You're proving my point - it's all about "what have you done lately".
Had you looked at the same figures at another point in time, say on SCHD's 10 year anniversary (10/31/2021), SCHD's cumulative performance would have underwhelmed:
10 year: 309.10% vs 348.91% (FXAIX)
5 year: 118.00% vs. 137.75%
3 year: 71.20% vs. 79.20%
1 year: 44.08% vs. 42.89%
The fairly recent outperformance should be obvious from my table showing SCHD outperforming FXAIX by a cumulative 20% over the three past calendar years (2020-2022).
Do you give any consideration to "regression to the mean"? The same table shows FXAIX outperforming SCHD by as much as 10% cumulative in other three year periods. With actively managed funds, there's a lot that can change. But with index funds, a "true buy & hold type" is going to need more than a one year anomaly to "sell & trade":
2023 YTD: 1.67% (SCHD) vs. 6.71% (FXAIX)
2022: -3.23% vs. -18.13% <-- 15% spread
2021: 29.87% vs. 28.69%
2020: 15.08% vs. 18.40%
2019: 27.28% vs. 31.47%
What's the theory for buying SCHD? That any time the market goes down, SCHD will win big? Or that we can expect, or at least hope for, another huge year (relatively speaking) for SCHD in the future? One that will make up for its typical slightly underperforming years?
At least we can dispense with the former idea - that SCHD outperforms in down markets.
2018: -5.56% (SCHD), -4.40% (FXAIX)
2015: -0.31% (SCHD) vs. 1.38% (FXAIX)
interestingly, FXAIX/IVV is on the honor roll too, and not SCHD
This is a good example of why I continue to urge people to understand numbers, not just quote them. Honor roll status is based on raw performance relative to category, i.e. top quintile over 1,3,5 year spans. Immediately we see one potential issue - these are funds in different categories.
At least as important is the fact that FXIAX's performance is being compared with that of (only) other S&P 500 funds. With a 2 basis point ER, it's a sure bet that FXIAX will always be in the top quintile of its narrow category of peers. Instant honor roll.
SCHD is in Lipper's Equity Income category - a broad category, and SCHD doesn't always come out in the top 20%.
The fact that FXAIX is a LC Blend fund (M* terminology) while SCHD is LCV goes far to explaining the 2022 split in relative performance. Value simply had a once in a generation (relative) banner year: VVIAX lost 2.08%, while VFIAX lost 18.15%. This 2σ+ fluke is hardly suggestive of future outperformance.
To reiterate, SCHD is a fine fund. But a better long term fund? I wouldn't place heavy bets on one style of investing - value or otherwise. Sure, use SCHD, but then counter balance it.

Over the long term they do slightly better than FXAIX
Do they do any better, or are you just looking relative to a particular moment in time (i.e. now)? Comparing their three year rolling cumulative returns by calendar years (e.g. Jan 2019-Dec 2021), the figures (from M* charts) are:

     2020-2022  '19-'21	'18-'20	'17-'19	'16-'18	'15-'17	'14-'16	'13-'15	'12-'14	'11-'13
FXAIX	24.75%	100.32%	 48.80%	 53.10%	 30.38%	 38.28%	 29.02%	 52.54%	 74.51%	 56.77% 
SCHD	44.56%	 90.14%	 38.51%	 45.45%	 32.84%	 40.22%	 29.53%	 48.09%	 65.32%	 56.42%
CDC	38.27%	 78.90%	 27.03%	 30.48%	 31.78%	 38.76%	   -	   -	   -	   -

Over its lifetime (July 1, 2014 through Feb 10, 2023), CDC has done slightly worse than FXAIX, returning a cumulative 138.04% vs FXAIX's 143.78%.
More importantly, all the cumulative figures ending Dec 31, 2022 are significantly skewed by FXAIX's sizeable underperformance in 2022 relative to the other funds: -18.13% vs -3.23% (SCHD) or -7.76% (CDC). (FXAIX has done better so far this year.)
I'm not knocking any of these funds, and I can certainly see the point in suggesting dividend oriented funds to someone who has been focused on cash returns. It's just that there's a tendency for people to look at "what have you done for me lately" even when trying not to - sometimes it's baked into the numbers.

For true buy & hold types, the argument for SCHD over SP500 is clear: SCHD has nontrivially outperformed 10/5/3/1y. (A flip occurred 4mos ago.) For those who fancy themselves slightly more conservative or at least 'non-volatilist', a second argument for SCHD is clear. For preservation Lipper gives SCHD 5* and FXAIX/IVV 4*. MFOP gives Great Owl status to both (interestingly, FXAIX/IVV is on the honor roll too, and not SCHD) but shows SCHD's UI to be ~50%-75% of SP500, depending on time period.

I'm also a past FMIJX investor.
The fund was sold after my Roth IRA was transferred to a different brokerage firm several years ago.
I generally prefer unhedged foreign equity funds but favor hedging foreign bonds.

I guess I could try switching to physical NYT and Washington Post but the amount of paper we would have to take to the landfill weekly is overwhelming

It's not like the old days, when a Sunday paper could clock in at 12 pounds. These days it seems that I can fold the entire Sunday NYTimes.
https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/heaviest-ever-newspaper
With the rapid rise in print edition costs (about 25% cumulative over the past two years), I've trimmed back to just the (ever lighter) Sunday paper. It is delivered in two parts (Saturday for fill sections, Sunday for news), so I still get to touch a paper for the whole weekend.

The SEC allows funds a 60 day lag in filing their annual and semiannual reports (also their quarterlies).
https://www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-8393.htm
Worse (or better, depending on your perspective), funds will be phasing in the annual report equivalent of summary prospectuses. Streamlined info (covering only an individual share class) will be distributed, and as with statutory prospectuses you'll have to go looking for complete (semi)annual reports.
https://www.sec.gov/investment/tailored-shareholder-reports-mutual-funds-etfs

Jaaaaaysus. This is the dumbing down of investors, indeed. Forcing curious, or detail-oriented investors to go onto a fund's website (or the SEC) to look for basic comparative information is insane.
I like the American Funds and held many of them them for years, but I totally suspect Capital Group, with its like 20 share classes per fund probably is behind the "fund documents to only report on a single share class" initiative. Why let individuals easily see that there are likely cheaper fund classes available and that the annual expenses DO play a major role in performance?
Fund companies must be ecstatic!

”if you are hedged”
Therein lies the problem. How much to hedge and what instruments to use. @BaseballFan had good luck using HSGFX last year I believe. Some use (inverse funds) SPDN or DOG to hedge. I believe investment grade bonds AAA rated @ 10 years or further out might be a useful hedge. The problem with most hedges is they will lose you money during good times. (I haven’t forgotten cash either, which I’m sure some consider a hedge.)
Some articles I’ve read recently have mentioned CCOR as a good hedge against stock market downside. But I remain undecided on that. It does not have a long enough track record IMHO.

Question: is there a correlation between 10 year treasury yield to the rest of bond market? This past week there is a pullback on IG bonds.

That’s for @catch22 to answer.
But since I mentioned the 10-year Treasury …. Mortgage rates set by banks often key-off of that rate. If I recall from refinancing, the rates are adjusted every Monday in line with how the 10-year has performed. . The 10-year represents the highest quality debt for over what I would characterize as an “intermediate” term. Very high quality corporate bonds of like duration would also react to moves in the 10-year. Their return should, however, be a bit higher.
But there’s a lot of other debt that’s little affected by what the 10-year Treasury does - like junk bonds which react more to economic conditions. And, of course, very short term investment grade debt (out to perhaps 2 or 3 years) reacts closely to the Federal Reserve mandated overnight lending rate. In a normal healthy economy, very long dated AAA bonds (20-30 years out) should earn more than what the 10-year yields. However, (without checking) it’s likely they do not currently because of the inverted yield curve.
@Sven - IG bonds fell last week in line with an uptick in yields. The uptick in 10 year treasury rates was part of that overall move. There’s a widespread misconception, I think, that the Fed is responsible for longer term rates. In reality, its influence is primarily at the very short end of the curve. The markets determine the appropriate rate out at 10-years and beyond. And that may diverge from what the Fed wants to happen.

Over the long term they do slightly better than FXAIX
Do they do any better, or are you just looking relative to a particular moment in time (i.e. now)? Comparing their three year rolling cumulative returns by calendar years (e.g. Jan 2019-Dec 2021), the figures (from M* charts) are:

     2020-2022  '19-'21	'18-'20	'17-'19	'16-'18	'15-'17	'14-'16	'13-'15	'12-'14	'11-'13
FXAIX	24.75%	100.32%	 48.80%	 53.10%	 30.38%	 38.28%	 29.02%	 52.54%	 74.51%	 56.77% 
SCHD	44.56%	 90.14%	 38.51%	 45.45%	 32.84%	 40.22%	 29.53%	 48.09%	 65.32%	 56.42%
CDC	38.27%	 78.90%	 27.03%	 30.48%	 31.78%	 38.76%	   -	   -	   -	   -

Over its lifetime (July 1, 2014 through Feb 10, 2023), CDC has done slightly worse than FXAIX, returning a cumulative 138.04% vs FXAIX's 143.78%.
More importantly, all the cumulative figures ending Dec 31, 2022 are significantly skewed by FXAIX's sizeable underperformance in 2022 relative to the other funds: -18.13% vs -3.23% (SCHD) or -7.76% (CDC). (FXAIX has done better so far this year.)
I'm not knocking any of these funds, and I can certainly see the point in suggesting dividend oriented funds to someone who has been focused on cash returns. It's just that there's a tendency for people to look at "what have you done for me lately" even when trying not to - sometimes it's baked into the numbers.
For a set and forget fund that covers all bases ("foreign, global, world and U.S", and fixed income) one might consider VGWIX / VGYAX. Not an index fund, but still a low cost fund. Its 35/65 stock/bond mix may also suit someone moving from a cash portfolio. Funds with more traditional blends include VGWLX / VGWAX and CIBFX (though jumbo). A drawback of these funds (notably the Vanguard ones) is a dearth of EM investment. You may consider that a plus (arguably a more conservative approach).

You might consider TSUMX, Thornburg Summit, balanced fund, has international exposure, focus is on provding total return over rate of inflation, younger folks runnng the fund, doesn't seem like they would retire anytime soon, no key person risk....if I had to only pick one fund outside of cash, tbills, CDs, MYGAs...maybe I would look in that direction...also would maybe look at BLNDX Standpoint if I had the conviction (which I'm not certain I do) that this might be one of the better funds over the next 10+ years...dunno.
Best Regards,
Baseball Fan

”Same manager since 1997” Thanks for the follow through Yogi. Very interesting.
Somewhere I heard this fund was more volatile than most but also more profitable. I’ll confess to often reading a forum that’s quite focused on gold / miners. And while I’m strictly an amateur observer there, it appears from what I read that there are stark differences in how different p/c mining companies have fared in recent years. Apparently this relates to the “sporadic” quality of various mines they own. Some have prospered while others have lost tons. Possibly OPGSX is intentionally investing in the under-performers as a longer term play.
I guess it bothers me that M* allows fund houses to post its “4 and 5 star” ratings (I’d imagine in return for compensation) as testimony / advertisement for their funds on their websites and than undermines that very rating in publishing critical reviews for readers willing to fork over additional $$ to see what their analysts really think about a fund. ISTM they’re making $$ on both ends here.

Yes, COWZ is up already by 7.5% YTD on saturday, 11 feb, '23.
SCHP= TIPS. (Schwab.)
FCBFX. 58% in triple B. (Fidelity corporate.)
HYMU. Munis. (Blackrock.)
Balanced: DODBX. Over 15 years, it's in top 7 percent of category. +7.63%.
Global stocks: YTD +8.42%. (TRP.) PRGSX . Over 15 years: +7.82%, top 18% of category.
52 USA. 43 foreign, presently.
Maybe SCHP is an Indexer. None of the others.
VMIAX. Basic Materials/Chemicals. (Vanguard. Stinky service.). YTD +6.49%. Over 15 years: +7.47, top 22 percent in category.
Single stocks for steady dividends: BHB. (I own it.) Regional bank in Northern New England. HQ in Bar Harbor, Maine. That's where Acadia National Park is. Branches in ME, NH, VT.
O is the mother of all REITS. Over 15 years, it's up by +10.45%. Dividends to reinvest. But I don't know how they keep doing it. The payout ratio is a huge, out of line number... But REITS are different animals, too. Since 1994, the stock is up by +730%. That's not a typo.
(Among REITs, I own PSTL. But it's still rather young.)
"Happy Motoring!"
"No, No, NO! Don't open that closet!"

Same manager since 1997.
Gold-mining has been terrible for B&H and being top performer in category for 3,5,10 years doesn't mean much. * ratings are based on past performance only within the category, and overall * rating is a weighted average of *s for 3, 5, 10 years.
Analyst ratings take into account several factors besides the past performance. However, Analyst ratingsQ are computer-generated and are hard to read or make sense out of. It's NeutralQ here. May be M* can train ChatGPT to do a better job.

10th Feb, 2023: B. Malkiel.
https://wealthtrack.com/fifty-years-in-a-random-walk-down-wall-streets-investment-advice-has-stood-the-test-of-time/

Thanks for the thoughts, @MikeM. For now, I'll be coasting with what I already own. Stinky week, this week.
Geritz and Foster write with candor. But their records are less than great. Matthews would maybe love to get Foster back there. I'm sure he'd not even think about it at this point. Some years ago, I owned his Seafarer fund. Not much to write home about. I'm staying away from EM. It always just burns me.

Good thoughts from @catch22. Generally people’s time horizon seems to have grown shorter in recent years. We live in an age of “instant everything.” There’s a lot in Barron’s this week about the frenzied buying and selling of ”end-of-day options” by both professional traders and individuals alike. In effect, plunk some $$ down on a speculative bet (going either long or short) at 9:30 AM and than “cash-out” the same afternoon. One market observor predicted this craze might even lead to a *“flash-crash”. It’s definitely contributing to the greater volatility. ISTM I read that last Friday was the single largest options trading day in history. Perhaps @Crash is seeking conviction where there is none - or precious little.
It is also possible the increased volatility is a precursor to a large move either up or down. If markets were to drop sharply, I know more than one prognosticator who will get caught flat-footed. There’s actually quite a bit of bullish sentiment out there as I think some numbers posted by @yogibearbull earlier today substantiate.
Here’s Marty Zweig calling the October 1987 *flash crash. The Monday following the show, the Dow fell 22.6% - most of that in just a few hours late in the day. Advance video to the 6:30 mark where Zweig is introduced.

Here’s a Wikipedia Article on the Flash Crash of 1987

Not a market call on my part. Karniol-Tambour (video) is looking out months - or even years. So I don’t feel she’s necessarily making a market call either. But I do think her longer term outlook is supported by the increasingly strident interest rate talk coming from various Fed officials this week plus recent / continuing movements in the bond market. The spread between 2 and 10 year Treasury bond as of this morning is the most inverted since the early 1980s with the 2 year Treasury yielding 85 b/p more than the 10-year . A steep inversion has often in the past been a good indicator of approaching recessions. (Just because I’m paranoid doesn't mean there won’t be one … )
Karniol-Tambour is the newest member of Bridgewater’s 3-person investment team. She does not (to my recollection) address the inverted curve.

From @msf quoted,

"hold an annuity in an IRA"
Teachers have had this dreadful option for years...
Variable Annuities (products) wrapped in a 403b.
Wonder if these VAs will get the same RMD treatment (relief) as QLACs?
Some teachers contribute to a mixed bag of Variable Annuities and non-VA mutual funds as part of their 403b portfolio. After retirement, the VAs get annuitized and the non-VAs often get rolled over into Traditional IRAs.
TIAA CREF Summary:
https://tiaa.org/public/pdf/Consultant_SECURE_Act_Summary_Flyer.pdf
403b QLAC:
https://businessofbenefits.com/2015/05/articles/uncategorized/the-403b-qlac/

I was sorta like Buffet Didn't want to buy anything I didnt understand and I thought Jobs was a jerk. But letting your emotions govern your investments is usually a bad idea, although there are some lines I can't cross, like "META". I am glad I help my nose on TSLA recently. It is far more profitable than any other car company.
A friend loaded up on APPL after seeing how popular the original iPod was.
Having used a iPad and and iphone for years, the contrast between these products and my wife's Android phone is night and day.
I am amazed the closed architecture has not been a bigger selling point for security with the business community. Not sure why APPL hasn't captured more of this market, but it maybe switching and legacy costs.

I find it one of the better, more thorough looks at the markets overall plus a good glimpse into D&C’s approach. Most years a 6-month old semi-annual report (June ‘22) would suffice. But so many shifts in both bonds and equities since June, would really like to get a look at their end of 2022 report - actually for all their funds but especially DODBX.

The other new twist is you can convert up to $200,000 ( used to be $160,000 I think) or 25% of your IRA into a QLAC tax free, so you can lower your RMD. I have not dug into it yet, but I think you can pick an annuity date at anytime in the future, and one that would still return money to your heirs.

I feel that deferred income annuities are one of the rare positive innovations in financial services in years. But that doesn't make QLACs a great idea.
As Kitces wrote in 2015, using QLACs for the purpose of reducing RMDs, doesn't pay off. It's their value as longevity insurance, not as an RMD reduction mechanism, that makes them worthwhile.
https://www.kitces.com/blog/why-a-qlac-in-an-ira-is-a-terrible-way-to-defer-the-required-minimum-distribution-rmd-obligation/
He also suggested that the 25% limit helped people to avoid a liquidity squeeze - where they didn't have enough left in their IRA to fund retirement before their deferred annuity started monthly payments.
What SECURE 2.0 changed:
- instead of a $125K limit, adjusted for inflation (that's where the $160K figure comes from), it is reset to $200K, still adjusted for inflation;
- the 25% limit is removed
- QLAC monthly payments, once they begin, can be used to satisfy not only the RMD requirement of the annuity but also of the remaining IRA balance, potentially lowering the RMD withdrawals required of the non-annuity portion of the IRA.
https://www.klgates.com/SECURE-20-Act-Legislation-Includes-Significant-Changes-to-Individual-Retirement-Accounts-1-31-2023
What did not change:
- must start payments by age 85
- return of principal to heirs is permitted
Original QLAC regs