Before we happened into PRWCX toward the end of 2006, we were invested directly through 8 funds and 4 different fund companies which covered LCG, LCV, SCG, SCV, real-estate and a couple bond funds. I knew nothing about DG at the time other than he and Arricale had been on the job for less than 6 months. We were 43 & 39 years old but it was very apparent my wife had no interest being involved in our investments, so I was looking to simplify in case something ever happened to me. Most advisors would never have recommended PRWCX by itself for investors our age. But, it has worked for us along with our personal high savings rate.
6 years ago we met with a CFP we know who helps advise >$10 billion at the firm he works for and he told us not to change a thing, as we were well on our way to meeting our retirement goals and that his annual advisory fee could not be justified to take over our accounts.
I won't recommend others investing as we have largely chosen to in the last 17 years, but it has worked for us. At ages 60 & 56 current Monte Carlo simulations have us at 99% success rates if we both retire today.
We've been fortunate to work our whole adult lives, live modestly, and to be vigilant about saving and investing which has also allowed us to give regularly to charitable organizations and individuals in need. For all this I take little credit other than to thank God for the opportunities we've been afforded and been able to take advantage of.
Wishing all a wonderful, peaceful and healthy 2024. I don't contribute much to this site, but have learned so much....thank you.

Among the SC funds that I track, FDSCX, Fidelity Small Cap Selector, is among the leaders for every time period going out 15 years. It’s been a steady, reliable performer — unusual for SC funds, which tend to be streaky. I prefer SC blend funds for that reason.

This thread has gone in an interesting direction.
I have been trying to consolidate the IRA to simplify it in case of the sort of stuff that seems more likely to happen as I get older. But I need more help from Mr. Market to get out of some positions. :).
I have temporarily consolidated the taxable by getting rid of a lot of Vanguard indexes. At the time I sold I decided that I would sit out the market until the next budget standoff and the recovery from holidaze hangovers sets in. Time will tell if I missed out.
I don't mind small positions for the taxable. If they can be left alone, they can turn out alright. And it is my hope to leave them alone. I don't find that they need a lot thinking about, or managing. I do sort of keep an eye on them the way I keep an eye on the trees I have planted.
I don't feel the need to buy the 500. I own tech funds instead. They have been the main driver of growth in that index for many years. But why multiple tech funds? They each do something different. So I think of them as a basket. The techs are FSCSX, TDV, and CSGZX.
I've pretty much stopped paying attention to Lipper and M* labels. The weighting box is still somewhat useful. More useful still are MFO premium and the overlap tool at etfrc.com. So I'm not concerned that I have too much mid cap value because I own PEY and SYLD--two different theses resulting in very little overlap. It is the theses that I am buying. That the weights ends up where they do is not really a factor in my decision to buy.

My own opinion on the current holdings in a managed ETF, not sure it means to much other than looking backwards. Maybe CALF has avoided financial for now but could make it a high percentage going forward. Who knows. You have to have faith in the management and process more so than the current holdings, I think. Same for any ETF or mutual fund.
One interesting statistic on CALF and AVUV. CALF has 100 holdings. 73% of those holdings are also in AVUV which has 748 holdings. Obviously, they like many of the same SC stocks, but CALF is more concentrated.
FWIW, I've held QRSVX at different percentages for many years. A conservative SC that does well over time. I've more recently in the past couple months added both CALF and AVUV to my SC holdings.

- I looked at M*’s stock price and it’s risen this year - to my surprise. I’m thinking eventually AI is going to take a bite out of their income. You should be able to pull up all the info. they provide - and even more - tailored to your specific needs using AI. Yes, I’m sure they will use AI themselves to provide better service. But, just my guess, that eventually it will ding their viewership and profits.
- Stumbled across a Schwab page on a fund I was looking at recently. Appears to be an excellent detailed source of data.
- @msf said, ”For example, it lists "market neutral". That hasn't been around since April 2021”
I tried to dig up a list of market neutral equity funds (across the internet) the other day to look over. Darned hard to find any. Maybe they’ve gone ouf of fashion? Gosh - couldn’t have been more than 20-25 years ago that I owned one.

This still works but not enough criteria(https://screen.morningstar.com/fundselectoraol.html)
Thanks!
Worth noting is that M* hasn't maintained its basic screener (its "official" one as well as this one) for years. This can be seen in its selection of fund categories.
For example, it lists "market neutral". That hasn't been around since April 2021, so a search on this category turns up empty. And it doesn't offer the replacement categories: equity market-neutral, event-driven, and relative value arbitrage.
For 93.567+% of investors, this doesn't matter. Or more accurately, it might matter only if you're searching for one of the new categories. If a category was merged into an older existing one (e.g. long-short credit into nontraditional bond), you'll still find funds, but under a different category.
Here are the category changes:
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/introducing-new-alternative-morningstar-categories

Thanks for the feedback @raqueteer. hard to find a consistently strong performing fund in the small cap space if you look at the 1 3 5 and 10 year time frames that also has good downside protection. Large cap has so strongly outperformed small cap over last ten years. Best example I have found that meets these attributes is PKSAX. AVUV and CALF look interesting.

I think M* advisor workstations/terminals cost around $10,000.
It cannot get those kind of revenues from the old M* Premium or the new M* Investor.
Those who haven't visited M* Discussions recently will find several discussion/Q&A areas now for its professional products. M* now sees it as M* online customer support. So, there is still one lone click for Investing Forums that takes one to the neglected, hard-to-navigate M* Discussions areas. It's also private now, so stuff isn't linkable and login is required just to look.
Ironically, years ago M* offered lots of free tools to us, but after lots of free debugging and feedback by us, it has moved those to its professional offerings. Its ambition is to become a mini-Bloomberg. It can claim that it offers many features much cheaper than Bloomberg terminals.
I still hang around M* for TIAA Forum (there is also a Facebook alternative) , etc, but I have moved on for portfolio monitoring and general postings.

I wonder how much it actually costs them to support portfolio analyzer, the really only useful think there now?
They made a decision years ago that there was much more o money to be made in institutional and especially advisor support. They must still be making a profit on all the individual stuff essays, etc or they would have shut it down completely, unless their advisor customers find it useful to refer clients to

I could never understand why anyone has more than 7-8 funds (they are usually the ones who say, there is no right number). You go over 10 funds and you are over-diversified.
What usually happens with over 10 funds? you are not sure and/or you have owned lagging categories for years. You already know that the SP500 beat most funds over 15-20 years so why do you own so many funds? This was my initial start (1995-2000) investing 90+% in VG Total index and the rest in VG growth.
If you are into more analysis looking for generic funds with great risk/reward how can you have more than 8 funds? How many great ideas can you have? I never had more than 5-6 funds.
While most think that you can't find great funds that have done well for years, history proved them wrong. PRWCX has done it. PIMIX did it for 9-10 years.
More at (https://fd1000.freeforums.net/thread/2/generic-ideas)
Let's use the above link. How about running a screener every 4-6 funds and buying good risk/reward funds? This way you are not stuck in a lagging category/fund for years.
First, I select allocation+international equity+US equity (link)
Second, select the risk tab on top, then Sharpe + sort Sharp (link)
Third, select overview again (https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/fund-screener/results/table/overview/sharpeRatio3Yr/desc/1?assetClass=BAL%2CDSTK%2CISTK&category=AL%2CCA%2CCH%2CCV%2CDP%2CEI%2CEM%2CES%2CFA%2CFB%2CFG%2CFQ%2CFR%2CFV%2CIH%2CJS%2CLB%2CLG%2CLS%2CLV%2CMA%2CMB%2CMG%2CMQ%2CMV%2CPJ%2CRI%2CSB%2CSG%2CSV%2CSW%2CTA%2CTD%2CTE%2CTG%2CTH%2CTI%2CTJ%2CTK%2CTL%2CTN%2CTU%2CTV%2CWB%2CWG%2CWV%2CXM%2CXQ%2CXY&order=assetClass%2Ccategory).
The above list is sorted by Sharpe from best (high) to low. All you have to do is look at performance for YTD,1,3,5 years.
Funds to consider:
GOODX=MC value
HIMDX=SC value
FMILX=LC value
BISMX/BISAX=SC+MC international value
SP500 is always a choice
Just 5 funds and good diversification.
============
MFO also has a great screener and Charles Lynn Bolin posted great articles about it.

The year turned out pretty good! The Great Normalization Bull is now in its 15th month. And, like has happened with each bull market for the past 100 years, the S&P 500 has recovered all previous drawdown and sits at a new all-time high, month-ending December.

@hank
Since we've moved cash we had parked in a MM and a couple bond funds to TRP Cap App & Income (PRCFX), we are back to 95% with DG. 17 years and counting. Whenever I've moved some dollars away from DG through the years it has always cost me money.

That’s where I’ve landed after years of “over analyzing” / “over allocating”. Run a 10-part portfolio @10% each. Various cash holdings constitute 10%. Another part consists of 3 individual stocks. The other 8 are single funds (OEMF, CEF, ETF).
Recently pitched a 10% weighted aggressive bond fund & replaced it with an investment grade short term fund. Had I @rforno’s money, a move like that might have sent “ripples” through the markets!

Your pie charts seem to confirm my view that high foreign investments have hurt its returns. TRPBX’s foreign holdings are much higher than FBALX. I don’t shun foreign investments, but will prefer to use dedicated foreign funds from now on, particularly since TRP’s foreign funds are so weak. After I sold TRPBX in my Roth IRA, I reinvested in FBALX plus my other TRP stock funds (TRMCX, TRVLX and PRDMX). Also put some of money in Fidelity’s FIVFX, which has outperformed TRP foreign funds. I’m planning to do a Roth conversion with part of the ARTKX shares in my regular IRA, and will put the remaining funds in that. I’m not comfortable holding 20% of the total assets of my Roth IRA in foreign stocks plus another 10-15% in foreign bonds, particularly given the higher risk and lower returns of foreign markets for many years.

I also tend to hold funds for quite some time, because funds have their own cycles and often when one fund underperforms another for some time, the pattern subsequently reverses.
Looking at the calendar year percentile rankings, one could say that it's not so much that TRPBX got worse as that it tended to be okay but not great. Or as rforno put it, "kind of 'meh'".
The fund had two bad years, 2021 and 2022 (and FBALX had an even worse record in 2022). These weigh heavily on its three year performance and five year performance. Those two years aside, its yearly performances were typically top third, just.
Even going back to your first decade with these funds (2003-2012), TRPBX barely outpaced FBALX, 8.23% to 8.21%.
I suspect that the fraction of equity that's invested abroad hasn't shifted much in decades. A fund may be permitted to make major allocation changes without ever taking advantage of that freedom. Not worth going back past 2017, though, because earlier annual reports don't seem to contain that information.
Sept 2023 (M*): 32% foreign (19.01%/59.60%)
May 2022 (annual report): 36% foreign (21%/59%)

May 2021 (annual report): 34% foreign (20%/59%)

May 2020 (annual report): 34% foreign (21%/62%)

May 2019 (annual report): 35% foreign (20%/57%)

May 2018 (annual report): 36% foreign (21%/58%)

The 2017 annual report notes that T. Rowe Price made several changes to what were then called the Personal Strategy Funds.

On October 1, 2016, we introduced three new underlying investment strategies to the Personal Strategy Funds. ... The changes include a new allocation to alternatives through a hedge fund-of-funds, as well as initiating an investment in the T. Rowe Price Dynamic Global Bond Fund and an equity index option strategy.

@msf
You are correct that TRPBX slightly outperformed FBALX by about 1.1% in 2022.
However, over the following time periods, FBALX outperformed TRPBX annualized by this much:
1 year, 6.7%
3 years, 4.1%
5 years, 4.2%
10 years, 2.2%
Put another way, $10,000 invested in FBALX ten years ago would be worth $23,262, compared to $17,743 with TRPBX. Since I had considerably more money invested in both funds over the past 10 years, the value of my FBALX holdings have increased by tens of thousands of dollars more than TRPBX — particularly since I’ve owned both funds for more than 20 years (until selling TRPBX earlier this year.)
Anyway, it’s my fault for sticking with TRP allocation funds for so long. They have underperformed
for a while, but I’m a patient buy-and-hold investor and kept expecting things to change. They did, but unfortunately for the worse.

FWIW -
RPGAX was one of my favorite funds when I invested directly with TRP. But haven’t owned or looked at it since. ISTM its performance was decent from inception on to about 2020 when I departed. I liked the idea of allocating approximately 10% to the Blackstone hedge fund. But that’s just me - always looking for a way to hedge the downside or step to a different drummer. True - the Blackstone holding was hard to justify on an expense basis. And it generally detracted from performance over those years. Still - I’m always looking for hedges - and that was the purpose.

TRP’s foreign stock funds have never performed very well, with a few exceptions … .

I’d agree with that.

Lipper loves TRRIX - 5's across the board (except for tax efficiency)

I pay a lot of attention to Lipper’s ratings. BTW - M* gives TRRIX a “silver” (2nd highest) rating which ain’t too shabby either. I like TRRIX too - or wouldn’t have 10% of portfolio devoted to it. Hard to beat the .49% ER for a pretty diverse basket of managed funds.
That said… No way should that fund have fell over 13% in 2022. Especially - @msf will recall - that over the decades (far back as before the turn of the century) one commonly lauded aspect of TRP was their skill at allocating among different assets. They always seemed to have an edge in that one area. I’ve heard it here on this board over the years and that conformed to my own view until recently. Lose that edge and a good part of the reason for investing with them is gone.
BYW - It appears they’ve recently added a bit of their Dynamic Income fund to the TRRIX fixed income mix. That fund uses bond shorts to hedge against rising rates. We’ll see how it all works out.

TRP certainly didn’t market or describe TRPBX as a global allocation fund when I started investing in it, although they’ve always had more foreign holdings than most balanced funds. If it’s a global allocation fund, then why did they create RPGAX? It’s my impression that they’ve increased foreign investments over the years. However, they have flexibility to increase or decrease foreign investments, so why do they keep pouring money into areas that aren’t panning out?. Finally, TRP’s foreign stock funds have never performed very well, with a few exceptions. I’ve also invested in Spectrum International (PSILX), which invests in a range of TRP foreign funds, and it has been a poor performer despite a low expense ratio.
A few differences I’ve noticed between TRP and Fidelity. If a Fidelity fund performs poorly, they replace or change the management team. If a Fidelity fund performs well, they generally don’t close it to their investors (although they have done so for limited time periods). Most Fidelity funds have the flexibility to invest in foreign assets, but they generally don’t load up on them unless the fund is clearly designated as global or international. FLPSX is the rare exception but it has continued to perform well despite holding a lot of foreign stocks.

From a non-expert corner. Not related to FMSDX. …
Be a bit careful if looking at funds (of any category) holding a lot of income-producing stocks. Oh - It’s a great sector / always has been - except that it looks like it’s been “hot as nails” for several years now. (Check out PRFDX.) The income producers can and do run in cycles.
I’ve seen Yogi’s description and it does not appear FMSDX is riding that wave - perversely, that might be a good sign. If you find something similar that’s wildly outperforming, take a look at the equity component before you leap.
I don’t own any Fidelity funds, but have been very impressed by the ones I’ve looked at. Steady performers, often with very low ERs.