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.

@Tarwheel: "TRP also started investing about 10% of its assets in hedge funds, which from my view hasn’t helped performance a bit."
RPGAX (Global Allocation, now 10 yrs old IIRC) also has like 10-15% exposure in a black-box. To my knowledge they never really explained what *exactly* Blackrock was managing/investing in for the fund. But wow ... I didn't know their Spectrum funds also had a PE component, too!
I agree w/Hank that their fund offerings are kind of 'meh' and definitely have proliferated over the years -- frankly I'd think they should consolidate/close some of them if for no other reason than to make their offerings list less cluttered with a lot of me-too funds that invest similarly to each other.
I only hold PRWCX but am keeping its income-oriented cousin (forgot the symbol) on watch as a possible holding down the road. I'll also track TCAF out of curiosity, but don't really have a need for it in my portfolios.

I own it in the wife's IRA. Only just more than 4% of the entire portfolio's total. Rates coming down ought to help, whenever that may start. Seems to me they "forgot" to take the annual small IRA maintenance fee.
I have lotsa free time. I check every day. BRUFX is heavy with SMIDs. Surely, that's a drawback. The elder Bruce died, yes, and I couldn't believe my eyes when Morningstar downgraded it because of personnel changes. Jayzuz. I admit I'm getting itchy. That big cash stake hurts.
"...The strategy's portfolio management team does not stand out and still needs to prove it has a competitive advantage. This earns the strategy an Average People Pillar rating, recently downgraded from Above Average. The strategy's effective investment approach earns an Above Average Process Pillar rating. Independent of the rating, analysis of the strategy's portfolio shows it has maintained a considerable underweight position in the Europe-Developed region and has a considerable overweight in developed markets regions compared with category peers. The strategy's parent organization is industry standard, albeit with some strong attributes like an experienced bench of portfolio managers, but is held back by low portfolio manager retention. This earns the firm an Average Parent Pillar rating...." ---Morningstar.
Ridiculous, risible. The ONLY Manager now is the younger Bruce, the son. Unless I missed an announcement?
Not only is the Fund heavy with SMIDs, but it's got a VALUE tilt. Looking back, it's not been VALUE'S time in the sun lately, right?
Fixed Income: 4.59%.
"Cash" 32.31%
There's something less than half a billion dollars AUM. If Mr. Bruce is bound and determined to be contrarian, I'd say the Fund's results are showing it. If that is the case, then performance comparisons won't be very-well focused, targeted. But no one should be pleased to end-up the year at THE very bottom of the pack.
YTD and 1-year: 100th percentile.
But looking backward over several years, performance has been quite good IN COMPARISON to its peers. But... who are its peers?

I wonder if much of the outflow isn't self-induced. My prior company's 401k accounts were with TRP for over 30 years. All accounts were transferred to a new custodian, Merrill Lynch, earlier this year. I wouldn't be surprised, just from this one company, they willingly sold off 10s of thousands of employee and past employee accounts. I doubt it was just this one specific company, so maybe the outflow is due to them not wanting to deal with employer sponsored 401k accounts anymore. Just speculating.

+1
Nice write-up @Tarwheel. I’d been a happy camper with TRP since the mid to late 90s. Kept anywhere from 40-60% of my retirement funds there over more than 25 years with the rest spread around different fund houses. I left about 3 years ago after noticing their phone based client support had become abysmal to the point where i began to worry about (unwanted) paper statements ending up in someone else’s mailbox. Repeated calls didn’t help. Couldn’t stop the unwanted sporadic and unpredictable statement mailings. And when I finally moved out, they screwed up the transfer to Fidelity royally.
Their fixed income funds lagged up until the late 90s when a very talented woman took over. For a few years, under her leadership they got a lot better. Not sure when she moved on. ISTM she left sometime after 2000 to take a government position in Washington DC. Fixed income fell back to mediocre not long after.
The Giroux affectionados here love the guy and everything he touches - with good reason. Maybe they’ll discover a way to clone him and put the clowns clones in charge of everything. But I agree with you that their allocation funds ain’t what they once were. Likely it’s the fixed income component that’s causing the lackluster performance. I do own a slug of TRRIX (a 40/60 fund). ISTM it lost 10-12% in 2022. Worst showing I can ever remember (umm … other than 2008). It keeps most of its fixed income component in their New Income Fund (PRCIX) and most of the remainder in a short-immediate term TIPs fund. The former has always been a bit of a dog.
The world turns over every 24 hours. I’m sure the move to ETFs is hurting their bottom line and maybe (a guess) causing either some talent drain or cut-backs in research. Just guesses. BTW - their offerings have multiplied at least 5X since I joined them in the mid-90s. Not sure that kind of shotgun approach is in their best interest. But definitely got problems in River City Baltimore.

When in doubt, claim seasonality?
Background: On another forum, you (finally) posted a near-real time BUY of the stock market in late Oct. You got UP a few % an sold your entire position.
The markets then promptly ran up HUGE gains in Nov and Dec. You justified your premature SELL by posting you don't need the extra money.
What followed was a slew of posts back-and-forth between several posters that ultimately caused you to be banned (again) from that forum, this time until EOY '23, for your incessant desire to post your crap.
That's why you are now posting here and on the Fido board - you have lost access to your main stomping grounds.
What's so odd about all that is that you have for YEARs posted about your impeccable trading abilities, ALWAYS making the right and best trades. Yet, on the ONE time that I know of (in over a DECADE) that you posted something near a real time trade, you made money, but only a fraction of what you coulda/shoulda made, and only a fraction of what others who you incessantly demean as inferior investors made.
Now you've graced the MFO platform with your astounding revelation that the market is UP due to seasonality. On the Fido board you recently used your standard "more buyers than sellers" line.
What would all of us stoopid investors do without you?

Here's Motley Fool:
https://www.fool.com/investing/stock-market/basics/santa-claus-rally/
Understanding the Santa Claus rally
Generally, the Santa Claus rally refers to the stock market's history of rising over the last five trading days of the year and the first two market days of the new year.
Also, the venerable Art Cashin has worked the NYSE for over 50 years. I really can't count how many times I've heard him say EXACTLY what MF states and EXACTLY what I've posted.

My experiences with foreign small caps and emerging markets have not been good. I invested in Artisan’s global small cap, and it performed so poorly that they closed it after a few years. I invested in MAPIX, and it was still losing money after more than 7 years. I invested in SFGIX, one of the better EM funds, and it had returned less than 4% annually after more than 11 years. These kind of funds tend to get destroyed in down markets, and it happens quickly.
I’m through investing in foreign SC and EM now, unless some of my broader foreign funds invest in them. My advice to anyone considering these markets, is to be prepared for a long wait before making any money— unless you get lucky with your timing. I’ll be 70 in January, and I might not live long enough to see them make money. Good luck!

I second the comments posted here. It is SO difficult to find any Foreign funds that perform comparable to Domestic funds. We get our Foreign exposure through a coupla Global funds, and that's it for us. Usually hold about 10% of our stock exposure in Foreign.

Interesting article in Financial Times about TRP’s loss of investors. I’m one of the long term investors who’ve been bailing out. Although I still invest in TRP funds, I transferred our Roth IRAs from there to Fidelity a couple years ago. Convenience was a big factor because now all of our investments are with Fidelity. However, it was also due to a growing lack of confidence in TRP. A lot of my investments are in allocation funds, and I’m not pleased with TRP’s offerings, aside from PRWCX, which has been closed to new investors for a while. My wife and I have invested with TRP for more than 25 years, with more than $200K in our Roth IRAs, and they still wouldn’t let us invest in PRWCX.
So we invested heavily in TRPBX, which has been a major disappointment. It was considered a top moderate allocation fund when we started using it, but performance has steadily declined— which is ironic because PRWCX has been so successful. Much of the problem seems to be their asset allocation, with heavy stakes in foreign and emerging markets. Although the fund’s volatility is not bad on a day-to-day basis, it has been hurt by the high foreign allocations in down and up markets. TRP also started investing about 10% of its assets in hedge funds, which from my view hasn’t helped performance a bit.
We still own several TRP stock funds that have performed well, through the Fidelity funds network. However, we’ve ditched their bond and allocation funds. The Fidelity funds that replaced them have all had better performance. We’ll probably drop some of our remaining TRP funds if they don’t improve soon. At one time, I considered using TRP for all of our investments, but we decided to use Fidelity as well — and my Fidelity investments as a whole have greatly outperformed my TRP holdings.
https://www.ft.com/content/7cdd7cd9-f465-48ae-af18-aa8201f8fab8

Sold Vanguard International Growth (VWILX) yesterday.
Used proceeds to purchase Seafarer Overseas Value (SIVLX) today.
VWILX holdings overlapped with my core foreign stock fund.
My portfolio also had minimal EM equity exposure.
I haven't owned a dedicated EM equity fund for ~5 years.

This fund appears to be over concentrated in pharmaceuticals and energy; not diversified at all. When benchmarked against the S&P500 (may not be the most appropriate benchmark for this portfolio) it has underperformed steadily for the last 12 years. I'd definitely move on and look for a more diversified fund that is performing competitively against a broad market index. Some good things to say about Bruce: low expense ratio, low turnover, no-load.

The Bruce fund has been under performing the last two years. Its on track to lose money again in 2023 which will make it two years in a row of negative returns. What insight does the group have on the Bruce Fund other than the Dad passed away this year. Is this a sign that Dad was the one making all of the correct decisions?

I’ve had a fairly large stake in FMSDX for about 2.5 years. Unfortunately, I bought it just before the last big market drop, and it’s just broken even during the past month. I’m sticking with it because it has a great record and I trust Fidelity’s management of its allocation funds. It pays dividends monthly, if that’s important to you. It has greatly outperformed most funds with similar asset allocations since its inception and hopefully that will continue.

Given how the site has reportedly continued to deteriorate significantly in its utility from what it once was years ago, I'll simply scrunch my eyes, cock my head, and ask "what's Morningstar?" :)

Yes and no. I bought some US Treasuries this week that are maturing in 3-6 months with yields about 5.3%. I consider them comparable to CDs with certain advantages. My CD ladders will have issues maturing every 6 months or so over the next 5 years. I’ll decide where to reinvest as they mature. If CD yields stay above 4%, I’ll probably continue to buy them, but might put some of the money in bond funds. If Treasury yields are comparable to CDs, I’ll probably keep buying them too. Their liquidity and tax advantages are pluses.

Tarwheel, you bring up a very relevant consideration--how low must CD rates fall, before they will no longer be considered for your portfolio. You have chosen 4%, and I am wondering what others have set as their "floor" before you start moving money to a different kind of asset. I thought 4% as the floor as well, especially since longer term brokerage CDs are already dipping below 4%, although that could be just a year end dip.

Yes and no. I bought some US Treasuries this week that are maturing in 3-6 months with yields about 5.3%. I consider them comparable to CDs with certain advantages. My CD ladders will have issues maturing every 6 months or so over the next 5 years. I’ll decide where to reinvest as they mature. If CD yields stay above 4%, I’ll probably continue to buy them, but might put some of the money in bond funds. If Treasury yields are comparable to CDs, I’ll probably keep buying them too. Their liquidity and tax advantages are pluses.

@crash and @hank, thanks for the clarification. Tactical moves does require larger % to make meaningful impact on the overall portfolio. Large move for us was to exit (most) bonds in late 2021 to cash equivalent as inflation became evident. 50/10/40 stock/bond/cash work out okay.
Since The summer we moved the opposite direction and stopped buying CDs and T bills. Think the sweet spot are those in intermediate term range, 5-7 years. Small bet on long bonds net over 10% as 10 treasury yield dropped to below10%. Other high yield bonds are doing very well, many have netted double digit total returns. Going forward there are more opportunities in bonds as the FED apparently had reached the pivot point. When and if the rate cut comes, bonds will do well in 2024.
In the meantime we will maintain a healthy % in stocks ( to combat inflation) but wait for “fat pitches” as stocks are not cheap.

This thread is directed toward those who currently own CDs. I have used CDs extensively for almost 2 years now, watched CD rates go over 5%, but now CD rates are dropping. As my my CDs mature, I am hearing a lot of chatter about why it is not a good idea, to continue investing in CDs, because stocks and bond options are pretty much guaranteed to make more than CDs. In the last several weeks, I have chosen to buy some bank CDs at my personal bank for 5.25%, but my brokerage CDs are selling in the 4% ranges now, because the FEDs projected rate cuts.
Are any "current" CD owners still buying CDs, with cash that becomes available to you, from maturing CDs or other cash sources?

Speaking for myself, it's just the way I was raised. Along the way it just became part of my curiosity toolkit to compare and contrast funds and their holdings, as well as what they are charging for doing business with them.
One example I can think of involves green energy funds. I steered clear of the ones that featured a lot of consumer durables in the nature of electric vehicles. That's more of a sector orientation though. And I can't say that it has done me much good so far.
Another example would be cogitating on the performance difference between FBALX and PRWCX.

Same. To wit: I remember when Berkwitz's Fairholme Fund was all the rage; I looked and its' top holding was like 40% of the fund, so I thought that was a little much (it was either Sears or St Joe, I forget). I just like to know what it holds & how it's allocated/investing before I jump onboard!
Same when PRGTX was the 'hot' fund a few years ago - its #1 holding was like 10-15% in TSLA. which was an immediate turn-off for me.

Initiated starter position in Liberty Broadband Corporation's Series A preferreds (LBRDP) $ 22.50 as a long-term income holding.

SEQUX has about 1% in their A shares, another 3% in their C shares, and 5.08% in Liberty Formula ! (FWONK ). It's not the worst taxable fund I have owned over 10 years. So I am also interested in what the attraction is.
I see now that SEQUX has added two more small slices from Liberty, one being the Atlanta Braves. Is this going to be their next Valeant?