BIVRX YTD +18% !!!! Is it open ?

I have considered investing in this fund, but the potential volatility concerns me. I believe there was a very large price drop last year in a short period of time. Any thoughts on it being a decent investment if I hold for 10+ Years?

Jason Zweig, WSJ:
"I don't know whether we're on the cusp of a cataclysmic decline, or whether this is one of the market's normal see-saw rides.
What I am sure of is that after two years of being cooped up at home with nothing to do but stare at market charts, a lot of my colleagues in the financial media are bored stiff.
So reporters and editors will seize every opportunity to turn market molehills into mountains, and to extrapolate every drop into a correction or bear market.
As the markets buck and heave over the next few days, I would advise you to keep in mind one of Benjamin Graham's most important messages from his book The Intelligent Investor:
Price fluctuations have only one significant meaning for the true investor. They provide him with an opportunity to buy wisely when prices fall sharply and to sell wisely when they advance a great deal."

My feeling pretty much echoes David's on this one and my own from before. If you already own Global Reach, you probably don't need this fund as its allocations to micro, small, mid and large cap stocks are pretty similar. It's possible the fund's individual country weightings may eventually differ dramatically from the other funds, but country allocation is an unproven skill set at the manager and by the time they do prove or fail to prove it, this fund will probably already be closed. Moreover, that skill set will be incorporated into other funds as Global Reach is the mother ship for all of them. The most interesting new fund Grandeur Peak has launched in recent years isn't this one to me. It's Global Contrarian.

+1
Actually my previous post pertained more to bear markets than run-of-the mill corrections. I’m not attuned to the finer points, except bears tend to last longer - usually measured in years. That’s why many keep the cash reserve.
If the early morning numbers hold up or get worse, we’d probably be in correction territory in most
markets. Calling it a bear would be premature.
Qtr 1 of 2020 was somewhat unique. Huge 15-25% selloff across many asset classes in 2 or 3 months. WTH that was, I’m not sure.

“I suppose there are some investors who can change up their strategy from bull markets to bear markets but I haven’t met too many who can do so consistently. I’m a much bigger fan of creating a portfolio that takes corrections and bear markets into account when you create your investment plan. You should strive to create a saving and investing process that is durable enough to handle both up and down markets."
It’s an unanswerable question. Corrections are about as unpredictable as the weather. And they can vary as much in intensity as well.
I doubt if there’s any one good way to prepare. Maybe you shouldn’t even try? Many here, wiser than me, keep several years’ cash reserve on the side so they don’t have to withdraw portfolio money during a correction. Personally, I’m conservatively enough invested and diversified enough that I can continue withdrawing $$ during a multi-year correction without doing a lot of damage. There’s a cost to that in that I can’t take as much risk and reap as bountiful a reward during the the good times.
How often to expect? Geez. I’d like them more often - maybe every year or two - because I think the severity would tend to be less than if we go 3, 4, 5 years without one. And, there’s a school of thought (ie Grantham) that we’re spoiling for much worse than a routine “correction.” I’m not endorsing Grantham - just tossing that out there for thought.

General human behavior is something that rarely changes over time.
Irrational investors have caused or exacerbated bubbles and crashes for hundreds of years and will continue to do so.

Sigh. I would not want to quip too subtly for the room, but veteran business writer Peter Coy's report in toto is interesting not only about FAA imputed pokiness (all the moreso given OJ's take) but also about gov stymying of its own agency as Kudlow brags of and takes such pride in.
Especially since DSP can indeed readily solve things:
“This is very, very easily solved technically,” said Theodore Rappaport, a developer of 5G technology who is a professor at New York University’s Tandon School of Engineering. “It’s frustrating as an engineer” to see the old technology still in use, he said. The F.A.A.’s argument is that it couldn’t issue a new standard for radar altimeters without knowing in detail the design of the 5G equipment. Etc.
Kudlow's comical college history was on point for anyone familiar with his years of divisive rightwing free-market blathering in economics and policy as Trump's NEC head, and before --- here crowing about beating the gov agency crucially charged w air safety. Seriously.
A commenter makes the point plainly but without any classmate jokes about a former Porsche-driving SDS leader who (sort of) reversed course in life:
... Ajit Pai [FCC], Larry Kudlow, and the rest of the clown car went to Washington to let industry, in this case the communications industry, do anything they pleased. Maybe that was based on their childlike faith that markets cure all ills and government can only do wrong. But the result was that administrative agencies whose job was nonprofit things like, you know, not crashing airplanes had no voice in the Trump government, and businesses such as telecom has no one watching who cared about consequences. The result was predictable. The wonder is that no one has died as a result. Yet.

"I grew up in the 50s and 60s. Both parents harbored vivid memories of the ‘29 stock market crash and Depression through which they lived. So stocks were somewhat of a dirty word among many (if not most) working class families in my childhood years. Few of ordinary means owned them."
@hank- Exactly the same here. Given that, it would seem reasonable to think that the market action in the 50s / 60s would not be comparable to the present time, when everybody and their brother, experienced or not, is trying to beat the market.

Based on the fund’s history going back to its inception the “reconstitution” formula works well more often than not. SCHD has exceeded my expectations and leads its segment. The upcoming changes may be for the best as they have been most years. Just my opinion.

However, I do see human irrationality playing a big part in the markets of recent years. That includes not only equities, but assets like real estate, bonds, crypto. And further, that uniquely human ingredient compounds the difficulty of determining where true value exists and where’s there’s mostly fluff.

This time is really NO different, but perhaps worse just as you pointed out. Now we are facing several challenges: geopolitical (Ukraine, Taiwan, and to a lesser extent N.Korea), high inflation globally, and pandemic-induced supply chain issues. Feel like we are revisiting the spring old 2020.

@catch22- following is the pertinent text from the NYT article. The SDS reference re Kudlow is interesting but not germane to the topic.

The F.A.A. also argues that it was excluded from decisions about 5G. In 2020, the F.A.A. administrator, Stephen Dixon, prepared a letter to ... the F.C.C., expressing concerns about 5G interference, but the letter was not passed along by ... the acting director of the Commerce Department’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
Larry Kudlow, who headed President Donald Trump’s National Economic Council, even bragged about blowing off the F.A.A., saying on his Fox Business show, “We ignored them because the science said don’t worry about it.” He added later, “We actually fought the F.A.A. and we won.”
It appears now that the Trump administration won the battle but not the war. One result of the extended conflict between the F.C.C. and the F.A.A. is that even now, nearly a year after the spectrum for 5G was auctioned off, the F.A.A. is still at the stage of information-gathering as it moves toward eventually issuing new requirements for radar altimeters. It is likely to take five years for all altimeters to be upgraded.

In my opinion the FAA is now and always has been notoriously slow in staying on top of evolving safety issues. They have been criticized many times by the NTSB for inaction on known or potential safety problems. In this case apparently they at least went through the motions of trying to participate in resolving the 5G issues, but were rebuffed by the Trump administration.
The NYT article also mentions that there are technological fixes for radio interference by using various types of filters, and/or by redesign of the radio altimeters themselves. This is true to a point, the but installation of filters in the affected aircraft may very well introduce other problems, and of course modifying or replacing the altimeters will be a very costly procedure likely involving significant aircraft downtime. As usual, money is involved, so we have potential winners and losers.
It's quite possible that rather than engage in an unproductive inter-agency fight the FAA elected to let the airlines themselves carry the fight to the FCC. These people are masters at this sort of thing. This is what I meant in my post up above where I said that "something is really smelly here.".
OJ

“The market is a bundle of irrationality.”
I grew up in the 50s and 60s. Both parents harbored vivid memories of the ‘29 stock market crash and Depression through which they lived. So stocks were somewhat of a dirty word among many (if not most) working class families in my childhood years. Few of ordinary means owned them.
(I tried to elucidate further but got trapped in an endless quagmire of words …. :) ) However, I do see human irrationality playing a big part in the markets of recent years. That includes not only equities, but assets like real estate, bonds, crypto. And further, that uniquely human ingredient compounds the difficulty of determining where true value exists and where’s there’s mostly fluff.
In early November I wrote: “I’ve never seen such heightened speculation across the wide investment spectrum … “
This Time It’s Different? / MFO Discussion Topic

We've had Schwab checking and savings accounts for years. No problems at all, but the interest rate is next to nothing.

I've had an Ally Online Savings Account since late 2013.
This account currently offers an APR of 0.50%.
There are no monthly maintenance fees or minimum balance requirements.
Since opening the Ally account, I've opened several savings/checking accounts at other financial institutions to take advantage of appealing rates. These accounts were subsequently closed after prevailing rates became uncompetitive. Rate comparison shopping coupled with opening/closing accounts became tiresome so I haven't pursued this in several years. The Ally Online Savings Account is primarily used for savings and as a "hub" for electronic fund transfers to/from my other financial institutions. I'm a satisfied Ally customer since they have a good website, offer a reasonable APR (for current conditions), and I haven't encountered any EFT issues.

All Parnassus funds are ESG, and all are fossil-fuel free.
That's one difference between the PRBLX of old and the PRBLX of today. The old version barbelled tech and industrials against staples and utilities much of the time, but the new version hasn't owned mainstream utes in a while. They had owned MDU and NWE for some years, but they don't own them anymore, apparently at least partly for fossil fuel reasons, as both are heavy into coal generation.
It's been a small-ish change, but it could conceivably push PRBLX into slightly growthier territory than it inhabited in the past.

I'll mention again T-Mobile money, full 1% paid on all balances. I also have used GS/Marcus for years and just took advantage of the $100 offer, hey why not!

Do your homework, read the fine print.
I could be wrong, but I recall a few years ago when inquiring about Discover mmkt, they gate your withdrawls, meaning you could not take out over $100k at a time etc.
Baseball Fan

I currently own PRBLX/PRILX in two R-IRA accounts. I have been looking for a LCV fund to "diversify" a little bit, because of the presumed rate hikes causing a slowdown in growth.
One fund that keeps popping up on my screen is PARWX/PFPWX. I've been following it since Mr. Hwan took sole duties and it appears he is doing what he said he would, reduce volatility, add some diversification, add alpha, lower SD, etc.
I am contemplating adding Endeavor to compliment Core, but there are concerns. There are about a dozen stocks in common, but only ONE in the top 10 positions. Most metrics favor PRBLX/PRILX and returns are not dramatically lower in the recent past (1,3,5 years).
Any thoughts on the rational to hold both of these funds? Suggestions, critiques, opinions welcome!
Matt

@JD_co
Hussy hsgfx after this reset might be top dog looking backwards 10 years
What are your thoughts re hussy hsafx. Allocation fund with risk controls. Puts. Looks at stonk and bond valuations when setting allocation. Most target date, allocation funds don't??
Best
Baseball Fan

Odd, the third result returned on my search for Champion Oppenheimer turned up this SEC summary of the settlement and what the issues were:
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2012-2012-110htm
Just skimming, it sounds like Oppenheimer made material, misleading statements (aka "lies") about what it was doing. That's not the impression I get about ARKK. Woods is saying she expects annualized yields averaging 40% over the next five years and has explained why. That would seem to be considered "puffing", rather than, um, "misleading".
We have at least one poster here who appears to feel this is reasonably possible even it it doesn't pan out: "I guess we'll know in 5 years." There may be a fine line between good salesmanship and illegal deception, but so long as Woods invests according to her statements and the ETFs' prospectuses, I don't think she's crossed that line.
From the SEC release:

"Mutual fund providers have an obligation to clearly and accurately convey the strategies and risks of the products they sell,” said Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. “Candor, not wishful thinking, should drive communications with investors, particularly during times of market stress.”