Thanks for the thoughts @dtconroe
You are correct that I currently tend to view bonds as ballast. Years ago I sold all my PRHYX after Price did a soft close (their 2nd in recent years). I assumed that (1) They knew something I didn’t about valuations and (2) Even if I sold 100%, the fund would reopen again eventually. Not sure about the first - but the second did not occur.
That probably had a lot to do with my current lack of interest in bonds for generating return. Like the poem - “Two roads diverged in a wood”.
Your thinking is spot-on about retirement investing. Hope your plan / methods work out for you.

hank: "I hope that better quality, longer duration bonds continue to suck air. Because if they begin to perform well in a meaningful way it means that other, riskier, markets (including junk bonds) are in a heap of trouble."
Depends on what kind of investor you are. Equity oriented investors, tend to only think of bonds as "ballast" instruments, focusing on treasuries and investment grade options. Bond oriented investors, are aware that there are a wide variety of bond oefs, that perform differently in different environments. Funds like PIMIX and DBLTX were birthed in the ashes of the 2008 crash, purchased nonagency mortgages that were out of favor, and over the following decade of equity bull market performance, those junky bond oefs became hugely popular, replacing CDs for income flow, and making great total return, without the volatility of equities.
I am not a great trader, but I have found that bond oefs move slowly enough that I can establish sell points for bond oefs, and easily switch to other bond oefs, in other categories, and still make a nice, lower stress, total return result. I did that in March 2020, when I sold my junkier bond oefs (with a small loss after hitting my sell point criteria), replaced them with some safe harbor bond oefs like GIBLX and BIMIX, and then when those junky bond oefs were once again performing well, I was able to switch back into funds like DHEAX and SEMMX, and make a nice total return. I am beyond my youthful days of heavy equity oriented investing, but have found my bond oef stage in retirement, provides a very nice total return result, allowing me to preserve what I have accumulated, and still grow the principal each year, even with the required RMD harvesting.
I am 73 years old, in retirement, with no company pensions to provide me a safety net. My preservation of principal objectives, with modest total return, fits my current investing objectives and needs. I am quite content making 4% to 6% annual total return, with minimal volatility and stress, using bond oefs.

BTW, Fidelity has added a series of zero expense index funds in recent years, and its regular classes of index funds typically have expenses as low as or lower than comparable ETFs. The only advantage of ETFs in these cases would be the potential ability to get better prices for sales or buys during the day rather than end-of-day prices. There are no guarantees that one could actually achieve better trade prices. To me, the advantage of being able to perform direct transfers of money between various Fidelity funds is a more important benefit. That way you don’t have to sell shares in a fund or ETF one day and then wait at least another day to reinvest.
I have invested in Fidelity’s zero expense total market fund (FZROX) since near its inception for our taxable savings. It’s returns have matched comparable funds and ETFs with no added expenses and it’s very tax efficient.

Good question. I’m not seeing anything near term. I prefer to call those “spec plays” anyway. As to “tactical” plays, I scale in or out slowly over months or years. So it’s a matter of portfolio weight or emphasis. I’ve lightened up a bit on the commodities / NR area just because it’s done so well. I’ll continue to lighten up there in “smigits”, but like the area too well to abandon it. BTW, I’ve plugged in PRELX as an (unlikely) substitute inside my real assets sleeve. And it’s beginning to move. A less dicey play on inflation than pure commodities.
I’m looking at what to add at Fido when I have some money there. Kinda like their utilities fund, FSUTX, which would replace some of my commodities exposure. Last evening I went back and re-read David Geroux’s December 2020 Fund Report for PRWCX. In it he makes a compelling case for utilities (which constituted 10% of his holdings at the time). I’m more convinced after reading that than ever. A real long-shot is Fido’s less than 2 year old Infrastructure fund FNSTX. At only 50 mil AUM, should it pop - you’d make out like a bandit. It’s mostly outside the U.S. Heavily in Italy and Spain for reasons unclear. (Maybe they like olives & wine?) However, that’s a pretty far-fetched gamble. It could just as easily go the other way.

OK, I’ll give an example of why I chose a mutual fund over a comparable ETF. For small cap exposure in my IRA, I had used a small cap index fund, DISSX, with an expense ratio of 0.50% for many years. Realizing that I could get slightly better returns from IJR, which follows the same index with an ER of 0.06%, I looked into switching. However, I then discovered that Fidelity has a small cap index fund (FSSNX) with an ER of 0.025% and even better returns, so I switched to it. So, in this case, the Fidelity index mutual fund had lower expenses than a comparable ETF. If your a stickler, iShares has an ETF that follows the Russell 2000, the same as FSSNX, also with a higher ER.
Other than the lower ER, I can do same-day transfers of money between FSSNX and other Fidelity funds, which is a big advantage to me, since many of the other funds in my IRA are with Fidelity.

Putting my home of 26 years in the burbs of CHI on the market next week...spent the past several weeks, cleaning, fixing, prepping...every few weeks I wait the prices in the neighborhood go up by $10k....we'll see what happens. Going with fixed fee listing, not gonna pay a realtor high 4, low 5 digits to do a few days work as the homes sell so fast. No inventory is right unless you want to buy a home for $1.5MM+, then plenty to choose from as many north shore burbs types flee the tax man of Illinois and no reason to go into downtown CHI town, crime out of control, way out of control, no thank you to the cook county state's attorney who does not do her job...you could spin whatever narrative you want, just go into the city and drive around. Drug abuse rampant. Criminal justice reform legitamcy has a point but after that point the narrative is one thing, reality is another.
Never beeen to Traverse City, been to Pentwater, South Haven...all real nice places, nice folks, looking forward to getting up to TC later this year!
Seems you get that...meaning the exporting of inflation...wealthy new yorkers sell their condo, buy somewhere else with half the money and have the other half to spend, invest etc. Meanwhile locals like the home appreciation but then can't afford the increase in tax assessments. Lot of trouble with affordable housing all across this country. Thank you to the Fed and CB...keeping interest rates too low, debasing our currency...increasing inequality across the board...
Good Luck to All,
Baseball Fan

Typically, I'm buy and hold and have made few changes in my IRA's in past 5-7 years. I like to be a little more aggresive/strategic with a % of my 401k. I purchased WOOD and GLTR in January...Previous small positions were in ARKK, FM, SLV and GLD.
Any ideas you have just for sharing purposes...

FLPSX is about 15% of my Rollover IRA.
I've let it ride since August 2011.
The total gain in a little less than 11 years is 304%.
It's been one of my "invest and don't mess with it" positions.
Ditto for FDCAX (up 421% in the same time period).
David

I just noticed, since someone mentioned elsewhere PRBLX performance blah blah, that two hoary funds which one probably wanted to be in since mid-Feb '20, which are huge and neglected in this forum and abandoned / disdained as to gogo sex appeal and so on, are (wait for it) FCNTX and FLPSX. Baboom.
DSnowball once wrote years ago (during yet another FLPSX doldrums period, surely) that he'd never sold FLPSX and not regretted it ultimately.
I wonder what the dates are of the last MFO mentions of these two.
Anyway, live and learn --- I did not own them this round. Danoff and Tillinghast, man.

@AZRph : A very good point you've made !
@royal4 : Thanks for reporting back. Gal PAL had a hard time selling condo about 1 1/2
years ago for in the $165 K range. About 6 weeks ago it sold for $215 K. !!
Enjoy the summer, Derf

hank's keen observation about non-stop flights into TVC tells a story about money and locations.
The Traverse City area and other shoreline communities to the north along Lake Michigan have a long past with wealth. From about 100 years ago, the vast amount of monies spent in these areas for property and houses arrived from an industrial based wealth class from Chicago and Detroit. A summer play land for the wealthy.
In the mid through late 1980's we vacationed in this area for a variety of reasons....besides being a magnificent area that is easy on the eyes and the cranium.
One of our observations when driving the "old" wealth communities (Harbor Springs, NNE of Traverse City and others) and the houses, is that one could view several auto license plates in the driveways.......Illinois, Florida and Michigan plates. The cars, generally speaking; were not baseline Chevy's or Ford's.
Likely 3 generations of an old money family on vacation for the entire summer, in particular the Florida plates, and folks escaping the Florida summer heat.
This observation revealed its own story, of course, IMHO.
Northport, N of Traverse City; has a current listing for 2.31 acres of vacant land, which has 814 feet of shoreline. At $2.6 million, the result is $3,300 per foot of shoreline. This may be one of the most expensive for the Michigan side of Lake Michigan; but it is not uncommon the expect to pay $2,000 per foot of shoreline for undeveloped property.
However, leaving the wealth side of things; a wonderful family vacation may be had in all of these areas, including great state parks alone the shoreline.
We've driven many of the county and state roads along these shorelines.
Traverse City and other larger locations are "busy" in the summer, but one may travel the shoreline a bit farther north and enjoy relative "quiet" and much beauty.
Good Hart and Cross Village sat. map
Traverse City and surrounds map
Thanks, @hank; for pulling the memories.
If there were a MFO class reunion, this area would be my pick. 'Course, the real draw would be my paying for the lodging for participants.

Bought for 460k 12/2019 now asking 625k and they'll get that or probably more....crazy times.

I looked at one (advertised) in northern MI that 5-6 years ago would have carried a asking price under $200,000. Today they’re asking $375,000. That’s an older 3 BR ranch w walkout basement on an average lot.
Many year-round locals can’t afford housing. Problem - wealthy individuals from distant locations are buying up everything to serve as a 2nd or 3rd part-time residence or for speculation. Community leaders are looking at incentives to make housing more affordable - but seemingly intractable problem.
A relatively small local airport (TVC) now has daily non-stop service to / from NYC LGA. (Late afternoon / early evening flights which gives you an idea who the prime users are.) Much as I love NYC, I suspect that if those high heeled individuals are buying northern Michigan homes for second or third residences, the year-round locals won’t be able to compete on price with the NYC real estate market.

Hilarious headline: "Petrostates See Dire Consequences If World Rejects Oil Too Fast." Companies like Exxon have known about the threat anthropogenic fossil-fuel driven climate change posed for over 40 years: https://scientificamerican.com/article/exxon-knew-about-climate-change-almost-40-years-ago/ Now the drill baby drill companies are claiming we're moving too fast.

Totally out of control... I think people are making up outrageous numbers when they put their houses on the market now from what I've seen and unfortunately they are getting those crazy prices and more. Last one I looked at they only owned for 1.5 years and are now asking 165k more than they bought it for....they'll probably get it. crazy.....

Would it be an over simplification to say that you own bond funds if you are afraid that you might panic and sell if there is an equity crash? Is that the primary reason? The market watch article says you own bond funds for safety and not return.
Ignoring the definition of a bond fund for the moment… as PRWCX (an AA fund with a LOT of equities) and HY (junk) bonds are not the same as an FXNAX. Those that held mostly or a large percentage of bond funds in their portfolio in Feb or March 2020 were probably very happy. How did they feel at the end of 2020 when measuring their bond returns vs equities or the S&P Index?

My investment style broke several myths because I don't follow simple rules and indexes.
Myth1: own bonds for ballast, it's about 10 years now that I own bond funds for performance too, starting with PIMIX in 2011.
Myth2: there is no free lunch. I had a free lunch for over 20 years. Anytime a portfolio Sharpe is higher than the index, it's usually free lunch. PRWCX performance since 2000 shows that it made more money than the SP500 with lower volatility. PIMIX in its glory days (2011-2017) made more money with lower SD than many allocation funds 30-40% in stocks.
Myth3: Momentum and trading don't work. It worked for me.

In terms of general tax efficiency, it's like any other short term bond fund - the divs are ordinary income and share price fluctuates mildly.
My approach to handling cost basis with short term bond funds is:

• Send divs to a MMF or bank account (do not reinvest) - to avoid creating a monthly small lot nightmare
• Set the account to use specific lot identification - for full control, to optimize recognition of cap gains
• Sell as needed in mid size blocks and use MMF or bank as buffer - to avoid a nearly daily stream of tiny transactions; identify lots appropriate for your cap gains objective
• Purchase in larger blocks - simplifies identifying lots when selling

P.S. I haven't seen you posting in years. Welcome back.

I think we are at the tail end of early adoption phase. I think all major manufacturers will be getting into this thread as supporting side industries emerge. I own a VW Passat and this year VW stopped selling Passat in the US in favor of their new EV. They still keep Jetta as their high volume gas/diesel vehicle but transformation is happening. It will probably take another 10-15 years before EV become dominant type on the highways. It will need a lot more infrastructural changes (charging stations) all over US.

The landscape for actively managed mutual funds will be increasingly competitive.
Prerequisites for most of the remaining open-end funds (OEFs) will include low costs and good returns.
Some OEFs will continue to exist since corresponding ETFs are not available (this may change in the future).
The shifting landscape will take years to unfold.
Although many mutual funds will be liquidated or merged into other funds, a sizable amount will remain.
I'd argue this is a good development since many unnecessary mutual funds exist.
Investors seeking exposure to a particular asset class or category can analyze OEFs, ETFs, and CEFs to determine the best solution.

Would it be an over simplification to say that you own bond funds if you are afraid that you might panic and sell if there is an equity crash? Is that the primary reason? The market watch article says you own bond funds for safety and not return.
Ignoring the definition of a bond fund for the moment… as PRWCX (an AA fund with a LOT of equities) and HY (junk) bonds are not the same as an FXNAX. Those that held mostly or a large percentage of bond funds in their portfolio in Feb or March 2020 were probably very happy. How did they feel at the end of 2020 when measuring their bond returns vs equities or the S&P Index?
I admit I don’t know enough about bonds and that was the purpose of this post. I read with interest FD’s take: “ Many retirees I know who have enough, including me, don't care as much about performance as they care about volatility.”… Here is my ignorant question… Wouldn’t the superior performance or returns from equities vs. bonds over 2-3 years far outweigh the “safety” and less volatility from bonds? Caveat: If one is relying on living only on their portfolio gains or returns and do not wish to touch the principal from their investments… I can clearly see the need for ballast and low volatility. However, if you can weather a “crash”…and recovery as has always been the case- why wouldn’t you just stay invested in equities? The longest collapse in history was 1929 and lasted 2.8 years. The 2007 recession lasted 1.3 years. I suppose I am obsessed with performance but perhaps there will come a day when I’m not and it will be all about preservation. In full disclosure, I own 2 bond funds and some AA. The bond funds are PONAX and FXNAX but are a very small portion of port.
Note: Coincidently, I wrote this before seeing FD’s post on selling when market crashes and @hank funny response. Thanks @Crash - yes I meant PRWCX -corrected

It's a matter of personal comfort. I used the phrase simply to mean that many of the funds on the list, by design, include more than a de minimis amount of equity. Yes, I'm just substituting one expression for another here without defining them.
Consider the conventional wisdom: everyone including retirees should have some money invested in equity, at least 20%. Taking that literally, that 20% allocation to equity is being viewed as a significant amount that affects the behavior of the portfolio.
Take something like BLADX that has around 15% in equities. YTD VCSH (same bond style box as BLADX) is up 0.08%, and VOO is up 12.74%. Assuming no rebalancing (I'm lazy tonight), a 15% weighting in equities would give a total return of:
85% x 0.08% + 15% x 12.74% = 0.07% + 1.91% = 1.98%
BLADX's YTD return is 2.74%. A little higher than the calculation above, but the figures give you a pretty good idea of where that return is coming from. Nearly all from equity.
In years when bond and stock returns are not that far apart (say, 5% bond vs 7% stock), a modest amount of equity isn't going to make a big difference. But in years like this one, where bonds are returning nothing or are even losing money (BND is down 2.65% YTD), a 10% equity stake can mean the difference between losing 1% on the year and breaking even.
That may not sound like much. Remember though that we're talking about bonds and bond funds, where yields are under 3%. In that environment, a 1% improvement can feel like a lot.