Each metric has different meaning and value to each investor
Yes, though my question was what the metrics mean to you. Certainly the approach you described (for the maximum acceptable pain, maximize return) makes sense. That's essentially what the efficient frontier is designed to do.
However, the fact remains that you're focusing on just a few metrics. This matters because you said that "MARMX has better metrics across the board than VTINX."
For example, you have focused on maximum drawdown. A typical definition is: "The peak to trough decline during a specific record period".
The SEC recognized the danger in funds selecting their own periods for comparison. It issued a rule for fund advertising designed specifically to preclude cherry picking. Performance figures given must span the preceding one, five, and ten year periods current to the most recent calendar quarter (here, Sept 30th). 17 CFR §230.482(d)(3).
Using these SEC-sanctioned metrics, one sees that MARMX has worse annualized returns over all standardized periods, one year (-1.97%), five years (-0.65%), and ten years (-0.15%).
This shows that MARMX does not have better metrics across the board. Though perhaps it does for every metric you care about (as you wrote, each metric matters differently for different people).
As to why I didn't mention the spike on 12/28/07 - you gave the answer. With or without it, the story doesn't change. There was an even larger one in the 2007-2009 period. That didn't matter either.
Finally, what's the big deal about a fund of just four funds and cash with static allocations? Given that there are just a few underlying funds, this is something easily reproduced on your own. It would be different if you were talking about a target date retirement fund (the subject of this thread), where a glide path were being followed.
For example one could substitute VFIAX (or VOO) for the more expensive MAEIX, and IJH (iShares S&P 400) for the more expensive MAMEX. Then one would just need to find a couple of solid bond funds to sub for the fairly vanilla Mutual of America bond funds in MARMX and then rebalance annually.
I tried BIMIX and MWTRX. Since they're slightly more volatile than the Mutual of America funds they're replacing, I took 2% off the S&P 400 index fund.
Works fine as a replacement. Slightly lower std dev (4.80 vs 4.88) and a slightly higher max drawdown (13.88% vs. 12.88%) all while returning a tad more (5.51% annualized vs 5.34%). All figures are monthly (so take drawdowns with a grain of salt) and this only spans 12/07 through 9/21. Looks even better over SEC standard periods. Data from PortfolioVisualizer.

Laugh all you want, the initial bounce IS over, bub.
They did NOT say there won't be another leg down, did they?
No, they said,
The indexes need to get above their resistance levels and confirm the new uptrend. If they fall back, there's a serious risk that this correction will take a new leg down....
You must not watch a lot of business news or read much worthy stuff as a central topic of the day Friday was, "Is it too late to buy the dip?" (Read, The initial bounce is over. The easy, LT money-making trades have been booked.)
And in case you missed it, IBD has been a widely recognized stock picking authority for decades with its specific, time-tested strategy (CANSLIM) for making indv stock investors out-sized returns.
Trying to diss them by citing "Numerous studies have shown..." is an exercise in demonstrating that old axiom about three kinds of lies:
(1) Lies,
(2) Damned lies,
(3) Statistics.
To wit, please show a specific study that includes IBD strategy results for indv stock trades and/or market moves to support your broad stoke diss of them.
FWIW, I used to subscribe to ALL IBD services back in the day and I routinely point to it as one of the primary reasons I retired early about a decade ago at 56.
YMMV.
And no need for a new thread on a current topic that already has one. FWIW, I'll continue posting on this thread until the Dip/Diplet is over (likely in a coupla days/weeks) and the BUYS I made during it (from cash and bond OEF proceeds; maturing CD proceeds to be deployed this week) are kicking arse like ALL of the Dip/Diplet BUYS I've made since March 2020.
Disclaimer: I am a LT Buy/Hold TR investor who BUYS Dip/Diplets with the above-referenced funds and since Feb 2020 have NOT taken a dime out of stocks. Have 96% of nest egg "under the umbrella" (read, tax-deferred a/c's), haven't paid a dime in taxes since 2012, and may not pay them for 5-10 more years.

Recently bumped up my allocation to VGWAX, one of the best performing newer (11/02/17) allocation funds and one not many are talking about. Yet.
Took a closer look at FSRRX, a fund that I owned many years ago. Truly is outperforming in its category during an inflationary period and worth a closer look for anyone with a strategy of owning specific inflationary period holdings.
That said I'm not as psyched out over inflation as many on forums are, and I'm also not inclined to BUY a fund that I think will outperform ONLY in an (albeit potentially transitory) inflationary period. I simply just did the fundamental move - I added more stock exposure via Total Mrkt/S&P index funds. Yeah, FSRRX is less effective equity and less risk, but increased inflation means increased stock exposure to me, and I'll take their 18% YTD TRs and higher risk over FSRRX's 13% YTD TR every time.

Thanks for posting. Motley Fool has many paid subscription equity newsletters, which I never subscribed to, though I know people that do. I did not know they have mutual funds. Not sure if the buy and sell recommendation through those subscriptions are good but MFOM mutual funds seem to have average performance and have not gained much AUM after many years in existence.

“FSRRX may be a fund of interest to those who believe that inflation is a concern or that rates may rise. It has had a maximum drawdown of nearly 15% over the past five years with an average annual return of over 5%. The yield is about 2 percent.”
Yes - But the max drawdown (14.5%) appears to have come in a single quarter (Qtr 1 2020). By contrast, Price’s TMSRX lost 3.2% over that quarter. To be fair, that brief period was particularly cruel to funds holding certain types of fixed income, as a severe liquidity crunch threatened until emergency measures by the Fed to prop up corporate debt were undertaken.
Not to suggest FSRRX sn’t still a fine fund. Just to say that along with 2008 (if a fund’s history extends back that far), Qtr 1 of 2020 is another place to look if seeking out maximum historical volatility.
For the roughly 30% of portfolio devoted to “alternatives” I like to include at least 2 (preferably 3) different funds, as the approaches and success achieved under varying market conditions vary greatly among the alternatives. None, AFAIK, have perfected the “secret sauce” for managing risk in down markets.

That piece is arguing that at best, VWINX will fall less than other traditional funds, e.g. since it leans toward value¹. That's in contrast to funds that are designed to benefit from inflation. Which is why I felt that it doesn't make much sense to directly compare performance of these two types of funds.
¹This is not unusual for traditional 40/60 funds. Only 4 out of 120 (30%-50% allocation) funds have portfolios that are in growth style boxes (per M* screener).
The writer speaks in sweeping generalities without substantiation:

• the fact that the Fed Funds rate will stay at or near zero for at least the next few years [as of Sept 2020].
  Facts don't change, but predictions do as events change or more data is known. In June, "The central bank forecast[] it would raise interest rates twice by the end of 2023 after previously estimating there would be no interest rate hike until 2024."
  Most recently (Sept), "Just over 70 per cent of [leading academic economists surveyed by FT] believe the Fed will raise rates by at least a quarter of a percentage point in 2022, with almost 20 per cent expecting the move to come in the first six months of the year. That is far earlier than the 2023 lift-off from today’s near-zero levels that Fed officials pencilled in back in June."
  
• Higher inflation likely leads to higher interest rates and a steeper yield curve?
  Wellesley traditionally holds a longer duration portfolio than is typical for its peers. That would hurt Wellesley if you believe this generalization linking interest rates and yield curves and that it will hold the next time.
  However, when we look at the last sharp spike in interest rates (1978-1981) we see a very different picture. Rate going up across all maturities (which would hurt all high grade bonds), but with the yield curve inverting - the opposite of steepening. (Inverted yield curves often presage recessions, which in turn can be triggered by high inflation and lower spending.)
  
  (Source page)

Speaking of the late 70s and inverted yield curves, banks (notably S&Ls) took a beating, as they lent out long term money at lower rates while borrowing short term money (via deposit accounts) at higher rates. SA notes that VWINX concentrates on financials, but doesn't break it down further. (According to its latest semiannual report, about half of the fund's financial sector holdings are in banks: JPM, BAC, MS, TFC.) Personally, I have faith in Wellington Management to navigate this risk.
M* has an actual analysis of real performance data for VWINX to see how the fund responds to rising interest rates.
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1041732/stress-testing-some-vanguard-and-t-rowe-allocation-funds
What M* found was that Aug-Dec 2016, "as the price of long-dated bonds fell, Vanguard Wellesley Income lagged its average category peer by 1.2 percentage points." VWINX lost money over that period while on average its peers eeked out gains.
OTOH, "over the more recent January-October 2018 interest-rate climb ... [VWINX] modestly outpaced the average of that group by 0.5 percentage points. Even with its longer duration, the strategy’s lower exposure to weaker-performing non-U.S. equities gave it a bump.
Hmm, a lesser exposure to foreign equities. SA didn't pick up on this. Could help again if rates climb globally, but hurt if rates rise disproportionately in the US. Regardless, we're again talking about relative performance against peers, not measuring against inflation oriented funds.
I certainly wouldn't sell VWINX. Though that's different from saying that this fund is designed to weather extended bouts of inflation well.

While I'm a big fan of VWINX, I don't feel that comparing it with funds that are very different in composition is quite cricket. VWINX has had a 40 year tailwind (falling yields), while real return funds have had a headwind over the same time frame - years of moderate to low inflation.
https://www.macrotrends.net/2497/historical-inflation-rate-by-year
Should inflation pick up (OP: " I don't see how we can avoid inflation"), this could all flip. Unfortunately, what appears to be the granddaddy of inflation friendly funds, PRPFX, goes back only to 1982, after inflation started receding. So one can't look easily to historical data.
Here's a recent M* column suggesting 22 funds that could be considered diversified real asset funds designed to handle bouts of inflation:
Now's the Time to Consider These Inflation Protection Strategies

I can't disagree with the view that inflation seems inevitable (starting with wage inflation because of the difficulty hiring these days)...but OTOH I can recall commentators throwing darts at VWINX for at least a decade over the same concern (granted, with minimal inflation headwinds over that stretch). It's navigated pretty well, including this year. Gun to head, VWINX still beats real asset funds over the next decade, even if inflation pans out to a foreseeable extent. My personal strategy is to hold VWINX as a core holding, never sold a share, but supplement with GUNR when opportunity permits.

While I'm a big fan of VWINX, I don't feel that comparing it with funds that are very different in composition is quite cricket. VWINX has had a 40 year tailwind (falling yields), while real return funds have had a headwind over the same time frame - years of moderate to low inflation.
https://www.macrotrends.net/2497/historical-inflation-rate-by-year
Should inflation pick up (OP: " I don't see how we can avoid inflation"), this could all flip. Unfortunately, what appears to be the granddaddy of inflation friendly funds, PRPFX, goes back only to 1982, after inflation started receding. So one can't look easily to historical data.
Here's a recent M* column suggesting 22 funds that could be considered diversified real asset funds designed to handle bouts of inflation:
Now's the Time to Consider These Inflation Protection Strategies

I'd be inclined to pass on MARMX. If you really want to purchase it, it's available through some annuities, e.g. Mutual of America's individual retirement annuity (IRA).
More completely:

The Investment Company offers shares in the Funds to the Insurance Companies, without sales charge, for allocation to their Separate Accounts. See your variable annuity or variable life insurance prospectus ... Shares of the Funds are also offered through retirement plans. See your Summary Plan Description or consult with your plan sponsor for information on how to purchase shares of the Funds through your retirement plan

https://connect.rightprospectus.com/MutualofAmerica/TADF/62824C842/FS?site=NAV#
(click on statutory prospectus)
Here's MARMX's legacy risk/reward page. One can enter VTINX to compare the funds on these metrics.
http://performance.morningstar.com/fund/ratings-risk.action?t=MARMX
Over the past three years, VTINX has produced better returns (Average vs. Below Average) albeit with higher risk (Average vs. Below Average), leading to a three year 4 star rating (vs. 2 stars for MARMX).
VTINX has superior 3 year returns (7.53% vs. 6.27%) albeit with more volatility (6.25 vs 5.18) leading to nearly identical Sharpe and Sortino ratios.
All of which is about what one would expect when comparing a fund with a 30% target equity allocation (VTINX) to a a fund with a target 25% equity allocation (MARMX).

Nice! @LewisBraham
I get all “choked up” whenever I hear the party of tax cuts for the wealthy decry “saddling our children with mountains of debt”. Sure. You bet! Bleeds one’s heart. Debt can be good or bad. Most of us wouldn’t have been able to finance a home without debt. Many continue to refinance, putting the proceeds to other productive uses and keeping the economy growing. Muni bonds have financed schools and infrastructure for years, affording everyone a better standard of living. Don’t hear anyone hollering about munis.
For as long as I’ve followed the economy (a long while) there’s been a “tug-of-war”, so to speak, between the diametrically opposite fears of deflation and inflation. That concern continues to this day with a recent post by @bee raising the deflation specter. And now, here we’re discussing inflation. Most would agree that deflation is the tougher problem to deal with. And, by most accounts, we came perilously close to falling into a deflationary sink-hole during 2007-2008. Let’s not forget that the Depression years were a deflationary period. One less desirable outgrowth of that lovely period was the rise of Nazism in Germany and other parts of Europe.
“Inflation can be good or bad.” Whatever failings they may have, the folks at the Federal Reserve aren’t dumb. Their stated goal for years has been achieving a 2% inflation target. And they’ve made clear they’d rather over-shoot than under-shoot. While they may not express it openly, they’re scared to death of the global economy tipping backwards into a deflationary spiral and the pain to society that would bring on. Is higher inflation coming? I think so. Invest accordingly.

My apologize, but are you trying to create a catastrophe or avoid one with FSRRX?
Here are FSRRX stats (source Portfolio Visualizer):

FSRRX has had no clear advantage over a conservatively allocated fund similar to VWINX.
It's almost 32% draw down in July of 2008 took over 2 years to dig out of. It Real return (after inflation) is barely 2% over the last 15 years. I believe Fidelity offers MM Mutual funds that might achieve this.
As a hedge against bad outcomes what about PRPFX..not perfect but better at dealing with equity market catastrophes.

Event based markets are difficult to bet on, especially when the event is 2 weeks away. Small and micro caps are in red today. So, it is not full on risk, notwithstanding a decent up day in large cap averages.

Yep. Anybody’s guess how it will all play out. Not only the debt question, but Evergrande and a lot of other newsworthy issues. I’d expect a “relief bounce” in many markets lasting a day of two if / when the debt issue is settled. However, I still think the path of least resistance near term is down - if we’re talking about the major indexes. That’s not to say some individual stocks and sectors won’t do well.

Well, for many it goes a bit beyond guessing.
GoldmanSachs for one I trust uses some pretty sophisticated programs and their "guess" (if you can call it that) is for a S&P 9% gain in Q4.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/05/goldman-sachs-sees-a-big-4th-quarter-with-a-9percent-sp-500-gain-from-here.html
=======================
Having been an auditor/audit manager for 30+ years, I'm pretty anal about words as I've seen one incorrect word in a FS footnote can change a person's interpretation of a company's entire financial outlook. (I know, I've read that incorrect "one word" many times and sadly applied ones myself more than I care to remember.)
"Relief bounces" or more commonly "Relief rallies" are generally associated with secular bear markets:
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/relief-rally.asp
FWIW, IMO, this is NOT a "relief rally" an I've NOT heard a single person in the biz refer to it as that. Just sayin'.

In case anyone has NOT noticed this, the national biz media tends to get a wee bit overly excited about SMALL moves DOWN in markets. Break the 50 dma and there's probably gonna be a CNBC "Markets in turmoil" special coming pretty soon. Ring the registers!
Yeah, many T/A's and investors gotta get back above the 50 to "feel safe" but several T/A guys/gals I read yesterday expressed that we'll likely be at new highs within a coupla weeks. A coupla weeks or a coupla months makes NO difference to me.
FWIW, I welcomed yesterday's slightly DOWN day to continue to build my ITOT position that I recently started but didn't get fully funded by last THU. I've recently revamped my port and started a new 5-yr portfolio effective 10/01/21. So I'm reasonably certain the BTD moves I've made in the past few days will be MUCH higher in the 5 years they'll be invested there. And the seed came from either cash, maturing CDs, and/or bond OEF sale proceeds. So there's that.
The biggest questions EVERY investor who reduces stock allocations during smallish pullbacks (like this one) and plans to re-deploy back into stocks later needs to ask is:
Am I sure the market is headed DOWN further?
Did a bell ring at the interim top?
Where am I going to park these proceeds?
Is that interim parking spot anywhere near the LT investment as the stocks I cashed them from?
WHEN does my crystal ball tell me will be the best time to re-deploy the parked proceeds back into the market?
Have I been successful with these market timing moves before?
Will I be ready when the time is right this time?
Will a bell ring when it's time?
What is my history/odds of timing this thing right on both the "Run and hide" AND "Get back in the game" moves?
And the BIGGIE: WTF do I do if I whiff on my re-deployment timing and the market moves HIGHER, or god forbid, significantly HIGHER than where it was when I ran and hid?
Is there NOT a better strategy than this one?
I employed the "Run and hide" and "Get back in the game" strategy for a while in hopes (ugh, that unviable investment strategy Art Cashin learned about over 50 years ago and routinely reminds us of ) to score a nirvana moment like dumping ALL of my money back IN the market on a day like March 20, 2020.
What's that infamous Peter Lynch quote again on this topic?
FWIW, I currently employ the BTD strategy that has been working flawlessly (for me at least) since the 2020 crash and I feel safe continuing to do it for the next 5 years.
Disclaimer: We're 65, retired for about ten years, have SS and pensions, have 96% of our port in tax-deferred a/c's, have NOT paid a dime in FIT/SIT since retiring in 2012, and have more $ than we're probably ever to be able to spend. But we're gonna start trying! YMMV.

I second @Ben WP's selection of BIAWX. I've held it a little over 3 years now. I am also invested in some solar stocks: ENPH, SPWR and a little bit of RUN. I use FAN an ETF devoted to wind power. I have been in and out of ICLN but I'm out for now.

From GP's Chairman's letter dated 1/31/2020:
Here is a link to that letter:
https://www.grandeurpeakglobal.com/documents/grandeurpeakglobal-is-20200131.pdf
Excerpt:
There is also a very important strategy that we’ve been developing for several years now, which we call Global Explorer. It follows the same idea as Global Reach, but would be managed by our geography teams rather than the industry teams. Launching Global Explorer is roughly targeted for 2021-2022.
Excerpt from the registration filing link above:
PRINCIPAL INVESTMENT STRATEGIES OF THE FUND
The Fund invests primarily in foreign and domestic micro- to mid-cap companies based on a geography-focused framework intended to identify companies that the Adviser believes are particularly well-positioned for long-term growth.
The Fund will typically invest in securities issued by companies economically tied to at least ten countries, including the United States. The Fund will invest a significant portion of its total assets (at least 40% under normal market conditions) at the time of purchase in securities issued by companies that are economically tied to countries outside the United States, including emerging and frontier market countries. The Adviser generally considers a company to be economically tied to a market based on where the company is organized, headquartered, has its primary stock exchange listing, or has substantial concentration of assets or revenues.

IMHO there was no obvious point at which most people would say they would have sold TPINX, yet most people would have sold at some point. It seemed that this was a good fund to illustrate how one's sell discipline worked in "real life", given that there doesn't appear to be a "correct" answer.
Only one taker, though.
I did have a small position in TGBAX for several years, which I sold in late 2019. I held the position because I wanted, and still want, a smattering of international bonds to diversify the few bonds (funds) I do hold. Given that target allocation, I was not going to sell the fund because of lackluster absolute performance, but because of poor relative performance. Thus I compared with alternative funds.
Lipper shows only 22 international (as opposed to global) bond funds, excluding inaccessible ones like DFA. Currently, one can purchase the following tickers: BEGBX, WISEX (M* classifies as short term bond, I'd call it EM as it invests according to Sharia and seems to hold a lot in the middle east), DIBAX, LWOAX, DNIOX, EPBIX, FBIIX, MPIFX, GARBX (M* call it EM bond), HXIIX (likewise, EM bond), OIBAX, PXBZX, PFORX, PFUIX, RPIBX, TNIBX, TGBAX, TTRZX, FIBZX, TIBWX, VTABX, ESICX.
Ruling out the EM bond funds and funds that weren't even available in 2016 (FBIIX, PXBZX, TNIBX), that leaves just 16 peers not managed by Hasenstab. Of these, only 1/4, 2 PIMCO funds and 2 index funds (Vanguard, TIAA) returned more than 1.75% annualized over the past five years.
So these funds could serve as points of comparison. Here's a PortfolioVisualizer graph comparing TGBAX with the two PIMCO funds since the start of 2011. Actually, TGBAX doesn't look bad compared with PFUIX (unhedged) until 2020.
What happened was that the dollar took off in 2014 and 2015 (see graph here), hurting unhedged funds and apparently also TGBAX. Through the rest of the decade, as the dollar became rather volatile, TGBAX did not respond well. It's a unique fund in that it's a combination of a foreign bond fund and a currency fund. For example, it never had exposure to the Ukranian hryvnia. (More significantly, it tended to short developed market currencies.) The fact that it did not play currency well, which became apparent (to me) only in the late 2010s was a factor in deciding to sell. The fund was not adding value on the currency side.
I will tend to wait three year before pulling a trigger. 2017 was its worst year (relative) since 2011, and while 2018 was a relatively good year, 2019 was a disaster, in both absolute and relative terms. With increasing volatility as well. This, coupled with what now seemed a long term move into exclusively EM bonds, and the aforementioned failure to navigate currencies well said that it was time to leave. Not a single factor, but a combination.
One could easily argue that I should have left years ago. Had I known the dollar would go up so much and that the fund's purported currency expertise was not as advertised, I might have moved years ago into a hedged fund, or into a global fund.
A related question for others: why would you have bought the fund? I ask because in terms of performance being a trigger, if one buys into a type of fund (here, pure international, not hedged back to dollar), then IMHO what matters is performance relative to peers or benchmark. And one should be careful in identifying peers. Global and international funds are different, even if M* chooses to lump them together.

Hi guys,
Thanks to those that made comment on my post and the linked article.
I am providing a short blub on how I roll which will explain in some detail why I chose option 1. This was taken from a recent weekly briefing and market recap that I write.
Now being in the distribution phase of investing (age 74) I run an all weather asset allocation portfolio with asset weightings of 20/40/40 (cash/bonds/stocks) and I can move up, or down, five percent in the bond area, in the stock area, or in both areas while letting cash float. I am presently at a neutral weighting while I await the next stock market pullback. Most likely, I will engage the stock market and overweight stocks through a special investment (spiff) position to play the rebound; and, then exit through a step sell process during the updaraft until I reach, or maintain, my desired asset allocation weighting. Generally, I rebalance at plus (or minus) two percent from my desired asset weighting. However, I can move from a low asset allocation weighting of 33% to a high asset allocation weighting of 47% in both the stock and bond areas, or some point in between, without having to do a force rebalance. At the low asset weighting (33% each) I could be as high as 34% cash and at the high asset weighting (47% each) I could be as low a 6% in cash. At first brush, what appeared to be a mudane portfolio does indeed afford for some good range in asset movement for positioning, based upon market reads, plus the portfolio generates a sufficient income stream which is important to me being retired.
From what I wrote in a recent weekly briefing and recap.
Today, September 17th being tripple witching day, with the S&P 500 Index closing at 4433 I opened my first "spiff" buy step to start my seasonal special investment position. Generally, I will load equites coming into fall, hold them during the winter, and then exit the position as spring arrives moving sell proceeds into either bond funds, cash or some of both. This is a strategy that I learned from my late father back in the 1970's as I became a more achmpolished investor. Through the years most spiffs have been beneficial for me with positive returns, but not always. Click on the below link to learn more about the strategy. https://www.kiplinger.com/investing/602700/sell-in-may-and-go-away-here-we-go-again
Taken form my September 24th briefing and recap.
During the week I made my second spiff step buy. I have now made two equally weighted spiff buy steps at S&P 500 Index readings of 4433 & 4354 for a gain of 1.4% as of Friday's market close (4455). These spiff buys will open my fall seasonal investment strategy where I usually load equities coming into the fall, hold them through the winter months and then start ot lighten up coming out of winter and moving into spring. I have found that the strategy does not work every year but has worked more times than not. I generally limit the strategy to no more than five percent of my portfolio.
And, taken form my October 1st briefing and recap.
Since, I have bought equity step buy positons during the last couple weeks (during market dips opening my fall equity spiff position) this was watch the action week collecting my month and quarter end mutual fund distributions and building cash while I await bigger declines. If not, then I will continue with an average in process building my fall spiff position as we move into the winter months.
Thus, in review of the options listed in the linked article I felt option 1 was the best fit although option 3 somewhat fits because I am generally not a seller in a stock maket decline which option 2 covers although I do rebalance, from time-to-time as some have noted in their comments.
Take care and thanks for stopping by and reading.

@Stillers: "Friday was a pretty important day in which the Dip/Diplet appears (to me and the people I read/follow) to have abated. At least for the time being that is, and stopping a potential gusher after you've rolled the dice a bit is always an upbeat time for me."
Do you mind sharing with us where you read / follow those people, assuming those are public and free sites? Did these folks also mention why the market went down? It will be good for me to also read other forums.
...

Do you mind sharing with us where you read / follow those people,
No, I would rather NOT share their names/company's names. I'm getting bashed here a bit and the last thing I want to do is post names of my fave T/A's, market analysts, PMs, etal that I subscribe to/follow, and then have to fend off the additional bashing about them. Not worth my time.
assuming those are public and free sites?
No, they are not all (free) public sites. I pay for a coupla investment service newsletters.
Did these folks also mention why the market went down?
Hmmm...first, a LOT of investors/media get bent out of shape over DOWN moves of 5% in the overall market. That's still in the normal market breathing range for me. Yes, they all state their thoughts on the specific reasons for this LITTLE move DOWN we've had recently. They of course vary. That said, IF there's a consensus among them, it's that the recent action was highly predictable/widely expected and normal market breathing.
It will be good for me to also read other forums.
You can read "forums" until you're blue in the face. LOTS of threads out here frequented by LOTS of posters with varying levels of investment experience and expertise (yeah, they're different). There were a couple posters who have made me "real" money over the past 10 years, namely the old M* CEF Forum crew who daily, for years, provided a pretty much paint-by-numbers plan to profit from FI CEFs, and the poster who got me to fully understand and apply his main investment axiom, "Volatility is the price you pay for growth." They are more the exception than the rule of forums. Kindly suggest finding some worthy professionals to regularly read. I will throw out two names. Start with Katie Stockton (for T/A) and Jurrien Timmer (for market perspective). See if you like them and if not, find someone that you do. Also, disregard the widespread bashing of CNBC. They have regulars and guests on there who provide priceless, free, current analysis on the market. Three notable PMs who are regulars on there are amongst my faves for market analysis and portfolio construction.

I prefer the third strategy - Hold and Stick to Your Game Plan.
An investor could create a portfolio with an appropriate asset allocation (accounting for risk tolerance and risk capacity) and then rebalance the portfolio periodically.
The second strategy, Sell and Limit Your Risks, sounds good in theory but may be very difficult to execute.
There can be huge opportunity costs when investors "stay on the sidelines" while stock markets are rising.
For example, some investors liquidated most or all of their equity positions in 2008/2009 and avoided stocks for years afterward.

Yes, this no longer surprises me.
There have been multiple issues with various M* products over the past few years.