Sold TMSRX in 2021 with some small profits. I did the same thing with ACVVX QMNNX PAUAX MFLDX years ago. ADANX is on my watch list and I may reduce my holdings in that one. Once they start declining I'm gone, because I don't have confidence that these funds work in every market. There's enough funds like BAMBX CVSIX ARBOX VARAX that continue to work for me. I probably should just simplify and go with funds like VWINX AONIX EXDAX FIKFX .

I'm a Cathie Wood fan. You need out of the box conviction if you really want to outperform. I remember watching her on CNBC a few years ago where she explained her TESLA thesis while many others were talking about eventual liquidation or acquisition. No investment style can work all the time, because if it did it would be duplicated or arbitraged and end up not working at all. If you want a 100% plus up year you need to accept 30% down some time. I am slowly picking up shares in ARKK and ARKG.

Just curious, when did you start buying ARKK and ARKG? Is it for a trade or a long term portfolio holding?
I did buy a little bit of ARKK yesterday. I am not putting any money into ARKK that I can not afford to lose. This is not Cathy's first rodeo but I do not see any trophies from past rodeos.

Long term, first buys June 2020. Even in ARKK. Down 8% in ARKG. buying only the big dips. I think this will work out over time, or at least do better than the broad market.

@LewisBraham, that is why Vanguard replaced IT/LT TIPS VIPSX with ST TIPS VTAPX a few years ago in its VG target-date fund (TDF) series.

I'm a Cathie Wood fan. You need out of the box conviction if you really want to outperform. I remember watching her on CNBC a few years ago where she explained her TESLA thesis while many others were talking about eventual liquidation or acquisition. No investment style can work all the time, because if it did it would be duplicated or arbitraged and end up not working at all. If you want a 100% plus up year you need to accept 30% down some time. I am slowly picking up shares in ARKK and ARKG.

Just curious, when did you start buying ARKK and ARKG? Is it for a trade or a long term portfolio holding?
I did buy a little bit of ARKK yesterday. I am not putting any money into ARKK that I can not afford to lose. This is not Cathy's first rodeo but I do not see any trophies from past rodeos.

@Hank, I don't own it; did own HSTRX about 12 years ago for a while. A friend owns HSAFX now and isn't too unhappy with it, but you know what they say about a stopped clock.
But then the best I did yesterday was zero from NVHAX, EIXIX, and PQTAX.

I'm a Cathie Wood fan. You need out of the box conviction if you really want to outperform. I remember watching her on CNBC a few years ago where she explained her TESLA thesis while many others were talking about eventual liquidation or acquisition. No investment style can work all the time, because if it did it would be duplicated or arbitraged and end up not working at all. If you want a 100% plus up year you need to accept 30% down some time. I am slowly picking up shares in ARKK and ARKG.

@wxman123 -- Bank MM funds yield around 0.4 to 0.5%. FDIC insured so 100% risk free. Are you expecting your near cash holdings to provide a higher return?

Yes, that would be the objective but doesn't always work out. Over the longer term, these "near cash" vehicles should outperform high yield FDIC insured bank accounts, but that's not generally how I use them. I mainly use them in retirement accounts where the only viable, comparable option is near zero MM funds. Over the last 3 years VNLA has earned a total return of 2.39% with very little heartburn. I don't think you could have gotten that even in the highest yielding fully liquid bank accounts.

I would probably opt for STIP for short-term TIP exposure, lower fees 0.05% versus 0.15% and shorter maturity bonds--0-5 years--so less sensitive to rising rates. VTIP also has lower fees. But TIPS in general look pricey right now.

Still not phrasing my question well, evidently.
Higher fee notwithstanding, TIPX has outperformed those other two competitors handily for 9/5/3/2y, but has trailed, nontrivially but perhaps unimportantly, 1y and less, meaning recently. Was wondering about any informed thoughts as to that, and longer-term prospects for any of them.

I’m not sure how Christianity entered the picture here? Maybe Wood’s religion?
I can’t see much difference between stopping at a convenience store in Michigan on the way home from work and picking up a 6-pack of beer along with a half-dozen state lottery tickets and than watching the state sponsored “live drawing” on TV that evening, and wagering $5 or $10 online on a sports event you’re viewing at home.
There are a lot of vices in this world. Gambling is one. And more so when it involves amateur athletes. I agree. But, as think @Mark suggested, you can visit any live casino and bet on a college game just as you would at home. I don’t think @LewisBraham has been in many casinos. I haven’t either. But the few I have been in are highly addictive in atmosphere. The sounds, the flashing lights, the skimpily clad waitresses. All of this is compelling to the addictive personality who tends to stay too long at the bar and run up an excessive betting tab. I avoid live casinos like the plague.
The online casinos are taxed heavily. I don’t think 100% of it goes to education; but a lot of it does. In fact, it’s the heavy state taxes on profits (50% in NY) that is making it difficult for the online casinos to stay viable. Be careful what you wish for, because that revenue is critical to the government and would need to be made up from other sources.
Come to think of it … Any one of us can log-in to Fido or Schwab or VG any time, day or night, and place a “bet” on any number of highly speculative stocks, currencies or ARKK-like funds. But, we don’t call it “gambling”. It’s “investing.” :) Yes, the motive and purpose may be more noble - but the addictive nature and potential for great harm are very similar. If you doubt my analogy here, consider the very words that graced the home page of “Fund Alarm“ for many years. It was a line from the Kenny Rogers song: “The Gambler” .

You are correct, I inadvertently read off YTD rather than 2021 numbers in some cases. Thanks for spotting my errors!
SNGVX really did lose almost a full percent, but you have the correct figure for BBBMX.
GILPX did eek out a 0.02% gain (still effectively zero) rather than lose 0.07%.
But MERFX did really lose 0.19% (still virtually zero), VNLA did really lose 0.18% (again, virtually zero).
BSV did worse than I reported, losing over 1% in 2021.
T-notes (maturities of 2-10 years) saw yields go up by 0.6% to 0.9%:
2 year rose from 0.11% to 0.73%,
3 year rose from 0.16% to 0.97%,
5 year rose from 0.36% to 1.26%,
7 year rose from 0.64% to 1.44%,
10 yr rose from 0.93% to 1.52%
Though yields on T-bills rose only slightly, with the shortest maturity bills even having yields fall:
1 mo dropped from 0.09% to 0.06%
2 mo dropped from 0.09% to 0.05%
3 mo dropped from 0.09% to 0.06%
6 mo rose from 0.09% to 0.19%
12 mo rose from 0.10% to 0.39%
https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/interest-rates/Pages/TextView.aspx?data=yieldYear&year=2021
Since interest rates did not move in tandem, how a portfolio was affected depended on its distribution of bonds. Two portfolios with the same average duration could have all bonds of the same, relatively short duration (thus not much affected by rising rates), or a mix of very short term and somewhat longer duration bonds (with the latter losing more value).

I would probably opt for STIP for short-term TIP exposure, lower fees 0.05% versus 0.15% and shorter maturity bonds--0-5 years--so less sensitive to rising rates. VTIP also has lower fees. But TIPS in general look pricey right now.

But since I use MERFX as a cash substitute, 2%-3% per year is fine with me

The problem is for me a cash substitute fund cannot have sustained a loss greater than 2% in a year, and preferably no loss ever. Why take the risk with such meager returns? My cash subs include, SNGVX (1 off year in 31, so it gets a pass on my 2% rule); BBBMX; GILPX, VNLA (ETF) and even good old BSV (ETF). You can buy with confidence that any loss will be small and temporary. Not so clear with MERFX, which suffered a 5.67% loss in 2002 and 2.26% loss in 2008.

Not picking on anyone here, just remembering the statement that SNGVX had only one losing year out of 31. It's now 2 losing years out of 34, with nearly a 1% loss last year. Not much, but something one hopes not to see with a fund used in lieu of cash.
FWIW, BBBMX stayed in the green, gaining 0.01%.
GILPX did not, losing 0.07%. Likewise, MERFX lost 0.19%, VNLA lost 0.18% and BSV lost 0.12%.
These five funds, win or lose, came so close to zero that one might as well think of them all as having broken even. SNGVX was a different story.
Meanwhile, RPHYX kept chugging away, gaining 1.8% last year. Only 11 calendar years so far, but not a single loss.
I'm also taking a closer look at VMLTX. Only 1 losing year out of 34; that was just a loss of 0.16% in 2016. It normally maintains a higher than average duration to get higher returns. But it has shortened its duration to bring it in line with its peers, showing that it can be managed conservatively if conditions warrant.
My parents used this fund in retirement. Yes,

this is still your father's VMLTX.

It was a tough year in this space, but your numbers seem off based on my personal data and MS. BSV was down 1.09 but BBBMX was up 1.18%. For the year as a whole in 2021, my "near cash" holdings were down .04%. Not great but I can live with it. Wish there were better options but I've yet to find one's I'm comfortable with. Hard to argue about RPHYX, which I hold, but would be reluctant to put big dollars into (or most of these vehicles). While things like SNGVX had a bad year I'm OK with that (based on rising rates) rather then risking a serious loss on defaults as is a bit more likely with most of the others. It happened with ZEOIX, which recovered, but stung when it happened.

I compiled all the funds listed on this thread(except two, see my prior comment) into a watch list so that I could run some metrics.
(1)Total of 42 Funds ranging in age from 1.9 to 39 years. Youngest is BLNDX and oldest is PRPFX
(2)Top 2 lowest Max DD(life) are RPHIX(1.1%) and BSV(1.4%). Top 2 APR(life) are BLNDX(19.7%) and SWAN(14.4%)
(3)Zooming out to 25 years(this period covers the dot com and great recession crashes), Top 2 APR's are PRBLX(11.7 with a Max DD of 35.6) and TRPBX(8 with a Max DD of 38.4)
(4)Zooming out to 15 years(this period covers the great recession crash), Top APR's are PRBLX(12.4 with a Max DD of 35.6) and TRPBX(7.6 with DD of 38.4)
(5)Zooming into the period of the Super Bull 2(as defined by MFO Screener to be the period 200903 to 202112) the Top APR's are QQQX(17.4) and PRBLX(17.3)
(6)Over a 15 year period, the highest 3 Yr Rolling Avg APR is PRBLX(12.3)
PRBLX has a strong showing in the 3 periods(albeit arbitrary) I looked at. I plan to dive deeper into this one.

I have owned VTMFX for several years and think it is a "file away and forget it" fund, although I am not sure it is really "defensive"
1) it is 50% equities and 14% FAANG and their sibs. A day like today with the Nasdaq down 3% will hit this fund harder than a more broadly based 50% fund.
2) Their 50% bonds are largely Munis, so will likely be less sensitive to interest rates etc. The duration is over 4 so with a rapid rise in interest rates, especially if due to increasing inflation that tanks the stock market, their bond portfolio may not be much help

@msf said,

A similar fund (the only similar fund I'm aware of) is VTMFX. Cheaper and has outperformed in almost all calendar years. But, one needs a Vanguard account to invest in it.

USBLX would be similar to VTMFX...long term VTMFX has out performed USBLX
Could the .5% extra ER on USBLX (ER is .59%) be the main reason for VTMFX out performance?
VTMFX ER is razor thin at .09%
.5% on 10,000 year 1 = $50. From 1995 to 2000 both funds doubled (so USBLX paid out 50+60+70+80+90+100...etc each year more than VTMFX). A better way of putting it is VTMFX "reinvested that extra .5% ER" by not distributing it to management. 26 years later this becomes 10's of thousands of dollars ($85K vs $65K).
Is there a calculator for this @msf?

added a conservative allocation fund TAIFX to taxable (really like its holdings, muni’s along with strong underlying equity funds).
A similar fund (the only similar fund I'm aware of) is VTMFX. Cheaper and has outperformed in almost all calendar years. But, one needs a Vanguard account to invest in it.

This is a great thread, appreciate everyone's views. Personally I use rolling 36 month stats to gauge a fund because I do not believe a 12 month eval period(even one over many years) is indicative. Bill Miller outperformed S&P each year for 15 or so years I believe in the late 90's and early aughts and I recall he stated something to the effect of the streak being a quirk of the calendar.
For defensive alts I like ARBIX, SFHYX and SVARX. I have positions in the first two.

ARKK was off about 3% just before 1:00 PM. Down over 5% YTD. A friend of mine at work years ago used to say, “Off to a roaring halt!” Don’t think he coined that one, but certainly describes the action for ARKK early in the year.
Part of that cargo, DKNG, is currently flirting with $25, having been around $75 earlier in the year. Suspect it will close below $25. If I were Wood I’d consider tossing that one overboard.

Keep in mind that David Rosenberg is among generally bearish strategists and he has been so for a long while.

Yes, of course. I should note that (while not a sharp strategist like Rosenberg) I am also bearish on many risk assets. (I’d compare investing in today’s environment to navigating a minefield.) So I tend to post articles that coincide with those views.
Note that Rosenberg isn’t calling for a “meltdown” this year or next. He’s concerned about over-valuation in many (not all) risk assets … but also believes that situation could persist for many years. One must also take note of the euphoria among small investors. In the past that has often been a sign of market tops. That all makes our jobs as investors harder. But neither he nor I would recommend avoiding equities or other risk assets (like higher yielding bonds) altogether.
If you are young (under 50) I believe you should be dollar averaging into equities for the long run - regardless of your view of valuations. Time cures a lot of missteps. If you are much older and in “preservation mode”, keep in mind that a 25% portfolio loss requires about a 33-34% gain just to get back to break-even.
Thanks @Catch22 for the insights.

I read David Rosenberg for a few years after the market melt of 2008 and agree with @yogibearbull, that Mr. Rosenberg, much of the time seemed to be on the edge of "don't invest in equity right now". Perhaps his investments were heavily damaged in 2008 and that he remained "twitchy".
FRIFX is a unique fund in the real estate area, maintaining somewhat of a balance between equity and bonds. Many of the bonds ARE NOT investment grade. I did invest in this area after 2008 for a few years.
Surprisingly, in the chart below; FRIFX did well during the chart period, relative to the more heavily positioned in equity of the other funds in the comparison.
Being curious about the investments mentioned in this thread:
Below chart is for FRESX, VNG (Vanguard real estate eft), FREL (Fido real estate etf) and FRIFX
CHART Chart limited to start of Feb. 2015 due to an inception date for FREL. At the left bottom edge of the chart, one may select the "red and green" icon to display a bar chart for the returns period.