Interesting site.
I found this amusing...
What Do You Get With This (LIFETIME) Wall Street Journal Subscription?
10 years of uninterrupted, limitless, and personalized digital access for to the WSJ website.

That sounds like an offer from Vito Corleone. Recommend people avoid the "lifetime" subscription.
:)

I found Barron's & WSJ unresponsive and "sticky" in the past (difficult to cancel). Have had good luck with some of the resellers. Currently have a 1-year digital Barron's from top subscription deals. Have chosen not to link the site because it would pull up a page full of Ads. Savings may not be great. But you get a fixed term paid in full up front without automatic renewals. Works for me.

Interesting site.
I found this amusing...
What Do You Get With This (LIFETIME) Wall Street Journal Subscription?
10 years of uninterrupted, limitless, and personalized digital access for to the WSJ website.
So .. I should subscribe in my 80s, then? lol

Some EE bonds reach maturity after 17 or 20 years. They reach final maturity after 30 years. Only then are they automatically redeemed. Yes, it's confusing and much of what's written, even on the Treasury site, doesn't get it quite right.
Not all that different from Social Security talking about "full" retirement age, which is different from when you max out.

These EE bonds have 2 maturity dates
EE bonds that we issued from May 1997 through April 2005 have an original maturity date part way into the bond's 30-year life, as well as a final maturity date at the end of the bond's 30-year life.

Issue date of EE bond			Original maturity date
May 1, 1997 through May 1, 2003		17 years from issue date
June 1, 2003 through April 1, 2005	20 years from issue date

https://www.treasurydirect.gov/savings-bonds/ee-bonds/may-1997-through-april-2005/

The performance of U.S. stocks versus foreign stocks has historically been cyclical.
U.S. stocks will outperform foreign stocks for a number of years.
A transition occurs and then foreign stocks often take the lead for years.
The duration and timing of this cycle are, of course, unpredictable.
US Equity vs. International Equity 5-Year Monthly Rolling Returns

https://www.hartfordfunds.com/practice-management/client-conversations/investing-for-growth/us-and-international-markets-have-moved-in-cycles.html

It has been very productive to diversify away from US, not just 2025, but likely 2026 as well. Others brought up how QQQ out-performed everything from developed to emerging market for the past 10 years. Hello, time has changed. With the ballooning $38 trillion dollars deficit and expensive (narrow breath) S&P500 index, one can get better returns without incurring additional market risk. By adding the current political risk, you all know the answer.
Institutional funds are moving elsewhere since 2025 and one can verify that on MFO Premium’s money flow.

Will once said he wanted to work into his 90's but I assume that its not all that fun just basically being a large cap growth closet index fund like it has been the last 15-20 years.

"M* reports that the fund's no-load share class gained 14.2% annualized during his tenure (through 01/26/2026)."
Not that it matters with such a spectacular record, but that figure doesn't take into account the 3% sales charge that was in effect at the time. That is, no investor got quite that rate of return, even by holding through the entire period. Though it was close (3% load amortized over decades is a pittance.)
In the 1980s and '90s Fidelity was a "low load" family, where most of its growth funds charged 3% on purchase (aside from its Destiny plans) and its growth and income funds charged 2% on purchase + 1% on redemption. The load on Contrafund was dropped on June 23, 2003.
"Jason Weiner is co-manager of the fund, which he has managed since November 2006. He also manages Fidelity funds. "
Is AI now writing M*'s manager data? This reads like a description of some other (non-Fidelity) fund Weiner manages. Otherwise, he'd also manage other Fidelity funds. Fidelity gives the identical bio on other funds saying that he's managed those funds also since 2006. See, e.g. the people page for FDCAX.
Here's a better description of the remaining fund managers, provided by Fidelity:

For years, Will has been working alongside Jason, Asher, and the entire Equity division, sharing how he manages the Contrafund franchise, his investment philosophy and approach, and best practices and key learnings over different market cycles.
Jason and Asher have a long history of discussing stocks and collaborating with Will and the broader team. Will has worked with Jason for 34 years and with Asher for 17 years. Jason served as assistant portfolio manager with Will on Contrafund from 1994 to 1996. Jason and Asher have been serving as co-portfolio managers for more than seven years on Fidelity Advisor Equity Growth Fund and Fidelity Growth Discovery Fund. Additionally, they have co-managed Fidelity Capital Appreciation Fund together for over six years. This partnership provides strong continuity across the Contrafund strategies and the team. Their investment philosophy is highly aligned to Will’s approach.

https://etf.wi.gov/boards/deferredcompensation/2025/06/05/dc10d5/direct

My parents held FCNTX from 1991 until my dad passed in 2022. (they held Magellan through the 1970’s and 1980’s too). Some years were better than others but my mom insists that both FCNTX and Magellan were the best investments they ever made. My mom sold most of FCNTX in 2022 because it was “too racy” for her in this time of life (plus it went down a fair amount that year) but still owns a few shares. She’s ecstatic with the wealth it created (and Magellan too).

Peter Lynch’s Magellan returned 29% from 1977-1990, double the 15% for SP500.
However, the average investor in Magellan returned only 7% while the fund returned 29%. This is frequently cited by Morningstar and was discussed by Lynch himself in his later years.
https://ritholtz.com/2023/08/mind-the-gap/
Two reasons for big gap;
1. Late Arrivals: The fund was private for the first four years (1977–1981) when Lynch had his most explosive gains (e.g., up 70% in 1980). By the time the public piled in, the fund had grown so large that it was harder to maintain that pace.
2. Panic Selling: During Lynch's rare "bad" years (like 1984, where he returned 2% vs. the S&P's 6%), investors saw the lag, assumed he "lost his touch," and pulled their money out—only to miss the recovery.
Morningstar is going to use my panic selling in their next mind the gap study.

Bought a new position in EISIX and got to thinking about India like rforno posted. But haven't made that leap yet, being very heavy in EM already, though that's mostly in debt.

What are your go-tos for EM debt? I'm leaning towards EMD or FEMB at the moment.

Dedicated exposure: EADOX. Broader mandates but heavily into EMs these days: APDPX, EAGMX, EGRAX. I haven't owned any of the etf/cef lineup for a long time; never had much luck with them, but then the dollar tanking is a relatively new phenomenon favoring all foreign assets, for the first time really in ~ 20 years during Bush II's reign.

@Anna and @rforno, thank you. Great alliance and future trading partner.
In 2026 the developed and EM indexes are ahead of US already. Let the race begins.

Pretty funny.
Since 2010, big tech, QQQ, made so much more than EM and developed.
Unless you are 20 years old and started 2 years ago, you missed about 15 years of unbelievable performance. After a performance like that, no one should expect the next 10 years to be the same. But, if you are so confident, please tell us you sold all your US equities for the next 10 years.
The chart says it all. https://schrts.co/WEIsQbqS
SP500 beat EM by 7 times and QQQ by close to 15 times.
SP500 beat VXUS by 4+ times and QQQ by close to 9+ times.

The official announcement, emphasis added on the transition piece.
Dear Leuthold research readers,
It is with heavy hearts that we share the news of the passing of Doug Ramsey, Leuthold’s Chief Investment Officer.  Doug died unexpectedly of a brain aneurysm. He is survived by his wife of more than 30 years, Diane; son Adam; and daughter Allie.
This year, we celebrated Doug’s 20th anniversary with The Leuthold Group, though our relationship with Doug extended back to the 1990s when he was first a research client. Doug’s encyclopedic memory and deep grasp of market history made him an ideal fit for The Leuthold Group.  In 2011, Doug became our CIO, leading our investment team and serving as a major contributor to our monthly research publication, Perception for the Professional. He helped build on the legacy of our founder, Steve Leuthold, and fostered a deep and loyal following through his sharp intellect, timely insights, and sense of humor.
Doug had an extraordinary ability to identify and articulate key market trends, bringing them to life through engaging commentary on topics such as the Major Trend Index, the All Assets No Authority (AANA) model, and his lighthearted “Bridesmaids” analysis on the momentum factors that can drive asset class performance.  His discipline and dedication to delivering meaningful market analysis—to clients and to a broader audience through scores of media interviews—were unrivaled. He also worked closely with and helped develop a talented investment team that will carry on his legacy.  Doug began his investment career in 1990 after receiving a master’s degree in economics from The Ohio State University, including stints at SCI Capital Management, Principal Global Investors, and others.  He joined us in 2005, working closely with Steve Leuthold for eight years before assuming the CIO role upon Steve’s retirement.
We are proud of the team members who have stepped up to fill in for Doug over the last few months as he worked through an apparently unrelated back injury. Our deep, long-tenured bench of investment professionals will continue to provide the research and portfolio management our clients rely on as we transition Doug’s responsibilities.
Please don’t hesitate to reach out to either of us or to others at The Leuthold Group with any questions. Doug will be missed by all who had the fortune of meeting him.
Sincerely,
Jeff Leadholm and John Mueller 
Co-CEOs 

@jafink63- The New York Times reports that Donald Trump has used his presidency to enrich himself and his family by $1,408,500,000 in just one year.
You have to give the man credit- a new high in presidential theft and gluttony.

Pelosi has been feeding her husband inside info for years, and how has he enriched them by millions? Why are both not in jail?
How does Ilhan Omar go from ZERO Net Worth to a Net Worth of $30,000,000.00 in less than 2 Years?
Why is there silence from the same people who claim to care most about corruption? That selective outrage feels performative.
The U.S. has been protecting many countries for decades. It’s reasonable to expect something in return. If they don’t like it, they’re free to turn to China and see how that works out. China has systematically taken the world’s inventions and manufacturing know-how, then flooded Western markets with the resulting products.

Howdy folks,
As OJ pointed out, at our age, we had pretty much put our investments on Cruise Control. However, being a 'stacker' for some 70 years, AND a student of our own Gary Smith, I have been trained to look for divergences and explore them for opportunities to momentum invest. When silver diverged, the alarms and sirens around my house were disturbing the neighbors. Gee, it looked like New Year's Eve in NYC or Vegas. From my youth, I remembered, when it's time to party . . . pass the bong. Besides, at my age, who knows how many parties I'll have left so no Half-Stepping . . . just load the boat.
In my main retirement account, I'm up to 63% PMs. Granted, a lot of this is recent appreciation (which has resulted in nose bleeds for many). Historically, on this board, I had been recommending 3-7% for EVERYONE while All the major banks and advisors, scorned the metals. Now some are suggesting 20%. feh. I'm not rebalancing. No good options other than silver for gold.
My gains have been very obscene, in a delightfully orgasmic way. That said, I'm not spending my paper gains, just like I recommend against paper metals. The PMs could drop 20% tomorrow like they did in 1980 and 2011. While I don't believe that will happen based upon the fundamentals, WTF do I care, I bought my first roll of Silver Eagles at $4/oz.
The fundamentals all point to a continued bull market. There are so many facets to the demand equation, they have to take a number. Sovereign wealth funds, Central banks, debasement trade, Sell America, TACO trade, Industrial demand, speculation, CYA, and so forth. The Supply equation is equally crowded. Mining limitations, international strategic export restrictions, hoarding and stockpiling, etc. And, unlike gold, when silver is used in many applications, it's effectively destroyed.
So, I'm long up to my eyebrows and staying that way for the foreseeable future.
And so it goes,
peace,
rono

David_Snowball said:
Vanguard, and others, appear to believe that over the next 5 to 7 years you'll be able to make about as much money in the Total Bond market index as in the Total Stock Market index but with less volatility. Research Affiliates reaches pretty much the same conclusion and their asset allocation research isn't trash.

I have been keeping many experts' quotes over decades.
Arnott (Research Affiliates) has been managing PAUIX. I listened to him in 2010 and invested in PAUIX, but got out within several months when PAUIX didn't deliver.
Since 2010, PAUIX's record is terrible. It made just 50% in 15 years, 2010-25.
See the chart=https://schrts.co/CZbnPquI
Vanguard's past predictions have been off too.
In 2012, VG predicted 6-9% return range. See https://investrends.ch/fileadmin/pdf/news/Vanguard02_VGI012012_Vanguard_s_Economic_and_Investment_Outlook__Davis_Aliaga-D%C3%ADaz_.pdf
In 2017, VG predicted lower rate of return in the medium term, and U.S. stocks will trail international stocks. They were wrong on both. See
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/21/vanguard-groups-stock-market-investor-outlook-hits-a-post-crisis-low.html

Yeah, go ahead and add that poll to your bogus lawsuit, Donnie -- because once again, your slip is showing, and you're too embarrassed to admit it.
Grampa can't let anything go, be it yesterday, last week, last year, or years ago. He just craves chaos and by stirring thing up he's guaranteed that people will be talking about him, which totally satisifies his ego. It's like everything said against him this week went in one ear and out the other while in Davos .... but when he got back to DC, he spent all night watching TV coverage praising Carney's speech, stewing, simmering, and after returning from a midnight pee thought, "huh, that Mark Carney is a bad man, how dare he not like me, so I'm going to attack Canada again." Pathetic.
Go ahead and tariff Canada 100% Donnie. See how many new homes get built without cheap wood. This will do wonders for your 'affordability' campaign, right? Such a super business jenius!
All he cares about is himself, his ego, his optics, full stop.

PRCOX’s top 10 holdings resemble that of S&P500 index. Is 18% active enough to differentiate it from being a closet indexer fund ?
Here is the 5 year performance comparing it to VOO (tracks S&P500) and VUG (Vanguard Growth index). PRCOX mirrors VOO closely and it performed better in several years than that of VUG.
https://morningstar.com/funds/xnas/prcox/chart

Howdy folks,
Whelp, silver blew through $100 and closed at $103. Gold is sitting a couple bucks shy of $5,000. Works for me.
We could see some profit taking at these numbers, but I don't see that changing any of the fundamentals. Observant summed it up pretty well with,
"The eye-popping gains — eclipsing even gold’s historic rally — have come as a surge of speculation
by retail investors has collided with a five-year shortfall in silver supply.
At the same time unusually high silver stockpiles in the US and China have drained supplies of bullion
from vaults in London, where global prices are set.
'It is the perfect storm,' says Philip Diehl, former director of the US Mint.
'We have been in a long-term supply deficit, and it is just getting worse.'”
On the demand side, we have Sovereign wealth funds and Central banks accumulating with the Debasement trade and the Sell America issue. We have enormous industrial demand and lastly, we have the Uncertainty / CYA trade. It all adds up and collides with a Supply issue. Perfect storm. The GSR is at 51 but seems to want to go lower. It peaked at 120 but the historical average (er, 2000 years) is 15. Personally, I'm waiting for it get down around 30 and at that point will start trading silver for gold. Not dollars on your life. The dollar is trash. Just garbage and it's going to zero. It will take a long while because they have no choice but to lower short term rates and print more money. With a $38T debt, they have the choice between breaking promises or paying it back with cheaper dollars. The latter is more politically attractive. They'll continue to lie about inflation while we all experience the truth. And internationally, the Sell America trade is picking up and will force long term rates higher. This is the beginning of the end of fiat currencies world wide. A fifty year experiment gone awry as it has done, repeatedly, since the Romans. Currencies backed by gold and silver restrict politicians from promising more than they can deliver so they ditch gold and silver and go fiat so they can print more money. Every time it happens it always end the same way -with runaway/hyper inflation and political upheaval. That, my friends, it where we're headed. It will take a while and at my age, my grandkids will benefit, but so what.
Some reading material.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/silver-price-continue-rise-200002982.html
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/gold-tracks-best-week-since-2020-silver-breaches-100-in-stunning-rally-155625500.html
A silver 1964 circulated quarter is now worth $18. Back in Rome, an ounce of gold would buy you a nice toga and sandals. In the roaring twenties, an ounce of gold would buy a nice complete suit of clothes. Today, at $5000, an ounce of gold will still buy you an nice suit of clothes. Do you see the pattern? Gold and silver are still worth the same as forever but the value of the currency has gone down the toilet. Since 1913, the dollar has lost about 98% of its purchasing power.
Oh, and please dear God, stop believing any data out of Washington. Cripes, the calculations used to be accurate but the formulae were designed to dink the numbers. All of them - CPI, GNP, Employment. Now, the calculations are bullshit and anyone who ever shops for anything knows it.
BTW, I did add some copper miners with COPP and COPJ.
Cover your asses people.
And so it goes,
peace,
rono

"Buy low, sell high."
I don't invest in individual stocks (except for one stock) but I would heed the following advice if I did.
Bolding was added for emphasis.
"Don't gamble; take all your savings and buy some good stock
and hold it till it goes up, then sell it. If it don't go up, don't buy it."
—Will Rogers

In my limited experience, 10 (about equally weighted) seems to be the minimum number of individual stocks to hold inside a portfolio basket / sleeve if you like sleeping at night. (Might even be higher). But the 6 I held for a couple months proved too volatile. Years past I got away with much higher allocations to particular stocks (occassionally over 5% of portfolio). Escaped without damage. But in hindsight it was foolish.

Good points made about Smead. Father and son have snagged interviews on CNBC in recent years, touting home builders and energy. Not surprisingly, performance has lagged seriously.