Gee, this sounds strangely - and disturbingly- familiar.....as the coda to 'The Big Short' notes, even as the dust was settling from the GFC, banks already were exploring the sale of CDOs under different names like "bespoke debt tranche instruments." History may not repeat, but it sure does rhyme, which also suggests the WSJ is being somewhat disingenuous in calling this a 'new' thing.
Big Banks Cook Up New Way to Unload Risk
Banks are selling risk to hedge funds, private-equity firms through so-called synthetic risk transfers
U.S. banks have found a new way to unload risk as they scramble to adapt to tighter regulations and rising interest rates.
U.S. Bank and others are selling complex debt instruments to private-fund managers as a way to reduce regulatory capital charges on the loans they make, people familiar with the transactions said.
These so-called synthetic risk transfers are expensive for banks but less costly than taking the full capital charges on the underlying assets. They are lucrative for the investors, who can typically get returns of around 15% or more, according to the people familiar with the transactions.
< - >
The deals function somewhat like an insurance policy, with the banks paying interest instead of premiums. By lowering potential loss exposure, the transfers reduce the amount of capital banks are required to hold against their loans
< - >
Banks started using synthetic risk transfers about 20 years ago, but they were rarely used in the U.S. after the 2008-09 financial crisis. Complex credit transactions became harder to get past U.S. bank regulators, in part because similar instruments called credit-default swaps amplified contagion when Lehman Brothers failed.
Regulators in Europe and Canada set clear guidelines for the use of synthetic risk transfers after the crisis. They also set higher capital charges in rules known as Basel III, prompting European and Canadian banks to start using synthetic risk transfers regularly.
U.S. regulations have been more conservative. Around 2020, the Federal Reserve declined requests for capital relief from U.S. banks that wanted to use a type of synthetic risk transfer commonly used in Europe. The Fed determined they didn’t meet the letter of its rules.
< - >
https://www.wsj.com/finance/banking/bank-synthetic-risk-transfers-basel-endgame-62410f6c

Wish I had a dollar for every prediction out there. Mostly just folks gassing. But I suspect in a few rare cases intended to influence markets for their own benefit. ISTM money is made in markets when they move in ways the masses are not expecting.
@Yogibearbull - Byron Wien was a class act. I began taking an active interest in my retirement assets in the mid 90s. Wien was in his prime at that time - often cited / quoted in financial publications. Well balanced perspective. Those “predictions” ISTM were more of a fun “gig” and not his normal approach to investing. Highly personable in interviews. A humble fella,

Some have posted in the past that Fidelity's eMoney provides some budgeting and cash flow capabilities. I haven't used any of these so I can't comment on how extensive they are.
https://www.fidelity.com/go/monitoring-your-financial-portfolio

Intuit (owner of Mint) is pushing people to its other property, Credit Karma.

Credit Karma is thrilled to invite all Minters to continue their financial journey on Credit Karma, where they will have access to Credit Karma’s suite of features, products, tools and services, including some of Mint’s most popular features. We know the most active Minters use Mint to monitor their cash flow and track their spending, and not only does Credit Karma offer these capabilities, but we’re able to take things even further for our members.

https://mint.intuit.com/blog/mint-app-news/intuit-credit-karma-welcomes-minters/
How much of that is accurate or how well it meets your needs, I have no idea. Though Intuit's closing sentence does seem to acknowledge that this is a work in progress:

Credit Karma is on its way to becoming a full-service financial platform ...

@stillers : "
I've netted anywhere from a % or 2 to upwards of 4%-5% extra proceeds over the years. For example, one BUY I still have the detail on shows I paid $47,739 (priced at 92.931) for a $50,000 CD for an effective Discount of 4.52%. Yeah, after all of the funds slushed through over the CD's life, that was worth my time and effort! "
First question , how long did you have to hold this CD in order to collect the $50K ?
Holding period would have some bearing on how good of a deal it was.
Wouldn't the brokerage take advantage on this instead of passing it down to it's customers ?
Thanks for your time, much appreciated.

My opinion of brokerage education about CD investing is not that good. When I have engaged in communication with brokerage experts on CDs, they fail to do a good job comparing the differences between brokerage CDs and bank CDs, fail to do a good job of explaining ongoing value fluctuations of brokerage CDs that are reflected at the end of each trading day, fail to explain termination fee information for brokerage CDs, fail to address liquidity concerns for brokerage CDs in taxable accounts vs tax deferred accounts, fail to discuss ways of measuring the financial health of banks offering CDs on the brokerage platform, fail to discuss callable vs. non-callable CDs, etc. etc.
These threads about CDs, started by posters with limited knowledge about brokerage CDs, can be very complicated, especially when the OP provides minimal information about the details of their personal financial situation and investing objectives.

@Level5 said,
“When the market is rising I think …”
(I’ve restructured the OP into multiple choices and added choice E.)
(A) Boy, was I smart to add to equities last week…
(B) Boy, was I smart to sit tight…
(C) Maybe I do know what I’m doing…
(D) What new fund can I invest in that’ll bring me greater returns than the indexes…?
(E) Maybe I should sell everything and run to cash …
I’ll pick answer C
Not to be critical, but “the market” is a phrase often used on CNBC, Bloomberg and other financial wastelands. In truth, there are dozens of different markets (speaking of equities alone). Some may be rising, Others falling … Some running in circles … So the phrase “the market” grossly oversimplifies investing and may lead many to act against their best interests. Whatever may be said in condemnation of small investors dallying into the world of individual stocks, the experience may help drive home / reaffirm the truth that it’s a “market of stocks” and not a “stock market”.

Guessing - YBB notes are from Powell presser?
Did Powell also say that current monetary policy and financial conditions are restrictive but may or may not be sufficiently restrictive to achieve the dual mandate but overall appear to be in balance. I also thought some reporters tried to bait him to say more rate hikes are coming but he would not bite. I was not well during the presser and was dosing off and delirious most of the time. So, it is possible I dreamt the above but took it to mean rate hiking has reached its peak, with the Fed reserving the right to hike more - sort of a dovish pause.. overall, Powell appeared more relaxed (dovish) than at anytime since starting to hike rates.

This filing shows a new address for DGIFX:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000139834423019814/fp0085783-1_497.htm
FINANCIAL INVESTORS TRUST
Disciplined Growth Investors Fund
(the “Fund”)
SUPPLEMENT DATED OCTOBER 27, 2023 TO THE PROSPECTUS
DATED AUGUST 31, 2023
Effective immediately the following change is made to the cover of the Prospectus:
The Disciplined Growth Investors Fund,
PO Box 219554
Kansas City, MO 64121-9554
INVESTORS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

@Derf- Why should a perfectly reasonable conversation between MFO members be removed from the financial section because of the destructive conduct of two people who obviously have no regard for MFO or it's members?
If there are continued egregious violations of conduct here, from either side of the political spectrum, the people responsible should be not allowed to post except in the OT section.

How typical. How very predictable.
Step One: @rsorden and @Baseball_Fan feel free to destroy a completely non-partisan financial conversation by injecting scurrilous and vile political comments. This is OK for them though, because this is America and they are free to say whatever they want, no matter how inappropriate to the circumstances.
Step Two: Other MFO members respond to the provocation, and @rsorden and @Baseball_Fan then loudly complain the MFO is a nest of left-wing commies whose agenda is nothing less than to destroy America.
What a couple of complete assholes.

New to the website and not sure how to "alphabetize" funds but here is the TRP preliminary estimate:
https://www.troweprice.com/financial-intermediary/us/en/investments/tax-center.html

Price itself has this on its "financial intermediary" mini-site (see link earlier)
https://www.troweprice.com/literature/public/country/us/language/en/literature-type/prospectus/sub-type/vip?productCode=EXP&currency=USD

This looks like Price Equity Index 500 PORTFOLIO that is offered via insurance products. AUM is $26.8 million only and ER is 39 bps.
https://markets.ft.com/data/funds/tearsheet/summary?s=0P00003DWI
https://www.troweprice.com/financial-intermediary/us/en/investments/mutual-funds/us-products/equity-index-500-portfolio.html
Unless I am mistaken, NOT affected are regular Price Equity Index FUNDs (AUM $25.3 billion) in classes PREIX (20 bps), PRUIX (5 bps), TRHZX (5 bps). Now, if Price liquidated those, that would be market moving news.

@yogibearbull - thanks! I clearly read too fast.
FWIW, the "ticker" that FT gives (0P00003DWI) can be used to coax a little info about the fund out of M*. If you use it as the ticker in a portfolio, you can "analyze" the portfolio. However, there is no direct fund info on insurance (annuity) products at M*. At least none I can find.

This looks like Price Equity Index 500 PORTFOLIO that is offered via insurance products. AUM is $26.8 million only and ER is 39 bps.
https://markets.ft.com/data/funds/tearsheet/summary?s=0P00003DWI
https://www.troweprice.com/financial-intermediary/us/en/investments/mutual-funds/us-products/equity-index-500-portfolio.html
Unless I am mistaken, NOT affected are regular Price Equity Index FUNDs (AUM $25.3 billion) in classes PREIX (20 bps), PRUIX (5 bps), TRHZX (5 bps). Now, if Price liquidated those, that would be market moving news.
There are many low-cost SP500 ETFs now, SPLG (2 bps; newer), IVV (3 bps), VOO (3 bps), another from S&P SPY (9 bps; older).

Last check at Vanguard , longer Cd's Callable. Not my cup of tea !

Not sure why Vanguard is so different than Schwab. I randomly clicked on multiple CDs in all maturity ranges, at Schwab, and they were all non-callable. These are very well known banks offering these CDs (Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo, Bank of American, UBS, Discover, etc. etc.). There also a large number of regional and state banks, with high financial ratings, offering the same. From what I have read from other posters, Fidelity offers very similar non-callable CDs that Schwab is offering.

@BaluBalu: good question/several answers. In my case, I'm a do-it-yourself kind of person. I don't try to do my own plumbing repairs. I'm gonna get it wrong. But once I make an investment decision, if I encounter a problem I'd rather try to fix it than flee. In dealing with DGI I am not dealing with a faceless mega monster but with real humans. I think they want to get it right. Another answer: DGI invests well. Its return on investment is good. Another answer: transferring or liquidating shares in a mutual fund is a bit of a hassle when not investing through a brokerage. I'd rather try the repair route. One more answer: DGI is unique. There's nothing quite like it that I know of. So in that sense it is irreplaceable. Vital to my financial security? Nah. Indispensable? I don't think so. Pretty durn interesting? Certainly.

how are companies going to roll over debt when they need to refinance at higher rates?

The debt/equity ratio is now a feature in all my screens on MFO premium. I'm also looking for good Martin ratio numbers.
Like you, I am looking for opportunities where the return hasn't relied on the usual suspects.
For those unfamiliar with the Martin ratio, here is the definition from MFO premium:

Like Sharpe and Sortino, it measures excess return, but relative to its typical drawdown. After the 2000 tech bubble and 2008 financial crisis, which together resulted in a “lost decade” for stocks, investors have grown very sensitive to drawdowns. Martin excels at identifying funds that have delivered superior returns while mitigating drawdowns. It too is best used when comparing funds of same category over same evaluation period – this very comparison is the basis for determining a fund’s MFO Rating metric.

Factoring in current events, the "market" has been incredibly resilient this year.
The recent Fed’s Survey of Consumer Finances indicated the median net worth
of American families climbed 37% between 2019 and 2022 after adjusting for inflation.
Consumers were in a strong financial position which allowed continued spending in 2023.
It will be interesting to see how the "market" reacts if/when spending materially deteriorates.
American Household Wealth Jumped in the Pandemic

@msf, thanks!
One tab I didn't look was Geeks + Lawyers - I thought that I was neither (-:). BUT there is all the info that I was looking for in the rest of the site. This included the CRITICAL info in the SAI that the fund was a series of the Financial Investor Trust (so, one has to look for that at Edgar/SEC).

I'm not sure I'd call a related distributor (a la Fidelity, Vanguard, etc.) a third party, as that term often suggests independence. Rather, a distributor is a separate legal entity (whether independent or a subsidiary), perhaps a distinction without a difference.
The 40 basis points mentioned is more significant, as that's the rack rate that Schwab and Fidelity charge for NTF funds. They charge significantly less to carry TF funds, so the fund might be able to go that route instead. In addition, Fidelity and Schwab carry funds from a few families that decline to pay even this fee (they charge investors a higher TF instead). Realistically though, the brokerages are going to sell funds without charging for shelf space only if the funds are so popular that the brokerages benefit from carrying them anyway.
It also said that fee sharing arrangements do exist with some 3rd party firms.
The prospectus says only that these arrangements may exist. Also that shares are available directly or via retirement plans.

Generally, shares may be purchased, exchanged or redeemed through retirement plans or directly from the Fund. ...
The Adviser and/or its affiliates may enter into arrangements to make payments for additional activities... These payments are often referred to as revenue sharing payments”

https://secure.alpsinc.com/MarketingAPI/api/v1/Content/dgifund/the-disciplined-growth-investors-fund-pro-20230831.pdf
It's boilerplate - disclosing potential conflicts of interest. IOW, legalise. As stated on this page (I assume from the original website) linking to the prospectus: "Some people prefer legalise to English." (Okay, I admit it; I'm one of those people :-))
https://www.dgifund.com/geeks-lawyers
The SEC filings for the fund are here:
https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?CIK=S000033265&action=getcompany&scd=filings
The fund is a series of the Financial Investors Trust, as are Seafarer Funds (SFGIX, SFVLX) and a variety of other funds. Here's the full prospectus for the trust:
https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000139834423016245/fp0084788-1_485bposixbrl.htm