According to the Morningstar definition of "other":
"Other"
"The proportion of the fund invested in other securities such as property or other financial instruments"
When I use to do a lot of bond oef investing, and you broke down the funds holdings, "other" often linked back to Derivatives.

Barron’s Funds Quarterly+ (2024/Q4–January 13, 2025)
https://www.barrons.com/topics/mutual-funds-quarterly
(Performance data quoted in this Supplement are for 2024/Q4 and YTD to 12/31/24)
(No Supplement – it’s all within the main issue)
Pg 12:2024 was tough for stockpickers. So, look at the holdings of the top funds – LC-PAGDX, LC-BRAGX, MC-RCMFX, SC-HFCGX. Those included Magnificent 7, big tech, financials, energy. What may work for 2025? AI, energy, materials, infrastructure, travel.
Pg 14: In this Trump market, just follow the leaders. Watch cryptos, the best M* category (Digital Assets) of 2024, followed far behind by the MLPs. Trump and sons have a crypto venture called World Liberty Financial. Bonds and rate sensitive plays (utilities, real estate, etc) were laggards with the exception of financials that should benefit from coming deregulations. Funds related to Trump’s circle of friends did very well – PTIR (2x PLTR), TSLL (2x TSLA), MLXIX (9.6% in ET).
SP500 has 33% in tech and 13% in financials and did quite well in 2024 with +25% despite softness in stocks in 2024/Q4. The total ETF AUM was over $10 trillion with 4 ETFs among the top 10 being the SP500 ETFs. Inflows into ETFs, including the active ETFs, were strong. Mutual funds had outflows. Foreign funds didn’t do well (the US investor returns were also hurt by a strong dollar). (By @LewisBraham at MFO)
More on Funds & Retirement
RETIREMENT. Super Catchup for 401k/403b from 2025. Another Secure 2.0 provision for catchups for 401k, 403b, government 457 and federal TSP kicks in 2025.
For 55+ $7,500 (regular)
For 60-63 $11,250 (higher of $10,000 and 150% of regular catchup)
SIMPLE retirement plan catchups are also adjusted: 55+ $3,500, 60-63 $5,250.
Priority order – 401k to employer match, Roth IRA, HSA, top off 401k.
Barron’s weekend issue has CASH TRACK charts showing 4-wMA of flows.
https://i.ibb.co/dDw0rm1/Barrons-Cash-Track-011125.png
Q4 Top 5 Fund Categories (MFOP)
https://i.ibb.co/5x4xYCK/MFOP-Quarterly-Top5-010925.png
Q4 Bottom 5 Fund Categories (MFOP)
https://i.ibb.co/R69M4pz/MFOP-Quarterly-Bottom5-010925.png
LINK

My parents have an advisor who is about to retire. he said he'll take care of them for as long as he's alive (my father is clergy and helped him through some losses) so thats nice but he's 5 years older than my parents!
I know what they are invested in and nothing is too out of bounds. I'd do it differently in all likelihood but nonetheless I don't want the hassle.
My dad wants me involved in all the meetings which is fine. I assume advisors roll their eyes at the idea of a novice stickign their nose in.
That said, I know one of the guys at his firm and he knows I know my stuff and has tried to get me to turn to a life of financial advice (blech) so its fine.
He asked me one day if I had any ideas I'd like to discuss. I was like I know you agreed to handle this for my parents and I appreciate that, but would it be better to move these 8 funds into a singular balanced fund that spits out a distribution that they can w/d or not w/d for their expenses? It seems like it woudl be easier for everyone involved. He's like thats a great idea but I'm not dead yet lets look at that later on.
I manage my fathers stock account (largely vtsax and john deere) that we use for charitable giving.

I don't have any "urge to manage friends and families investments"! I have a hard enough time just managing the investments for me and my wife. I will encourage families and friends to do as much self-education as possible, and then decide for themselves if they need help from a professional Financial Advisor, or if they want to do it themselves. On these Financial Forums, I try very hard to avoid offering advice to others, but am willing to tell others what I am doing with my own personal investments. I view these forums as opportunities for posters/investors to learn from each other, but ultimately each poster/investor has to decide on what is best for themselves.

Seems to me to be two completely different skill sets-
• A): Insuring that numbers are being computed and accounted for properly, according to established accounting principles.
• B): Manipulating numbers in an attempt to increase their values and sums to the maximum extent possible, while also remaining reasonably consistent with safety.
And like most skill sets, there may be some degree of natural interest or aptitude involved, but education and training are the most important factors.

Yeah, you seem to have missed my point. And other posters routinely missing my points is the primary reason why I don't post a lot. That said...
I said earlier "Conversely, the women, many highly educated and certified in high level finance positions, were largely uninterested, uneducated and inexperienced in wealth mgmt."
I cited their FEAR as the primary reason for this.
Having education and work experience in accounting, finance and bizness administration IMO should increase the likelihood that a person understands investing more than the next person, and is less FEARful in investing. (Duh, we not only read financial statements, we create them, audit them and issue findings and recommendations related to them!)
My family was blue collar. Nobody in my family ever owned a stock or bond until I did. We were collectively FEARful of markets, primarily due to inexperience and lack of financial intelligence.
I did not start investing until I got my degree. I would have remained terrified of financial markets had I not had my base level, formal education in accounting, then LT employment in accounting. So, I overcame my FEAR of markets largely due to formal, financial education and work experience.
Over the course of my 35+ years in the financial work force, and a similar amount of time assisting friends and relatives with their investments, I saw the exact same effect on other men. I did not see the same effect on women.
BUT, when the women I knew who did overcome their FEAR, they generally went on to be highly successful investors. And as some studies show, women tend to be better investors as men. The biggest problem appears to be overcoming their FEAR about it all. (The study I linked notes "stress." Stress is the condition. FEAR is the resulting emotion that is expressed.)
YMMV.

Are there AA-AAA rated companies that would do seller financed purchases, with or without life estate (i.e., lease back)? If not, I would think there is a lucrative market for this product.
I'm having trouble making sense of some of this.
"Do seller financed purchases". What does "do" mean? Are you thinking of brokering (arranging) purchases? That is, finding an interested buyer and/or handling the paperwork? For those types of services I don't see what difference a company's credit rating would make.
Or does "do" mean taking the buyer side in the transactions? There, the credit rating of the company (as borrower) would matter. But what's the business model? Would the company build up an inventory of homes that it is buying "on time" and resell them to other buyers?
"lucrative market"
Would the profit come from paying well under market value, as "we buy homes for cash NOW" companies do? But then the seller wouldn't have any motivation to provide financing.
Or would such a company pay a better price for the seller financed homes? It might hope to make a profit from the use of the cash (full price) it receives from the sale of inventory homes.
It would pay the original seller one rate of interest (the seller financing rate) and earn another rate of interest on the proceeds from reselling the home. But where's the spread? The company would be borrowing long term from the original seller. Or would you expect seller-financed sales to be relatively short term (say, five years) with a correspondingly lower rate of interest?
Can you offer an example of a transaction "done" by such a company? I don't get what you have in mind.
"life estate (i.e., lease back)"
These are two different things. A life estate is actual ownership of property. A lease back is a rental where someone else owns the property. If you want more clarification, look up the difference between freehold estate (ownership) and leasehold estate (rental). See, e.g. here (it's not letter perfect, but gets across the general idea).
As far as Selleck is concerned, it's not a bad ad.

Unfortunately, his message to “explore the potential” has been confused as a recommendation older homeowners should get one. This may not always be the case.
Obviously, the time restrictions of TV commercials limit content. To his credit, though, he created national awareness of a less-known and frequently misunderstood resource that has the potential to increase and extend financial security – a hugely common fear among aging Americans.

https://southshoresenior.com/2024/05/what-tom-selleck-did-not-say-about-reverse-mortgages/

These commercials do a good job of introducing the reverse mortgage product. However, the decision to secure the loan can be complicated and confusing.

https://www.boldin.com/retirement/tom-selleck-reverse-mortgages-telling-truth/

When you take out a reverse mortgage, the lender deducts an upfront fee. It also charges interest over the life of your loan. Reverse mortgage interest rates are usually higher than conventional mortgage interest rates, but similar to rates on home equity loans.

Kiplinger, 10 Things You Should Know About Reverse Mortgages

FDIC is important in my world of investing, with my use of CDs and banks in general. I am now starting to venture into Credit Unions, where the SIF insurance is the FDIC counterpart for government protection. For older Fixed Income investors, there are vivid memories of the 2007/2008 financial crisis, and the many banking failures. I had CDs in numerous banks that failed during that financial crisis periods, and so now I try to use Deposit Insurance tools to evaluate the financial health of banks, in addition to making sure I stay within the limits of FDIC and SIF insurance, for each bank/credit union I use.

There's no sale involved in a reverse mortgage (who would the buyer be?). You may be conflating Yogi's two paragraphs. One is about reverse mortgages where you gradually borrow money against the value of your home. The other is about seller financed transactions where you loan the full sale amount and are gradually repaid.
Since they are different types of transactions, the mechanisms for continuing to live in your home are different. With a mortgage (forward or reverse) you continue to own the property so long as the mortgage isn't foreclosed. With a sale (seller financed or other), the buyer owns the home. You need to make some sort of arrangement (as a renter or as the holder of a life estate or owner for some period of years, or ...) to continue to use the property.

A reverse mortgage loan, like a traditional mortgage, allows homeowners to borrow money using their home as security for the loan.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, What is a Reverse Mortgage?
FHA-approved reverse mortgage lenders
https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/housing/sfh/hecm/hecmlenders

@ Art
My portfolio holdings were generally unchanged in 2024 except for a little tweaking within sectors (mostly during pullbacks to limit taxable gains). The Info Tech and Financial stock sectors contributed the most to my 2024 total portfolio returns. The lower level of Info Tech dividends paid by its holdings during 2024 contributed to the year-end increase in the stock % held in that sector. The higher level of dividends paid by my REIT and Financial sector holdings during the year contributed to their year-end stock sector % declines.
% of Stocks .... % of Stocks
12/31/24 ........ 01/01/24
20% .. Real Estate .. 24%
20% .. Info. Tech. .. 14%
12% .. Utilities .. .. 11%
17% .. Financials .. .. 18%
13% .. Energy .. .. 13%
82% .. Total .. .. 80%

I see mostly men posting about the lack of financial interest from their wives. Individually find out the root cause for yourself and your role in it. As Yogi said, others can guess but can be wrong. If you need help, ask another woman for the cause. There may be a few in this forum.
Great post YBB.

I don't think it is a gender issue. I think is a marital relationship issue, and what is unique in that marital relationship regarding finances and investing.

Per this source, um, it is at least part gender issue, or at least it can be stratified as such:
https://www.newyorklife.com/newsroom/2024/survey-highlights-existing-financial-confidence-and-knowledge-gaps-between-men-and-women
Excerpt (BOLD addded):
NEW YORK - The latest findings from New York Life’s Wealth Watch survey provide insights into the existing financial confidence and knowledge gaps between men and women. Confidence is the top emotion that men report feeling toward managing their household finances (45%) while stress is the leading emotion for women (38%). The survey found that women report feeling the most knowledgeable about paying bills, maintaining good credit, and saving for emergencies. However, they report feeling significantly less knowledgeable than their male counterparts about building wealth, creating investment portfolios, understanding protection products like insurance, and legacy planning.
Plenty of other stratified M/F data included in study for anyone interested in facts over opinions.
That said, the data pretty much ties to what my 40-50 years of work and investing experience has taught me and what I've posted previously here.
Aside: I worked in audit shops my entire career. By chance, the composition was generally skewed more towards women than men. Many were VERY bright people, including plenty of MBAs, CPAs and CAOs, with our reports going to upper mgmt and high level clients.
I always wanted to discuss investments, portfolios and wealth management with anyone else interested, including auditees and those to whom we reported. So did the vast majority of the men I worked under/managed. Conversely, the women, many highly educated and certified in high level finance positions, were largely uninterested, uneducated and inexperienced in wealth mgmt.
Puhleeease don't take these remarks as sexist. They are not and I am not. Take them for what they are: my real-life experiences in the financial world. These experiences are what convinced me the best way to tend to my wife's financial future if I pass first was to educate her as best I could on wealth management.

I see mostly men posting about the lack of financial interest from their wives. Individually find out the root cause for yourself and your role in it. As Yogi said, others can guess but can be wrong. If you need help, ask another woman for the cause. There may be a few in this forum.
Great post YBB.

I don't think it is a gender issue. I think is a marital relationship issue, and what is unique in that marital relationship regarding finances and investing.

I see mostly men posting about the lack of financial interest from their wives. Individually find out the root cause for yourself and your role in it. As Yogi said, others can guess but can be wrong. If you need help, ask another woman for the cause. There may be a few in this forum.
Great post YBB.

Good point BB.
I've (gratuitously) managed ports for at least 10 women over the past 40+ years. The most often cited reason from them for not wanting to manage their ports is FEAR.
Yeah, ALL CAPS! True FEAR! FEAR of all kinds of things related to management of investments or doing anything of material financial consequence.
FEAR related to investment portfolio mgmt is as really tough obstacle to overcome. But as part of managing their ports, I've had as a goal for each of them to one day be confident and capable of managing their own ports. I've only been able to do that with one woman who took over the mgmt of her port and is doing remarkably well. Conversely, with a couple of others, we know that we can only even talk to them about their ports for about five minutes before they nearly pass out or break out in hives.
Both widow's ports who had spousal written plans that we currently manage are the same:
Intense FEAR of everything related to the process, especially their own acumen
Distrust, near hatred, of their dearly departed (sic) hubbies handled their finances
Which is all to say, whatever a spouse has written in their plan for their surviving spouse stands a reasonable chance of not being executed/executed as planned due to FEAR, distrust and/or a lack of acumen.

I see mostly men posting about the lack of financial interest from their wives. Individually find out the root cause for yourself and your role in it. As Yogi said, others can guess but can be wrong. If you need help, ask another woman for the cause. There may be a few in this forum.
Great post YBB.

Great post @yogibearbull.
Me and the missus have been together since we were kids. Back in the 70's-80's, she easily (and proudly for her) would have been on a Top 10 List nationally of spouses who had ZERO interest in all things financial, especially investments.
After all these years, that interest level of ZERO might now at least be a ONE or TWO.
Yeah, her interest level is still a challenge for me.
BUT, over all these years, I felt it was my duty and obligation to not concentrate on her interest level, but rather address her acumen by educating her on all things financial, especially investments.
So I did, albeit with her kicking and screaming in the early years!
And now, after ~50 years, despite still negligible interest, she is a walking, talking authority on US stock OEFs and ETFs and CDs (our investment vehicles of choice), well, at least the ones that are worthy of our investment dollars.
Leaving a written plan might help the dying spouse feel that they've done their part in the marriage. But good luck to the surviving spouse with all that, as yogi has so eloquently detailed.
Aside: We currently manage the portfolios of several friends and relatives, including two widows whose hubbies had left them written plans that they had ZERO interest or ability in following.
YMMV. As may your take on how this critical element should be handled.

Several people have mentioned that they plan to leave detailed written instructions for their spouses to follow.
I informally help several friends. IMO, those written instructions won't be effective.
A spouse who has not been interested in financial affairs won't have confidence to just follow what is written and may even fear that they don't understand the written instructions well.
They will find a trusted friend or a financial advisor.
I have seen other family dynamics at work as well. Recently widowed spouses want to keep some financial matters private - so they don't want to tell their kids about them. This view may change as they age and start to feel that they won't be around for long. It's for sociologists to figure out why, although I have guesses.
In a recent situation, when a friend's health has deteriorated, I did make the family aware of some financial details - maybe they knew or not, but my concern was that some accounts may become inactive or abandoned.

@dtconroe- Well sir, while I surely respect your thoughts on all of this, I must demur with respect to the "spousal" element of the conversation. From my many years of frequenting MFO I can confirm that this question is actually a very important one with respect to older investors, and one which has been discussed numerous times over the years.
I personally have a similar situation, and have attempted to simplify and structure our financial resources to accommodate my wife's abilities to deal with the various financial "systems" that must be involved. I'm always very interested to read about how others might handle this subject, as there's always something to be learned here.
Thanks for initiating this thread.
OJ

msf, you are absolutely correct! My Schwab assigned Personal Account Representative has previously informed me that there is a list of local FAs, that they can provide to me, if I want to work with someone locally. We have not gone down that path "yet", but we have discussed it as an option. The important thing for me is to involve my wife in these decisions, and to ensure she is part of the decision, whatever that may be. And concerning the "option" of switching my banking arrangement to an online experience with Schwab Brokerage, that has been discussed periodically on these financial forums in the past, and it has been adopted by a few posters I know very well. If it was just a decision I was making for myself, then I would look at it in more detail. But Banking in my situation, is always "joint" banking arrangements, and I always have my wife's input/participation in those decisions. We have been married over 50 years, and I know how frustrated my wife is with online financial processes, and she would never agree to online, joint banking systems. Just because it is possible to do it, does not mean it is something that you should do, especially if it will upset and be resisted by your wife.

If it seemed like I was pushing you to bank at a brokerage, I apologize. I was responding to a statement that banking should be left to banks. Since some brokerages capably provide most banking services, then if one's brokerage is convenient and if one is comfortable with this idea, banking and investing through one institution can simplify things.
FWIW, I see there is a fee-only advisory firm (via NAPFA) in Tyler that can work through Schwab. This is just a suggestion of something to explore if you haven't done so. Tyler does seem to be rather removed from much of the financial industry so as you stated, there aren't many options for face-to-face transactions.
People have been suggesting alternatives because bank-affiliated advisors may wind up costing more than independent advisors, in terms of fees, in terms of limited offerings, in terms of recommendations (conflicts of interest). Here's an old Forbes opinion piece that goes into this.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/robrussell/2016/01/18/should-you-trust-a-bank-with-your-investments/
That's not to say it is impossible to find a financial advisor at a bank who meets your needs. Just be careful. Given the stringent constraints you're working with (geography, wife's capabilities, comfort level, interest in brick and mortar) it sounds like you're doing the best you can.

DT, you know I like and respect you, but often it boils down to your wife and extremly limited options in a 10-mile radius.
What would happen if there was only one lousy bank and nothing else?
I think the best choices long term are mutual funds. If I'm gone, my wife has to drive to the local Schwab and meet with our local rep so he can sell all other funds and do the following.
Another possibility could be that I grow old and decide to implement it anyway. I can do it all online.
I'm not letting any bank (even not BofA + Merrill) or CU hold my money except 3-6 months cash.
In order to make my wife's investment decisions easier, I set up a written plan for her to invest in only 3 funds. I only trust 2 choices indexes + Vanguard funds managed by Wellington for long term hold. Wellington Management is the oldest, it's conservative, team style, and not one dominant manager, with a very cheap expense ratio. Since our money isn't with Vanguard, we would have to own the more expensive funds(not Admiral), but it's still cheap.
For a younger age, until age 75 and still having a taxable account...50% VWINX(40/60)...taxable=20% VWAHX(HY Muni)...30% VSMGX (60/40 invested in 2 US + 2 international indexes). Since HY Muni bonds are hybrid, this portfolio is more like 40/60.
Older than 70-75 or taxable account is gone: 40% VWINX(40/60)...30% VWEHX(HY Corp)...30% VSMGX(60/40). Since HY Corp bonds are hybrid, this portfolio is more like 35/65(stocks/bonds).
As long as I'm managing the portfolio, I will be using my style.

FD, what you and your wife do in the future is a private and personal issue, that you will have to resolve. Other poster opinions will be based on their unique situations. I am absolutely sure, my wife and I will go down our own unique path, and I am absolutely sure my wife would not be willing to tolerate a "written plan" that involved mutual funds that "I" trust, or would tolerate. She will live her life, with "her" tolerances, and based on some arrangement that she accepts. The type of situation that she most often quotes to me, is that of what several of our lifelong close friends have--they have a "financial advisor" who works for an investing firm. Our friends do not have the investing skills to perform self-directed investing decisions. My wife will need a professional to hold her hand, attempt to meet her financial wishes, and try to avoid investing decisions. Our friends will be her "support system", and I will be a "cherished memory" who is not available any longer to help her.
Now, the current topic has become the idea that it would be good to have all banking activities rolled into the brokerage umbrella that we have developed with Schwab. I know my wife, I know her needs, I know her frustration level, I know her financial skills, and I know what she would prefer. All she knows is banking activities, tied to local brick and mortar banks, located close to our residence. That is what our friends do with their banking as well, including a friend who uses Schwab for his investments. My wife would be very resistant if I tried to impose online banking, through Schwab brokerage. Others know what will work for them, maybe very different than my situation with my wife--that is fine and none of my business.

@dtconroe, I remember discussing this some years ago. At the time, you had indicated that Fido office was 2 hours away in Dallas, but there was a 2-3 person local Schwab broker/office - did that close?

Yes, it closed, and all the Schwab Account information was reassigned to a "new" personal account representative in the Dallas area. We had switched from a Fido office in Dallas, to the Schwab office in Tyler, for access and convenience for my wife. My wife was very willing to make the 10 minute drive to the Tyler Schwab office, to meet staff, and know who to meet with when necessary. When Schwab closed in Tyler, I was back to the same predicament we had with Fido. That is very frustrating regarding brokerage services for my wife, and I sure am not going to switch my local banking services to Schwab and further complicate financial access and convenience issues for my wife.
I may be more obsessed with a financial system, that is user friendly for my wife, than others are. If something happens to me, I don't want to leave an emotionally distraught spouse, struggling with a financial arrangement that is online, scary, and intimidating for her. I keep banking local and enough money in local banks, so she can take a 10 minute drive to the bank, and ask a local bank representative to "help" her make necessary changes to reflect my demise. She can't do that easily with Schwab, does not have the online skills to handle that, and does not want to make a 4 hour roundtrip drive to a Dallas office in very congested traffic.