Thanks for sharing this @BenWP. I wasn't aware of this fund. Another one you might want to take a look at is Matthews Asia ESG. It has performed quite well over the past 1 and 3 years and has a nice balanced portfolio across sectors. A bit more value oriented than most other Asian funds.

@Observant1 et al
Relative to the thematics of the day.....
Through year end of 1987, Fidelity had 35 select/sector mutual funds; with several of these beginning life in 1981. Eight of the 35 were added in 1985, and another 12 were added in 1986.
As I noted previous in another thread, IMHO, thematic investing is not new for availability to the retail investor; but it has evolved. The sector funds became thematic etf's.
The Fido select funds started as and are mutual funds usually holding a large number of companies within. Etf's may also have a large number of holdings, but some are very focused, with 30 or so holdings.
Info only Sidenote: Fidelity unveiled same-day trading of its 31 Select/Sector Portfolio funds, which enabled investors to get quotes on an hourly basis and redeem or purchase shares between 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. rather than waiting until after 4:00 p.m. to get a fund's closing net asset value. Later eliminated.
Amateur opinion: Yes, some of the numerous thematic, factor and flame thrower etf's that have come to market during the past several years will have problems and cause portfolio damage at some point. The best one can do with these investments is to fully understand the areas of investments and why you feel there is a positive path forward in a given sector for investment. Yes, there are some "dot.com" types out there that are not proven and without profit.
We've held two very narrow focused etf's; one which is no longer held, ZROZ, and the other still remains, BOTZ.
The 36 holdings within ZROZ, Pimco long term treasury(s) are rock solid holdings, but the etf can be as volatile as a narrow focused equity etf. Obviously, the etf performance is subject to long term interest rate fluctuations and what the bond players in this area perceive. BOTZ has about 39 holdings in the robotics area. We still have faith in this market area and the companies within the fund.
The fickle markets, trends and whatever else can and may have various unknown impacts in all of these areas.
We retail investors are an interesting group of thinkers, eh?
Take care,
Catch

I received that meesage too. This explained the challenge that @bee had earlier. COVID made everything much more difficult. DMV offices are slowly opening back up. Renewal was strictly done online with 10 years old photo.

I read the Bloomberg "Robinhood Army..." article.
When I hear about thematic ETFs, the word gimmick springs to mind.
Assets in thematic ETFs quadrupled in the past five years.
This probably will not end well for many investors.

What worked yesterday may not work going forward, until it does again, We invest in cycles and cycles trend up and down.

The most significant investing trends over the last 10 years can be summarized as follows…
1. Large Caps over Small Caps.
2. US over International.
3. Growth over Value.
4. Tech over Everything.
5. Long Duration over Short Duration (Yields Falling, Curve Flattening).
6. Stocks over Commodities.
7. When Covid-19 first hit the US last February and March, all of these pre-existing trends accelerated.

when-secular-trends-reverse/

A good background article, despite its date in 2018, can be found in this link to a NY Times article:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/13/business/finding-emerging-markets-stocks-with-social-consciences.html
The Times article reviews many ESG strategies, including MFs, so I won’t repeat what is said there.
Inspired by a recent M* finding that ESG MFs and ETFs have been outperforming the indices against which they are measured, I took a closer look at a recommended ETF for broad EM coverage, namely IEMG, as well as two ETFs that have portfolios based on ESG principles. Nuveen (now owned by TIAA, which has offered a Social Choice balanced fund for many years) offers NUEM, an EM ESG fund using its proprietary index. Two other choices in this area are XTrackers EMSG and a 2020 addition to the mix, iShares LDEM. Both of the latter funds eliminate some companies based on the business (tobacco, alcohol, gambling, etc.) and then they apply ESG screens to the remaining MSCI EM stocks to eliminate bad governance, pollution, corruption, and so forth.
NUEM and EMSG have long enough track records to make comparisons possible. Since the lows of world markets in March, 2020, all EM funds have shot up. However, as predicted by the theorists and researchers, companies with higher ESG scores, including in this case EM companies, did outperform an index of unscreened firms. I lean towards NUEM because I know TIAA’s record in ESG investing. They may have a “secret sauce,” and were I looking to expand my EM allocation, this is where the money would go. If the theory is correct, long-term results should achieve similar outperformance.

Yes, it is indeed an expensive moment to invest. Can't get past that fact. It's always hanging there, behind us, in the background. For myself, I'm glad I already did the work of streamlining and consolidating my portfolio, preparing for retirement. What I hold now, I hold in bigger amounts than two years ago. So, all of them are high-conviction bets. I've reduced foreign equity to 9-10%. If I decide to add to the foreign stuff, it will be in PRGSX. That's apart from a segregated few thousand dollars in an account dedicated to my wife's interests. HGGIX.

@Crash I think you may be correct... Bonds may just be poison. I'm looking at my FUAMX , FXNAX , FNBGX and wondering what the future holds. I don't like making changes either but what does the next 2-3 years mean for bonds? It seems like foul weather ahead.

I'm still 55% bonds, in retirement, and wanting to reduce risk and volatility. Though I'm still re-investing the monthly dividends, I'm glad to see that income show up at the end of each month. (Though my PTIAX pays in the middle of the month, after someone thought it would be a better idea.) 38% stocks is about enough for me. The Fund Managers of the funds in my portfolio together have me holding 8% in cash. I'm giddy to see days like today, even though I know I'm missing a chunk of the profits by holding all those bonds. The ballast feels comfortable when the Market drops, the way it did, last week. ..... So..... I'm sure you'll think this through to do the best thing in your own situation.
I'm happy with my bond funds: PTIAX, PRSNX, RPSIX. I think I'd steer clear of anything specifically devoted to long term bonds right now. (FNBGX.) Those are all Fidelity funds. Maybe you're semi-married to Fidelity? The same way I'm rather married to TRP? I'm in my holdings DIRECTLY with the fund family, not using a brokerage. If you use a brokerage, that would make spreading out your stuff a lot easier than in my case.
Anyhow, if you've got some years to go, wanting to grow rather than preserve, I'd create a meaningful position in small-caps. Just don't bet the farm. I own PRDSX and it's great. @TheShadow pointed out to me that it is open to new investors. I was mistaken.
FOCSX (A Fidelity fund.) HASGX (Harbor, $50k minimum to get in.)
Also, global: HGGIX (Harbor, again.) PRGSX (TRP Global.)
...Or a million others you might prefer. Zero interest rates and a big investment in bonds will not serve you well if you still have several years to go.

Expect the unexpected. The most bizarre year for investing that I've experienced in all my years and it defies any logic or sense that I can apply to it.

@Crash I think you may be correct... Bonds may just be poison. I'm looking at my FUAMX , FXNAX , FNBGX and wondering what the future holds. I don't like making changes either but what does the next 2-3 years mean for bonds? It seems like foul weather ahead.

All MF's are NTF. No commission. I did not mention load. That is a separate item. In my account if you click on" research and tools", then click on mutual funds, a page appears where you choose( in small letters) the list you wish ,either load list, no load list or NTF funds. Clicking on the no load list brings up a page and at the bottom it notes there are 11090 funds on the list. My checks were free. My Fidelity and Firstrade checks both list UMB bank in Missouri. I did not look at the ATM cards.
If purchasing TF funds at Fidelity for $5 is by first setting up the account for recurrent purchases on a timed basis and then discontinuing this, I prefer just buying NTF without the extra work. There is no secure e-mail that i know of.
Again I have no connection to Firstrade. For those who are willing to deal with the negatives and fees are an issue with another company then this may be an option. I have had a good experience so far. Yours may be different. As I noted earlier, I buy load waived funds at Fidelity ,if need be. I think Fidelity is a great company and have had an account with them for at least 20 years. Due diligence as always before making any decisions.

The high turnover appears to be more for making profit than protecting against loss. For example:

A funds turnover ratio can vary and rise due to a plethora of causes. Pastor, Stambaugh, and Taylor (2016) suggest that turnover ratios are higher when the market environment falls within certain parameters. Their findings suggest that turnover ratios are higher in an environment where investor sentiment is high, stock volatility is high, and stock market liquidity is low. These market characteristics allow for more profitable opportunities for fund managers, as well as an increase in flows in to the funds as investor sentiment rises. These parameters are similar to that of the recovery period following the time period one which is the time period analyzed in the research by Li, Klein, and Zhao (2012) who find that the highest turnover ratios are found during the time following a financial crisis. Following a time when markets are severely down it is not unexpected that many old positions would be sold off in order to replace them with new more promising positions that arise as the market begins to see positive returns again.

https://scholarsarchive.library.albany.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=honorscollege_finance
SEC yield is based on the idea of constant yield to maturity. Think about a yield curve where 2 year bonds pay 2% to maturity and one year bonds pay 1%. If you buy a two year bond with 2% YTM, you're getting a total of 4% interest. After a year, the market says that it will pay 1% interest.
The price adjusts accordingly though effectively you're getting 3% for that first year and 1% for the second year. If a fund continually buys two year bonds and sells them off after a year, it achieves a 3% yield. That comes at a cost. The average maturity of that fund is 1.5 years (bonds are all between one and two years from maturity). If the fund held the bonds to maturity, the fund's average maturity would be one year. Shorter maturity and less risk.
Here's a brief paper explaining this phenomenon:
https://www.northerntrust.com/documents/commentary/investment-commentary/maturity-bond-funds-vs-individual-bonds.pdf

I'll first reiterate that if there's a specific fund that you want, there's a good chance that Firstrade has it with no brokerage-charged commission and that it may have a lower min than one would find elsewhere.
That said, there are a lot of other statements that seem to be misunderstandings or misleading; or I don't understand.
Every MF on the platform is NTF.
If NTF means "no commission", that's true. But if it means no fee including no load, that doesn't appear to be the case. (Note that load funds are generally commission-free everywhere even though you may still have to pay the load.)
Consider Praxis Genesis Growth Fund. It has only one share class, MGAFX. When I log in to Firstrade, go to the customer fund screener, check Fund Family (Praxis), and check Load Type (Load), this fund along with a few others shows up. (It does not show up if I select no load instead of load to screen.)
FWIW, it appears to be NTF (really NTF, i.e. load-waived) at TD Ameritrade.
Firstrade does sell this fund: I go to my mutual fund trading page (from the "Trading" drop down, select "Mutual Funds") and enter MGAFX. It says that at Firstrade the fund has a $1K min and three day settlement. Since I closed my account years ago I can't actually test a trade.
The site is quirky in that the M* info page shows the normal 50,000 minimum [for VWIAX] but on the buy ticket the minimums change to $500
Same as for me, so that's evidence that I'm looking at the same page when looking up VWIAX or MGAFX. Note that if one enters VWELX or VWENX one sees that Wellington is not open to new investors at Firstrade. But if you could open VWENX at Firstrade, you'd only need $500.
Old joke: Customer - the guy down the street is selling the same thing at half the price
Shopkeeper - why don't you go down the street and buy it there?
Customer - he doesn't have any left
after becoming a customer and opening an account (no minimum) that number became 11,090 no load NTF funds when you are signed into the site and click on the no load fund list and they are all listed as such.
Yet the customer screener shows "just" 9,903 no load share classes. In addition, it shows 6,316 load share classes. To borrow from Graeme Edge of the Moody Blues: which is right and which is an illusion?. Buffalo Springfield also comes to mind.
I re-balance twice yearly. Also I prefer to reapportion monthly dividends/gains to positions of my own choice based on the economy, my current financial and tax situation or cash needs. Typically I would do about 40 buys/sells a year. At Fidelity about $800-1000/yr
At Fidelity, I can add to a TF position for $5 and sell for $0. 20 buys and 20 sells would run me $100 bucks.
I'm glad you mentioned tax situation. Fidelity has had online cost basis services - specific lot identification and changing default disposal method - down pat for decades. These days, most other brokerages make it easy as well. All I've found so far at Firstrade is: "Please contact your broker if you wish to change the default tax-relief method for your account or specify different tax lots for liquidation".
https://www.firstrade.com/content/en-us/accounts/taxcenter/?h=costbasis
Though few in number, Firstrade does have some nickel and dime fees. It charges $15 (or $50) for check printing. It doesn't appear to provide ATM rebates and charges 3% for foreign transactions after the first one each month. (BTW, Fidelity's debit card is provided by PNC bank, not UMB.)
Lewis asked about security against hacking. A question worth thinking about considering that I was able to log in years after closing my account by just looking up my old login/passwd/pin in my home files. The system didn't suggest that I might want to change my password (no password aging).
It doesn't seem to offer two factor authentication, though it claims that a PIN constitutes "an additional factor". It does not.

there are three generally recognized factors for authentication: something you know (such as a password), something you have (such as a hardware token or cell phone), and something you are (such as your fingerprint). Two-factor means the system is using two of these options."

https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/two-factor-authentication-who-has-it-and-how-to-set-it-up
As near as I can tell, Firstrade doesn't provide secure email.
https://www.firstrade.com/content/en-us/customerservice/contactus
(The internal contact page has a different URL but the same info.)
Firstrade does meet legal requirements on security but doesn't seem to go beyond that.

We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal standards to guard your personal information. We protect your account information by placing it on the secure portion of our website and use industrial strength firewalls and encryption technology to protect personal information on our computer systems.

https://www.firstrade.com/content/en-us/customerservice/onlinesecurity/onlineprotectionguarantee
Note that SIPC insurance (or excess insurance) only kicks in when a brokerage is in financial trouble or filing bankruptcy. It doesn't cover run of the mill hacking or identity theft.
Firstrade, as with other brokerages (e.g. Fidelity), guarantees to cover your direct losses. This guarantee "does not include any tax consequences, legal fees and expenses, or any consequential, lost opportunity, special, indirect, incidental, punitive, exemplary or non-monetary damages."

Every MF on the platform is NTF. Also instead of VWINX I bought VWIAX the admiral share with a lower ER with a $500 minimum. Same with the other Vanguard admiral funds so far. The site is quirky in that the M* info page shows the normal 50,000 minimum but on the buy ticket the minimums change to $500. I also have a Vanguard acct that was switched from the MF account that I had for 20 years and find that Firstrade is much easier to use online.

I've had Firstrade among the brokerages I use for many years and for precisely the reason stated by the OP. I've had one fund order rejected but most work, great to get a foothold in institutional shares at a low minimum. One minor difference in my experience is that ACH transfers are NOT immediately available at least for mutual fund purchases, not sure if that holds true for stocks and ETFs.

Dodge & Cox has a high manager retention rate and manager tenure is very high.
Many of its managers/analysts choose to work at the firm for most (if not all) of their careers.
Here are a few examples:
Charles Pohl - nearly 40 years
Dana Emery - since 1983
David Hoeft - since 1993
Bryan Cameron - 38 years

I would like to know how I can find out how much leverage is used in a fund. I use the Schwab platform. Tkx!

It's being delved into here:
https://armchairinvesting.freeforums.net/thread/733/introducing-svarx

The above will not show you how much and how long leveraged was used over the years. The managers can change it anytime.
I found the semi-annual report for SVARX (link) from 3/31/2020 and more than 50% is in treasury bills, mutual funds about 30%, MM at 13.8%(maybe used for leverage).
What was the leverage 3-6-12 months prior at any time? no way to know

FD takes EVERYTHING personally. I just pointed out the FACTS about his posts on this topic.
He "Introduced" this fund to the world (sic) on two forums recently BUT had to be informed by other posters that it was highly leveraged. Read this full thread and his parallel thread on armchairinvesting and it's pretty clear that's the case.
That's all.
No reason to take it personally or claim after the fact that he actually knew it was leveraged. He did NOT know that, or at least he forgot to note that critical point (sic) in any of his posts about it until AFTER other posters pointed it out to him.
Hey, we ALL make mistakes and most of us freely admit them. Some though try to drag tired old stories into every discussion as though they provide absolution or are relevant to the topic at hand.

FD takes EVERYTHING personally. I just pointed out the FACTS about his posts on this topic.
He "Introduced" this fund to the world (sic) on two forums recently BUT had to be informed by other posters that it was highly leveraged. Read this full thread and his parallel thread on armchairinvesting and it's pretty clear that's the case.
That's all.
No reason to take it personally or claim after the fact that he actually knew it was leveraged. He did NOT know that, or at least he forgot to note that critical point (sic) in any of his posts about it until AFTER other posters pointed it out to him.
Hey, we ALL make mistakes and most of us freely admit them. Some though try to drag tired old stories into every discussion as though they provide absolution or are relevant to the topic at hand.

Fact check. I did post on the sites above but the same person Big Tom = BT2020 = Stalker made the same arguments in both places.
There was not a mistake. As I said before, I don't owe you ALL the information. I presented several numbers. If there are errors in these numbers I will fix them. So far in the last several years the leveraged didn't affect the results, and we know that past performance isn't a guarantee of future results.
BTW, in my first post I have a link (site) and if you open it you can see SVARX total = 148.89%(clearly leveraged)
But, your supposedly "innocent" remarks are nothing new. Your posts over several years are far from it but nice try.
Did you post in the past (I have the link) that I have "NO CHANCE of meeting my annual TR performance goals, this year and for the foreseeable future"? Were you wrong?

@msf and anyone else who might know.
Do bond fund managers typically try and sell bonds before they mature to decrease the chance of losing principal? Is this why the turnover can be so high in some funds. I just have had a hard time understanding why the distribution yields can be so much greater than SEC yields (without ROC) for years at a time in many funds. Any thoughts would be appreciated. And thank you @msf for your wonderful explanations about similiar questions in the past. Fundly

Historical market data can’t help you predict the future but I still find it useful as a way to understand the potential risks and rewards you can see as an investor.

Looking through 93 years of returns for stocks, bonds and cash won’t help you predict future returns for these asset classes.
But it can give you a better sense of the risk involved in these asset classes since risk is much easier to predict than returns.

Stock, Bond & Cash Returns: 1928-2020
stock-bond-cash-returns-1928-2020/