It seems as if that only works if the income for the special distribution was not accounted for in the TR prior to their distribution. I can't think of how that could happen over the course of a full year? If it were being accumulated, wouldn't the NAV have risen along the way?
This kind of gets back to the idea that distributions are 'free money' that have nothing to do with the price assigned to the individual shares. Invariably, anything you take out through distributions or selling reduces the value of what remains invested. Unless your TR is positive, this requires an ever-increasing percentage return to support a fixed distribution from a decreasingly-valued investment.
Corporations/businesses are simply not going to give you something for nothing. The idea that investments with a high distribution are somehow inherently more advantageous than ones which simply generate profits and increase price is, imo, a naive one. Of course, you can get price dislocations and there are certainly advantages to having a way to get predictable income from an investment at times when the investment is struggling. These are issues of convenience, however. and not of financial advantage.

About this allocation: 55% Moneymarket, 45% Fixed Income: 51% Treasury, 49% CDs
Note that while we have outrageously conservative investments at this time, I'm now 85. Our situation is almost identical to Tarwheel, and when we were at his point our investment spectrum was very much like his. It's only in the last couple of years that we've pulled in our horns. Why mess with a good situation?
There have been a number of threads/comments lately regarding investment simplification driven by a partner's lack of interest in financial affairs, and consequent inability to navigate within a brokerage website. My wife has always been interested in our financial situation, but has never really been comfortable with complex internet sites.
As a radio tech for SF 911 I was the "documenter" for our group. So I told myself that I needed to use that skill set to print a step-by-step for navigating the Schwab website.
I am both proud and happy to report that, armed with her new guide, my wife is now reasonably comfortable there and can now perform all of the basic operations. And she is eager to continue learning some of the more complex operations such as finding and purchasing CDs and Treasuries. That's next.

Confirmation statements for my UMB HSA Saver account have been unavailable for mutual fund purchases
made since 04/22. I first contacted UMB regarding this issue on 05/10.
I've sent or received six emails/phone calls related to this matter.
The Customer Care Manager was unable to provide an estimated resolution date when we last spoke on 06/05.
I've finally decided to send an email to the Chairman/CEO of UMB Financial Corporation
and to the President of UMB Financial Corporation.
I'm not familiar with UMB's internal applications/systems but it shouldn't take over a month to resolve this issue.
Edit/Add: The email to the Chairman/CEO and President was composed and scheduled to be sent on 06/18.
I cancelled sending this email and submitted a BBB complaint instead.
If the issue is not resolved within a reasonable time, I'll then send an email to the Chairman/CEO and President.

You wrote that you were "hoping with heavy inflows [MRFOX] also would be able to buy new or more promising investments."
During the period in question (the one ending Aug '23 with zero turnover), MRFOX increased the number of its positions by almost 20%. One of the new positions (Disney DIS) was clearly undervalued at the time according to M*. M* pegged its fair value around $145 while its price hovered around $90.
Given these facts, could you clarify your hopes and whether the addition of Disney failed to meet those hopes? Discover Financial Services DFS, also added by the fund in this period, was similarly undervalued.
Perhaps, since M* currently rates DIS and DFS as 3*, what you were hoping was that the fund would dump these recent acquisitions, seeing as they have met some sort of target?
---
Many people assume that low or zero turnover means that a fund isn't changing its positions - a misunderstanding that your post reinforced, intentionally or not. I attempted to address that misunderstanding by providing M*'s definition of turnover and by using MRFOX as a case study.
One wouldn't know the precise definition by looking at MRFOX's website, as its footnote says only that "turnover is a measure of how frequently assets within a fund are bought and sold by the manager."

@stillers. Perhaps another universe is oddly phrased, but my financial life would be entirely different if I had a pension check roll in every month. Many decisions would be looked at differently.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/720309/000119312524160798/d844723d497.htm
497 1 d844723d497.htm AMG FUNDS III
Filed pursuant to Rule 497(e)
File Nos. 002-84012 and 811-03752
AMG FUNDS III
AMG GW&K High Income Fund
Supplement dated June 13, 2024 to the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information,
each dated May 1, 2024
The following information supplements and supersedes any information to the contrary relating to AMG GW&K High Income Fund (the “Fund”), a series of AMG Funds III (the “Trust”), contained in the Fund’s Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information, dated as noted above.
The Board of Trustees of the Trust has approved a plan to liquidate and terminate the Fund (the “Liquidation”), which is expected to occur on or about September 11, 2024 (the “Liquidation Date”). Effective on or about June 14, 2024, it is expected that the Fund will begin selling its portfolio investments and will invest the proceeds in cash and cash equivalents, in anticipation of the Liquidation. Proceeds of the Liquidation are expected to be distributed to shareholders of the Fund promptly following the Liquidation Date in full redemption of each shareholder’s shares of the Fund.
Effective immediately following the close of business on June 13, 2024, the Fund will no longer accept investments, except for investments made through existing asset allocation programs investing in the Fund, and shares purchased pursuant to automatic investment programs, such as automatic investments through 401(k) plans and reinvestments of any dividends and distributions. Those shareholders investing in the Fund through one of the exceptions described above may continue to purchase shares of the Fund provided that such transactions settle prior to the Liquidation Date.
A letter will be sent to shareholders who hold shares directly with the Fund (“Direct Shareholders”) setting forth the various options and instructions with respect to the Liquidation and the distribution of Direct Shareholders’ redemption proceeds. Any Direct Shareholder may elect to have redemption proceeds sent to them via check. Direct Shareholders may also elect to exchange their Fund shares into the same share class of any other fund in the AMG Funds family of funds that is open to new investors (subject to minimum initial investment requirements as described in such fund’s prospectus). Shareholders who hold their shares in the Fund through a financial intermediary should contact their financial representative to discuss their options with respect to the Liquidation and the distribution of such shareholders’ redemption proceeds.
The Fund intends to distribute its accumulated net capital gains and net investment income, if any, to shareholders of record of the Fund as of the close of business on June 17, 2024; these distributions may be taxable to shareholders who do not hold their shares in a tax-advantaged account such as an IRA or 401(k).
PLEASE KEEP THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/879947/000119312524160793/d849966d497.htm
497 1 d849966d497.htm AMG FUNDS II
Filed pursuant to Rule 497(e)
File Nos. 033-43089 and 811-06431
AMG FUNDS II
AMG GW&K Enhanced Core Bond ESG Fund
Supplement dated June 13, 2024 to the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information,
each dated May 1, 2024
The following information supplements and supersedes any information to the contrary relating to AMG GW&K Enhanced Core Bond ESG Fund (the “Fund”), a series of AMG Funds II (the “Trust”), contained in the Fund’s Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information, dated as noted above.
The Board of Trustees of the Trust has approved a plan to liquidate and terminate the Fund (the “Liquidation”), which is expected to occur on or about September 11, 2024 (the “Liquidation Date”). Effective on or about June 14, 2024, it is expected that the Fund will begin selling its portfolio investments and will invest the proceeds in cash and cash equivalents, in anticipation of the Liquidation. Proceeds of the Liquidation are expected to be distributed to shareholders of the Fund promptly following the Liquidation Date in full redemption of each shareholder’s shares of the Fund.
Effective immediately following the close of business on June 13, 2024, the Fund will no longer accept investments, except for investments made through existing asset allocation programs investing in the Fund, and shares purchased pursuant to automatic investment programs, such as automatic investments through 401(k) plans and reinvestments of any dividends and distributions. Those shareholders investing in the Fund through one of the exceptions described above may continue to purchase shares of the Fund provided that such transactions settle prior to the Liquidation Date.
A letter will be sent to shareholders who hold shares directly with the Fund (“Direct Shareholders”) setting forth the various options and instructions with respect to the Liquidation and the distribution of Direct Shareholders’ redemption proceeds. Any Direct Shareholder may elect to have redemption proceeds sent to them via check. Direct Shareholders may also elect to exchange their Fund shares into the same share class of any other fund in the AMG Funds family of funds that is open to new investors (subject to minimum initial investment requirements as described in such fund’s prospectus). Shareholders who hold their shares in the Fund through a financial intermediary should contact their financial representative to discuss their options with respect to the Liquidation and the distribution of such shareholders’ redemption proceeds.
The Fund intends to distribute its accumulated net capital gains and net investment income, if any, to shareholders of record of the Fund as of the close of business on June 17, 2024; these distributions may be taxable to shareholders who do not hold their shares in a tax-advantaged account such as an IRA or 401(k).
PLEASE KEEP THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/912036/000119312524160800/d807981d497.htm
497 1 d807981d497.htm AMG FUNDS IV
Filed pursuant to Rule 497(e)
File Nos. 033-68666 and 811-08004
AMG FUNDS IV
AMG Beutel Goodman International Equity Fund
Supplement dated June 13, 2024 to the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information,
each dated March 1, 2024
The following information supplements and supersedes any information to the contrary relating to AMG Beutel Goodman International Equity Fund (the “Fund”), a series of AMG Funds IV (the “Trust”), contained in the Fund’s Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information, dated as noted above.
The Board of Trustees of the Trust has approved a plan to liquidate and terminate the Fund (the “Liquidation”), which is expected to occur on or about September 11, 2024 (the “Liquidation Date”). Effective on or about June 14, 2024, it is expected that the Fund will begin selling its portfolio investments and will invest the proceeds in cash and cash equivalents, in anticipation of the Liquidation. Proceeds of the Liquidation are expected to be distributed to shareholders of the Fund promptly following the Liquidation Date in full redemption of each shareholder’s shares of the Fund.
Effective immediately following the close of business on June 13, 2024, the Fund will no longer accept investments, except for investments made through existing asset allocation programs investing in the Fund, and shares purchased pursuant to automatic investment programs, such as automatic investments through 401(k) plans and reinvestments of any dividends and distributions. Those shareholders investing in the Fund through one of the exceptions described above may continue to purchase shares of the Fund provided that such transactions settle prior to the Liquidation Date.
A letter will be sent to shareholders who hold shares directly with the Fund (“Direct Shareholders”) setting forth the various options and instructions with respect to the Liquidation and the distribution of Direct Shareholders’ redemption proceeds. Any Direct Shareholder may elect to have redemption proceeds sent to them via check. Direct Shareholders may also elect to exchange their Fund shares into the same share class of any other fund in the AMG Funds family of funds that is open to new investors (subject to minimum initial investment requirements as described in such fund’s prospectus). Shareholders who hold their shares in the Fund through a financial intermediary should contact their financial representative to discuss their options with respect to the Liquidation and the distribution of such shareholders’ redemption proceeds.
The Fund intends to distribute its accumulated net capital gains and net investment income, if any, to shareholders of record of the Fund as of the close of business on June 17, 2024; these distributions may be taxable to shareholders who do not hold their shares in a tax-advantaged account such as an IRA or 401(k).
PLEASE KEEP THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

Chat conversations are very much with a human and the service that I've gotten from them has been just fine, thank you. You talk about people as if they were your personal servants. I'd surely pity anyone unfortunate enough to have to work for someone like you.

I have spoken to many people on the phone including in my ex work thru complicated issues. I never got any complaints and I always got great reviews. Nobody, as well as I, were servants.
But, I expect someone to be a pro at handling customers and getting the right answers.
So let me repeat AGAIN, the best service is usually by talking to a human. That's my experience over many years working in IT in several businesses, including many years in financial institutions and as a customer. If it's important I demand it in writing. That saved me a lot of future problems and time of what was promised.
If you feel otherwise, you can do it your way, others can try both.
Just for the record, you made a harsh judgment of me without knowing anything about me while I never posted anything about you.

I've never used Schwab's chat, but I have had great luck with Verizon, SiriusXM, T-Mobile, Amex, and other chat-based customer representatives. The advantage is that you can keep the log if there are any disputes down the road. These chat lines are run by 'people' as well ... so if you're decent to them, they'll likely be decent/efficient to you. I don't care HOW I interact with them as long as my problem/concern is addressed promptly and in a professional manner.
ProTip: When using chat, if you think it's going to be an 'uncomfortable' conversation with likely attempts to upsell, (eg, cancelling cable TV) just type your problem (or a set of responses) out in NotePad or TextEdit first and then blow it into chat as needed based on the flow of the chat. Lots of folks don't know that browser-based chat reps often can see you typing / correcting / rephrasing things in the chat window and adjust their pitch to you on-the-fly based on if you seem undecided or waffling.
Edit: Schwab CSR got back to me on one of my enquiries, but I had to read it 3x to understand which issue they were responding to b/c the non-boilerplate part of the response read more like a technical trouble ticket, not a response to a brokerage account question.

Chat conversations are very much with a human and the service that I've gotten from them has been just fine, thank you. You talk about people as if they were your personal servants. I'd surely pity anyone unfortunate enough to have to work for someone like you.

I have spoken to many people on the phone including in my ex work thru complicated issues. I never got any complaints and I always got great reviews. Nobody, as well as I, were servants.
But, I expect someone to be a pro at handling customers and getting the right answers.
So let me repeat AGAIN, the best service is usually by talking to a human. That's my experience over many years working in IT in several businesses, including many years in financial institutions and as a customer. If it's important I demand it in writing. That saved me a lot of future problems and time of what was promised.
If you feel otherwise, you can do it your way, others can try both.
Just for the record, you made a harsh judgment of me without knowing anything about me while I never posted anything about you.

Post-Conference Notes by YBB
Rates are maintained - fed funds 5.25-5.50%, bank reserves rate 5.4%, discount rate 5.5%. Inflation target remains +2% average. Base-effects have caused a slight bump in recent inflation data. Confidence in progress on inflation is low, so higher rates for longer can be expected. Neutral/equilibrium rates is a theoretical concept that is good only in hindsight. Ad-hoc evidence of price reductions is just that.
Treasury QT continues at the reduced level of -$25 billion/mo, but MBS QT remain at -$35 billion/mo.
Monetary policy is restrictive, although economic data remain flat now.
Labor market remains strong, but it isn't overheating.
Housing is weak. The OERs (owners' equivalent rent) remain elevated. There is an overall shortage of houses.
Consumer spending has been rising, so is the consumer debt. Household wealth is also rising. But many consumers are unhappy as lower inflation doesn't mean lower prices.
Banks are in good financial shape.
Dollar is strong, but that is Treasury's responsibility.
Internal review of the Fed will start later in the year.
New SEPs (Summary of Economic Projections) were released.
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1512/thread

While it does not give an actual overall rating, quarterly financial call reports are are prepared and submitted by banks to a repository. Uniform Bank Performance Reports (UBPRs) are generated based on the information submitted from those call reports which have financial ratios in comparison to their peers.
You can check the FFIEC website for public information.
https://www.ffiec.gov/

I like the idea of looking at NRSRO ratings such as Fitch. Financial institutions will usually give their ratings on their website.
For example, here's Morgan Stanley Bank's ratings. Morgan Stanley has its own credit ratings and separate ratings of its subsidiaries. Scroll past the former to get to the Morgan Stanley Bank ratings.
I also like Weiss (not an NRSRO). From WSJ, May 6, 2010 (subscription required):

Weiss Group LLC, an independent research provider, bought back a financial-institutions rating business it previously sold and intends to apply for the unit to become a "nationally recognized statistical ratings organization," or NRSRO, the group's chairman said.
The unit, Weiss Ratings, produces "financial-safety ratings" for hundreds of U.S. banks and insurance companies and doesn't accept compensation from the companies it rates.
...
The ratings from Weiss are meant to be an indicator of the risk and financial soundness of banks and insurance companies. They are similar to the "financial strength ratings" that NRSROs like Moody's Investors Service and A.M. Best currently provide on financial institutions.

Here's Weiss' rating of Morgan Stanley Bank, and Weiss' page describing its bank ratings in detail.
DepositAccounts rates Morgan Stanley Bank a B+ for health. The single 3* rating that you see is just a subjective rating by a user apparently disappointed with the rate offered on a CD. It has nothing to do with safety, which end users are ill equipped to comment on.
https://www.depositaccounts.com/banks/morgan-stanley-bank-national-association.html#health

FYI - The link takes one to the login page.
If you're already logged in (requires a Merrill account) the link takes you to the cited page. If you have a log in but are not logged in, then when you log in on that login page you'll land on the cited page.
If you don't have a login, you can still get the list of available MMFs from the next link (rates and mins). But you won't know what their settlement date is or by what hour you must submit orders for execution on the indicated day (ranging from 11:45AM to 5:00PM(!)).
Why it matters is that settlement dates affect when cash is needed for trades. I've been unable to do an exchange between two MMFs in the same family simply because they had different settlement days. I had to sell one fund and subsequently buy another. What other timing/trading impacts the differences in settlement days have I leave as an exercise.
Among other things, the inability to invest pennies means that small amounts of cash (earning virtually nothing) will gradually pile up. If your fund is paying $N.75 per month, then you'll have 75¢ in cash after one month, $1.50 in cash after two months, etc. I expect loose change in a couch but not in a financial institution. Material or not, this is a shortcoming that I've not seen at any other institution.

Since GLD inception 11-18-2004 recent history:
CAGR SPY 10.07% VBINX 60/40 7.38% and GLD 8.52%.

Interesting. Since inception GLD has done a little better on average than VBINX. However, VBINX’s inception date is about 12 years earlier (1992).
I agree with FD that gold hasn’t been a good investment compared to stocks. Can’t give you a good reason to own it. It does receive some attention from the financial press and is held by many central banks. There have been brief periods over the years where it outperformed many other investments. Very pretty stuff to look at I think. But that’s in the eyes of the beholder.
Possibly of interest - Costco selling as much as $200 million in gold bars monthly

Based on the timing, I'd guess the explanation is that MrRuffles is a Schwab Private Client. This is a new feature added July 10, 2023, and includes a dedicated rep.
Schwab press release
These dedicated reps, even credentialed ones, are more salespeople than advisors.

As part of these new experiences, all HNW and UHNW clients have access to a dedicated Schwab consultant who is responsible for their overall relationship with Schwab at no additional cost to them. ...
I received written responses from Michael Cianfrocca, my media contact at Schwab. He advised me that:

1. The new services aren’t advisory.
   
2. The dedicated financial consultant will primarily connect clients to different resources at Schwab, which are not free.
   
3. While some financial consultants are CFPs, their “primary role” is acting as a concierge and directing clients to Schwab's relevant services.
   
4. The financial consultants are not fiduciaries.

https://www.advisorperspectives.com/articles/2023/07/19/schwabs-insurance-leverage-marketing-solin

I asked my Schwab rep out of Texas if they could waive TF’s on a number of MF’s after a rep in my local office gave me the thumbs down. The remote rep was happy to do it and I just had to inform them after making my purchases.

It seems it is discretionary and on a case by case basis.
Do you get to reach the same rep each time or you have to call the pool of reps and take your chances that you might get an obliging rep?
Thanks

Schwab assigned me a dedicated Financial Consultant/CFP last year so i was able to directly email them with my request.

What is the difference between VMFXX and VMRXX, except for the 1 or 2 basis points 7-day yield difference?
VMRXX product summary from VG website: "The fund invests at least 99.5% of its total assets in cash, U.S. government securities, and/or repurchase agreements that are collateralized solely by U.S. government securities or cash (collectively, government securities). The fund invests more than 25% of its assets in securities issued by companies in the financial services industry, which includes securities issued by certain government-sponsored enterprises. The fund is considered one of the most conservative investment options offered by Vanguard. Although the fund invests in short-term U.S. government securities, the amount of income that a shareholder may receive will be largely dependent on the current interest rate environment. Investors who have a short-term savings goal and are interested in a fund that invests in securities issued by the U.S. government or its agencies may wish to consider this option." [Bold added]
The sentence in Bold is not there in product summary for VMFXX, their default sweep fund. Is that the only difference between these two products?

@msf @sven
Worth talking to Lynnbolin2021 who uses both Vanguard and Fido advisors I think.
The Vanguard guy did not seem inexperienced on the phone, but clearly said they would not take any of our legacy positions into account when managing our money. Most is in Berkshire.So we would have had to sort do mental arithmetic to account for it
Fido, as I mentioned, seemed to offer little for the fee
Schwab farmed it out to a large independent firm ( Wealth Management Group) whose financial planning seemed comprehensive and pretty good. They reviewed our wills and caught significant typo our lawyer had missed, for example.
The portfolio was individual stocks with bond mutual funds. They had a plan to slowly sell positions they felt were not useful.
The portfolios resembled SCHD and SCHG, but hey had a tighter screen for a few parameters. It was unclear how flexible they were with their portfolios and if they changed dramatically. SCHD is a very cheap fund and only lost 3% in 202 but since has done little. My "Deep value" advisor is morevolitle but has beaten it by a mile.
All in all I was impressed but since I am still Compos Mentus, decided I could wait to switch. For someone who needs help, unless you go "All Bernstein" it is not a bad choice.

@sma3, thank you for sharing your experience with Schwab, Fidelity, and Vanguard brokerages. I think it is a crapshoot of which agents you deal with and that set the tone on whether that firm works for you or not. These days there are high turnovers in the financial business. Planners I talk with have less than 10 years of experience. We are working on Plan B so that my wife can handle the finance without advisors when I pass on.
Like you I also subscribed to "No Load Fund Analyst" for a number of years until they retired that business. Rather than using an advisor early on, we spent time learning about asset allocation from William Bernstein's books. NLFA became the tool to implement the target allocation in our portfolio and the value of active management. This process has proven invaluable as we survived the severe drawdowns during the dotcom and GFC crisis, and we became more informed investors and asking the right questions.
We have been DIY investors ever since. Until last year I explored using financial advisors to manage part of our portfolio. Vanguard is reasonable with 0.3% fee but the choices are limited to Vanguard products only. Think that is the same with most brokerages. This experiment ended as we moved on from Vanguard.
Fidelity offers their advisory services and I will talk with them to better understand their capabilities now that I had experience with Vanguard.