Some of our mutual funds are down significantly YTD. This might not be a bad time to consider executing a Roth conversion if you were planning on doing one.
roth-ira-conversions-in-a-down-market-6-things-to-consider

According to a March 2020 report from Fidelity Investments, in the year after the “trough” of a bear market, the S&P 500 has gained an average of 47%. That is in comparison to the little over 8% per year on average that the S&P 500 has returned over the last 20 years*. To go back to my example of a $50k conversion, let’s assume you did that when the market was at the low on March 23rd of this year. The S&P 500 is up 44.54%* from March 23rd through yesterday, July 28th, so that $50k grew to just over $72k in about 4 months, $22k of tax-free growth.

getting-the-most-bang-for-your-buck-roth-conversion-during-a-market-pullback/

A Roth conversion may not always be in a
taxpayer’s best long-term economic interests if:
• The current tax cost of the conversion is prohibitively high. A Roth conversion, in
its simplest sense, is a trade-off between paying taxes now vs. paying taxes later.
For the strategy to be impactful, the current tax cost of the conversion should not
be so expensive that it outweighs the benefit of any expected future tax-free
investment growth.
• The taxpayer is making regular and material withdrawals from their pre-tax IRA.
• The taxpayer does not have the cash to pay the tax due on conversion.
Tip:
We recommend converting shares of investment positions rather than selling investments in
the IRA and then converting cash proceeds. This ensures that the taxpayer continues to have
market exposure during the conversion process, and also saves on the transaction fees that
may be levied when selling an investment position.

2020_was_the_Perfect_Year_for_a_Roth_Conversion

A little more from @Devo’s linked WSJ article:
“He argued that the low inflation since the 1990s wasn’t so much the result of astute central-bank policies, but rather the addition of hundreds of millions of inexpensive Chinese and Eastern European workers to the globalized economy, a demographic dividend that pushed down wages and the prices of products they exported to rich countries. Together with new female workers and the large baby-boomer generation, the labor force supplying advanced economies more than doubled between 1991 and 2018. Now, he said, the working-age population has started shrinking across advanced economies for the first time since World War II, and birthrates have declined as well. China’s working-age population is expected to shrink by almost one-fifth over the next 30 years.”
Hard to argue with the above.
I lived through the sharp inflation of the 70s and beyond ... I recall the steep increases in gold prices & commodities that were an early prelude to the actual cost distress later felt by everyday consumers. Remember paying 15% for a fixed-rate mortgage. And recall hearing the initial announcement of Nixon’s institution of wage / price controls under the Economic Stabilization Act over the car radio in 1970 en route to my first good paying job somewhere in the southern part of Michigan.
One early lesson involved running out “with the crowd” in the late 70s and buying a few gold K-grands at $875 per ounce … and than watching their value slowly fall by more than 50% over the next 5-10 years. :) Inflation continued upward of course, but some of the “hot” assets that rose at first actually lost value towards the end of the hysteria. “To the early bird goes the worm.”
I really think the best approach is a well rounded diversified portfolio. Sure, I’ve tilted slightly in the direction of metals and away from fixed income. Might provide a slight edge if the predictions of worsening inflation come to fruition. But, be careful. Most likely by the time you and I decide something is a “good inflation hedge” a lot of the money has already been made by those “in the know” and having the power to move markets.
PS - In my humble opinion, it’s not too late to own gold, although it’s correcting today. But, it was a better buy two months ago.

Pretty much any equity fund is a hold right now. I just bought into MAPOX in January.
You may want to see the discussion on the recent proxy mailed to shareholders.
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/59232/mairs-power-proxy-vote-on-murkiness
From that post were the following items:
https://www.mairsandpower.com/about-us/company-news/item/132-proxy-vote-proposed-reorganization-mairs-power-mutual-funds
https://www.mairsandpower.com/images/resources/Mairs__Power_Funds_Reorganization_FAQs.pdf

Yahoo Finance and Stockcharts use ADJUSTED-PRICES that are ratio-adjusted for distributions (not subtraction-adjusted; that would be wrong, but see some links below). If the pre-distribution price is Pi that drops by distribution Di per share to Pf = Pi-Di on the ex-dividend date, then all older prices are multiplied by (Pf/Pi) = (Pi-Di)/Pi. The cumulative total return (TR) can be deduced from the ratio of adjusted prices at two specific times, and that can be annualized. This provides good enough approximations up to 10 years. Beyond 10 yrs, the approximation errors become noticeable, but still OK for most purposes.
Many sites use GROWTH-OF-10K where the number of shares are adjusted for distributions. If before the distribution, the price is Pi and the number of shares is Ni, then the balance is Bi = Ni*Pi. If dividend Di is distributed on the ex-dividend date, then price drops to Pf = Pi-Di, and additional shares for reinvestment are Ni*Di/(Pi-Di). The new number of shares is Nf = Ni + Ni*Di/(Pi-Di) = Ni *(Pi/(Pi-Di)), and the post-distribution balance is Bf = Ni*(Pi/(Pi-Di))*(Pi-Di) = Ni*Pi = Bi. So, the balance is unchanged after reinvestment of distributions (i.e., Bf = Bi); the decrease in price is offset by the increase in the number of shares.
Note a certain SYMMETRY: In Growth-of-10K, the number of shares is adjusted by the multiplier Mi = Pi/(Pi-Di), while in adjusted-prices, all old prices are adjusted by the multiplier (1/Mi) = (Pi-Di)/Pi. Thus, the cumulative TR between two specific times T1 and Tn by both approaches must be the SAME ( = M1*M2*...*Mn - 1). The graphs of Growth-of-10K and adjusted-prices should also be similar except for a scale factor. But differences arise from Yahoo Finance practice of rounding share prices to 2 decimal places only (at each distribution step), and this rounding error builds up over time. Moreover, some distributions are missed in Yahoo Finance and are not corrected and that introduces additional errors. It is unclear what Stockcharts does internally (whether rounding prices to 2 decimal places or doing calculations with higher precision) as these data details are not visible.
Yahoo Finance charts are for actual prices only. Stockcharts have the option of adjusted prices (for TICKER; default) and actual-prices (for _TICKER) and both can be seen in the same chart.
LINK

https://www.wsj.com/articles/inflation-high-forecast-economist-goodhart-cpi-11646837755?mod=hp_lead_pos5
I found this article very interesting on future inflation and Mr. Goodhart. Makes me come back to the TIPS article from February. Series I bonds > Short Dated TIPS > Long Dated TIPS.
Somewhere in there Real Estate has to prove its worth but need to see price action support that.
Tricky, tricky, tricky.

Shale oil production was cut back drastically in 2020. Now the US shale oil producers are not rushing in to produce when they see huge backwardation in the oil futures market (it takes several months for new shale oil to bring to the market), with WTI for April $117.21, May $113.13,..., December $91.57,..., June 2023 $84.88.
I think that a temporary solution for the US to replace Russian heavy/dirty crude is with Canadian (friendly) or Venezuelan (unfriendly) crude. The US WTI is sweet/light, and the old US refineries have to mix it with some heavy/dirty crude for processing.
https://www.cmegroup.com/markets/energy/crude-oil/light-sweet-crude.quotes.html

Read & or listen .
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-08/owners-outfoxed-as-russia-absconds-with-10-billion-of-jets?utm_campaign=bn&utm_medium=distro&utm_source=yahooUS

The US gasoline distribution system is fairly efficient in spite of people complaining about federal highway tax and local taxes. (Compared to the retail gasoline prices in Europe and Asia)
The CME crude oil futures, with WTI and Brent averaged, are about $122/barrel, or $2.90/gallon. For oil, 1 barrel = 42 gallons.
RBOB (wholesale, unblended) gasoline futures are $3.61/gallon. So, There is only $0.71/gallon for global shipping/refining costs. Generally, RBOB/unblended gasoline is distributed regionally to avoid damage to pipelines, storage tanks and tankers (railroads, trucks).
Then there are local blending (much of it per tanker truck), distribution and retail pump costs, plus local taxes. Retail gasoline costs are $4.00-4.75/gallon in the Midwest & East, $5.00-6.00 in the West. This is still very efficient pricing considering that $2.90/gallon is just from crude oil prices.
Keep this mind as crude oil prices jump around a lot, and some are saying that soon, crude oil prices may be $150 or $200 or even $300. It is fair to assume that incremental costs beyond crude prices won't jump around as much.
https://www.cmegroup.com/
https://www.gasbuddy.com/gaspricemap?lat=38.822395&lng=-96.591588&z=4

I'm a proponent of clean energy but oil and gas will still be needed in the near future.
You're absolutely correct that some people are/were overly optimistic regarding the
timeframe needed for the transition to clean energy.

I never heard anyone credible say the timelines were short, perhaps my being ignorant, but I do wonder whom @davfor was thinking of or reading. Yes and no appears to be the current thinking:
https://www.iea.org/news/renewable-electricity-growth-is-accelerating-faster-than-ever-worldwide-supporting-the-emergence-of-the-new-global-energy-economy

I'm a proponent of clean energy but oil and gas will still be needed in the near future.
You're absolutely correct that some people are/were overly optimistic regarding the
timeframe needed for the transition to clean energy.

Perhaps driven by the number of Teslas seen on the road.

Here's another version of the story that I just came across from NPR. (Same general info.)

VMVFX grabbed my attention in 2019.
The fund generated category-beating 5 Yr trailing returns with considerably less volatility.
The relative performance for VMVFX deteriorated from 2019-2021.
Like most factor funds, minimum volatility funds will periodically underperform relevant indexes.
I prefer funds which include dividend growth stocks or wide-moat stocks to somewhat dampen volatility.

@OJ - They mostly do their talking through ALEC, and have been working on it for a long time. From a 2013 Huffpo article:
"In the latest attempt to rollback pro-clean energy policies, fossil fuel and utility interests operating through the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) are proposing new model legislation to slow the rise of the clean energy industry by weakening net metering policies. ALEC released the new model language on their website prior to the group's "States and Nation Policy Summit" scheduled for early December."
I'll stop now since it's off your topic. Thanks for the headsup on the new approach.
AJ

Last I looked the top holding is dated as of 1/31/22. It must got updated in the last several days. Giruox still has over 10% cash according to Charles.

here are the top holdings of PRWCX as of 2/28/22. I believe that BD is the only new company in the top 10. So if he's making changes in the portfolio its outside the top 10. Alphabet's % of the overall portfolio has decreased.
Top 10 Holdings (02/28/2022)
Data as of:
02/28/2022
Holding Name
% of Fund
Microsoft--6.55%
Amazon.com--5.76%
GE -- 4.67%
Alphabet --3.97%
Yum! Brands-- 3.16%
Thermo Fisher Scientific-- 2.99%
Humana-- 2.54%
PerkinElmer-- 2.46%
Becton, Dickinson & Company-- 2.34%
PNC Financial Services Group-- 2.32%

@lynnbolin2021 posted an article about alternatives and recession. You may find it helpful.
https://mutualfundobserver.com/2020/09/alternative-and-global-funds-during-a-global-recession/#more-14509

@hank, Looks like TMSRX popped today. The first up day in a month(?) Hmm, what changed? :)
Seriously, there may be better alt funds than TMSRX, but I'm not all that dissatisfied YTD. I hold a few alternative funds as a hedge against equity holdings, in lieu of bonds actually, and in that perspective TMSRX is doing well as measured by the S&P 500.
One alternative fund I bought last fall in my 401k was REMIX. I had a rude awaking with it in November through January, but since it's January low it's up ~11%. More roller-coaster than I like but I'll give it a year or so to play out.

In highly volatile markets, minimum volatility ETFs end up on the wrong side, or rebalance inappropriately. If it was a fluke in 2020, well, it is happening again. Of course, they are not adjusting in real-time, so this is understandable, but their names sound more reassuring.
Shorter-term YTD view from Stockcharts, LINK1
Longer-term 3-Yr view from PV, LINK2

FAIRX up + 4% YTD, but it held over 73% allocation to 1 single stock (The St. Joe Co).

YTD damage continues getting worse (change time to YTD in the link below if it defaults to 1 Yr). https://stockcharts.com/h-perf/ui?s=$SPX&compare=$COMPQ,$INDU,$TRAN,IWM&id=p05528334466
Terrible sounding death-cross (50-dMA crossing 200-dMA on downswing) was noted for Nasdaq Comp about 3 weeks ago, in mid-February (it had happened to R2000/IWM in mid-January). One may have thought then whether the other indexes will follow, or will pull up R2000 and Nasdaq Comp. We now have a partial answer. DJIA/$INDU also has a death-cross and SP500/$SPX may follow in about a week. Surprisingly, it may happen to very cyclical DJ Transports/$TRAN in 2 weeks, or not. It is not in the cards for DJ Utilities/$UTIL - strength in it belies the talk of the coming rate hikes, starting next week. So, the market has several cross-currents. Of course, the disastrous Russia-Ukraine situation remains very fluid too with news changing by the day, sometimes by the hour.