OP (Fred):
I am a soon-to-be early retiree. (Had planned to retire in Aug 2020, but COVID arrived, and my employer sent me home to work from my sofa -- so I decided to hang around a few years more, not out of financial necessity, but by choice...)
I mention this only because most of my lifetime investment contributions have been made. My primary concern is not maximizing return. Rather its to preserve and protect principal and the purchasing value thereof.. I've 'made it'. I don't wish to 'lose it'.
I discovered QDSNX at the end of last year -- on these message boards. I discovered REMIX (BLDNX), in the same time period. Based on their volatility/performance/risk-management philosophies, I opened positions in both funds very early in 2024, and have added to them periodically. QDSNX in particular seems to be positioned to benefit (modestly) during hard "down days" in the market.
Excepting my company plan -- which has the typical, plain-vanilla, unhedged, indexed type limited choices, QDSNX and REMIX are the 2nd and 3rd largest , non-cash positions in each of my accounts. The largest position is BAMBX -- another fund classified as 'alternative', but which I view as a tremendous bond fund substitute.
When the next recession/bear market hits, I will likely re-deploy more capital to more conventional / unhedged ETFs/funds, at lower prices. Until that happens, given the stretched valuations and exuberant market sentiment, I'm very content to rely on risk-managed funds to eke out returns.

"RELIABILITY, CONSCIENTIOUSNESS, ACCURACY, DEPENDABILITY"

The above are serious accusations...based on what? If this is true Schwab would be shut down. Millions have been using Schwab for years, including several posters...maybe it's you?

Notes with a pencil? again, are you serious? notes are entered into the system so the next customer rep can see them.

So, you miss the point about taking notes. Handwritten notes along the way can assist the phone agent to enter notes into the computer for the NEXT person more ACCURATELY. Unless they just are unable to be accurate. Which is mostly the case, today.
"....If this is true Schwab would be shut down." You've obviously not tried to talk to anyone on the Customer Rage and Aggravation phone line in the past 30 years. I was once assigned by a Temp. Agency to a Call Center. After receiving our instructions, I declined the job. They make ZERO attempt to actually be specific, accurate and helpful. And we were handed a script. If you mention to them that they sound like they're reading from a script, they will deny it. Even if there's no printed script, they are trained to be evasive, unhelpful. They have been instructed to put the bursen on the customer. It's all junk.

@FD1000
Hand-holding, I don't need much. What has gone missing is RELIABILITY, CONSCIENTIOUSNESS, ACCURACY, DEPENDABILITY, and Customer Rage And Aggravation agents who can THINK. I also think it's disgraceful that employers won't ALLOW employees to simply have a pad and pencil to take notes, to assist the process when their help is asked for. I've been told that, explicitly.

The above are serious accusations...based on what? If this is true Schwab would be shut down. Millions have been using Schwab for years, including several posters who stated they never had any issues for years...maybe it's you?
Notes with a pencil? again, are you serious? notes are entered into the system so the next customer rep can see them.
Several days ago you doubted Schwab would give you the $50...and they did...but you didn't report it until I asked you.

@hank, this T+1 (vs T+2) rule for stocks/ETFs/CEFs was adopted 2 years ago. Brokers were given 2 years to make changes to their systems and 5/28/24 is that final date. So, who wants to deal with a broker who couldn't fix this in the 2 year window?

Entertaining and educational reading as @Crash confronts new challenges at Schwab. Been there. Done that. Deeply indebted for all the support received here when I migrated from TRP’s in-house funds to Fido a few years back.
Familiarity sometimes breeds complacency. Often now I just resort to the “pick & pray” method when not sure what to do next / where to look on Fido’s site. Usually solves the problem - but has on occasion been costly.
One available source of advice & inspiration - The Holy Bible. From The Book of Matthew: ”Ask, and it shall be given … seek, and ye shall find …”

Hard for me to imagine, unless you got the one out of 10,000 people there who happens to be bad at what you were trying to accomplish. But I haven't moved any accounts into or out of Schwab in around 8-9 years, which went well at the time.
I probably said this before, but in 27 years I've had zero bad experiences with Schwab.

I wrote that no number provided was wrong, but that they were representing different quantities. When reporting figures, it helps to be clear about what those figures measure. Otherwise it's easy to get tripped up using different metrics (such as monthly or daily performance).
For example, when using M* charts, sometimes M* graphs daily performance by default (when looking at short time periods), and sometimes M* graphs monthly performance by default (for longer, multiyear periods such as 5 years).
With respect to the fund's ER, the May 2023 prospectus says that it is 1.72%. The fund just put out a supplement saying that the ER is 2.62%. Even if one doesn't care about the size of an ER, ISTM that one should care about changes in ER. They affect how one regards past performance. That is, had the ER in previous years been 90 basis points higher, the performance might have been 90 basis points lower.
But that's not the end of the story. The supplement dated April 1 says that the ER change is due to an anticipated implementation change in some of the underlying funds. It hasn't even happened yet.
If one views the anticipated change in ER as merely a formality (as does M* when it calculates adjusted expense ratios), then the "true" (effective) ER remains 1.62%. If one views the anticipated change as something more than a formality, then perhaps one should expect future performance to be diminished by 90 basis points.

Barron’s Funds Quarterly (2024/Q1–April 8, 2024)
https://www.barrons.com/topics/mutual-funds-quarterly
(Performance data quoted in this Supplement are for 2024/Q1 and YTD to 3/31/24)
Pg L2: SP500 is dominated by Magnificent 7 (or 5). For looking BEYOND SP500, consider LC-growth MRFOX; LC-value DAGVX, SMVLX, SPYV; LC-blend DHAMX (hedged); MC-value FSLSX, COWZ; SC-value AVUV; foreign DFJ; sector funds (with lower R^2) SGGDX, RING; FCG, XOP; URA; IAI; IYH, IHF; XLU. (By @LewisBraham at MFO)
Pg L6: New spot-Bitcoin ETFs (IBIT, FBTC, etc) led in inflows and performance; the old GBTC trust that up-converted into ETF GBTC had huge outflows as it stuck to very high ER. Next were energy, LC-growth and Japan (it rallied after many miserable years). Inflows into money-market funds were strong. The top asset gatherer was SP500 VOO. Despite the gold rally, the gold bullion funds had outflows. (By @LewisBraham at MFO)
Pg L?: In 2024/Q1 (SP500 +10.54%): Among general equity funds,... Among other equity funds,.... Among fixed-income funds,..(FI isn’t very refined in Lipper mutual fund categories listed in Barron’s). NOTE – Funds Quarterly online is missing almost half of its content. This quarterly review will be updated later.
MORE Fund Stories
FUNDS. Uncertainties about the fed fund rates are headwinds for bonds. But they will benefit from rate cuts (maybe in June or later). Stick with short/intermediate durations for now, some credit risks with FR/BL BKLN, SRLN; dividend stocks (XLP, XLU).
LINK

you can also use the multisearch analyze tool on the results page to see maxxdd (and several other metrics) by calendar years and about 150 other fixed periods ... all in one datatable.

@yugo, @yogibearbull
thank you.
there are dozens of display periods available on mfop, like: monthly, yearly, calendar year, market cycles, decadal, and other unique periods.
in this case, just set display period to 10 years and then select the maxdd value or rating as desired.
c

@MikeW- For years I have posted excerpts, both edited and unedited, and always specify those conditions. Also, I give credit to, and provide a link directly back to the original information source. So far there have been no complaints regarding this approach.
FWIW- OJ

As a quant manager, AQR has not had the best track record this past decade. AQR stuck with their convictions during tough times, and many of their funds took a major hit, badly underperforming for stretches. They have had heavy portfolio manager turnover these past few years.
This Fund of Funds (FOF) has performed with low volatility (OP mentioned 7% SD) in it's short life. Maybe that FOF diversification works here, and hopefully AQR has learned a few lessons from it's prior experience.
As to what you actually own here, I'd be curious to see what others say. It acts like a hedged fund (long-short?). I had purchased a small amount so as to watch it closely. Recent performance has been rock steady, even on ugly market days.

Another way to see Schwab offerings is, from the top line, to click Research and then Bonds, CDs, Fixed Income. The result is a page showing rates out to 30 years of a wide variety of instruments. I find it interesting that the slope of CD's is not as negative as for Treasuries. Click any item on this page and you get a page of dozens of offerings. Click on any offering and you get a pop-up of offering details. You can buy from the offering page - just be sure you are in your desired account.
I have a ladder of CDs and Treasuries, and recently had a CD called. Was able to rebuild that rung with a Treasury of shorter duration but higher interest rate than the called CD. This will work only as long as the yield curve is negatively sloped.

@Tarwheel concisely and accurately stated "Nobody knows where longer term rates are headed, despite all of the punditry." I would add that it's also regularly called a fool's game.
True story: Years ago and for a coupla years, I was diligently (some say "anally") projecting my defined benefit pension plan lump sum payment (one of three defined benefit pension plans in our household) that was largely driven by a coupla factors including the 10-yr rate. During one of those years, one of the most reliable investment houses projected a 3.5% change in the 10-yr in the coming 12 months. And voila! Amazingly they nailed the % move EXACTLY! Well, except for the all important direction of the move, which they said was going to be DOWN, but instead went (Oopsy!) UP.
The strategy for owning a CP CD ladder as one's fixed income sleeve has been posted about ad nauseum on this forum. I know that's true because I am one of its leading proponents and made a ton of posts about it. Any otherwise reasonably intelligent investor on this forum who still doesn't get it needs to go back and re-read some of the many other threads on the topic over the past year or so. It's pretty simple.
Basically, what are you hoping for (and I ask that pointedly as IMO, hope is what you're dealing with here) out of your dedicated bond funds over the next 5-yr period. 4%? 5%? 6%? And if your hopes are in that range, why did you NOT (when the option was available - it ain't now) instead take the stress, guessing and hoping out of the equation and guarantee a 5+% APY from an FDIC'd, CP CD 5-yr ladder?
BTW, the venerable Art Cashin used to routinely remind us, "I learned long ago that hope is not a viable, long-term investment strategy."
Disclaimer_1: We own a 5-yr CP CD ladder paying 5+% APY as our fixed income sleeve and it now serves as self-insurance for our projected LTC needs. The current 5-yr CP CD rate is still over our % hurdle and we continue to replace rungs as they fall off. This strategy has given us WAY more time to spend on our stock sleeve (IMO, where real money is made) and the extra time and effort afforded us by the ladder has resulted in blowout TRs over the past 1-to-1 1/2 years as we've accurately identified some of the best places to be in that market (that is, US, AI, LCG and Semis).
Disclaimer_2: I'm tired of posting the same thing over-and-over again and I trust some forum participants are tired of reading it as well. So this will be my last time. For those who still don't get it, maybe try reading it s-l-o-w-l-y one last time?

If you own GE, then you know own GEHC and GEV. We’ve got GE shares that we’ve own for 40-50 years. It’s finally starting to regain some of the value it lost over the past 20 years. My wife’s grandfather gave her the original shares, and she hasn’t wanted to sell for sentimental reasons. If we do sell, figuring out the cost basis would be a nightmare because we reinvested dividends until the past few years when the yield was cut.

Nobody knows where longer term rates are headed, despite all of the punditry. The so-called experts have wrong repeatedly. I deal with the uncertainty by covering all of the bases. My CD ladders extend out 5 years, and when issues mature, I reinvest where I can get the best yield furthest out. Long term, I assume my intermediate bond funds will eventually start gaining value again, particularly if rates drop.
My CD ladder in taxable savings is heavy on the short end, with issues maturing every 1-3 months. My IRA ladders have issues maturing about every 6 months.

@BenWP, I did not get as far as looking at the portfolio. You are right, the index description does not match with the current holdings. Now that I look at the stock style, only in 1 out of the past 5 years it was in large caps. Since it claims to select factors based on the stage of the economic cycle and given the fund currently is in high value, low quality, small to mid caps, I am guessing the index provider must think we are at the beginning of an economic cycle. I was drawn to its dynamic (not on a preset time line) rebalancing (almost like an active fund). I do invest in the mid cap space but I prefer real active management for that space. The only exception I make is for XMHQ (rebalanced twice a year). I still think OMFL, as a dynamic multi factor fund, can be profitable if the index provider gets economic cycles and market conditions right. Evidently, we are off the norms because of Covid but the index provider is able to stay with or ahead of SPY.

@msf, thanks for noting the PDF edits.
I am going by my actual experience with my margin accounts at both Fido and Schwab where the initial purchases of anything (including the m-mkt funds) don't become marginable for 30 days. Then, at the end of the 30-day period, there are routine journal entries that auto-move stuff from cash to margin side.
So, this 30-day practice (before things become marginable) isn't new, and has been going on for years. The PDF document editors may have put this language in/out places for clarifications. The $100 fee rule to kick in 06/2024 is definitely new.

First, note that all of the "Preferred" CDs shown are new issues. OK, the "Quoted price" simply means that if you wanted to buy $1.00 of a particular CD the cost to you is $1.00 (100%). You will find that there are also older CDs out there, paying rates lower than newer ones.
Obviously you wouldn't buy those when you could just as easily buy one paying a better rate. So the "Quoted" (asking) price for one of those lower-paying CDs will be something less than 100%, so that the total income at maturity (YTM: Yield to Maturity) will be competitive with the higher-paying ones.
Similarly you will also find some older CDs paying more than the currently available ones. You can expect the "Quoted" to be higher than 100%. Same reasoning.
No one is interested in selling you a really small CD- the minimum is typically $1000.
The default 1-year "Preferred" list is only the tip of the iceberg-
• If you want a maturity other than the one-year default simply click on the maturity that you want- they go from 1 month to 10 years.
• If you really want to explore the CD universe use the "Visit Find CDs" link for a detailed CD search. There you can enter any parameter that you want, such as "non-callable" or a different maturity, or a minimum rate that you will accept.