It is worth knowing that Dan Weiner who has published the Independent Advisor for Vanguard Investors (for decades), long ago felt Hynes was doing such a poor job running VGHCX that he advised his readers to sell it and just use the Vanguard Health Care ETF VHT. He has between 8 and 14% of his portfolios in VHT
He has a "hold" ie Sell on VGHCX but rates VHT a buy still.

Mr. Wiener recommended the Vanguard Health Care Fund for many years.
The fund was subsequently sold in all three active Independent Advisor model portfolios -
Growth, Conservative Growth, and Income.
IIRC, Mr. Wiener pulled the plug on the Health Care Fund after Jean Hynes
became the Wellington Management CEO on June 30, 2021.

I have thought about these BRK problems too for a long time as a shareholder. On the optimistic side I feel:
1. Apple after Steve Jobs didn’t feel like it would be able to carry on. But strong institutions have a way to last and thrive will beyond the first generation.
2. We will get to a Day when the index fund holders will get direct ability to vote on proposals. It might be too much for most people to handle. But the options Are more likely to exist in the future than not. The form and design will be decided by the Congress or the sausage makers.
3. Notwithstanding the above, there will be a class of shareholders that will go along with Warren. Their children might not want the shares either. Being an investor today requires having faith in institutional strength beyond the next few years COMPARED to institutional strength elsewhere.

This sentence that @msf posted from Buffett “because all of my Berkshire shares will be fully distributed to certain philanthropic organizations over the ten years following the closing of my estate.” is the most worrisome to me as a holder of the stock.
It will enable larger institutions and shareholders to exert a lot more influence and control than they are able to today. I think it represents a very big risk to the future of the company post Warren.
When he first joined the Giving Pledge - I was concerned. Now more so. This MW story offers a good summary of my concerns: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/buffetts-estate-plan-to-benefit-charities-could-kill-berkshire-hathaway-as-we-know-it-11652386090

Peter Bernstein suggested a 75/25 portfolio of stocks/cash equivalents
Not much different from Buffett's suggestion to skip bonds (2013 Berkshire Hathaway letter), except that Buffett felt 10% in cash equivalents (short term bonds) was sufficient.

My money, I should add, is where my mouth is: What I advise here is essentially identical to certain instructions I’ve laid out in my will. One bequest provides that cash will be delivered to a trustee for my wife’s benefit. (I have to use cash for individual bequests, because all of my Berkshire shares will be fully distributed to certain philanthropic organizations over the ten years following the closing of my estate.) My advice to the trustee could not be more simple: Put 10% of the cash in short-term government bonds and 90% in a very low-cost S&P 500 index fund. (I suggest Vanguard’s.) I believe the trust’s long-term results from this policy will be superior to those attained by most investors – whether pension funds, institutions or individuals – who employ high-fee managers.

"That's the lamest excuse for not doing one's homework before turning it in."
@rforno- Having spent a significant portion of my school years evading homework, I'm curious as to what there is to turn in if one hasn't done it? Evidently I missed something important way back there...

Well, yes, he turned SOMETHING in, but it wasn't worthy of a grade.....and the professor in me says he didn't do the expected work. :)

"That's the lamest excuse for not doing one's homework before turning it in."
@rforno- Having spent a significant portion of my school years evading homework, I'm curious as to what there is to turn in if one hasn't done it? Evidently I missed something important way back there...

There are pre-market (before open) and after-market (after close) sessions. It is a VERY THIN/ILLIQUID market, so use limit-orders. Even reliable quotes are not available. These sessions don't mix with regular sessions, i.e. nothing carries over between sessions. I have used them at Fido and Schwab. Years ago, Fido did require me to listen to several minutes long stuff that the Rep read on phone about warnings and cautions, but that was it. I don't recall Schwab doing anything like that.
Example - Nasdaq Quotes on TWTR https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/twtr

That's for sure... I've been thinking the same thing for years now.

@yogibearbull,
Any thoughts on the following?
VIX was down yesterday when S&P 500 was down a decent amount. VIX is having difficulty cracking 35 today.
AAII- S&P 500 has been down about 10% since 4/28 while Bearish sentiment is also down coincidentally about 10% - focusing on the severity of the moves in the same direction rather than the percentage of the move.
CNN fear and greed index is at 6 - the lowest in a year. (CNN is no longer giving me a long term chart of this but I do not remember seeing this low reading in ten years, except for in March 2020).
2-10 yr rates have come down about 20 bps in the past week but not collapsing.
The question I am asking myself is, is the stablecoin fiasco muddling some of the readings and perhaps the contagion is not systemic enough to call a bottom in the stock market?
P.S.: Senate confirmed Powell for the second term.

I've owned Matthews funds (MAPIX, MAPTX) previously and believed Matthews was an estimable firm.
Lydia So and Rahul Gupta left the firm in April 2020.
Tiffany Hsiao, YuanYuan Ji, and Beini Zhou left August 31, 2020.
These PM departures occurred within a short timeframe which really concerned me.
I no longer have a high regard for Matthews because of this and mediocre overall performance in recent years.
@ProtonAnalyst33,
I was not aware that a private equity firm has an ownership stake in Matthews.
Do you know when this PE firm initiated its stake?

Your list of names made me go dig up my notepad! There were other key PM departures: Raymond Deng who was a brilliant up and coming PM on Pacific Tiger and China left for Genesis in 2021. Robert Harvey, lead PM of their frontier asia fund also left in 2021. I recall the first major PM departure that shocked me was Kenichi Amaki, who was lead PM of the Japan fund (left for capital group in 2019). Brilliant investor and had basically been with the firm his entire investment career up until that point. how could they let him go? That was the begining of the exodus it seems and I stopped investing in the matthews funds and started asking more questions. In total, I recall them losing over 10 next gen PMs in the span of 2 years. Scary for an investment team of less than 40!
There was also that bizarre hiring then resignation of their President and CIO, Yu Ming Wang. The loss of PMs couldn't be attributable to him b/c many occured before he was even brought in. Truly odd and something I've never seen before in my 40 years in the business. https://citywireselector.com/news/matthews-asia-global-cio-exits-after-less-than-a-year-in-role/a1404581
I believe their new COO also left in less than 2 years, but the PM departures and their profiles (and where they left to) really spooked me.
Re the PE firm, I googled and found this. I think its Lovell Minnik. This article says they first invested in Matthews in 2011. That's over 10 years of being invested, which is a bit long in the tooth for a PE fund. Seems that supports the "sales mode" the firm has undertaken. I am guessing that fund life is coming to an end, so PE firm must sell sell sell!
https://www.themiddlemarket.com/news/lovell-minnick-backs-asia-focused-asset-manager
Something is going on at Matthews and it doesn't seem great for investors. I'd urge everyone to do your diligence.

Regarding BLNDX, Standpoint, it's done well YTD but...............the 5% down in one day last autumn still holds in my memory and I have reduced my position here....
Baseball Fan

I felt that pain last year, too. I like the idea of BLNDX, but that kind of move should not happen.
ATESX is a long-short fund that has done ok in its 4 years (all positive), and its held up pretty darn good YTD. Could be worth a look.

@Charles Lynn Bolin...enjoyed the recent commentary...resonated with me.
Charles, how do you feel about putting monies into funds that have a somewhat "black box" dynamic to them...yes, they explain their positions but sometimes I wonder, how safe of an investment are some of these funds?
I've had my eye on Grant Park Multi (GPANX) for a while now and have stepped in, toes first, testing the waters...other than I bonds, and Tbills, 2 yr treasury, I think this type of fund might be the only way you can scrape up mid single digit returns for the next few years.
Regarding BLNDX, Standpoint, it's done well YTD but I am concerned the mgr's model might not be picking up quickly enough if there is a trend change, meaning stonk markets really flush, like a limit down day I mean and/or bond yields start moving down and the commodity futures trades turn quickly on him...the 5% down in one day last autumn still holds in my memory and I have reduced my position here....did pick up a bit on PQTAX PIMCO Trend as I'm not certain but my perception (and I could be way wrong) is that their models might be quicker to account for a turn in certain markets and likely less stonk mkt exposure?
Hold on Palm Valley, PVCMX, nibble position started recently in RPEIX T Rowe Global Dynamic Bondo.
Continue to shovel in cash into 90 day Tbill, 6 month T bill, 1 and 2 Yr T Notes.
Safety first, rule1 don't lose money.
Of course, do what works for you, don't listen to anyone on line like me who does not know anything about anything, I just post here to share what I'm doing and only for entertainment purposes.
Good Luck to all,
Baseball Fan

FBGRX, Fidelity Blue Chip Growth, has actually outperformed TRP’s Blue Chip fund. Also heavily tech and growth names. Just another alternative for “bottom fishing.”

Thanks for the information
I have in the distant past owned TRBCX. Was a fine fund 15 years ago. But things change. It fell 3% today putting it down over 33% YTD. If you liked it at the end of 2021, you gotta love it now - at 2/3 the price.

@BaluBalu, in the heady days of allocation/balanced funds, some even touted their performance beating SP500 with one hand tied in the back (i.e. 30-40% in bonds). Of course, that claim couldn't be sustained.
FPURX now is also much different from the past. It used to have value tilt for equities but the new FPURX has been quite growthy for years (VWELX is going through that shift now but it chose a bad time for that). For the time period you looked at, there was no magic but FPURX lost much less than SP500 by 1974 - i.e. it came out way ahead by not losing that much in that bear stretch (1972-74).

Using the FPURX 1/1/65-12/31/80 chart from Yogi's post, I shrunk it to start 2/1/1970 and FPURX nearly tripled in the next eleven years and handily beat SPY. Not sure what conclusions one can make without digging deeper as to the workings of FPURX at that time that allowed that type of performance. Even if we know the answers, how can we use those answers to invest now?

Have the first five months of 2022 been the worst start to any year for moderate and conservative allocation funds?
ISTM that while using calendar year boundaries for losses may make sense from a tax perspective, the market doesn't have that same level of respect for the calendar.
That said, there's an obvious period to look at, albeit one very different from today: the 1930s.
According to M* (old chart), VWELX lost 29.18% from 12/31/1931 through 5/31/1932. Keep in mind that M*'s data for this period seems to be monthly.
So one should set the dates to show five steps, at the end of Jan, Feb, Mar, April, and May. For the old chart, that means using a start date of 1/1/1932, while the new interactive chart works with 12/31/1931 as the start date. Either way, 5/31/1932 is the end date.
1974 was indeed an ugly year, but it took nine months to reach its nadir. Wellington was only off 9% by the end of May. Both 1932 and 1974 differ from 2022 in that our current market decline started this year, while the market had been declining for at least a year prior in the other periods. Our current decline may and probably does have longer to run.
Wellington declined from the beginning of 1973 through Sept 1974. And it declined from its inception in mid-1929 through the middle of 1932. The former period was a deep recession; the latter the beginning of the Great Depression. The US has yet to enter a recession now.
While those eras and in particular those years were significantly different from 2022, differences in Wellington then and now are less clear:
Bogle said that "Wellington Fund has followed the same balanced approach to investing ever since it began operations in mid-1929." And it has paid quarterly divs since 1930.

Added to OPGSX which appears to have gone nowhere in a year. Opened small spec position in GLTR which invests an a mix of precious metals. Had a buy order in on DKNG AT $10, but it rebounded after touching about $10.40. Did buy a bit at $11 yesterday. (currently $11.36)
I like the action in gold having followed it closely for a few years. Near the bottom of a trading range it’s been in for a year or two. Several macro developments may help - including the recent decline in Bitcoin

I've owned Matthews funds (MAPIX, MAPTX) previously and believed Matthews was an estimable firm.
Lydia So and Rahul Gupta left the firm in April 2020.
Tiffany Hsiao, YuanYuan Ji, and Beini Zhou left August 31, 2020.
These PM departures occurred within a short timeframe which really concerned me.
I no longer have a high regard for Matthews because of this and mediocre overall performance in recent years.
@ProtonAnalyst33,
I was not aware that a private equity firm has an ownership stake in Matthews.
Do you know when this PE firm initiated its stake?

Mr. Grant's outlook has generally been somewhat pessimistic over the years.
He currently contends that he is not being pessimistic.
Ptak: "So, maybe turning back to portfolio strategy, if you will, given the fact that it sounds like you're a bit pessimistic on the 60/40."
Grant: "I wouldn't say pessimistic. I'm trying to be clear sighted. People who are optimistic, because they're wrong are no more helpful than those of us who are pessimistic and wrong."

Hah, i read this. Pessimistic people never think they are pessimistic.

I've invested with Matthews for decades, but redeemed in the last 5 years as they have lost a lot of key young PMs and next generation management, and investment performance has become mediocre at best (related, the CEO change is long overdue).
I saw their ETF announcements but was left underwhelmed.
1) The china strategy managed by andrew mattock is the most benchmark-aware strategy in matthews lineup. The fund only has an active share of 50-60%. So this looks very much like an index fund, but with a much higher expense ratio and performance is middle of the pack.
2) Asia Innovators used to be called the Asia Science and Tech fund...irrespective of the name change, the PM Michael Oh is the same and the strategy is still...largely an Asia ex Japan tech fund. They are obviously trying to take market share from Kraneshares and KWEB which is one of the biggest Asia ETFs in existence. So not shocked an ETF version is launching.
3. Matthews Emerging Markets strategy has been around for almost 3 years, but the track record is pretty mediocre and assets have remained very small. Not surprising since Matthews has not hired any real emerging markets staff since launch. I questioned if Matthews was really committed to becoming a true EM manager when they first launched this fund....I am still skeptical. ETF launch doesn't mean anything to me with that performance!
My big question: Where are the flagship strategies? Pacific Tiger, Asia dividend are noticably absent from the ETF launch. Not even Japan equity? The absence of these major strategies makes me think this is not a move to try and help investors.
I am of the same mindset as Crash. Matthews has lost its mojo and I've stayed away. They used to be the pinnacle of active management but now their flagship fund Pacific Tiger can't even beat the index! When you see so many young, next gen staff leave for other firms ---> huge red flag that indicates its time to move on. Also, I've heard from people internally that a private equity firm is a part owner and has been trying to cut costs to "beautify" the firm for sale, which hasn't helped with moral.