I think that the drive for no till farming, the start up mentioned that claims to eliminate nitrogen fertilizer, and "precision planting " are driven by drought conditions, falling water tables and the need to reduce nitrogen runoff and be more ecologically sustainable.
"Biotechnology, says Edgington, has accelerated the shift to no-till farming and other eco-friendly practices. “Biotech is helping the world’s environment, period,” he says."
Sounds pretty "E" to me.
Like a lot of Barron's articles this is really only the barest hint of how to invest. FPI for example may have been up 82% in the the last three years but it is down significantly in the last because of it's huge debt load as interest rates have increased.

Over, Under, Sideways, Down; February 27 - March 3, 2023
The above is a song title of a Yardbirds song from 1966. Not about investing, but the words fit the current investing market place, eh?
How about the state of things at the moment, it's all over the place, so it's sort of over, under, sideways, down.
---Over.....over valued
---Under..... under valued
---Sideways.....just plain sideways in values
---Down.....prices down for equity and bonds, bad; down yields for bonds, good for bond pricing and borrowing needs, private and business
Other than these, everything is very clear in the investing world at this time :)
Parts still on back order for the Magic 8 ball....crap!
--- This list Feb. 20- 27 (most current for a full week) FUND FLOWS
Pretty much bond-land for this time frame.
Top 10 Creations (All ETFs) ...Ticker... Fund Name... Net In-Flows (millions)
SHV iShares Short Treasury Bond ETF 3,146.28
BIL SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF 1,841.76
SGOV iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF 1,339.54
BND Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF 943.49
SPTS SPDR Portfolio Short Term Treasury ETF 835.62
JPST JPMorgan Ultra-Short Income ETF 695.99
TLT iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF 685.80
GBIL Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF 626.00
JEPI JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF 526.29
SMLF iShares MSCI USA Small-Cap Multifactor ETF 490.80
--- Friday, March 3.....ISM (Institute of Supply Management) services sector report is too 'hot' for the FED's liking. Too many folks still working. The number 50 is the base line, and the current number is 55.1, with an estimate of 54.5; the highest since December, 2021. One suspects we may find another higher (.5) Fed funds rate increase in our near future.
ISM services covers many areas of economic measurements. Read about them here, if you're curious about the reports.
***Bonds were in a funk until Friday helped many sectors become happy for the week. The Real Yield thread at MFO may help with some of the current thinking. I remain with the thought that the 'pundits', if they're drinkers, would rather be throwing a few down at their favorite bar; as I'm convinced a lot of them don't know which darts to use for the board, either. I always keep in mind while watching yields that they only apply to our investing to a point, as I'm not buying individual bonds to hold for ten years or whatever time frame to obtain a full 4% rate. Our house watches the yields and how they are going to affect pricing, as we're buying the price, not the yield. Pension funds and related may be happy with long term holdings of bonds; but we retail investors for the most part, are buying bond mutual funds or bond etf's; and this is where pricing becomes most important, IMHO. NOTE: 'Hedge funds' also play big in the bond etf world. Yes, we may want to hold the fund or etf long term, but our goal is to buy 'low', right? Wouldn't it be nice to buy a fund with a sideways price and a yield of +6%; and just hold on, to support your income flows and balance one's equity holdings.
Those MMKT's. Stagnant yields again this week, as they've hit a plateau; but most still having a yield between 4.2 and 4.5%, unless it's a magic sauce MMKT. Perhaps another bump up in yields when the FED raises rates again.
--- U.S.$ DOWN -.64% for the week, +1.18% YTD (Big POP this week)
*** UST yields chart, 6 month - 30 year. This chart is active and will display a 6 month time frame going forward to a future date. Place/hover the mouse pointer anywhere on a line to display the date and yield for that date. The percent to the right side is the percentage change in the yield from the chart beginning date for a particular item. You may also 'right click' on the 126 days at the chart bottom to change a 'time frame' from a drop down menu. Hopefully, the line graph also lets you view the 'yield curve' in a different fashion, for the longer duration issues, at this time. Save the page to your own device for future reference.
A good day to you.....
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---Several selected bond funds returns since October 25, 2022. I'll retain this date, as it is a recent inflection point when bonds began to have positive price moves. We'll need to watch if this was just a 'blip'.
NOTE: I've kept the prior dated reports in the beginning of this thread; and have added YTD to this data.
For the WEEK/YTD, NAV price changes, Febuary 27 - March 3, 2023
***** This week (Friday), FZDXX, MMKT yield continues to move with Fed funds/repo/SOFR rates and ended the week at 4.46% (flat lined now). The core Fidelity MMKT's have continued a slow creep upward to 4.22%. The holdings of these different funds account for the variances at this time. *** These rates have now mostly flat lined for two weeks.
--- AGG = +.19% / +.58% (I-Shares Core bond), a benchmark, (AAA-BBB holdings)
--- MINT = +.02% / +1.15% (PIMCO Enhanced short maturity, AAA-BBB rated)
--- SHY = -.02% / -.12% (UST 1-3 yr bills)
--- IEI = -.07% / -.49% (UST 3-7 yr notes/bonds)
--- IEF = +.05% / -.22% (UST 7-10 yr bonds)
--- TIP = +1.36% / +1.48% (UST Tips, 3-10 yrs duration, some 20+ yr duration)
--- VTIP = +.71% / +.81% (Vanguard Short-Term Infl-Prot Secs ETF)
--- STPZ = +.72% / +.66% (UST, short duration TIPs bonds, PIMCO)
--- LTPZ = +3.0% / +4.14% (UST, long duration TIPs bonds, PIMCO)
--- TLT = +1.16% / +2.86% (I Shares 20+ Yr UST Bond
--- EDV = +1.66% / +4.31% (UST Vanguard extended duration bonds)
--- ZROZ = +2.38% / +5.05% (UST., AAA, long duration zero coupon bonds, PIMCO
--- TBT = -2.3% / -5.14% (ProShares UltraShort 20+ Year Treasury (about 23 holdings)
--- TMF = +2.8% / +4.6% (Direxion Daily 20+ Yr Trsy Bull 3X ETF (about a 3x version of EDV etf)
*** Additional important bond sectors, for reference:
--- BAGIX = +.1% / +.57% (active managed, plain vanilla, high quality bond fund)
--- LQD = +.66% / +1.37% (I Shares IG, corp. bonds)
--- BKLN = +.96% / +3.92% (Invesco Senior Loan, Corp. rated BB & lower)
--- HYG = +1.35% / +2.6% (high yield bonds, proxy ETF)
--- HYD = +.1 %/+1.2% (VanEck HY Muni)
--- MUB = +.44% /+.36% (I Shares, National Muni Bond)
--- EMB = +.58%/+1.62% (I Shares, USD, Emerging Markets Bond)
--- CWB = +1.15% / +5.67% (SPDR Bloomberg Convertible Securities)
--- PFF = +1.4% / +7.67% (I Shares, Preferred & Income Securities)
--- FZDXX = 4.46% yield (7 day), Fidelity Premium MMKT fund
*** FZDXX yield was .11%, April,2022.
Comments and corrections, please.
Remain curious,
Catch

Physical ailments: sorry to hear about that. In 2021, after surgery, doc told me: "Yes, I removed what was left of your L-5 disc. So much pain for so many years. Now, quite a bit less. So, you use PT. i found it to be quite useless. Best wishes to you as we ALL grow older.

Thanks @Sven.
Your link didn’t work for me, but found the Zweig article in my Kindle edition of the WSJ from Saturday. Never been a big Zweig fan. Good advice usually, just not very deep. But he hits the nail on the head in leading off with the following:
”Bonds are getting beaten down again. That means they can do a better job of protecting the rest of your portfolio against getting beaten up.”
I agree. But it all depends on one’s investment approach. Certainly, the 4-5%+ returns on short term bonds & money funds are attractive and relatively risk-free. Fits the bill for many. All the while longer dated bond funds have been losing money. But for those who are more aggressively positioned in equities, having some intermediate or longer dated bonds / bond funds might provide a needed offset should the equity markets go to hell. Not saying that will happen. Just that for some folks bonds may have a role to play in how they construct their portfolios. I’ve tried to derive lessons from the 2008 fiasco. Appears most bonds / bond funds did not do very well but that those with government backing (especially longer dated) gained during 2008.
It’s increasingly hard to find people in the investing business today who think U.S. stocks offer the same value proposition now that intermediate term bonds do. Doesn’t mean they have it right. And I prefer to stick to an allocation model I’ve put a lot of thought into over many years rather than jumping from one “hot” investment idea to another.
Another observation: If I understand Zweig correctly, near the end of the article he says he thinks commodities will rise along with interest rates. Interesting conjecture.

After all, one's got 30 years to get things straightened out.

Not sure I want to hold on to them for that long. Five year holding period is required for I bonds before facing the 3 months interest penalty. Selling the paper I bond at local bank sounds reasonable as @yogibearbull suggested. This would be a brand new experience since I last sold stock (certificates from employee stock plan) several decades ago.

For many years we received the current issue of The Economist on Saturday. As of a few months ago it now comes three or four days later- Tuesday or Wednesday. Good grief!

Trump's selection for Postmaster: Louis DeJoy. Saboteur from within.

IMHO the problems I or sma3 experienced shouldn't be viewed as so difficult that buying the tax refund bonds isn't worth doing. After all, one's got 30 years to get things straightened out.
I could have simply mailed the $50 bond back, waited four months or so, and watched for it to show up in my TD account. I was just annoyed by the facts that TD didn't do what it said it would do (issue electronic replacements) and I wound up being the one paying (in postage and personal time and effort) for it. Next time, if there is a next time, I can just wait out however long it takes for things to work as expected.
And the USPS did deliver 11 out of the 12 savings bonds (each in its own envelope) correctly the first time. Maybe you'll get lucky and get all dozen delivered properly.
My guess as to the cause of sma3's trouble is that there were various combinations of siblings as co-owners on the savings bonds. While TD says that only one owner's signature is required to cash a paper bond, the bank may have been overcautious and wanted everyone to sign together. These days, how many paper bonds do they cash?
"Both owners must sign for most other transactions [aside from cashing the savings bond]"
https://www.treasurydirect.gov/savings-bonds/buy-a-bond/register-a-bond/
This is just one of a few reasons why I feel it is better to keep the savings bonds in electronic form.
If you inherit paper bonds and want to get them into electronic form, it's a little tricky because there are instructions for inheriting bonds, instructions for converting to electronic form, but not instructions to do both in one step. I was in that situation a few years ago, back when TD was helpful. I got very clear instructions on what form to use and what to mail in. No problems, handled quickly. I might be able to dig up those instructions if someone needs them.
Those savings bonds reached final maturity and I got a timely automated email from TD informing me of the pending maturity. After they matured, I was able to log in and cash out nearly immediately. That still works.

For many years we received the current issue of The Economist on Saturday. As of a few months ago it now comes three or four days later- Tuesday or Wednesday. Good grief!

@Mark and @MikeM: I also abandoned the Akre Focus fund after several years and holding it profitably in three different family accounts. However, the fund seems to have lost its individuality, perhaps as a result of its size, its concentration and its buy-and-hold-forever strategy. There seems to be no more room for investing in the mid-caps that used to generate good returns. Avantis does have some promising funds.

My sisters and I cashed three matured paper bonds my recently deceased Mom bought years ago.
It required the three of us to sit in a bank officer's office for over a two hours signing, notarizing etc. We eventually got the money ( took several months) but it was a huge waste of time and required us to all be in the same place

Thanks @Mark. I recently made a switch from AKREX to this ETF. Certainly not an apples to apples category switch, but I like the components and process of AVGE. If I remember correctly, when the Aker fund started out, in it's hay day, it was also multi-cap. I think after years of success it got to big to be that and settled in as a large cap. Possibly the retirement of Chuck Aker also has something to do with 3 years of under performance. But in any case, I made the switch to AVGE.

I keep reviewing my developed market funds for Chinese stock exposure, but they still have a few that required looking though the entire portfolio. I eliminated VWO several years ago as I grew uncontrollable with the Belt & Road Initiative. Seafarer is the only fund I invest today and it contains consumer staples and discretionary stocks, nothing in construction and technology.

Following are lightly edited excerpts from a current NPR report:

The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to take up a case that could threaten the existence of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and potentially the status of numerous other federal agencies, including the Federal Reserve.
A panel of three Trump appointees on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last fall that the agency's funding is unconstitutional because the CFPB gets its money from the Federal Reserve, which in turn is funded by bank fees.
Although the agency reports regularly to Congress and is routinely audited, the Fifth Circuit ruled that is not enough. The CFPB's money has to be appropriated annually by Congress or the agency, and everything it does is unconstitutional, the lower courts said.
The CFPB is not the only agency funded this way. The Federal Reserve itself is funded not by Congress but by banking fees. The U.S. Postal Service, the U.S. Mint, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., which protects bank depositors, and more, are also not funded by annual congressional appropriations.
In its brief to the Supreme Court, the Biden administration noted that even programs like Social Security and Medicare are paid for by mandatory spending, not annual appropriations.
"This marks the first time in our nation's history that any court has held that Congress violated the Appropriations Clause by enacting a law authorizing spending," wrote the Biden administration's Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar.
Conservatives who have long opposed the modern administrative state have previously challenged laws that declared heads of agencies can only be fired for cause. In recent years, the Supreme Court has agreed and struck down many of those provisions. The court has held that administrative agencies are essentially creatures of the Executive Branch, so the president has to be able to fire at-will and not just for cause.
But while those decisions did change the who, in terms of who runs these agencies, they did not take away the agencies' powers. Now comes a lower court decision that essentially invalidates the whole mission of the CFPB.
The CFPB was the brainchild of then White House aide, and now U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren. She issued a statement Monday noting that lower courts have previously and repeatedly upheld the constitutionality of the CFPB.
"If the Supreme Court follows more than a century of law and historical precedent," she said, "it will strike down the Fifth Circuit's decision before it throws our financial market and economy into chaos."
The high court will not hear arguments in the case until next term, so a decision is unlikely until 2024.

@Observant1
Thanks for link to Professor Snowball's article on China. There he says small cap funds, are less likely to be in China
One small cap value fund, not strictly EM, that has done well over the years ( That David profiled in 2015) is QUSIX
China LT 1% here

Among other "perpetual bulls" ( it seems) on EM is GMO
For a very long time they have believed Emerging markets will outperform almost everything else, but I think this is almost all based on valuation.
There are a lot of moving parts to try to understand.
Some are just financial: Dollar strength vs weakness ( can be hedged away I guess) honesty of management ( perhaps identifiable by good PM), corruption ( a matter of opinion perhaps but clearly some countries have stronger rule of law protections etc than others)
Then there are the ethical issues: child labor, worker's rights etc all weaker than in US and even the US we will all admit has major problems
You now have to add Climate Change. India has done very well, until the last couple of years, but already is hitting summertime temperatures ( per Bloomberg) with only 10 % of population having air conditioning. Over the next few years this is bound to weaken economic performance unless you are 100% into Indian A/C companies
For the funds that do provide decent annual letters, a careful read can see how well a lot of these issues are addressed. But what do you do when they are not mentioned at all?

@larryB It’s a weird world. I had a neighbor some years ago who would polish his car every day, clearly loved it. I forget what model it was. Eventually his wife left him but he kept the car. I don’t think she felt she could compete with the vehicle for his attention.

Several years ago I did a little volunteer work the Homeless Advocacy Project in your city. With a clear mind and sufficient training and education, "the system" can be navigated. Unfortunately, that help or training is too often needed.
The Homeless Advocacy Project (HAP) primarily assists with SSI, SSDI, and housing issues for clients who are homeless or at imminent risk of homelessness
As to brick walls, I just keep pounding away, hoping that once in a while it can make a difference.
(If you're not familiar with Dr. Who, the video below may not make much sense. Just think of it as representing how long it can take to break through some walls.)

Last year when I mailed the tax refund savings bonds I actually did receive, I didn't send them certified. My thinking was:
- if the USPS loses the mail, handing them a tracking number will not locate it (I've gone through that process); or
- if TD says it didn't receive the mail when it did, it will be pointless arguing with them since they'll still insist I file another form for reissue; or
- if TD does receive the savings bonds, TD will send an email acknowledgement three months later (which is what happened):

Dear Customer,
This is a system generated email to communicate we received your Savings Bonds/Treasury Marketable Securities materials.
Cases are worked in the order they are received in our office. Your request is important to us and will receive attention as soon as possible. Please allow up to 13 weeks for review and processing. If we require additional information, we will contact you. Thank you for your patience.
Please retain the Customer Number and Case Number referenced above to streamline any future actions associated with this request. Also note, you may receive multiple email notifications and Case Numbers depending on the type of transaction(s) you have requested.
If you have additional questions, please use the Contact Us link on TreasuryDirect.gov.
We appreciate your interest in U.S. Treasury securities.

Remember too, stamps were 8% cheaper back then (58¢) :-(
Keeping the single savings bond in my safe deposit box raises other concerns. Will that box still be around in 30 (now 29) years? Will I? Why create an additional hassle for an executor by keeping it separate from all the electronic savings bonds?
Cashing savings bonds at banks can have its own problems - while most (but not all) banks will redeem savings bonds, many require that you have accounts with them, sometimes long term.
after an uptick in fraud, some banks quit accepting them
Sept 2022, https://www.cbsnews.com/sacramento/news/us-paper-savings-bonds-taking-long-time-to-cash/
Some banks and credit unions may be able to cash savings bonds, but that service isn’t currently available at Capital One.
https://www.capitalone.com/learn-grow/money-management/how-to-cash-in-savings-bonds/
To cash in a savings bond(s) at your local [U.S. Bank] you must [be] ... A signer on a U.S. Bank checking, savings or money market account that has been open for five (5) years or more.
https://www.usbank.com/customer-service/knowledge-base/KB0209712.html

@sma3: you probably are aware of Matthews’ MEMX, which excludes China. How to screen for such a portfolio, I dunno. Maybe Premium guru Charles can help.

Good point. But, Matthews. We're all aware of their inner turmoil recently, going back a couple of years, at least.

My 75 y/o parents are considering putting some cash into JEPI as they want some additional income and like the yield (11.49%). They have a growth section in their portfolio (a lot of FCNTX and DODGX both of which they've held for over 35 years) and are considering JEPI for the income side of their portfolio and are willing to sacrifice capital appreciation for the extra income. JEPI has some investments that I simply don't understand and I don't think my parents do either. What are your thoughts on JEPI?
Thanks in advance for any and all replies!