The author's recommendations for the coming year resonate with me.
"Looking back over the past two years, one word comes to mind: extreme.
It’s been a period of extremes in the market and the economy.
Many have benefitted, but we’ve also seen excesses that aren’t necessarily healthy—from the rise in NFTs to the craze in SPACs to the boom in day trading.
That’s why, as you look ahead to the coming year, the theme I recommend is moderation."
Link

I enjoy reading the MFO articles. Anybody have thoughts regarding the article mentioning .....a 20% equity portfolio translates into receiving 60% of the returns of an all equity portfolio with about 25% of the volatility? Just a Thinking Fast and Slow type observation....volatility (SD) is a annualized metric that would remain in this case relatively consistent over time around 25% but the 60% yearly returns vs SPY compounded over a 30 year retirement horizon would not be 60% after 30 years. A significant difference in return. IOW's the value one receives from low SD does not compound over time. Although there is value inherent.

Rosenberg seems to think both long duration bonds and gold are an attractive play.
I’d actually intended to make a small spec play today with a bet on on GLDB, which combines a gold position with investment grade corporate bonds. Looking at the substantial damage today to that “cocktail” brew (the fund’s down nearly 2%), I decided to stay put. By chance, I rebalanced Friday and sold off a bit of OPGSX. That proved fortunate.
Predictions ….. Who the f knows? I agree somewhat we’re in a bubble. But, as Rosenberg mentions, it could continue on for years. The action today is nasty in the metals and bond markets for sure.
Thanks @bee for noting. It is one of the more in depth interviews I’ve seen.

Not a lot of port moves specifically for 2022. We are nearing end of 10th year of retirement. We use 5-yr retirement portfolio strategies and are nearing the end of our 2nd 5-yr plan (June 2022). All major moves towards next 5-yr plan have been gradual/cumulative over past six months or so and will be completed by June.
Core for next five years will consist of 11 AA OEFs (and possibly 1-2 more) that can be detailed here or via PM if anyone is interested. Still reluctantly holding a smaller slug of dedicated bond OEFs (HY Munis, BL, Multi, ST HY), significantly reduced in number and aggregate $ amount from initial 5-yr plan plan. Also initiated much larger explore section during 2nd, 5-yr plan that will carryforward in next one, comprised of a coupla indivdual stocks and a coupla dedicated stock ETFs and OEFs. Former 10-yr CD ladder initiated at start of retirement continues to see final rungs fall off w/o being replaced. Maturing CD proceeds continue to be rolled to much higher risk cats, primarily explore stuff. Keeping an eye on 5-yr CD rates this year as they inch back to levels that may be acceptable replacements for some dedicated bond OEF holdings.
Will continue to make (what are effectively) tax-free IRA w/d's for personal spending wants/needs up to taxable income threshold in lieu of making Roth conversions. Continue to be ~96% under the umbrella (read, in tax-deferred a/c's) and ~4% in taxable. Haven't paid a dime in FIT/SIT since final year of employment in 2012 (state has actually been paying us $50 annually last coupla years via tax credits) and starting to look like that will all continue for at least five more years or until RMDs are um, required. Life-long tax planning strategy has been to Avoid, Defer, Minimize, and pay them on our terms when we want (read, ultimately have) to pay them.
REALLY appreciated the contributions of many of MFO regulars. Keep up the great work and contributions here and Happy New Year to all!

I’m not hallucinating. Just misread Wood’s words. A total 40% appreciation is possible over 5 years.. 40% annually is totally wacko!

I'm imagining what the Upside/Downside capture ratio relative to the S&P 500 would have to be over the next five years to deliver a 40% annualized return after the longest bull market in history. You have to believe U.S. stocks are due for another five very strong years or that ARKK is run by the greatest investment genius in history to believe 40% annually is possible for the next five like the last five. And even if it is possible, will investors be able to stomach the volatility along the way or will they time their buys and sales poorly just like they did before?

Our KISS of a portfolio ended the year with 80% in PRWCX/TRAIX and 20% in AKREX. So, not a bad year with low to mid 70's exposure to equities by year end.
Our average age is 56 and probably have been on the light side of equities for our age the past 15 years since PRWCX has dominated our investments, but we are okay with that. We'll keep saving, but probably have enough saved for retirement already, just need to keep growing it at a modest rate for the next handful of years. Grateful to be debt free.
Have decided equity exposure is a bit higher than preferred at this point and am in the process of reducing AKREX and moving some of the proceeds into TRAIX and PRFRX for now which is also holding some inheritance monies my wife received recently from her folk's estate. Planning for our equity exposure to be between 65-70% when done rebalancing.

Love the Roth for that reason - No RMD! Yogi says, “And they give ya real money… ” (not cheapened by taxes).
Maybe remotely related … I’ve had decent luck with some tax-deferred money I withdrew 2 & 3 years ago and put in PRIHX. It scores poorly on M*, as I think they’re comparing it to longer dated muni funds. So far, volatility seems more in keeping with a short term or ultra-short bond fund. But, of course that could change. A gain of nearly 4.8% in 2021 on such a liquid, stable (and largely tax exempt) asset wasn’t hard to take.*
*Footnote : The fund invests in below investment grade (junk) bonds and is subject to market risk!
@Tarwheel - I hear ya. Third year of mask mandates about to begin. Makes air travel, concerts, plays, museums, etc. less than enticing - especially, I think, for us older folks. Don’t even think about overseas travel!

@BaluBalu,
TANDX, ~10%
ARTTX, ~5%
FMSDX, ~5%
PVCMX, ~5%
I'm uber conservative...recognizing I have taken on "risk" by being way conservative past several years...still working, I didn't like being idle as I was "semi-retired" for ~ 18months...so live below my means.
Do recognize I've been ok with this during the past several years but past year have taken it on the chin with "silent losses"...due to severe inflation which appears to be getting worse as we head into new year (grocery store, heating bill, conversations with supply chain/vendor mgr's...many taking double digit increases at the beginning on 2022)
Best,
Baseball Fan

msf, thanks for your thoughts. Seems no provision for a bad market cycle of a few years.
They didn't require a withdrawal last year. & just maybe that is how they would handle a bad market of a few years ?!
HNY , Derf

It is complicated. I am not sure why there is so much focus on the "4%" rule when the IRS forces people over 75 to remove 4.07% of your retirement accounts. By 80 it is up to almost 5%.

This conflates 4% of starting amount (inflation adjusted) with 4% (or 5%) of remaining balance.
The 4% rule is supposed to enable one to spend down savings so that they are not depleted for at least 30 years. But the savings are, or may be, depleted at some point past that.
As one draws down one's savings, the 4% of the original value gradually evolves into 5%, 6% and more of the remaining balance. The RMD calculation is designed to automate this while adjusting for a gradually growing life expectancy.
That is, as one grows older without dying, one's expected lifetime expands. So year by year, one needs to plan on living longer and draw down a bit slower (as a fraction of remaining assets).

The estimable Professor Snowball wrote about ARKK in this month's 'Briefly Noted' commentary.
"Despite a multitude of warnings, here at MFO, at Morningstar, and elsewhere, investors absolutely poured money into the ARKK Innovation ETF in December 2020 and January 2021. The warnings were pretty straightforward: (1) you can’t buy last year’s returns, so don’t let those sway your decisions, (2) ARK was wildly understaffed and inundated (net $20 billion in 2020) with dumb money, and (3) manager Cathy Woods has a consistent long-term boom-and-crash track record, with the boom having just occurred."
"Good news for investors committing their money on December 1st: you’re only down 13% since then. Less good news for folks who made ARKK one of their New Years 2020 resolutions: you’re down 24%. Folks who gave shares as a Valentine’s Day present? They’re underwater by 39%."

“We expect a compound annual rate of return of roughly over 40% over the next five years.”
Perhaps her current picks will appreciate by that amount. But - will she have any investors left in her fund by than? Having played around with one of these hot potatos this year (DKNG) all I can say is “Ouch”.
I used to think gold mining funds were volatile!

Looking for some guidance here. As previously mentioned, I hold MSSMX and WAMCX and they have underperformed in 2021: 5.78 and 5.46. I noted @gk3105gklm comment about how he traded out of them as they are “ex champs”. Wondering what prompted that and when?
Running MFO premium for CSMCX FCPGX MSSGX WAMCX and NEAGX and it’s clear that MFO also dropped my two funds to a 1 and 2 rating in 1 year performance. Side Note: Wouldn’t it be great to have MFO alert you when a fund in your watch list or port dropped in overall rating? Valueline did that. Would it be in time or advantageous?
The rating drop was deserved based on this years performance. Sure. These two funds have highest risk in 1 and 3 year as well. 10 yr performance, MFO still doesn’t like MSSGX in terms of overall rating. It’s rated a 2 for 10 yr. I don’t recall that when I first evaluated. 20 year it’s a 5. FWIW: M* ratings based on past performance remain unchanged 5*.
NEAGX is rated 5 for all periods. Wondering why this fund didn’t make my screening process. I’m still reviewing this.
While I’m deciding whether to stay or make a change with these two funds, I’m equally as interested in learning how to better evaluate an exit or change. Not a momentum trader. “Consistent Underperformance” is somewhat subjective, no? Is that 1 year or 2 years if there’s been no change to mgmt or underlying fund strategy change. It could be what @BenWP said… just some bad choices in high flying small caps. What makes me confident that they will correct?

...ya...so in the past couple weeks I rec'd back about a 1/4 of my investment in IQDAX, Infinity Q fund...hopefully within the next 2 years after the lawyers and their firms get paid I get another 1/4 back...if I do, I'll consider myself lucky.
Done learnt an expensive financial investing lesson as my hard lesson was monitized. Alledged fraud by the fund mgr who was "adjusting" the NAVs as he felt was appropriate. Alledgedly.
I still think at the end of two years our, I will have taken less of a hair cut that this dumpster fire of a fund, ARKK etc. Someone commented several months ago, ya, at least Wood isn't a crook and if you lose money with her you lose it legit. True that but net, net, fraud, inexperience, marketing charlatan...your checking acccount and spending power doesn't know.
If rates do go up, and personally I think Powell might try and then all kinds of volatility will happen, her funds will really get smacked...who sung the song..."you, ain't seen nothing yet"....BTO? Bachman Turner Overdrive...baby. baby....ya ain't seen nothin'yet....
Best,
Baseball Fan

https://bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-09/cathie-wood-says-ark-soul-searching-as-once-stellar-funds-lag?sref=3zYETA5s

The $17.8 billion ARK Innovation ETF has tumbled more than 20% this year, with several of its top holdings like electric-vehicle giant Tesla Inc. and video-streaming platform Roku Inc. down from their peaks. During the same period, the S&P 500 Index climbed about 24%.
“I’ve never been in a market that is up -- has appreciated -- and our strategies are down,” Wood said in a Thursday interview with Bloomberg Television. “That has never happened before.”
Wood says her funds are sticking to their plans even after the rough stretch, and that their models forecast big returns in the next half decade.
“Our strategy is our strategy,” she said. “The opportunity in our strategy is huge right now. We expect a compound annual rate of return of roughly over 40% over the next five years.”
“When we go through a period like this, of course we are going through soul-searching, saying ‘are we missing something?’” she said, adding that in response, Ark has doubled down on its research and modeling.

What does the good book say--pride cometh before...

Usually, I track maximum drawdown across market cycles or other periods of interest, but I found looking by calendar years fun.
Most years, investors in the S&P 500 can expect drawdowns as much as 10%.
More details here.

Climate change is real and extraordinarily dangerous to the future of humanity and the planet itself. Yet this long-short vehicle you mentioned does not sound like a good fund. Part of the reason is the difference in time horizons between Wall Street and a phenomenon like climate change. Wall Street investors are short-sighted and only think at best generally about the next quarter while climate change is a slow moving train wreck that has taken decades to unfold. The private sector is ill-equipped to fight climate change because of its own short-sightedness. A company that might offer a technological solution years down the road with R&D will not receive the patience it needs from Wall Street to deliver that solution. Meanwhile, a company that is actively hurting the planet and could ultimately facilitate its destruction could have a good quarter and thus have strong performance. Neither the long side nor the short side may work here. The better option for investors is to starve the worst offenders of capital while trying to change the less worse offenders via shareholder activism. The best option for citizens is to encourage greater regulation of the private sector to fight climate change and global cooperation in hitting emmission goals. Regarding funds fighting the good fight in climate change, Green Century Balanced (GCBLX) holds no fossil fuels companies and is very active filing resolutions to change companies. It is conservatively managed.