Since the start of the Covid pandemic, hospitalizations/deaths follow a wave of infections by about 2 weeks or so. This has happened several times over the past 2 years in the earlier 4 waves. By mid-January, we'll have a pretty good idea of the scope and severity of this most current wave. Since many healthcare facilities are struggling currently with capacity, it may get ugly. The conversations where I live is, don't get sick....with anything. There might not be a bed for you.
So...I'm actually a bit surprised the markets have held up as well as they have given the widespread nature of this most current, the 5th wave. January may be bumpy. I hope not.

SEC/Edgar fund reports (semiannual, annual) would have that info going back several years, but the manual retrieving and analysis process can be cumbersome.
Many funds post holding reports but the new ones replace the old ones.

@bee - Thanks for linking the list of Barry’s mistakes. Nice to see that 2016 was “apparently without any flaws”. I thought it interesting that he makes a big deal about his errant call on BREXIT and related matters. Kind of runs contrary to his stated aversion (Item #2) to making predictions.
I could write a book about all the things I’ve got wrong. Nearly killed the goose with an ill-advised bet on an Oppenheimer commodities fund couple decades ago. And, like some others here, I invested in HSGFX in its early years. Abandoned that one before too much damage was done. Just 2 of many missteps over a 50+ year investing history.
-
PS - I think the hardest lesson for me to learn is not to “double down” on a failing investment. Often that simply compounds the problem. A one-way street!

I suspect we are now beyond the 2020 crash rebound period, and I think we will have to accommodate more rising interest rate impact. I don't have strong predictions about particular funds, but I am expecting bond oefs like IOFIX will come back down to earth and have more "normal" returns.

Today’s 3 cent gain continued a recent pattern of outsized gains one to two trading days before ex dividend date. This is the reverse of the pattern in effect prior to 2020. Their portfolio is trading around 96 cents on the dollar up considerably from the 60 to 80 cents since 2017. So I agree its best days are behind it and thinking 2022 may only see a 4% to 5% total return. Hopefully I am dead wrong. Can’t think of many or any bond fund that had such a stellar return this year. The managers feel the fund has another 25% to 30% before the legacy non agencies play is over. I would probably cut those numbers in half if only because fund managers in general tend to be overly optimistic. Sure has been a unique and special bond fund over the years and if one was able to sidestep the carnage in March 2020 and return the following month.

Thanks. I’ve long held PRPFX as a staple. It’s much more aggressively positioned in equities & metals than what I’m looking for for a bit of play money. HSTRX is a weird bird. Mixing in around 10% gold / pm miners was apparently Hussman’s way of “goosing” returns on what looks like a bond fund on the surface. It hasn’t done badly. I compared it to TMSRX. Think it’s ahead for 3 years.
Probably somebody will open an ETF based on that concept in the future.

@rono,
Your Grandson is lucky to have someone humble like you as a Grandparent. And good on him to be thinking of his future while he's young.
Some thoughts to consider (some mirror what was already stated in other comments):
Start with reading a book like WSJ book of investing. After each chapter is read discuss topic and learnings with Parents or you etc. I found when talking to many young(er) folks at work etc, most don't know how to open a brokerage account, what at Roth IRA is etc.
Open Roth IRA Schwab account. I'd think first about asset allocation. I can virtually guarnatee you that many will advise a young man/person to "be very aggressive when investing at a young age." I say bunk to that. I can virtually gurantee that the first large drawdown, they will sell, go to cash and then avoid the markets if they are too agressive.
I'd start with a 65-35 stocks - cash mix to start with. Get a good education, work hard, get a decent job, stay within your means, don't worry about keeping up with the Jones' and he'll do just fine over time. Stay away from the get rich quick quacks (ARK etc)
I'd consider going with one fund to start with, ARTTX, Artisan Partners Focus Fund. The fund is process oriented, risk aware, can vary between growth/value/blend styles, generally invests in US stocks, fund mgr is very experienced but on the younger side, likely won't be retiring any time soon. ARTTX with the 65% of initial investment, then I bonds with the 35%. Do that over the next 5 years etc. Stay with it.
Also. Young man should stay the F away from any kind of drugs, be careful with the folks he runs with and who his friends are. Think for yourself, don't be brainwashed by social media or what the other Tik Tik sheeple are doing/thinking. Don't gamble. Only have a cocktail on "non-school" evenings. Choose a career path that will be viable, not be able to be automated away, oursourced overseas and that is not locked into a certain geographical area. Choose the right girls to date and the right girl to marry. Choose well.
Only buy a home in a good school district. Never buy a home where in the closest park the basketball rims are bent or missing the nets.
Donate to the local food bank once a quarter. Wouldn't hurt to donate your time a few days a year as well to help others less fortunate.
Good Luck, Good Health to you and your Grandson,
Baseball Fan

Good morning @hank. I was kind of using PRWCX as an example of the simplicity and the decent return you get by just owning a good or a few good balanced funds and holding them for a long time. That always seemed to be your style and over the years I've gravitated to it myself.
Hind sight is 20/20 and I've come to understand that sticking with a good fund, like PRWCX, versus collecting funds or jumping in and out of last years best funds wins in the end. The latter to me is like playing "fantasy football". It's a whole lot of fun. You build a new team of star players every year, dumping a player and "re-drafting" a new hot player during the year. Watching players (or funds) stats in the sports page (or MFO?) Your team at the end of the year often looks different than your original picks. Hind sight is, IMHO, this doesn't work well in investing.
I have about 25% in PRWCX. I could call it my Tom Brady fund because it has lasted and been a winner for many years, but I hate TB for obvious reasons - so I won't :)

Some times I have to laugh at myself for thinking I can do better than these balanced funds by making my "strategic" selections. I can't. I would have been better off over the years just putting everything in PRWCX and maybe a couple others.

While Geroux appears to be perfect genius, I’m not sure PRWCX has been tested in a prolonged bear market (measured in years) since he took the helm or since the fund ballooned to its current
$52.7B size. Depending on time horizon it may or may not be a good idea to have all your eggs in that basket.
Personally, I own it, but have little (5-10%) allocated to it - and have to laugh at myself too. :)
But hindsight is always 20/20.

Hi Ron, Nice to read what you have written about the desires of this young man.
I've pushed Roth IRA's for minors and +18 year olds with our extended family and friends for years. Sadly, few takers for follow up information.
I'm biased towards Fidelity and their quality operation. (wife and I since 1978 with T-IRA's). The online set up is clean and easy, and there are no minimum $ for the vast number of offerings, including active managed Fido funds.
I hand held two mid 30's relatives 2 years ago starting a Roth. They were both a bit more motivated as their mother provided them "seed" money to get their arse's in gear. They have 401k and 403b plans they contribute some money to, but the Roth is a nice extra. They are able to be aggressive (and should be at their age); so all money is invested in QQQ etf.
He has until April 15, 2022 to qualify for a 2021 tax year deposit. The money contribution does not have to be his, so others may help him fund the account.
What we did: We funded (minor Roth, account activation) and still fund our daughters Roth; as she continues with her full time university studies and some part time employment. The Roth is linked to a credit union acct. for easy access; and also includes a taxable brokerage acct. for future use.
The current Roth (Fido acct:) holdings are: FTEC (Fido tech. etf), FBCG (Fido blue chip growth etf) and FSMEX. Additionally, IRS Pub. 590-A should offer info about who may provide funding of a Roth.
I personally remain U.S. centric for our investments, but ACWI is global large cap equity etf at about 60/40, U.S./Global of about 2,200 holdings, if one wants that exposure. There are many other choices in this area for a global spread, if desired.
ACWI holdings
Remain curious,
Catch

Using MFO screener and other sites, its easy enough to pull up a high flyer SC fund called NEAGX . Consistently beats the SPY even in down cycles, is a Great Owl / HR, Sharpe and APR vs Peer keeps improving every year etc.
With a 35.84% YTD return and 45% in 1 year and 40% in 3 years, I was surprised to find only 1 mention of it here in the discussions by @BenWP in a timely moves for 2022 thread: https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/144021/#Comment_144021

I have to ask, how many of us have YTD returns in our portfolios of 17-18%? I do not.
Some times I have to laugh at myself for thinking I can do better than these balanced funds by making my "strategic" selections. I can't. I would have been better off over the years just putting everything in PRWCX and maybe a couple others.

ytd VONE + STIP 50-50 = ½ x 25.48% + ½ x 5.38% = 15.43%.
That would not be the best way to do the calculation since the lack of rebalancing implicit in the arithmetic would see the equity allocation drift up toward:1.2548/(1.2548 + 1.0538) = 54%.
Still, that's well below FBALX's 72%. (M*'s analysis says that it average a 2/3 allocation to equity and that the current 72% is its high point.)
Here's a better approximation using Portfolio Visualizer, taking a 70/30 VONE/STIP portfolio, rebalancing monthly, and comparing it to FBALX.
The index fund blend had a comparable std dev (8.04% vs 8.06%), and a worse max drawdown (-3.21% vs. -3.07%). But it did noticeably better when it came to raw performance (16.56% vs 14.80%), Sharpe ratio (2.12 vs 1.91) and Sortino ratio (4.87 vs. 4.29).
Based on AUM, the most popular moderate allocation fund is American Funds American Balanced, once one adds up the assets in its 19(!) different share classes. At $223B, no other fund is on the same planet. The runner up, if one wants to call it that, is Wellington (VWELX / VWENX), half the size at $123B. Then comes Vanguard's index entry, VBIAX, half again as large at $60B, and then PRWCX at $53B.
---
From the M* piece Yogi quoted:
" So, if you're investing for something six, 12, even 18 months from now, a 60/40 is probably a little too volatile for that."
Something that IMHO is key here is that these days the bonds are almost exclusively for ballast (dead weight to temper volatility) and just a smidgen of yield above MMFs over time. The less ballast, the longer one should expect to hold the fund. Currently I'm taking a little money off the table (something I rarely do, but equities have grown to be just too large a portion of my portfolio), so I've been looking at 50/50 funds. That's consistent with the M* quote, since I'm thinking of these as a place for cash for 12 or 18 months out.
The quote also brings to mind what I once read in literature from the former Strong Advantage fund STADX, renamed Strong Ultra Short, and then acquired by Wells Fargo. (From the frying pan into the fire?). That this fund (which was on the aggressive end of its category, with a fair amount of mid and low grade holdings) should not be used for money needed within the next year, but was better suited for money to be used in 1-2 years.

If this money is for retirement and not for a home or family in the next 10 years, the Roth is the best idea hands down.
I think if I was starting out and had 1 investment to start with, I would just buy QQQ and don't worry about diversification at that young age. Technology was a great investment 40 years ago, 20 years ago, 10 years ago and no reason to think differently in the future.
And I can't for the life of me think why a senior in high school whose only obligation for the next 4-5 years is to concentrate on a college degree, and being an only child with parents having good jobs as you described would ever need an emergency fund. It's not like he has to worry about losing his job and have to pay the families bills. This may be the best time of his life to invest as much as possible for the future without having other life-obligations that will certainly come in the future.
I'm very impressed with this young man wanting to understand finance at this young age.

I got a couple of my kids started when they were young, using UGTMs. They are adults now, so they have the accounts. With a relatively small pie to start with, I found it necessary to find MFs with low initial investment limits. If your grandson is ready to have a brokerage account and learns how to trade, the idea from yogi to use ETFs is perfect. One of my kids still has VIG that has appreciated nicely over the years. My inclination is towards a global growth fund, or at least a fund that has some international exposure. APFDX ($1K min) or BWBFX ($100 min) for global growth, AKREX for primarily US exposure. Many funds lower the starting minimum if the holder uses an Automatic Investment Plan. That strikes me as a good option for a new investor.

@Sven ...my portfolio consists of 10% cash and FI holdings, 21% equity OEFs, and the balance being individual stock holdings along with CEFs and 2 ETFs (SCHD and DIVO). That last portion generates divi's of 4.5%. That, plus prudent fund profit taking generates sufficient cash for me.
I understand that bonds are (were) effective ballast, but I think a few high quality healthcare or utility stocks (or even banks) serve the same function. That bull market in bonds we had for the past 30 years was pretty nice, but I see nothing conservative in bond purchases at present.

https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1073089/how-did-the-6040-portfolio-do-in-2021
"'The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated,' says the asset-allocation standard.....through the end of November, the 60/40 has returned about 15%, and I'm using just a generic stock and bond 60/40 portfolio for an example here. So, about 15%. And so, real return after you adjust for inflation, even with high inflation, that's about an 8% real return, which is pretty great. I looked at the rolling 12-month real returns for the 60/40 since 2000. The median over that last 21 years is about 7.5%. So, it's actually outperformed its median real return over that time period. So, even though all this doom and gloom came true, it didn't derail the 60/40.....I think it's definitely not something for a short-term investment. With 60% stocks, you're going to have volatility. You could have drawdowns. In 2008, 2020 drawdowns were a little north of 20%. So, that's your downside risk. So, if you're investing for something six, 12, even 18 months from now, a 60/40 is probably a little too volatile for that. But I think if you have a long time horizon, it's a very good starting point, and it's proven very difficult to beat because the stocks and bonds, when it's like an investment-grade bond portfolio, really balance each other out nicely. And unless that correlation between those two really significantly changes, which it's hard to see how it would, though it could over shorter periods, I think it's a really good long-term investment, and it's definitely been a very hard benchmark to beat....."
And for those who want to venture out some more, look at evolving MULT-ASSET funds that include stocks-bonds-alternatives in the mix.

I read a recent article stating that $50 mil AUM is considered a minimum level for an ETF to be sustainable longer term and suggesting many newer ones may need to close in a few years if they can’t garner that level. I recently bought some of Invesco’s PSMM (actively managed fund-of-funds) costing .33% - including accrued expenses of the underlying funds. Not looking for criticism or affirmation of the choice. Just tossed it out as an example of what’s available at what cost. The fund only has around $20 mil AUM at last look - but appears to be growing steadily.
FWIW - While .33% is still higher than others, it’s about half the cost of PRSIX - an actively managed mutual fund at T. Rowe with a similar 40/60 allocation.

I believe that 2022 will end higher than 2021 concludes, but it certainly won't be a smooth ride. It should be volatile during the first half of the year particularly.
With only a few exceptions, none of my year-end OEF distributions were reinvested. In early January I plan to trim 25% from a few individual stocks which ran up nicely the past 2 or 3 years. I plan to put the sum of these dollars into NVHAX, FRA and FRFZX, and then when the FED moves and the market vomits in response, I'll move that into a few holdings geared towards increasing my dividend income to include RQI, BME, EVT, DIVO, FLC, JPS and possibly ETNHX to make up for a down 2021. Other than floaters and preferreds, I have no conventional bond funds.

Yes, I did exact what you did at the library. For a number of years, I subscribed to No-load Fund Analyst that taught me everything I knew today about mutual funds and more. The internet allows me to further my learning in several blog sites including bogleheads and others. Several of MFO posters here subscribe to Barron’s as well - useful as a sounding board on the global economy.

There have been many changes in the fund industry over the years which benefit today's investors.