roger all of this ... was not recalling sufficiently the days only ~20y ago when local papers had an editorial staff of more than one, with beat stringers who were savvy and experienced
outside boston as local papers have been glommed together or turned into adsheets chiefly, we have not had anything resembling thorough local coverage for many many years
there are newsy forums (yahoo, now moving to io) and email chains that do this with the most substantive and important and divisive issues

I would argue that people lose far more in terms of depth and diversity of knowledge of their communities than what they gain in speed from information disseminated via social media. Aside from misinformation on social media, there is also the echo chamber effect on Facebook where only like-minded people are communicating with each other. Also, having a neighbor tell you such and such is going on locally on Facebook is not the same as having a group of people at a paper whose full-time job it is to get to the bottom of what's happening in your community, informing you about ideas, events, risks, machinations and coverups a neighbor would never discover. What it meant to pick up a newspaper I think 30 to 40 years ago was to serendipitously discover something perhaps you never even considered about your hometown and hear opinions different from your own. I think part of the divisiveness we see today is from that lack of exposure to alternative voices outside one's social media self-reinforcing feedback loop or bubble.
More to the point, there is research that indicates communities that have lost newspapers vote less on average and have more political corruption on average because people are just less engaged and less in the know as to what's going on:
https://pen.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Losing-the-News_Executive-Summary.pdf
Yet there is no question that news spreads faster on Facebook. Whether it is useful news or thoughtful in depth analysis is another question entirely.

Pondering FAMEX, DFDPX, and YAFFX which I would buy on their distribution dates later this month. However, YAFFX has over 25% in cash and 2.5% in Macy's which has fallen 50% year to date, so I can't help but to question their judgement. I do not believe the market is overvalued by any measure whatsoever and I do believe the bull will continue for many more years, so a fund with 25% in cash is probably not for me. Yet the long term history of YAFFX is compelling.
I'm realling looking for a fund which scores highly on ESG and low on carbon. I already have Brown Advisory Sustainable Growth and am looking at the Parnassus lineup. Many tech funds qualify on ESG as well. Any other suggestions would be gratefully received.

Hi David,
If I were prone to conspiracy theory I would be doing a head scratch with this from September 18, in Reuters (I did read the article linked below twice and scratched my head then. I thought I posted this at MFO...did not).
From the article:
More information is needed to assess whether the moves are a sign of a broader problem, other investors said.
“It’s probably nothing,” said Willie Delwiche, investment strategist for Baird. “But there is a risk that there is some trouble in the monetary plumbing in the economy.”

Complicating matters is the recent departure of two key markets experts, leaving vacancies at the New York Fed that some worry may have slowed down the U.S. central bank’s response to the volatility this week.
The two market-focused officials abruptly departed in June: Simon Potter, who oversaw the New York Fed’s trading desk, and Richard Dzina, who ran the bank’s financial services group. To date, neither has been replaced, leaving the central bank without permanent leadership in a key part of its operations.
>>>Abruptly, being a key word with the above statement. I've witnessed several abrupt departures over many years at a corporate level and knew the problem was an operational disagreement between individuals, a how to run the business problem.
Perhaps there exists an operational disagreement at the NY Fed. Perhaps the large banks are attempting to have rule changes made for reserve requirements, and then they'll rejoin the repo party. Perhaps there exists a serious problem in the monetary system that is way past my understanding.
Full Reuters story HERE.
Lastly, aside from the normal written story search, Youtube offers some videos discussing the REPO markets; as well at Khan Academy.com.
Regards,
Catch

Oh, I pay for the WSJ, WaPo, and NYT ... but prefer to pay for a quality viewing experience with less distractions and better 'flow' of articles. Ergo, I pay to provide that desired experience I use my geek-fu to deconstruct/reconstruct pages/page sections and block/enable scripts to ensure that. :) But each to our own! (I don't like reading news in apps personally)

- Add-free. I wouldn’t mind if online papers included static “print-type” ads that didn’t detract from my reading (as hard copy newspapers did for a century or more). However, invariably these ads flash, blink, flicker, change color and dance about. I cannot read text with such distractions.

Neither can I. Which is easily solved for the web using various ad- and script-blocking plugins for browsers. You can get really granular in the control ... I haven't seen a distracting ad on a news site in YEARS, and can even customize the view so that I can block entire sections of a page -- ie, 'visual' stories or large video blocks I have no desire to watch, etc. Makes life much nicer that way!

@rforno, Glad it works for you. I’ve tried assorted ad-blockers with only limited success. Currently have at least 3 on my ipads in addition to what Apple builds-in as their standard blocker. It was clear from my brief subscription directly with the NYT couple months ago that the

Times did not want me blocking their ads and was trying to circumvent the blockers. That’s a no-win for publisher and reader alike. https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/53366/best-way-to-subscribe-to-newspapers
The Kindle edition NYT is costs about $5 more monthly ($20 vs $15). Not only the distracting ads, but a smoother layout/format and less data consumed on downloads are appealing, since I’m still on a data-capped internet plan. I’m happy to pay the added cost in exchange for a better reading experience. And the higher subscription fee should allow Amazon to compensate publishers fairly.
Overall, I believe Amazon increases circulation numbers for many publications above what they would otherwise be in this day and age. Let’s face it: Newspapers face intense competitive pressures from the likes of cable news and free websites, albeit the quality of these pales in comparison. Amazon’s Kindle site serves essentially as a free marketing forum for hundreds, if not thousands, of quality publications, both domestically and globally.

- Add-free. I wouldn’t mind if online papers included static “print-type” ads that didn’t detract from my reading (as hard copy newspapers did for a century or more). However, invariably these ads flash, blink, flicker, change color and dance about. I cannot read text with such distractions.

Neither can I. Which is easily solved for the web using various ad- and script-blocking plugins for browsers. You can get really granular in the control ... I haven't seen a distracting ad on a news site in YEARS, and can even customize the view so that I can block entire sections of a page -- ie, 'visual' stories or large video blocks I have no desire to watch, etc. Makes life much nicer that way!

@rforno, Glad it works for you. I’ve tried assorted ad-blockers with only limited success. Currently have at least 3 on my ipads in addition to what Apple builds-in as their standard blocker. They work with a lot of free websites - but ineffective with major publications. It was clear from my brief subscription directly with the NYT couple months ago that the Times did not want me blocking their ads and was trying to circumvent the blockers. That’s a no-win for publisher and reader alike. https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/53366/best-way-to-subscribe-to-newspapers.
The Kindle edition NYT costs about $5 more monthly ($20 vs $15). Not only the absence of distracting ads, but smoother layout / format and less data consumed on downloads are appealing. (I’m still on a data-capped internet plan.) Willing to pay the added cost in exchange for convenience and a better reading experience. The higher subscription fee should allow Amazon to compensate publishers fairly.
Overall, I believe Amazon increases circulation for many publications above what they would otherwise enjoy in this day and age. Let’s face it: Newspapers face intense competitive pressures from the likes of cable news and free websites, albeit the quality of these pales in comparison. Amazon’s Kindle site serves essentially as a top-notch marketing platform for hundreds, if not thousands, of quality publications, both domestic and global.

- Add-free. I wouldn’t mind if online papers included static “print-type” ads that didn’t detract from my reading (as hard copy newspapers did for a century or more). However, invariably these ads flash, blink, flicker, change color and dance about. I cannot read text with such distractions.

Neither can I. Which is easily solved for the web using various ad- and script-blocking plugins for browsers. You can get really granular in the control ... I haven't seen a distracting ad on a news site in YEARS, and can even customize the view so that I can block entire sections of a page -- ie, 'visual' stories or large video blocks I have no desire to watch, etc. Makes life much nicer that way!

And only in leap years.

https://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/sectors/sp-500-top-stocks-own-in-years-best-time-december/
Now's The Best Time To Own Stocks (Especially These Eight)
MATT KRANTZ 08:00 AM ET 12/03/2019
December is the best time to own S&P 500 stocks. But some stocks are a bit better to own than the rest.

Japan's market has not recovered now for maybe 30 years?
But yes, nothing else is new. Maybe one thing. We still don't know who the last person will be who will say that and promptly market will correct, and then we will all remember him as THE guy.

The Matthews fund is pretty much sui generis. In the US market, I can find only two other funds that are vaguely comparable, Harvest Asia Bond and Aberdeen Asia-Pacific Income. One other Asia bond fund liquidated a couple years ago. That makes it hard to construct a meaningful peer comparison. Morningstar had it as "world bond," where it was a four-star fund then moved it to "emerging markets bond," where it is a four-star fund.
That said, it's a poor fit - for purposes of benchmarking - with the group. I checked the correlations between the six Great Owl EM bond funds, looking at both their correlations with one another and their correlation with Matthews. Their inter-group correlation is in the mid-90s, their correlation with Matthews is in the mid-70s.
I own shares and have since launch. I'm impressed with Ms. Kong and am persuaded by her argument about the shift in the world financial capitals from New York and London to Asia. Modest correlation to the US bond market, about .53.
"Strategic" was all the rage in fund naming once. Not so much now. These things come and go.
David

I agree with former Justice Potter Stewart who said: “I know it when I see it.”
Stewart’s remark was in regard was to pornography. However, the same might be said of market crashes and bear markets. Consider this: A person under the age of 10 or 11 in the U.S. has never experienced a bear market. Most under the age of 20 probably can’t remember one.
Geez - The linked article grossly oversimplifies matters. It’s not as neat as “One, two three. Now’s the time to jump back in.” As part of a third grade primer on investing it would suffice. A bear can last anywhere from six months to twenty years (as in the case of Japan). Better resembles a black hole than a merry-go-round.

“we got the name wrong on our first try” or “we’re not achieving what our fund name suggests”?

I get your point. Not knowledgeable about these guys, so I’ll take a pass.
About 8-10 years ago T Rowe did the same thing with TRRIX. Changed name from “Retirement Income Fund” to “Retirement Balanced Fund.” I was fine with that. I took them at their word that the new name better reflected the fund’s existing framework. Possibly the “income” part of the original name was misleading to some investors and suggested a less risky approach than the fund pursues. Also (I think importantly) prevailing interest rates in the U.S. and globally had fallen steeply during the fund’s relatively brief existence so that less income was being generated from the bond component than earlier envisioned.
Another one that baffled me a bit was TRIGX. Initially it was named T. Rowe Price International Growth and Income Fund. Than (also about 8-10 years ago) they renamed it International Value Equity Fund. They gave the same reason: to more accurately represent the investment approach the fund follows.
Shakespeare might say, “What’s in a name ...?” For mutual fund managers who find themselves in the midst of an investor class action lawsuit, perhaps quite a bit. Case in point - Oppenheimer’s “Core Bond Fund” which lost 36% in 2008. http://shareholdersfoundation.com/case/oppenheimer-core-bond-fund-investors-class-action-lawsuit-05282009 One can surmise that the litigation, ill will and investor exodus occasioned by this episode did much to hasten the demise of Oppenheimer.

“It’s been easy to be a bad investor for the past 10 years: the market’s relentless rise, fueled by enormous amounts of fiscal (hello, trillion-dollar deficits!) and monetary (hello, negative real interest rates!) stimulus, had made it likely that even a badly constructed portfolio booked acceptable – perhaps even double-digit – returns.“
- David Snowball

The third or fourth Capital One rep I spoke with said that some people are reporting problems with Firefox. So if you're unable to open an account, try a different browser.
Another problem: Capital One kept our "profiles" on file from when we had accounts many years ago. But it wouldn't let us access the profiles or create new ones (since we had existing profiles). We had to call to have the passwords reset.
Despite having closed accounts years ago, Capital One not only retained our SSNs, but data on linked bank accounts, phone numbers, etc. AFAIK, Capital One should have no need for external bank data once an account is closed. On the plus side, we didn't have to go through a validation process to relink a bank. Still, I'd rather they not retain information that isn't needed for legal purposes.

If we’re investing for a long-term goal — and most of us do have horizons of five years or more — then why are we so obsessed with the daily headlines and the gyrations they can spark in asset prices

Good point. But I wouldn’t consider five years “long-term”. I’ll go further and suggest that by-and-large this near term obsession with portfolio value / stock prices leads to more bad investing decisions than it does good ones among the investing public.

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/rethinking-risk-in-equities-2019-11-25
Rethinking risk in equities
If we’re investing for a long-term goal — and most of us do have horizons of five years or more — then why are we so obsessed with the daily headlines and the gyrations they can spark in asset prices

Yeah - D&C seems to be a “stickler” on the medallion signature guarantee, even for small dollar amount transfers out - as I understand them. I’ll need to move a few K from Invesco after the new year to TRP and am already sweating it a bit. My guess is they won’t require the signature guarantee. Most seem not to for amounts under around $50,000.
My local CU’s been good about providing signature guarantees in the past. But many institutions, including some local banks, now refuse to provide one without substantial documentation and assurance directly from the institution you are coming out of - essentially “guaranteeing” the money is on deposit with them and will be provided. Apparently this reluctance stems from recent court decisions holding the agent granting the signature guarantee liable for any monetary losses stemming from misrepresentation / criminal intent.
Nuts - I’m old enough to remember when obtaining a medallion signature guarantee was a relatively simple matter. Over the past 25 years they have gotten harder to obtain. Best bet is bank where you do business. I’m told by those who issue these that requests for them are rare. It’s something they’re not very familiar with or comfortable granting.

Day trading is NOWHERE as productive (or fun) as it was 10 years ago or longer. Speaking as someone who paid for parts of his PhD via daytrading futures (who has both earned and lost 10s of thousands in a single day), I suggest he first learn about the markets, stocks, and human psychology before even considering daytrading. Frankly I think day trading is becoming fairly extinct given the rise of algos and technology that can out-wit an out-perform the individual human operator and would counsel him against daytrading with anything other than 'fun' money for an occasional kick .... life is too short to be staring at screens all day anyway :)
BTW sure, he can dabble in trading simulators, but trus tme, no amount of 'paper' or 'simulated' trading experiences will EVER prepare a person mentally for playing in the markets for real, live, and with real money on the line.

If your friend is 12 years away from retirement, why is he / she only now taking an interest in investing?
Not much to go on here. Does he have access to a tax deferred plan at work? (I suspect not based on your question.) Does he by chance look forward to a pension or some kind of “buyout” that will assist him? There are many different investment vehicles depending on type of work, tax status, etc. Others here know more about alternatives to the traditional 401K than I do.
Good advice from you to learn more. My biggest source of help in the early going was from co-workers who had been at the game longer. A good global stock fund sufficed for the first 20 years. But I was young enough than not to worry about every market flux. Your friend may not have that advantage.
I’ve found “learning” about investments / investing to be a slow multi-year process (a long learning curve ). One doesn’t just pick up a book or two and suddenly know everything. BTW - I like “The Only Investment Guide You’ll Ever Need” by Andrew Tobias as a good quick easy to read book for the novice investor. He’s updated it over the years. I recently did a quick re-read. Available in print or download at Amazon. Of course, there are longer more comprehensive books for the serious student.