally looking for positive returns for both years. I'm a nervous bond fund owner. :)

I had a related problem some years ago. My limit order wasn't filled but the consolidated tape showed a low price that was lower than my limit price. Fido told me that it sent the order to a particular exchange but the consolidated tape has data from all US exchanges. It said that my limit order couldn't be filled on the exchange it was sent to and that nothing could be done.

There is a lithium mine in Nevada which the company exploiting it claims could meet our needs. I think it’s still getting off the ground as site approval is only two years old.
https://lithiumamericas.com/thacker-pass/overview/default.aspx
Ever since lithium became “the latest sure-fire investment” about 3 years ago, the price of the substance has been on the express down elevator. M* doggedly still assigns a 5 star rating to Lithium Americas stock.

that's what they were saying but i think they were just covering their asses and trying not to be wrong. all they had to say is that i was in the wrong and what else could i do? well, for one thing, move my money to schwab, not that fidelity would care. it does kinda irritate me, tho. plus, i placed a call to my local fidelity rep about it and he, of course, didn't bother to return my call, no matter that over the years he's hounded me left and right about his ability to offer solid financial advice and help. i understand, tho: i'm small potatoes, not even a fingerling ... but still ...

If M* can be trusted:
WCPNX. ER = 0.65%
-duration is out to 5.5 years, now. That smells more like intermediate-term.
-risk, looking back 3 years: just 20 out of 100, on their proprietary scale.
-LOW risk, HIGH returns.
-zero in equities.
0.97% in cash. So, fully invested.
Weighted coupon =5.37.
Securitized stuff in portfolio= 56.02% of total.
gummint = 29.21%
corporate = 13.77%
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/wcpnx/portfolio
I own it, and am growing it. Since I got in several weeks ago, it's been dead. Maybe I should not be so patient, but the sadistics and ratings (not just at Morningstar) look attractive. It fits into the frame of what I've been wanting to initiate in my taxable.

I've learned to expand my definition of alternative funds. I look at PVCMX as an alt fund in that it uses cash for defense - in a manner quite different from most other funds (thus the ALT view).
Low SD of 5, with a 7.84% 5 yr return. It's worst quarter in 5 years was -(1.83%).
I had purchased QQMNX recently as well, but that's it for market neutral funds. It will sit alongside HMEZX, RSIVX, WBALX, CBUDX, CBLDX. Low SD grinders that I hope get me close to 7% annually.
Many true ALT funds are finicky.

warning : the potential complexity of most gold ETFs is a mess for taxes.
if not each year, then certainly the manual collection and calculation of data of all years past when you sell. repeat for each subsequent sell, and hope you did it roughly right. there is no hand-holding or even hints in turbotax.
it is for this very reason i abandoned k1s in the past, and will never be adding new buys in this space.

+1 / Sounds like it. Best held in tax exempt / tax sheltered accounts. As Yogi noted above the 28% tax on collectibles does not apply to etfs that invest only in mining companies.

warning : the potential complexity of most gold ETFs is a mess for taxes.
if not each year, then certainly the manual collection and calculation of data of all years past when you sell. repeat for each subsequent sell, and hope you did it roughly right. there is no hand-holding or even hints in turbotax.
it is for this very reason i abandoned k1s in the past, and will never be adding new buys in this space.

Interesting day, as gold (represented by GLD) is higher, but the miners at mid-day (represented by GDX) were down around 4%.
While PRPFX always gets a lot of attention when precious metals are on the rise, its actual allocation to gold and silver (in bullion form) is only 25%. Additionally, PRPFX has a substantial allocation to natural resource stocks which, no doubt, includes some miners.
The mining stocks tend to be much more volatile than the underlying metals. They are affected by many other factors than just the price of metals. (ie energy costs, labor issues, environmental / health & safety issues and regulations, and to some extent FX / geopolitical considerations as many are in foreign countries).
As others have noted, the mining stocks appear undervalued relative to the price of gold. That’s been the case for many years (based on regular reading of Bill Fleckenstein, highly knowledgable long-time gold bull).

I believe RPHYX is no TF at Schwab, but that doesn't help you with the higher than normal ER (1.19%). I don't think to much about the ER since, even being on the high side, the risk reward is so good. FWIW, I've also held FLRN (SPDR Bloomberg Investment Grade Floating Rate) for years as a steady-eddy income fund, though this one has had a couple hiccups along the way.

For the past two months, I have been following two "Market Neutral" funds, QQMNX and VMNFX, which held up very well and provided some protection during recent market downturns. New managers have been at the helm of both funds since 2021.
As MikeM said: "I have to admit, QQMNX is a tempting alternative in this alternative field for a less bumpy ride and, so far, excellent returns."
..............QQMNX....VMNFX
YTD.........15.6%.......8.9%
3 YRS.......14.4........14.8
5 YRS.......10.3..........8.2
2022..........9.5.........13.5
Std. Dev....8.6%.......7.3%
As a retired investor who doesn't need a lot more money, preserving capital is more important to me than seeking sizeable returns on capital. While both funds have excellent risk/reward profiles, I have decided to add QQMNX to my portfolio at this time of fairly high equity valuations.

A couple other market neutral funds you can consider: BDMAX and JMNAX. BDMAX has outperformed QQMNX over the last 1 and 2 year trailing periods, and has a higher Sharpe ratio and lower standard deviation over the last 3 years according to Morningstar data. JMNAX has had lower returns, but has a smooth ride. I use a combination of BDMAX and JMNAX, but I might consider adding QQMNX. Thanks for bringing it up.

And thanks for bringing up BDMAX and JMNAX, much appreciated.
Unfortunately, BDMAX has a 5.25% load at my brokerage firm. But, another share class, BDMIX, may be available in an IRA with no minimum investment limit. Still checking it out.
However, JMNAX looks very promising and, as you said, it offers a "smooth ride" with a very low standard deviation of 4.35%. It's available NTF (No Transaction Fee) and offered load-waived.
I will continue to monitor both funds. I am currently fully invested, but some of my CDs are maturing early next year and will make some investable cash available.
Thanks again, Chinfist.

for me at schwab, i can place an order for anything even if i don't have the funds to pay for it immediately. i am told, before placing the order, that i'll need to have the necessary funds in my account within two or three days (can't remember which). never have to sell MM funds before buying or anything like that. same thing doesn't work at fidelity, at least not for me.

Years ago it was 3 days (T+3). Until recently it was 2 days (T+2). Now it's just a day (

T+1).
Fidelity automatically sells your MMFs as needed, as though they were your core (transaction) account. Or you could think of them as "overdraft protection". AFAIK, no one else does this.

Sweep is the term, right? Fidelity lets MMF etc. be so used, yes. ML otoh specifically says 'this is not a sweep fund.' However, and this appears to be new, if you do the 'buy stock before MMF sale' thing, they do NOT hit your margin account but let everything go through normally and settle belatedly. When I called to ask (apologetically) about that, the nice c/s person said it was a courtesy to (certain) customers, please don't do it again or at least don't make a habit of it, but no prob this time yada yada. I believe this was not the case say a year ago.