Dex, STHBX a dog of a dog. In the same short term junk arena it is completely outclassed by ASHDX and OSTIX.

I was going to suggest a combination of OSTIX and WHIYX.
ASHDX has a short history from what I have researched.

STHBX is for 'near cash' it was bought about 2 years ago and is down 1.3% from my purchase price. A fund with a stable price and some interest is better then a fund with a volatile price and higher interest. The interest has more then offset the loss - so the fund did the job.
When doing the comparison you have to look at the interest rate at time of purchase and change from purchase price.
What did those fund pay for interest 2 years ago and how did the share price change +/-%?

Edit: You are lucky to have a pension. Shouldn't you be just fine once you begin taking SS? You may still have a little out of pocket but not much. I assume that will come from your nest egg?

I'm looking at taking SS at 63.5. That would give me 13 years where I don't have to touch my dividends/interest/principal. If I buy a new truck it is 8-9 years. This is another, example of what we both said before - How do people without a pension or a large investment account pay their bills??????????

@JohnC - Not sure what strategy I'm following - but I've come to like multi-asset funds more and more in recent years - specifically the TRP low-fee variety. I think of them more as "I don't know what the f* to do with this money" type funds. Won't make a lot. But won't lose a lot either.
RPSIX is one good example. It's a fine multi-asset income fund that might fit your needs. The semi & annual reports are exceptional at showing graphically how the fund is allocated, normally among 10-12 other funds. And, that's what you're buying: a broad collection of funds - but from people who know how to allocate and how to fine-tune along the way. (Anyone so interested can easily pull-up the reports for this fund on TRP's website.)
I differ from most here in not keeping a significant stash of cash for emergencies or unexpected needs. Other than the currently 18% overall portfolio allocation, viewed as ballast, there's nothing additional outside the normal budgeted living expenses. In our case, anyway, we're conservatively enough invested that a separate stash isn't necessary. We'll pull those unexpected expenses from across the total portfolio. It'll "ding" our returns a bit if taken at an ebb in the markets. However, holding lots of cash also dings you.
Am not recommending the above approach for others. Wouldn't be advisable for younger or more aggressively invested folks. ..... Have a good weekend.

Linkster,
What do you know about this guy? I like what he said, but I have never heard of him before. Is he all that and a bag of chips or what? Can one invest with him? I like his long term approach. It's like fresh air to grow a long term portfolio. When I retire in a few years, I would be looking to have my money run by someone else, maybe. And I liked what Tom says.....
the Pudd

A while back I bought into a income fund that is multi asset in nature. My thinking on this was a place to park money for the short term before it goes into cash instead. For example, if I keep 12 months cash available, I would have 3-5 years in this fund to temper any hiccups in the markets.
Anyone else use a similar strategy? It could be a form of bucket or sleeve investing of sorts.

Seems like a reasonable approach.
Instead of thinking that there might be market hiccups I try to plan on the hiccups happening during my draw down periods. I try to do this by using back testing (historical data). You can explore mutual fund MaxDD and recovery from Max DD here at MFO thanks to Charles' efforts using this tool here.
A website I visit to back test mutual funds is Portfolio Visualizer. I'm attempting to get a close approximation of future "MaXDD" (Maximum Draw Down) of different mutual funds or etfs (cash can be entered as CASHX). This site lets you enter your mutual funds as individual holdings (100%) or as a combination of fund percentages (which also must add up to 100%). When reviewing the results I pay close attention to this feature (which you have to hover over with your cursor to open...located next to the MaxDD results). It looks like this:

At this website:
https://portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio
Max DD is expressed in a percentage and recovery time from MaxDD is expressed in a time frame it took the fund to overcome MaxDD (return to profitability for a buy and hold investor).
On a separate note:
I would argue that cash has a Max DD equal to inflation that can be measure in percentage and time. This might be the most misunderstood MaxDD...the buying power of cash. When you get down to it this is what we all are trying to do preserve or increase... buying power.
My portfolio often feels like a balloon that changes in size, but needs to at least overcome the deflationary pressures of inflationary leaks (the buying power of money).

A while back I bought into a income fund that is multi asset in nature. My thinking on this was a place to park money for the short term before it goes into cash instead. For example, if I keep 12 months cash available, I would have 3-5 years in this fund to temper any hiccups in the markets.
Anyone else use a similar strategy? It could be a form of bucket or sleeve investing of sorts.

FYI: WHEN Ken Kavula of Genesee, Mich., retired from his job as a high school principal at age 53, he decided to defy conventional wisdom and manage his own financial life — including his retirement accounts and a mix of stocks and bonds he had either accumulated on his own or inherited.
Fifteen years later, Mr. Kavula, now 68, has ridden the huge highs and crushing lows of the markets so well that he has enough to live off, for now, without even tapping some accounts.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/23/your-money/the-risks-and-rewards-of-self-managing-investment-portfolios.html

@msf Thanks a bunch. Got it! As someone who once managed a branch office of a not-for-profit law firm for several years, another example that one should always go first to the opinion before proceeding elsewhere, to avoid confusion and the risk of being misled.
And so the stake in the heart of Hope will remain, until something else comes along to pull it out. :) [perhaps "cognitive bias" at play here with my first impression; I so very much loathe 12b-l fees]

Dex, STHBX a dog of a dog. In the same short term junk arena it is completely outclassed by ASHDX and OSTIX.

I was going to suggest a combination of OSTIX and WHIYX.
ASHDX has a short history from what I have researched.

Bee, I was in (and out) of WHIYX many times over the years. But it has never been the same since they lost their high profile fund manager. Now I am in and much prefer PHYTX. It has been a nice steady performer year in and year out compared to its peers. RIMOX is an interesting junk/bank loan fund. It has been an outperformer since they shook up their management team by adding several new ones. Everyone pretty much hates junk and have been warning of their high risks. But YTD some are up close to 5%.

I've been posting a lot about budgeting, near cash, and cash flow.
Here is my current cash flow calculation for this year as of today's date.
Budget (28,500)
Cash Back 243 - credit cards
checking/Int 753
STHBX 16,449
Money Market 1,700
Pension 8,058
Spent 12,494 - this the amount spent to date
Total 11,197 - this is the amount remaining of STHBX I estimate I will have at year end.
I could show you future years but basically it is a adding in dividends and reducing STHBX until SS begins.
This is the first year that the pension kicked in.
Get back to basics with your planning. But, as I said before, the younger a person, the less likely they will be able to have a comfortable retirement.

I recently sold MOAT after holding it for more than two years. Made decent money, but didn't like it piling into energy at the last reconfiguration. I already had an energy play, so MOAT became redundant. For most of the fund's history it has outperformed the S&P 500, but not so in the last few months.

@jlev, thanks for the MFO writeup, I know I must have read it because I read every word of every commentary but I just didn't remember it.
I've been watching MOAT for years and while I'm impressed with the "idea" behind it I'm less convinced about M*'s fair value process. It seems to me they make big changes too often (for instance I think they were very far behind the eight ball on energy) and then they seem to be all over the place with their moat definitions. I'll give them credit for having a decent record but I'm just worried they'll find a way to screw it up over time.
@00BY, thanks also for the mention of IVAL. The MFO writeup provided the full context of their overall strategy. I agree with you that it appears more aggressive. In fact, with a portfolio focused far more on Japan than Europe it actually seems a bit more like the momentum version that's supposed to come later this year. My general impression from the CAPE information I look at every once in a while is that Japan is overvalued in general terms, but apparently they're finding a lot of value there.

@Dex got me thinking about what he called "near cash". I interpret this "near cash" as the portion of my portfolio that is available to supplement yearly income and the occasional emergency. @Dex mentioned this amount should help bridge a four year time frame. Many MFOers ( @MJG and @davidmoran) admitted to not maintaining anywhere near four years of "near cash".
So where does one turn to secure a (2% - 4% return with little of no downside risk) that can weather market shocks, interest rates rising (inflation), and yet perform well if de-leveraging pressure persist (deflation)?

The length of time is determined by your risk tolerance and individual cash flow.
The downside risk evaluation is relative to your other investments. The point of the 'near cash' is so if your other investments take a hit - you don't have to sell them and take a big loss.
So, for an extreme example, if your other investment are vulnerable to a 50% hit your 'near cash' taking a 5+% hit at the same time would help to protect your portfolio survive.

Will the next 30 be as smooth?

Have no idea how smooth it will be.....but have a very good idea that it won't be as profitable...........as interest rates have fallen for 34 years, making bonds a good investment.
Have no idea what rates will do, but they certainly aren't going to fall for the next 34 years!

I am actively looking for these kinds of investments.
@Dex got me thinking about what he called "near cash". I interpret this "near cash" as the portion of my portfolio that is available to supplement yearly income and the occasional emergency. @Dex mentioned this amount should help bridge a four year time frame. Many MFOers ( @MJG and @davidmoran) admitted to not maintaining anywhere near four years of "near cash".
To me its the trickiest part of one's portfolio and is often an after thought. Cash earns next to nothing in MM funds. Laddered CDs provide a small return, yet locks up those funds for longer periods of time.
So where does one turn to secure a (2% - 4% return with little of no downside risk) that can weather market shocks, interest rates rising (inflation), and yet perform well if de-leveraging pressure persist (deflation)?

The analysis is a simple money flow balance usually done on an annual basis. To oversimplify, portfolio value at the beginning of the year plus annual incomes plus/minus portfolio returns minus total expenditures equates to an end balance. It is a money balancing equation done yearly. If the bottom line goes negative, the portfolio does not survive.
But let's assume you are right. Adding another constraint to the global money balance (what you termed cash flow) will only lower portfolio survival probabilities. My second 6 set of simulations included your entire resources and represents a maximum survival rate likelihood. Any other money transfers within those resources will only contribute to failure. Sorry, but that is the analyses outcome.

The generalities you write about, do not apply once you are given specifics i.e. my examples in this thread.
You need to go back to my examples and understand the 4 years of expenses in near cash - understand the implications of that in the simulations and how it affects survivability.
Also, you should never be sorry when you learn something.

All BS stuff...I guess the money/income I have will have to make it....
IF it doesn't what would you like me to do now?...20-30 years before I could run out of money.....
post opinions on how to figure something you don't know anything about....?
Just wondering

Eeek!
Some incredible numbers-crunching & analysis.
- Did anyone mention that staying healthy for as long as possible is an "investment" - and one you have a great deal more control over than stock and bond market gyrations? I'm talking about not smoking, limiting alcohol intake, lots of fruit & veggies, daily workouts, etc. Those medical bills for in-home care will kill you. Poor health will rob you of the ability to enjoy the fruits of your investments. And, if your health deteriorates to the point you can no longer manage your own finances, what good is Monte Carlo or any of this other mumbo-jumbo?
- Has anyone mentioned that investments which appreciate the most during inflationary periods might offer the best protection in retirement? The current low inflation environment may favor bonds and equities. However, the underperforming (typically "hard") assets in today's economy are precisely the ones which should outperform during periods of high inflation. So, investing for current growth may be different than buying future inflation protection. The worst thing about inflation is that prices compound in the same manner that money does. At 10% annual inflation, a $2 loaf of bread today will cost you $3.22 five years from now and about $5.20 in ten years. A new car selling for $20,000 today would "inflate" to $32,210 in five years and $51,875 in ten years. Apply the same rate of increase to insurance premiums, property taxes, medical expenses, and you've got a serious problem that - I'm afraid - few retiring today even contemplate.
- Anyone who has ever constructed a household budget in retirement knows that while income tends to remain fairly static and mostly beyond our control, the expense side is much more flexible and allows for considerable control. Small steps like driving an older vehicle an extra 5 years, cutting out one vacation a year or doing more of your own home maintenance can all have a positive impact on the bottom line.
This is not intended to be comprehensive - just some other factors that may have been overlooked in the preceding deliberations.

Hi Dex,
For your convenience, I’ll repeat them here. I did 12 simulations in about 5 minutes with a $13K drawdown schedule. I did 6 cases for a 185K initial portfolio value. My baseline was a 7% average annual return with parametric standard deviations of 10%, 14%, and 18%. I repeated the same standard deviations for a 6% annual portfolio return rate. Portfolio survival rates were atrocious.

In the 185K value - the total value should have been the 51,888 and 185,000 plus some contingency amount at least - you pick the number.
The amount should never be 185K alone and the 51K should be in near cash - treasury bond ladder or a short term bond fund.
So, it doesn't look as if the simulator was modeling what I wrote. Same for the $350K example there needs to be the 'near cash' aspect also.
"$12,972 to be funded
$51,888 in near cash for 4 years of expenses - this is ride out market (bond & stock downturns.
$185,143 earning 7% to get to 12,972/year expenses to be funded
$100,000 to 150,000 contingency money, if wanted, earning ???
$337,031 to 357,031 total excluding house"

Back in the 90's David Marcus had a short but good record while managing Mutual European fund. Then he left for hedge fund world. Several years ago he returned and started Evermore fund. It's performance is uninspiring that shares the same distinction with David Winter's Evergreen fund, another former Mutual Series fund manager. The expense ratios of these funds are also high. No thanks...