It doesn't surprise me. Over the years, there have been many ways to try to beat a simple index such as VOO/VTI/QQQ, but can't do it over the long term. The beauty of it is the fact that it is based on the market, AKA the price. The price is what buyers are willing to pay regardless of someone's opinion, including valuation.
I have seen so many of these "special" funds fail again and again.
Remember, the price is the ultimate indicator = KISS and total returns is what matters because it includes everything.

C’mon FD. I was just trying to summarize Howard Marks’ rather well known approach to investing as he has elaborated on in scores of Oaktree “memos” over the years and also in several books. No intent here to advocate any particular approach or tell anyone else what might work best for them.
You make some fine arguments against deep value investing. I’d never argue with you. And I don’t think @Mark or anyone else would be offended if you want to pick apart the linked memo from Howard Marks and expose the fallacies in his thinking. You obviously know a lot more about investing than he does.

@hank "Marks is big on buying at a discount and holding long term."
FD: Millions tried the above while only a small % have done, Buffett. I have read his articles for a couple years, but he never helped me with my trading which is mostly in bond funds because....read what I said above, generalities and shades of gray.
Quotes from the article:
What this means is that in good times, investors obsess about the positives, ignore the negatives, and interpret things favorably. Then, when the pendulum swings, they do the opposite, with dramatic effects.
The human brain is wired to ignore or reject incoming data that is at odds with prior beliefs, and investors are particularly good at this.
Further complicating things in terms of rational analysis is the fact that most developments in the investment world can be interpreted both positively and negatively, depending on the prevailing mood.
Rarely do investors realize that (a) there can be a limit to the run of good news or (b) an upswing can be so strong as to be excessive, rendering a downswing inevitable. (FD; SPY,QQQ have been going strong for 15 years).
In short, sometimes the things that have gone up the most should be expected to continue to go up the most, and sometimes the things that have gone up the least should be expected to go up the most.
The above is meaningless unless you mention the specifics.
At least the best nugget by Buffet and Bogle = buy the SP500 for accumulators and go sleep for decades.

Marks is big on buying at a discount and holding long term. That’s his game. “Patience pays”, he would say. That philosophy seems at odds with what most seem to do today which is buy what’s done well recently. His specialty is distressed debt, but I think he would apply the same approach to equities, real estate or most any other risk asset. It probably helps if you’ve followed him over the years and are familiar with how he views investing.
I wasn’t sure @Crash meant to “dismiss” Marks. I took his “ Marks: Emotion? No. Analysis? Yes ” remark as a complement. Certainly, if Crash can listen to Larry Summers every Friday, he should find Marks relatively easy to fathom. :)

If you hold for years and diversified it's not for you.
+1.

Working hard and long hours in IT helps you in the long run...or...you can just be lazy and cry later why you didn't make the big bucks.
Of course, you can be lucky and do well.
I decided after about 12 years that I would never work more than 40-45 per week in IT and I did it at over 90-95%.
All my efforts went to investing...and it worked.

Well Crash, you dismissed it too quickly, maybe the new one is better
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISntD4uLUdk&t=899s
You get real analysis, including bonds...just my own opinion. It can improve most investors trading, and it doesn't mean weekly trading.
If you hold for years and diversified it's not for you.

Thanks @Catch - I agree LQD has done much better over time. But look at the 2022 performance of the 2 funds.
While we can compare performance to other bond funds, I’m mostly interested in how the use of interest rate swaps to hedge rate sensitivity could blow up. Are there hidden dangers in this kind of hedging? On the surface it looks like a simple way to capture the difference between what Treasuries return and what investment grade corporates do. I’ve compared the return over 10 years to money market funds, short term bond funds and ultra-short bond funds. It seems to have done better - and on a reasonably consistent basis.

Looking at M* for the past several months, LQD has outperformed LQDH for each of the monthly periods. One might have expected better from LQDH in anticipation of rate cuts and their swaps, etc. The portfolio indicates 95% of the portfolio is LQD. Am I correct with this and what you see?
You noted:

M* shows LQDH returning north of 3% annually over the past 10 years. That’s about double what money market funds achieved.

MMKT's were paying only about .01% yields for many years. As of April, 2022 the Fido MMKT's were paying .11% yield. This is when the move up to the current yields began. So, comparing to 10 years backwards against a MMKT yield 'is not valid'.
6 month CHART of the two.

I don't see any direct short Treasury positions.
Basically, it holds corporate LQD & tons of rate-swaps plus supporting cash. Duration is very low. So, the overall effect is m-mkt like returns out of intermediate-term bonds overlaid with derivatives. But the current yield is well below VMFXX, so, what's the point?

I’m not sure that’s a fair comparison, With the present inverted yield curve money market funds should yield better than longer dated bonds. Were yield the only factor nobody would invest in longer dated bonds today. Any (perceived) advantage would accrue to someone who wanted to own longer term investment grade bonds for diversification and who thought the inverted curve will return to normal some day.
* Isn’t the ultra low “effective” duration (0.15 years) really just a reflection of the hedging? Duno. Just trying to learn.
Here’s a link to Blackrock / LQDH with some performance data. Seems to have outdistanced money market funds in recent years. - M* shows LQDH returning north of 3% annually over the past 10 years. That’s about double what money market funds achieved.
Appreciate the comments from @yogibearbull

First, it's 3 years, not 2 years.
Second, looks to me they started in 2019, not showing the peak of 2020. If you look at this chart(https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q)
Trump started in Q1/2017 and by Q2/2020, real wages after inflation grew up from 355 to 393. That is 10.7% real growth. Then covid hit, and since Q2/2020, it went from 393 back to 368, this is a decline of 6.4%,
2 more observations:
1) From Q4/1099 to Q1/2017 = 18 years, it grew from 335 to 355 = 5.9%
2) Since 1980, no other president except Trump has achieved above 10% real wage growth.

I agree with FD that Marks makes you think harder. My cup of tea. Like to think. Might stave off dementia a few more years.

I stopped paying attention to M* years ago because many of my best risk/reward funds in the past never met the above criteria.
MFO lists are much better and looking at meaningful criteria. Example: look for Great Owl Funds .

I don't pay too much attention to sectors, so take the following as questions and observations from someone who knows just enough to be dangerous:
Do homebuilders like Pulte (a name I do recognize from having lived in suburbs) take out short term loans to purchase building materials? The reason for the question is that interest rates for mortgages don't move in tandem with short term rates. In this industry each rate can have an impact.
In looking at companies like BLDR, are you thinking about remodeling or new home construction, or both? I believe that the stock of existing homes has been held down by high mortgage rates - people are reluctant to walk away from low rates they locked in years ago. So many have chosen to make improvements rather than move. When (if) mortgage rates drop significantly, this may change and affect who is buying building materials.
It could also affect the market for new homes, since they'll now be competing with more existing homes than before (acknowledging that there is still an overall housing shortage).
The construction industry seems (from my 30,000 foot vantage point where I rarely look out the window) to be bad at dealing with market cycles. In good times, they build on spec. Though often by the time the construction is put on the market, demand has cooled.
I'm guessing that you're referring to this article:
https://www.barrons.com/articles/buy-dr-horton-stock-price-pick-72f0f4e1
(Thank you Google and public libraries; I got free access both ways)
It presents a nice, level headed picture of a well run company. As to the industry prospects, it's looking more than two years out. "Fed governors see short-term rates falling by about roughly two percentage points over the coming couple of years". However, over the next year+, both Fannie Mae and the Mortgage Bankers Association are seeing rates drop by just over 1/2%, from 6.46% (8/22/24 actual) to 5.9% (Q4 2025).
https://finance.yahoo.com/personal-finance/when-will-mortgage-rates-go-down-164144910.html
Certainly the prospects for the industry look better now than they have been for awhile (perhaps excepting building materials - lumber prices soared during the pandemic as people spent money on home improvements). How much better, and how much is already priced in, I have no idea.

Started to dabble in home builder and builder supply stocks. I started buying BLDR, Builders Firstsource, back in April and have added periodically to it. I've owned this stock multiple times over the years and I like it a lot. Started a position in DHI, D R Horton Co, last week after reading good things in Barrons about the stock that made sense to me. Today, I bought a little PHM, Pultegroup Inc.
Home building "should" take off when interest rates drop. All these stocks started to take off the past couple weeks, so I'm hoping the trend continues. FWIW, individual stocks don't make up a large part of my portfolio. Just what I call my play money.

"A New York Yankees jersey worn by Babe Ruth during perhaps the most storied moment
of the baseball legend’s career has sold for $24.12 million,
shattering the record for most expensive sports collectible sold at auction."
"The gray road jersey, sold by Heritage Auctions on Sunday in Dallas, was said to be worn by Ruth
when he 'called his shot' in Game 3 of the 1932 World Series against the Chicago Cubs."
https://www.npr.org/2024/08/25/nx-s1-5089222/babe-ruth-jersey-called-shot-auction-record
That's a lot of dough for a wool flannel jersey over 90 years old!
Does anyone here invest in the following collectibles:
antiques, art, automobiles, coins, comic books, sports memorabilia, stamps, or watches?
If so, what has been your experience?

We have owned almost all of those seven American Funds over the many years we were building our pile, varying allocations depending on what was going on in the world economy. Did just fine for us- very stable. I always did like the committee approach to management, but I realize that many of you don't particularly care for that style. Hey, whatever works...

Russel Kinnel from M* applies strict screens to narrow down the mutual fund universe to 25 - 50 funds.
Mr. Kinnel's screens are:
• Expense ratio in the Morningstar Category’s cheapest quintile
• Manager investment of more than $1 million in the fund
• Morningstar Risk rating lower than High
• Morningstar Medalist Rating of Bronze or higher
• Parent Pillar rating better than Average
• Returns greater than the fund’s category benchmark over the manager’s tenure for a minimum of five years
• Must be accessible to individual investors with a minimum investment no greater than $50,000
• No funds of funds
• Funds must be rated by Morningstar analysts
Six funds were added this year while two funds were removed.
Vanguard [8], American Funds [7], Fidelity [6], Dodge & Cox [5], and Baird [5] dominate the list.
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/thrilling-36-2

From the article,
"In years where stocks declined, eg the global financial crisis in 2008 or the bear market in 2022, the call options expired worthless but did provide investors with additional income that reduced the drawdowns*."
*(YBB Note) By tiny amounts. Basically, covered calls didn't provide downside protection unless some puts were bought using the covered call income.