FD,
Thanks for the following info:
"What is "now"?
Years ago, using my original system, 'now' used to be 1-3 months but I also looked at 1-3 years just to be sure the fund did well for the short+longer term.
Since 2017, "now" is the last 2-3 weeks and where better trading is needed
"now" also means investing in the best wide range funds, why you don't want to diversify, and exactly what I have done."
How often do you run the fund screener even if your current holdings are performing to your satisfaction?

I suspect when @bee posted this thread August 16 there was widespread assumption rates would decline across the curve. While short term rates - notably the Fed overnight discount rate - have fallen, since @bee posted, that has not been the case with longer term rates. August 16, when this thread was started, the 10-year treasure rate stood at about 3.8%. Today it sits at 4.07%. Over the last month 10-year rate has risen sharply from around 3.63% to 4.07%. Consequently, the values of most bond funds with any duration have fallen in recent weeks. ISTM bond investors are smelling more inflation ahead.
Good discussion of high yield. I recognize it’s an important investment for many. In recent years I’ve generally chosen to limit my risk to equities rather than play in the HY area. In fact, I’m getting a little freaked out by narrow spreads and rising rates. Moved all of my 4-5 year old hold in PRIHX (intermediate muni bond) into cash this week, while adding a bit of equity risk. (But I confess to having terrible timing.)
@bee? Are you becoming clairvoyant? The Fidelity article (on how to profit from falling rates) you posted August 16 bears a publication date of August 21 … ? And, it doesn’t appear to have been added later. :)

So, when someone posts about a fund I own now and says, Well, in 2022, it lost more than another fund or in the last 10 years, this fund was better than another, I don't care, what matters is what the fund is doing now..

The problem is defining "now." A fund that does well for a few months or even a year would be bad reason FOR ME to jump in, perhaps you are different. If you have a fund that outperforms for years then that would be a reason for me to move...but just as often I find the fund reverts to the mean rather than continue to outperform, a point you acknowledge in another post. I totally get the idea of riding the wave of a winner, but find that strategy hard to implement in real life. Truth is it's very hard to beat buy and hold with solid funds over a long period of time, or even an index fund. I suspect many of us know that deep down, but just because I'm a bad golfer doesn't mean I dislike golf.

Actually, most funds trail the SP500 with which has a very small expense ratio if you hold for decades. There is a good reason why Bogle and Buffett recommended the SP500 for decades....and it's the easiest way to invest. So, why are we discussing funds and trade?
I came to a conclusion that I want to participate in the markets by using best risk/reward funds. The idea is to find good performance wide range funds with lower volatility, and that will result in a better sharp ratio. My basic system from 2000 to 2013 was to use a fund screener every 4-6 months and find the best 5 risk/reward funds for 1-3 months + 1-3 years and invest 20% in each. After I have done it several years, I learned a lot more about the managers, their history, and their weaknesses and strengths.
2008 was a waking call, I lost 25% in that year, and since then I have been searching for a way to control meltdowns. It took me another 10 years to master that concept, but this time by using special bond funds.
As you can see, it took me years of practice and tweaking. You just can't wake up one morning and be successful doing it.
Of course, bad calls are built into it, the idea is to lose very minimal (which in bondland is 0.1-0.2%) and make a lot more when I'm right. I'm not your typical trader, if my trade is right, I can stay in it for months until I find a better fund.
Now, at retirement, my portfolio is big enough that I only need to make inflation + 2-3%(of course, I want more) and why I don't need to take a lot of risk.
What is "now"?
Years ago, using my original system, 'now' used to be 1-3 months but I also looked at 1-3 years just to be sure the fund did well for the short+longer term.
Since 2017, "now" is the last 2-3 weeks and where better trading is needed
"now" also means investing in the best wide range funds, why you don't want to diversify, and exactly what I have done.

So, when someone posts about a fund I own now and says, Well, in 2022, it lost more than another fund or in the last 10 years, this fund was better than another, I don't care, what matters is what the fund is doing now..

The problem is defining "now." A fund that does well for a few months or even a year would be bad reason FOR ME to jump in, perhaps you are different. If you have a fund that outperforms for years then that would be a reason for me to move...but just as often I find the fund reverts to the mean rather than continue to outperform, a point you acknowledge in another post. I totally get the idea of riding the wave of a winner, but find that strategy hard to implement in real life. Truth is it's very hard to beat buy and hold with solid funds over a long period of time, or even an index fund. I suspect many of us know that deep down, but just because I'm a bad golfer doesn't mean I dislike golf.

As to what constitutes "that moment in time", I can only speak for myself. I tend to look for things which are showing a pattern of doing well over the last couple of weeks as a validation of performance over the last month or two. Something that did well three months ago or before, but is currently stumbling, might indicate an inflection or an accident in composition. The same is true of something which has done nothing for six months, but is currently doing well. Might mean something; might not. It does me little good to be involved with something which did well a year ago, but hasn't in the last month or more. That's a trader's perspective, certainly, and not for everyone.
This is also the perspective of someone who has enough, and who doesn't want to lose what has been gained; I don't, after all, have 30 years to smooth out losses. Purely binary outcomes with roughly equal odds are not appealing. While willing to run risks, I prefer to control the extent of the risk and want to be paid to take that risk. Right now, I chose not to risk a lot, because I don't think you can expect to be paid adequately for taking that risk. So far this year, I've gotten about 70% of the market, while usually holding less than 50% equity and haven't felt at risk. Everyone's situation is different, but I consider that to be a good outcome.

1) hank "@FD / Wouldn’t it help people more if you posted what different investments will do in the next 1, 5, 10 years rather than what they did in the past?"
FD: your claim is pretty old. I don't predict what would be good, I invest based on what markets do currently and what I have posted for about 15 years on different sites.
You can read real time trades (here). What I think about bonds (here) and market calls (here).
2) hank: day/frequent trader
FD: I never said I'm one. I said I'm a trader and I'm not ashamed of it, while many who trade as much as me or more can't admit they are one.
3) BB: what does FD say about the prospects going forward for QQMNX or the L/S category
FD: I have said many times that most should avoid ALT funds and explained why. You must hold for years to see the benefit just to find out it was wrong.
4) MikeM: It's just BS to say this fund did well in this time frame but didn't do well in another,
FD: it's not BS, history proved that 1-2 categories can be at the top for years. Constructing a portfolio with the best funds now and never trading will not guarantee best results in the next 10 years. Markets change. Managers that did great with one style will lag markets that do better with another style.
One of the best writers in this site is Charles Lynn Bolin because of his ability to change based on current markets.
5) MikeM: To keep responding with fund suggestions after the fact and thinking you are some guru is irritating.
FD: of course, we had to get to this claim :-) Just read the above 3 links in item 1).
6) MikeM: I don't believe that FD can construct a portfolio for a second.
FD: pretty funny Mike.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355064/000158064224006059/alphstrategic-497.htm
497 1 alphstrategic-497.htm
AlphaCentric Strategic Income Fund
Class A: SiiaX Class C: SiicX Class I: SiiiX
(the “Fund”)
October 7, 2024
This information supplements certain information contained in the Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information for the Fund, each dated August 1, 2024.
______________________________________________________________________________
Effective on or about November 1, 2024, the Fund’s name will change to “AlphaCentric Real Income Fund”.
Effective on or before November 5, 2024, AlphaCentric Advisors LLC intends to retain CrossingBridge Advisors, LLC (“CrossingBridge”) as the new investment sub-advisor to the Fund, subject to approval by the Board of Trustees of the Fund. CrossingBridge is a boutique investment firm specializing in corporate credit, with an emphasis on high yield debt and opportunistic credit. CrossingBridge manages over $3.2B in assets across nine funds and includes a management team of nine investment professionals with an average of 20+ years of investment experience. The Fund’s investment strategy and focus on real estate related securities will remain intact. Additional information regarding the sub-advisory services provided to the Fund will be made available on or before November 5, 2024.
Effective on or before November 5, 2024, Goshen Rock Capital, LLC will no longer serve as the investment sub-adviser of the Fund.
* * * * *
You should read this Supplement in conjunction with the Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information for the Fund, each dated August 1, 2024, which provide information that you should know about the Fund before investing. These documents are available upon request and without charge by calling the Fund toll-free at 1-844-ACFUNDS (1-844-223-8637) or by writing to 4221 North 203rd Street, Suite 100, Elkhorn, Nebraska 68022.
Please retain this Supplement for future reference.

@BaluBalu."

Hi @Dennis,
MRFOX down today 1.41% which is unusual. Do you by any chance know the fund's 2023 annual distribution date? In prior years, based on M* info, it distributed in mid December. Why can not I locate prior year distributions at the fund site?
I also noticed that the fund website has a lot of tabs but the info is sparse / stale. Most funds' websites readily show expense ratio and I just realized that one has to go the prospectus document to know this fund's expense ratio. Am I not looking in the right place?
https://marshfieldfunds.com/fund-facts/
P.S.: the fund total return since the beginning of April is 1%. I can not find an investment or money market in my account with that total return!

“I also posted … why high-rated funds were terrible in the last 10 years “
@FD / Wouldn’t it help people more if you posted what different investments will do in the next 1, 5, 10 years rather than what they did in the past?
You seem to be inventing your own definition of “trader” vs “investor.” I’m not sure if there exists a rigid definition of “trader.” You are entitled to your own like anyone else. For day trading the SEC does have a definition. But it’s several times weekly, not yearly.
Here’s a legal definition of frequent trading
Here’s some SEC definitions of day trading
Of course, various mutual fund providers also have definitions for frequent trader. These can vary from one provider to the next.

@MikeM, I did understand you pretty well. Racqueteer's answer was excellent, explaining it further. There are so many styles between traders to B&H for ever.
You could have constructed a very nice portfolio in 2010 just to find out that your decent VALUE or EM funds have lagged SPY/VOO by a big margin.
On the other hand, the same funds above lost money for 10 years.
I also posted how PIMIX did great and then ICMUX did much better + why high-rated funds were terrible in the last 10 years.
The above examples are not monthly or even yearly trades, these are at least 3 years in the same fund. It shows it would be difficult to construct a portfolio that works well in all markets.
So, when someone says she is not a trader on these boards, it's hard for me to believe it.
Did you trade 2-3 times per year? You are a trader.
Did you trade only 30% of your portfolio? You are still a trader.
There are not many posters who bought 10 funds 5 years ago and created their "perfect" portfolio and haven't done 3-5 and more changes.
Most of the ones who owns their funds for years are indexers and or Bogleheads.

The SP500+QQQ has been great since 2010. From 2000 to 2010, the SP500 lost about 10% and QQQ lost almost half.
FAIRX was a great fund during 2000-10 but has been far behind since 2010.
ICMUX made more than PIMIX for 3 years (chart)
But PIMIX made more from 2015 to 2020 (chart) and PIMIX management is pretty good.
Based on my history of following many funds, I hardly ever found a fund that stays at the top every 2-3 years. Maybe PRWCX is the exception.

@FD1000, you totally didn't understand or ignored what I said. My opinion is that, for most investors (not traders), it's the portfolio construction that matters more so than individual funds. Of course no fund stays in the top tier of category year in and year out. But there are plenty of funds that stay consistently good over time and fill that portfolio segment, like ICMUX.
Your comparative selection of funds above is all in hindsight and therefore irrelevant to portfolio construction IMHO.

It's my perception that people who move in and out of funds are "fund" investers, maybe even collectors, not over-all "portfolio" investors. My hope is having a portfolio that trends upward with the least amount pf volatility I can obtain. The portfolio is, hopefully, made up of managers and a mix of fund type with a winning long-term history. Not the best fund that month or year. If ICMUX has a so-so year, I don't jump out to get into the hot fund at the time. ICMUX, and I'm just using this fund as an example, has history of good management and returns and a risk level that fits the portfolio.... Is there better funds at this precise time? Probably. Just another 2-cents.

Good management is not guaranteed to be good every year or even several years and in every situation and/or market.
I never believed in diversification either because it led to lower performance for years.
BTW, in very high risk markets, you learn pretty quickly that most funds sink together. You even learn that bonds don't always save you, think 2022.
The SP500+QQQ has been great since 2010. From 2000 to 2010, the SP500 lost about 10% and QQQ lost almost half.
FAIRX was a great fund during 2000-10 but has been far behind since 2010.
ICMUX made more than PIMIX for 3 years (chart)
But PIMIX made more from 2015 to 2020 (chart) and PIMIX management is pretty good.
Based on my history of following many funds, I hardly ever found a fund that stays at the top every 2-3 years. Maybe PRWCX is the exception.
In bondland the exceptions are so much better and can last for months, sometimes years.
An extra of 3% in bondland annually for many retirees is so good that you can own a small % in stocks (or none) with a much lower volatility portfolio.
The investors who believed in B&H; in the last 10 years, the most recommended bond fund, BND (US Total index) made just 1.7% average annually, far behind inflation.
In the last year, I owned 2 bond funds for most months and hardly traded. Not every trader changes funds every week/month. I always admitted I'm a trader but I see many who trade so much more than me and claim they don't.

Early retirement passed me by years ago :) At 70, I still work 2-3 days a week. But alas, that ends at the end of this year.

Some posters here may remember that years ago, Vanguard tried to be disruptive in the market for variable-annuities (VAs) with income-riders (GMWB, GLWB). People thought that was odd for a major low-low-cost indexer to jump into a product with the highest ERs. VG was disruptive all right for a while - its ERs were about half of the industry norms, but still high. However, as its losses grew, it first increased the ERs of these VA-GLWB, and eventually, got out of that business.
Then, years later, it dumped its entire VA operation on to Transamerica, and now only manages the VA funds for fees.
So, the talk of being disruptive is easy, but stamina and staying power are something else. I am glad that it has chosen active bond funds for its first big disruptive push (should Pimco be concerned?). Hopefully, nothing much can go wrong there. But as it goes into other areas such as private markets, RIA business, things may not go as easy.

How far does anyone think this reversal on the 10 year may go? I understand the “bond vigilantes” taking control of longer rates out of the Fed’s hands (not that they ever really had it) but am surprised by the speed and magnitude of the reversal. Friday’s hot jobs report really blew the lid off the rate structure. Just a temporary bump - or are we heading a lot higher? The damn election throws a whole lot of monkey wrenches into the equation too, with several possible outcomes. I think the Fed is being a little restrained right now due to the election. At some point afterward (assuming it ever ends) they might decide to clamp down harder if the economy keeps running hot. And, counterintutively, that could cause the short end to spike and longer rates to drop.
Maybe too off topic - But does anyone think as I do that the big gains in equities the past 2 years (and to a lesser degree bonds and cash) are helping keep the economy hot by providing consumer spending stimulus - mostly for the people who already have enough? So to a degree it becomes a virtuous circle with spending propping up stocks and stocks propping up spending. What could possibly go wrong? Just some far out thoughts. You won’t hear this on Bloomberg.
Anybody know what’s coming? Is that light at the end of the tunnel a locomotive heading our way? I don’t pretend to know. Just throwing some crazy questions out there for the smarter board members.

Observations:
1) fred495 is a good trader. Every investment board have different traders. The ones who buy and hold years, the ones who switch every 2-3 years, and others who change when they see better funds than what they have.
So, when someone posts about a fund I own now and says, Well, in 2022, it lost more than another fund or in the last 10 years, this fund was better than another, I don't care, what matters is what the fund is doing now.
2) We discussed PVCMX several months ago and I said why own it now. YTD is made only 4.2%. Does anyone own this fund and feel great?
3) ICMUX made YTD 8.5%(there are better bond options). Retirees who have enough and want low SD performance should be very happy to make it in bonds. I know fred is in this camp.
Where can I sign for 3-5% annually over inflation and I keep the money?
4) What about QQMNX? I have tested so many ALT funds, especially AQR funds, and was never impressed about their LT. It is also very difficult to hold them when the market is running away. ALT funds can do a better job in more volatile markets, but remember, if the managers make 1 mistake every year, it can be costly.
In 2022 QQMNX did well, but in 2023 it made 5% while SPY made 26%. Would you hold that long?
5) Retirees who have enough can avoid the big losses easier than accumulators who must stay invested all the time.
6) Someone who can't time markets and wants to own 10%, maybe 20% in ALT funds and hold LT? why not.
BTW, I don't love or hate any fund/manager, I dislike laggers, especially the ones that lag for 1-2 and more years while many hang on.

Let say I buy a annuity, own rental property, apply for Social Security, and receive a pension along with any other income producing asset. I have often wondered how these income producing (in periodic payments) assets are calculated into my net worth and my overall portfolio asset allocation.
Annuity:
The annuity pays individuals differently, but for the sake of the discussion let's say you buy a 5% fix annuity. You won't actually know what you lifetime payout will be (until you die), but you would expect ($300K*5%) periodically ($15K/yr for example). Eventually, a annuity dies with you. Does annuity income add to your net worth while alive? Is it subtracted when you die (not that you care, but your heirs might).
Social Security:
Social Security seems to be set up in a similar manner (plus a COLA rider), but your payout is determined instead your work income history. SS goes away upon death and so does its net worth value. Does it have a net worth value while alive.
Rental Property:
If you bought a $300K home and rented it for income, you might hope to net 10% ROI or $30K/yr. The property has to be managed and maintained. Upon death, the property has value. While living, a rental asset provides rental income. Both seem to be additive to one's net worth in life and death.
Pension Income:
From the linked article:

For example, if your pension pays out $40,000 a year, you expect to live 30 years, and your discount rate is 4%, then your pension would be worth around $692,000 today. You can get this value by plugging all of these values into a financial calculator [Payment = $40,000, Future Value = $0, Interest/Year = 4%, Periods = 30, Periods/Year = 1] and then solving for the Present Value. In other words, if you had $692,000 today (Present Value) that was earning 4% per year, you would be able to withdraw $40,000 per year for 30 years before running out of money.

This article might lend itself to help determine how these income producing assets impact net worth.
how-much-is-my-pension-worth/

You might consider CPAI (Counterpoint Quant Equity ETF, a multi-cap growth fund. Age 0.8 years; 11.96 financials (not heavy); YTD return 33.4% through September beats SP 500 by 5.7%; ER .75.

I seem to recall that many years ago, White Oak and Pin Oak were popular and highly touted funds.

For the past two months, I have been following two "Market Neutral" funds, QQMNX and VMNFX, which held up very well and provided some protection during recent market downturns. New managers have been at the helm of both funds since 2021.
As MikeM said: "I have to admit, QQMNX is a tempting alternative in this alternative field for a less bumpy ride and, so far, excellent returns."
..............QQMNX....VMNFX
YTD.........15.6%.......8.9%
3 YRS.......14.4........14.8
5 YRS.......10.3..........8.2
2022..........9.5.........13.5
Std. Dev....8.6%.......7.3%
As a retired investor who doesn't need a lot more money, preserving capital is more important to me than seeking sizeable returns on capital. While both funds have excellent risk/reward profiles, I have decided to add QQMNX to my portfolio at this time of fairly high equity valuations.

A couple other market neutral funds you can consider: BDMAX and JMNAX. BDMAX has outperformed QQMNX over the last 1 and 2 year trailing periods, and has a higher Sharpe ratio and lower standard deviation over the last 3 years according to Morningstar data. JMNAX has had lower returns, but has a smooth ride. I use a combination of BDMAX and JMNAX, but I might consider adding QQMNX. Thanks for bringing it up.