M* has set the chart tool to use monthly frequency for longer periods, viz. five years and max.
If that's what's happening to you, then before you enter your dates change the chart frequency back to daily. If you do that, the chart should accept whatever dates you enter for start and end dates. It won't flip them to month-end dates.

Annuities just don't make sense to me: the money ceases to be yours, and it becomes THEIRS. A charitable annuity for X amount may be a nifty way to give to a favorite charity, however. Better when rates are higher.

That’s been my opinion over the years. But I’m no expert. It always seemed to me they were giving you back your invested sum over time with very little appreciation, if any. Of course, last time I looked interest rates were 1 or 2% on intermediate term bonds. A lot has changed since than. To wit … if you lived to be 120 you’d probably make out like a bandit.

All of this is duly noted here. Thanks for taking the time to spell it all out! One small detail continues to bug me: M* has made it difficult now, to compare funds using the charting feature , for a 10-year time span. 1,3,5 years is pre-set. And "Maximum." But that could be back to 1911 or only as far back as last Tuesday.
In order to compare funds for 10 years, you must enter it yourself. And when you do, the lovely, fabulous and marvelous people at Morningstar seem to have instructed the chart to go to the first or last day of the month, not the day you have entered. It's maddening. And so, I'm using M* less and less.
I have tried Simply Wall Street. Have a couple of portfolios there. For a few days, going back some weeks now, they were all discombobulated. I went back to see what's what by now, and it seems to be functional again.

I would be curious if he mentioned gold or real estate. In January he mentioned both to Market Watch.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-crazy-retirement-portfolio-has-just-beaten-wall-street-for-50-years-11672945313

Thank you for all the effort in this thread.
Sorry, but may I be so bold to ask for the top 10 in Sharpe over 5 years?

In my quick search with M* Investor Screener yesterday, I missed some usual hybrid favorites because:
1. M* has (again) changed allocation/balanced categories to descriptors: Conservative, Moderate-Conservative, Moderate, Moderate-Aggressive, Aggressive. IMO, it's good as I never liked the %based names (like Allocation/Balanced 30-50%, etc).
BTW, a new M* Category document that is typically published in April but is overdue (in the past, M* has just slipped in the new document but still with the April date).
2. Another recent M* change has separate ratings for classes, so the M* Investor Screener now shows zillions of AF classes that overwhelm the list. There is no way to suppress that (the old Screener had "Distinct Classes Only" option and that showed either the oldest class or that with the lowest ER). IMO, M* can leave the default as-is but add "Distinct Classes Only" option.
3. Some old favorites are Bronze or Neutral now. That can be explained by the terrible 2022 for hybrids that affected them differently (growth-oriented hybrids suffered more). But I doubt that many holders would swap out of them because of that. I noticed that but limited my mentions to Analysts Ratings of Gold/Silver only. For example, JABAX, a hybrid choice in my Schwab DAF is now Neutral, but if it remains that way, Schwab will likely kick it out and replace with something else.
Another recent M* change is the elimination of computer-generated Q-ratings. Justification provided is that the computer-generated ratings are now as good as genuine Analyst Ratings - may be a wishful thinking. I see lots of gobbledygook in the computer-generated ratings reports. M* needs more work on "Mo", its version of AI chatbot, or just use ChatGPT or Bard in the meantime.
FWIW, M* Analyst Ratings are forward-looking and based on multiple factors, while the Star-Ratings are purely based on past performance over 3, 5, 10 years (weighted). With old regular and Q ratings, this covered universe is now substantial.

@Derf - the links I provided (Baird, Tax Adviser) have pretty clear examples. Here's another page that's especially example-oriented.
https://thismatter.com/money/bonds/bond-income-taxation.htm
It has a section entitled US Treasuries that starts: "US Treasuries are taxed like other bonds and notes." It goes on to say that T-bills, being short-term debt (maturing in a year or less) are taxed at maturity, with the "gain" being taxed as ordinary income.
That "tax at maturity" rule for short-term debt is the reason why you don't have to pay tax on CDs of a year or less until maturity. But you have to declare interest annually on longer term CDs.
@BaluBalu - cash basis accounting is just the way most people naturally operate. Think of it as "checkbook accounting", or "cash flow accounting."
https://www.shopify.com/blog/what-is-cash-basis-accounting
As an example, one December I did some consulting cross country. I incurred my expenses in December and declared them on that year's tax return. The business mailed me a check between Christmas and New Years' and booked its expense that year. I received the check in the mail in early January. I declared the income the year I received the check, not the year I earned the income.
Cash basis accounting is not a way to magically transform investments into operating expenses. When you purchase a bond at a premium, part of each coupon payment is considered return of principal. If you pay $110 for a $100 bond, you don't get to deduct the premium when you make the investment. You reduce the taxable amount of each interest payment as the premium amortizes.
Same thing here - you're paying up front for a higher cash flow down the road. Not advice, only describing the way I would treat it.

ETFdb shows:
LC Quality SPHQ, FQAL
SC Quality XSHQ
There are several others with dividend-quality angle.
https://etfdb.com/etfs/

Like a lot of etf's in small/mid cap, XSHQ returns have been anemic over the last five years. So I like to go with funds that have a ten year life span with M*. I 'll have more flexibility with MFO premium.
There are some good returns from RWK and RWJ, if you can live with the volatility.
Some old-timey managed funds have held up OK. Will they prosper when the sun finally shines in the back door of smid caps someday? Who can say?
Some funds I have dug up since moving to Fido: FMIMX, NBGNX, CAMMX, TSCSX, and so on. I'm not buying all of them. Your mileage may vary.

Interesting web call today from Doug Ramsey. Leuthold is, as you know, determinedly quant so it's rather more data-rich and informative than folksy and engaging. They've promised to share a copy with me, and I'll share it with you if I can.
Highlights:

• both yield curve inversions and six-month drops in the index of Leading Economic Indicators are pointing to a business downturn beginning in fall. Both are eight-for-eight with no false positives as predictors, though their "predictions" occur with "long and variable lags." The window for a yield curve inversion has been four to 16 months previously. Others observe that Fed actions presage recession by about two years.
  
• the last false signal from a yield curve inversion was in the mid 1960s. Doug talked a bit about the differences in economic conditions between then and now.
  
• the stock market generally rallies - on average by 13% - immediately after a curve inversion, before rolling over. Currently it's up 16%.
  
• US inflation has dropped like a rock but “…Fed policy has never been this tight with inflation having already come down significantly.”
  
• the stock market is not in a bubble, but in in the top 10% of historic valuations
  
• seven to nine stocks have gone crazy, driving all of the year's returns of the S&P 500. They're the best candidates for a smackdown.
  
• midcap valuations are good, small cap valuations are historically good. That judgment looks only at the valuations of the 80% of small caps that operate in the black, so "small quality" might be worth your attention.
  
• the valuation on small caps relative to large caps is as extreme as the late 1990s. Remember that the S&P 50 corrected by 50% in 2000-02. The S&P Equal Weight index and small caps vastly outperformed back then.
  
• assuming 6% earnings growth and normal valuations as the base, large caps are priced for 3.5% returns in the medium term, mid caps are 6-7% and small caps are at 8-9%. Foreign corporate earnings still have not returned to their 2007 levels which makes such calculations for EAFE and EM, given Leuthold's discipline, impossible.
  
• Average stock likely to perform much better over the next 3-5 years than the average index because the average index is so beholden to a few vastly overextended stars.
  
• Leuthold Core Investment today is 51% net equities with no evidence that they're going to drop toward their 30% minimum allocation; their investable universe looks like the S&P 1500 Equal Weight and that's not looking nearly as risky as it did 18 months ago.

Don't hold me to all of that yet. Those reflect my type-as-he-talks notes, and I'll need to cross-check against the original when I get it. I'm guessing that I got 95% right ... leading to only a 5% chance that I'm leading you to insanity, despair and poverty!
For what that's worth,
David

I personally believe Gold will do over the next 45 years what the SPY did the last 45 years. Too much debt fueled by "only so much gold on the Earth" hype behind it (think bitcoin 21M max). My opinion is in the minority but I believe steadfast regardless. I own zero but will acquire at some point going forward.

Anyone pay for M* services?
What are the top 5-10 funds in the Moderate Conservative Allocation Category for top Percentile Rank over 5 years?

Lynch was great, but he did it when a lot of information wasn't available and most investors didn't have an easy access to all the tools we have in the last 20 years. See below BRK.A performance. It is very clear that the best performance was in the 70-90s and it's probably a similar reason. BRK.A performance in the last 20 years trails SPY(https://schrts.co/SvTMAdUw).
And you forget that Giroux superior risk-adjusted performance while investing usually in 60-65% stocks makes his case stronger + AUM is much bigger.
https://www.1stock1.com/1stock1_2729.htm

BRK is in several S&P indexes.
But it's only in the MSCI USA Financial Index, not in the MSCI USA Index. QUAL just selects from the latter. I tried to find why BRK isn't there, but couldn't find a reason as the broader index does have financials.
Years ago, when there was only BRK-A, even the S&P excluded it due to its very high price (= low liquidity for indexing). Some companies may also be excluded if they have dual class structures, except for the grandfathered ones, but I haven't looked at BRK capital structure.

T Rowe Price wouldn’t let me invest in PRWCX, so I sold my largest TRP holding (TRPBX) and bought TCAF. I’m going to pair it with a multi-sector bond fund, probably FADMX.
I’ve held TRPBX for many, many years but its performance has steadily declined. It’s a prime example of “deworsification” — holding way too many foreign stocks and bonds, commodity stocks and a hedge fund. Ironically, all of its diversification hasn’t seemed to help performance in up or down markets. Earlier this year, I exchanged about half of my TRPBX for FBALX, which has been consistently excellent.

Powell's primary message to Congress was to reiterate the largely unwelcome news that the Fed's interest-rate hikes would continue until inflation was fully subdued. The Fed has raised interest rates 10 times since March 2022 to 5% to 5.25% in its fight against inflation. It took a break in its rate hikes last week, but Powell said more are likely on the way even as the rate sits at a 16-year high.
A photo of Powell at the Dead & Co. show has circulated in social media feeds with plenty of jocular observations about what this might mean for the economy and inflation. "That guy is the main reason tickets are $80 and up this tour," tweeted @SmokinBat. "You can’t just print money. We play for life!"
Link to Story: https://themessenger.com/news/fed-chairman-tells-congress-hes-been-a-deadhead-for-50-years
Link to Photo: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fxx4YIYXwAAOmf9?format=jpg&name=large

Check the operating performance tab. I'm guessing the little numbers are a reflection of change from previous years or quarters.

Thank you very much!

It depends. Someone who mostly buys and holds and what most should do, has no issues. Trading markets since Covid started is harder. Risk/volatility is elevated, market changes have been faster. I changed too because of it. I trade more often, think weeks instead of months. I stay more in MM. But, volatility makes it easier to trade. Sideways is harder.
Basically, I tell investors to stay within their skills. If trading worked for you which means, you look at your portfolio risk-adjusted performance over 3-5-10 years and it's better than the indexes, keep doing it. Otherwise, stop. Most should just use only 3-5 funds with a mix of indexes and managed funds and hardly do anything.

I can still access my M* portfolios and watchlists through their app, but not if I go through their website. When I try to access portfolio view through their website, it goes to a page showing their membership fees. Sorry M*, but your content is not worth the fees you charge.
I mainly use M* to track various portfolios and watchlists. I can do that on the Fidelity site for free. FWIW, over my many years of using M*, I have little correlation between their funds picks/evaluations and actual performances going forward.

Check the operating performance tab. I'm guessing the little numbers are a reflection of change from previous years or quarters.

[snip]
The more you diversify, the chances are your portfolio will not beat the indexes and why Buffett said "Diversification is a protection against ignorance".
[snip]

Warren Buffett speaking to MBA students:
"If you are not a professional investor; if your goal is not to manage in such a way that you get a significantly better return than the world, then I believe in extreme diversification.

I believe that 98 or 99 percent —maybe more than 99 percent—of people who invest should extensively diversify and not trade.
That leads them to an index fund with very low costs.
All they’re going to do is own a part of America.
They’ve made a decision that owning a part of America is worthwhile.
I don’t quarrel with that at all. That is the way they should approach it."

Why not use the full quote, which is exactly what you said " Buffett said "Diversification is a protection against ignorance". Other than that, Buffett recommended the SP500
BTW, I held several funds in the past that beat the SP500. During 2000-2010, the SP500 lost money, I owned each of the following about 8-9 years SGIIX/SGENX,FAIRX,OAKBX, see (https://schrts.co/Cwpbphqk). I also owned PIMIX which beat the SP500 for several years too, see (https://schrts.co/eFdkpeJf)