I guess someone needs to get their eyeglass prescription checked. I don't see anywhere in DrVenture's post where it talks about owning PDI from 2023 to whatever. Also preparing for rate cuts does not equate to owning the fund either.

You are absolutely correct. Thank you, Mark. My total return on my portfolio in both 2023 & 2024 was +25% each year, on an 80/20 portfolio mix. Not feeling like I missed out on anything. Not then, not now. I take risk, when I feel that risk is appropriate. And less risk, when I feel that less risk is appropriate. As I stated, I am now at 58% equities. I may go lower.
Yet, we are not here to talk about the past, are we? PDI has smashed the S&P in 2025. Timing is everything. I expect CEFs to do very well going forward, for some time, until they don't.
I certainly do not recommend anything to anybody. Or feel the need to pass on platitudes about the S&P to seasoned investors. I might add that I believe the S&P makes a great place to start. Still, my individually selected stocks portion of my portfolio (10%) beat the S&P by a significant amount in 2023, 2024 & YTD 2025. That, and some select sector funds, is how I beat the S&P with an 80/20 allocation in most years.
Back on topic, for those unwilling to be at a high level of equities (which is likely most here), there is probably going to be good opportunities in FI. Especially if someone is willing to take a little risk, at the right time. That is only my humble opinion. And subject to revision.

As regards HOTIX (bold added):
The Holbrook Total Return Fund seeks to deploy capital opportunistically across government securities, corporate bonds, and securitized credit to produce income and total return. The Fund will have a longer target duration than the other Holbrook funds, generally ranging from 3 years to 7 years. The Fund can also investment across capital structures opportunistically, but with a limit to high yield exposure.

APDPX has been on my best list of funds for months, but not for DT.
In April it was down 1.8%. In 2024 HOSIX goes up extremely nicely from left to right, while APDPX goes down
Since 01/2022: HOSIX made 32+% APDPX 35+%
But HOSIX SD is at 1.3% vs 2.6%
HOSIX has the best Sharpe > 3 of all the funds at Fidelity.
The 30 day yield of HOSIX=6.6...DHEAX=5.5%...SEMIX=6.2...SCFZX=5.4%.
We are not in a low-rate environment. 2025-6 would still be higher than years ago and if rates go lower, these funds would probably make 4.5%
My cloudy crystal ball says that the first 3 will make 5-6% in 2025...and 4-6% in 2026. See YTD chart (https://schrts.co/gGdZWGIt)
The idea is to get at least 4.5-5% in 2026 at the lowest SD possible.
But Schwab MMs still pay over 4%. Why would DT take a risk for another 1%? That's not for me to answer.
The future is unknown.
If you want to beat MM by a bit, go for RPHIX; see YTD (https://schrts.co/pmVkkFJw)
In the last 5 years, max loss for RPHIX was about -0.3%.
See a 3 year chart (https://schrts.co/VzvsMKJB).
Disclaimer: I don't currently own any of the above.

I don't interpret it as having trouble, but the funds are in "quiet period" with SEC so they are getting everything in order before the funds start to being offered. It appears the opening date has been moved from August 11 to September 10. Look at how long the T Rowe Price Capital Appreciation and Income Fund was announced back in 2017/2018 only to open a year or two ago.

They are delaying till October 1st now.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/806633/000119312525197907/d50711d485bxt.htm
If they are not having problems raising the money, any insights into what "getting everything in order" might involve that would require extra ~ 2 months? I certainly would not want this to drag out as long as the ~ 5 years it apparently took PRCFX...

@dtconroe. I will be curious what your final decision is. I would also like to retract my recommendations. Those two funds - SCFZX and HOSIX - were stellar during the most recent period of higher rates but their yields have been dropping like a rock the past year. They were more suited for the past higher rate environment as was anything CLO related, DHEAX has more of a history but returned over 4% but once during its first six years of existence of mostly lower rates. Same with SEMIX with an even longer history but didn’t come close to 4% in the lower rate environment.
I believe your goal is 4% to 6%. The best advice I have seen in this thread was from @PRESSmUP that if you want to achieve 4% to 6% you have to venture out on the risk scale. Especially if the much lower rate scenario comes to fruition. Many would tell you to venture into emerging market debt which has shined the past many years and their yields haven’t been dropping drastically - think EIDOX and AGEYX which I hold. But definitely not for those who are risk averse and definitely not for you. To be honest 4% to 6% with little to no risk in a much lower rate environment is pie in the sky thinking. Best of luck with whatever you decide.

Junkster, thanks for your participation and suggestions on this thread. Realistically, my goal is for 4% returns since I can't get 4% CDs any longer--I am getting 4.31% with SNAXX money market currently, and I will continue using it as needed, but am not optimistic that MMs can stay above 4% much longer. Many of my current CDs mature in December, so I still have a couple of months to sort through my options.

@dtconroe. I believe your goal is 4% to 6%. Many would tell you to venture into emerging market debt which has shined the past many years and their yields haven’t been dropping drastically - think EIDOX and AGEYX which I hold. But definitely not for those who are risk averse and definitely not for you. To be honest 4% to 6% with little to no risk in a much lower rate environment is pie in the sky thinking. Best of luck with whatever you decide.

However, along those lines, I would recommend you check out APDPX.
For the period from April 2022 to August 2025, Portfolio Visualizer reports an annual return (CAGR) of 9.35%, and:
SD = 2.65%
Sharpe = 1.81
Sortino = 3.94
Max. Draw down = -1.42%
No guarantees, of course, but what's not to like? So far, so good.
Good luck, dt.

@dtconroe. I will be curious what your final decision is. I would also like to retract my recommendations. Those two funds - SCFZX and HOSIX - were stellar during the most recent period of higher rates but their yields have been dropping like a rock the past year. They were more suited for the past higher rate environment as was anything CLO related, DHEAX has more of a history but returned over 4% but once during its first six years of existence of mostly lower rates. Same with SEMIX with an even longer history but didn’t come close to 4% in the lower rate environment.
I believe your goal is 4% to 6%. The best advice I have seen in this thread was from @PRESSmUP that if you want to achieve 4% to 6% you have to venture out on the risk scale. Especially if the much lower rate scenario comes to fruition. Many would tell you to venture into emerging market debt which has shined the past many years and their yields haven’t been dropping drastically - think EIDOX and AGEYX which I hold. But definitely not for those who are risk averse and definitely not for you. To be honest 4% to 6% with little to no risk in a much lower rate environment is pie in the sky thinking. Best of luck with whatever you decide.

someone in a podcast somewhere talked about the machination of creating an ETF and absolutely how much easier it is to do than a mutual fund. but they said that starting a ETF is expensive so unless something has changed, these things have to recoup so much before they just shut em down.
on a other discussion board a product called XOUT grew in popularity. they had a screeen that would remove 10-20% of the SP500. Basically their screen would rule out the worst 20%. people were discussing their methodology and how it was dumb or right but overwelmingly people were positive on the product. it lasted 2 years before getting shut down. #1. nobody put money into it and #2 it performed HORRIBLY.

I have been saying the following for many years.
The only sure way to control volatility is to sell early.

I have experienced several market crash periods, in which several funds with low volatility for years, had dramatic losses during a market correction. In post-crash analysis, derivatives that were using leveraging and speculation, were blamed for the "surprisingly" large losses. When I see relatively new funds, which has large percentage investments in derivatives, I wonder how those derivatives are being used. It is hard to be sure, but often "suspect" leveraging and speculation, but hard to be sure. I tend to avoid them. Below is an AI article that explains that in more detail:
"Derivatives can both increase and decrease market volatility, though the overall impact is complex and depends on factors like market maturity, regulation, and how the instruments are used. While they can enhance stability through risk management and price discovery, high leverage and speculation can lead to amplified price swings and increased volatility. However, derivatives also increase information flow and liquidity, which, in mature markets, can lead to more efficient price discovery and reduced long-term volatility.
Factors contributing to increased volatility
Leverage and speculation:
Derivatives amplify exposure, meaning small price movements in the underlying asset can lead to large gains or losses, contributing to volatility.
Speculative trading:
When derivatives are used for speculation rather than hedging, they can attract destabilizing speculative activity, particularly in less mature markets.
High short-term reactions:
Derivatives can cause prices to react more sharply to new information, increasing short-term volatility.
Factors contributing to decreased volatility
Price discovery:
Derivatives markets facilitate faster price discovery as they incorporate new information, leading to more efficient markets.
Risk management:
By allowing participants to hedge against price fluctuations, derivatives can reduce overall market risk and contribute to stability.
Increased information flow:
The increased information flow from derivatives markets to the spot markets can accelerate this information absorption and reduce volatility.
Market maturity:
In more mature and efficient markets, derivatives are used more for risk management, and their price discovery role leads to more stable prices.
Conclusion
The relationship between derivatives and volatility is not a simple cause-and-effect. Derivatives can act as a double-edged sword: they offer valuable tools for managing risk and improving market efficiency but can also be used in ways that amplify volatility through speculation and leverage. The overall impact depends heavily on the specific market conditions and the regulatory environment."

Hank,
Milken case was 36 years ago, not 66.

Interesting comp - they both returned about just over 5% annualized over the past 10 years, with SDs near 5. OSTIX had slightly lower SD. RSIIX had 79% positive return months vs. 70% for OSTIX.

Would be interesting to know how many of these ETFs disappear within 1 to 2 years. Too many gimmicks.

Great. Thanks. No employer match to 401K. It all goes into a cash account plan. Same effect though, I will not get the full years contribution from them. My main impetus for the Roth build/conversion is to reduce RMDs, as you mentioned. I may also start them before age 73, as they could get out of hand quickly, especially when one of us passes and we have to file as "single".
Related, my circumstances with retirement are very unique. I am the only SME left in my company for this product line, and a very large customer is involved. They have asked me to stay until the last piece of equipment is retired from the customer's network, and until we shut down our lab dedicated to this product. Essentially, they know that I have very little to do and do not care. We have a signed support contract worth millions.
How they handle my leaving will be interesting. If they were to send me packing once the equipment is all gone, they would be on the hook for severance, and I would be entitled to unemployment pay. My guess is that they offer me a position on an associated product line, which I have no interest in pursuing. Thus, causing me to voluntarily retire. Which is fine, this whole situation has been extremely lucrative for myself and my wife.

Great thoughts. I considered switching this year, but I am already bumping against the next tax bracket due to liquidating an inherited IRA in 2025, for which we decided to take the hit now. Our lower income years will start in 2026, when I only work 1/2 a year. And onward, as we only have SS, my wife's small pension and investment income. I will accept the lump sum for my own pension, frozen since 2010.
We do already max out Roths for both of us each year. And we want to start more aggressive Roth conversions in 2027 and onward. That will be 5 years of Roth conversions before RMDs. We are both 66 this year. RMDs are certain to push us into the 24% bracket, so I am looking at future Roth conversions to mitigate that.
I know that going all-in on conversions is the best move, but it is still a bit overwhelming. The choice seems to be limiting the amount of income at the 24% level, as opposed to avoiding it altogether. If we are not careful, we could end up with income in the 32% bracket, eventually.
I was prepared to retire at 62, then came covid and work-from-home. It became so easy that I just stayed on the job. This has led to 5 additional years of Roths, waiting on SS until FRA, 5 more years of pay and 5 more years of maximum 401K contributions.
So, my "compromise" is to double up in the first half of 2026, all into Roth, and start Roth conversions the following year, when I no longer have a salary. I know that I should have started this earlier.
I do appreciate all feedback.

A lot would depend on your tax bracket, age & estimated income in retirement.
If you go for maxing regular 401k, you may gradually convert to Roth IRA in lower income years.
Mixing up may be a good compromise.
And why not start in 2025 - there are few months still to boost 401k contributions.

Yield-curve control is something central banks to, not funds.
Most intermediate-term bond funds manage their yield-curve exposure by following strategies such as barbell approaches (i.e. loading up on ST and LT binds but skipping the belly, when appropriate), rolling-down-the-yield-curve (as years go by, maturity shortens, and if yield-curve is normal, the decline in yield will provide temporary gains - those gains will disappear at maturity), duration control (with futures; PIMCO does this a lot), etc.

There are some rate-hedged bond etfs that might meet some people’s needs if they’re worried about significantly higher interest rates down the road. IGHG (investment grade bonds) AZGD (higher quality bonds)
I’ve been comparing IGHG out to 10 years against various income-oriented OEFs. It has yielded similar returns to BAMBX with just a bit more volatility. That’s probably deceptive because IGHB was saddled with extremely low prevailing rates over most that time. As one concerned about the longer term rate picture I would lean towards either of these over an unhedged fund.

Securitized securities often carry another form of derivative risk, though it is hidden.
A mortgage borrower can usually prepay the mortgage, whether that's to refinance at a lower rate or because the borrower is selling the underlying property to move. That's a form of embedded option. One of the risks it creates is called, not surprisingly, prepayment risk. The risk of a high yielding bond being paid off early.
This embedded option also creates extension risk. Homeowners may be less inclined to pay off their mortgages if rates are going up and they've locked in a lower rate for years.
Investors typically look at duration - the first derivative, or slope, of the bond price vs. market interest rate curve. When looking at bonds with embedded options it can be important to look at the convexity or second derivative of that curve. Prepayment risk and extension risk affect the convexity to the detriment of the lender (bond holder).

M* Fund Category Definitions published 04/2025, available only in 09/2025 (don't know why M* does this every year!).
Changes, April 30, 2025
× Added Global Aggressive Allocation, Global Moderately Aggressive Allocation, Global Moderate Allocation, Global Moderately Conservative Allocation, Global Conservative Allocation, and Miscellaneous Allocation
× Retired Global Allocation and Leverage Net Long
× Revised text definitions of Aggressive Allocation, Moderately Aggressive Allocation, Moderate Allocation, Moderately Conservative Allocation, Conservative Allocation, Global Large-Stock Growth, Global Large-Stock Blend, Global Large-Stock Value, Global Small/Mid Stock
(Domestic allocation/hybrid funds have 75%+ in US securities, global allocation/hybrid funds have (only) 25%+ in foreign securities. This would make most TDFs global, but TDFs are classified separately & there is no mention of US vs foreign securities in TDF descriptions.
Global stock funds have 25-80% in foreign stocks.)
https://pdfhost.io/v/ZA2TxpMej3_MStar_Fund_Categories_042025
Note about PDF Host. M* Methodology/Research documents are now for download only (some years ago, they could be linked). M* Library isn't also easily searchable. But if you know the publication date, you can scroll through reverse-chrono order and locate the document. What I do is upload these documents to FREE PDF Host site and link them. Yesterday, some could open these documents, others could not. I also had problems uploading documents yesterday. So, hopefully, PDF Host works better for posters now.
https://www.morningstar.com/business/insights/research/methodology-documents