@Kaspa: No problem, I never work on MFO without my steel toed shoes !
Regards,
Ted :)
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/53580/bank-of-america-declares-the-end-of-the-60-40-standard-portfolio#latest

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/bank-of-america-declares-the-end-of-the-60-40-standard-portfolio-2019-10-15
This time is different :-). Not sure I agree, but then again I always find bond market a little more difficult to understand.

FYI: Here are our highest-rated mutual funds and ETFs across a series of Morningstar’s fixed-income categories.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/948584/the-best-bond-funds

Hi @Simon, @johnN and others:
How to Deal With Head-Spinning Market Swings ... In short words ... Play the Swing
Big money has the ability to create volatility in the markets though their program trading systems. With this, the markets get pushed around more than they perhaps use to. And, this leaves the little investor wondering, at times, how to govern. Generally, when in doubt, they sell. For every sell that takes place there has to be a buy. And, again generally, this is big money that is doing the buying when the little guy is selling. When the big investor is selling generally the little investor is buying towards the top. Through the years I've seen this process repeat itself many times.
For me, a small retail investor, I now generally do some buying during the dips and sell the rips. Some call this playing the swing. I call this activity a special investment position or a spiff. I've been doing spiff activity for the past twenty years, or so, with good success. Please note that my spiff positions are a part of my overall investment plan and are not designed to be my complete investment plan.
Old_Skeet's market barometer helps me govern my spiff activity which I have been posting on the MFO board for the past couple of years, or so. Here is a link to my most recent post.
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/52513/old-skeet-s-market-barometer-report-august-september-october-update
For those that would like to get on board with some proven trading strategies (The Essentials) the link below might just be of good interest.
http://www.seykota.com/tt/
You might also enjoy listening to the Tribe's theme song. Just click on the link below.
http://www.seykota.com/tribe/essentials/index.htm
I'm a card carrying member.
And, so it goes.
Old_Skeet
Trailing comment: The graph in the link below reflects the S&P 500 Index's range of movement over the past rolling year. Notice, the trend for the most part has been down to flat with a recent gain resulting of about a 3% to 4% overall return for the time period. By playing the swing, at times, I was able to increase my returns over just being invested in a long only strategy.
https://finviz.com/futures_charts.ashx?p=d1&t=ES
If you would like to view the volatility spikes the below link graphs the VIX for the past rolling year.
https://finviz.com/futures_charts.ashx?t=VX&p=d1

FYI: Six investment experts highlight promising areas to deploy cash.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bloomberg.com/features/how-to-invest-10k/?srnd=etfs

I tend to agree with Terri Spath on junk bonds although my conviction isn't very high. Their allure is if stocks rise more than expected because of a strong economy that should be favorable for junk. If instead stocks tank, 10 year rates should fall also making junk attractive as an income generator. I am buying an inconsequential amount of a junk fund today (5%). and add if necessary.
Edit: Unlike this year, I worry that 2020 may be a real challenging year for bond investors. Hope I am wrong.

I misread the filing and got the wrong gender of the portfolio manager. Life goes on!

Not surprising, given that In-bok is generally a male's name, such as that of biathlon athlete Lee In-bok.
I would not expect you (or anyone else) to go checking to see if Sam Lee was short for Samuel or Samantha. Live a little, learn a little.

@MFO Members: The Linkster believes a picture is worth a thousand words !
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/search?q=In-bok+Song+–+A+New+Learning+Curve+is+Coming&sxsrf=ACYBGNSsRn1yh2I2-CkgXFeQ4qeDaNa0wA:1571061016960&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=ixwPt_Y2PkdN2M%3A%2C4kBbTqJgDEwWIM%2C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kTVd1N7tUzNLBA-SFONe5WZPqiH1w&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjii9iu8pvlAhVBHDQIHT13DDcQ9QEwAnoECAUQCQ#imgrc=ixwPt_Y2PkdN2M:&vet=1

This video got a little traction on Twitter - https://twitter.com/awealthofcs/status/1183004538623680513?s=21

History may make me look foolish but I don't think the market will be in serious trouble unless and until its clear that Trump will leave office which seems unlikely in the next 6 months. Since you are conservative I would go with 25% oakbx 60% the capital preservation fund and 15% the PIMCO fund or other fund you think looks best.
You will surely be following Buffett's advice
Rule 1 Don't lose money
Rule 2 Don't forget rule 1
remember that even when conservative your retirement account should provide a real return (i.e beat inflation)
I think my suggestion will meet that goal and I hope your desired future investments will do that.

I had my 401 set up as you suggest until recently.
The question I asked was:
''Which funds of my 401 choices would you leave money in the next 6 months.''

Got it. You're not asking about portfolio allocation, just fund selection. There's no apparent reason to have significantly different asset allocations five months from now (pre-retirement) and seven months from now (post-retirement).
But the specific funds you have available will change in six months, when you roll over your 401k. So you're asking about funds to use now for the next six months given your target allocation.
(If it helps you feel better, you might check to see whether your plan allows in-service distributions after age 59½, assuming you're that old. Then you could just move the money now; end of problem.)
Frankly it won't matter which 401k funds you pick. They are all respectable.
Whether you get your chosen large cap domestic equity exposure by using VFINX or a combo of AMRMX and VIGRX won't make a big difference. Whether you take one of these options and add PTTRX for your bond exposure, or use OAKBX for both stocks and bonds won't make a big difference either.
Building on @MikeM's comment - if you have a stable value fund that is paying as much as an intermediate term bond fund, that might actually be a better choice than PTTRX or OAKBX for bond exposure. Long term (the past year was an anomaly for bonds) that could give you similar returns with less volatility. You could roll over your other assets while leaving money in the stable value fund (if that's what you've got) when you leave.

In the same laconic style as PK, I wrote: It [public debt] does not create, but amplifies, income inequality."
The findings summary of the paper you cited reads: "The author finds that the composition of public debt is consistently a significant determinant of income inequality: the domestic share of public debt is regressive and significant across all specifications [even controlling for other factors]."
Sounds about the same. What appears to be an earlier (2011) version of the paper likewise finds evidence that "the domestic share of public debt is associated with higher levels of the Gini coefficient".
Have you read the full paper? I'm disinclined to rent it for 24 hours (even for $4) when my time is limited.
Right now I'm too busy reading a paper for an urban economics class I'm taking. That paper looks at how income level affects where people live in urban environments. And I've been having out-of-class exchanges with the teacher on different methods of calculating environmental footprints (think sustainable cities).

Twitter is useful for the lay readers of many researchers since there is almost always elaborated, non-laconic, material to read elsewhere.
This, about gov debts and income inequality, looks pertinent, brought to my attention by a family member:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JES-01-2014-0015/full/html
(Saez and others are clear about other, non-gov debt: 'This explosion in debt means effectively that the bottom 90% has been saving 0% of their income over the last 30 years.'
So ... in what direction is your own mind made up? What, again, do you yourself advocate?

"It's not just that with interest rates below growth rates, debt won't snowball."
Regardless of how much debt is added outside of interest? Didn't he say before: "unless the government runs large primary deficits"? I wish he'd make up his mind.
"it doesn't reduce the future income of society as a whole"
What about future per capita income? GDP may have a faster growth rate than interest (especially as we approach negative rates), but still not as fast as population growth. Will we all become poorer together? Likely not, as he acknowledges: it creates claims by one part of the population on another part ... This can create some problems." It does not create, but amplifies, income inequality.
"Emissions will stay in the atmosphere for generations, raising global temperatures all the while."
Some will, like CO₂, some won't like CH₄. Methane has 21x the impact of carbon dioxide, but that impact is front loaded. It is not "raising global temperatures all the while", just long enough to "damage our future ... irrevocably." Persistence is secondary.
There's a reason why I pay no attention to twitter with its typical laconic tweets.

Say that you like fund A more than fund B in all market environments. If you were starting with $5K, it seems pretty clear that you'd invest that money in A rather than B.
Now say you started with $6K in fund B, and because of market declines it's worth $5K. "Typically I would hold till things came back up."
What's the difference? Whether you have $5K in cash or $5K in fund B, you've got $5K to invest - either put it/leave it in fund B, or invest it/move it to fund A. Many people have a mindset that they don't want to "lock in" a loss. But that $1K loss above is a sunk cost. It's not a question of "recouping" the loss, but where that current $5K would be put to best use.
I agree with Skeet that you would be well off thinking about your long term asset allocation, setting up your portfolio that way, and when you roll over your account, to maintain your target allocation. Though you might use different and possibly better funds.

I am looking for some punch over my MM funds with minimum risk. I am not too happy with RPHYX and RSIVX.

You might look at the other fund in the Semper stable too: SEMRX/SEMIX. Mostly mortgages, very short duration (0.4), mostly investment grade, current distribution yield ~ 3%, avg. price a shade over par, 5* in M*'s ultrashort bond category.
NAV risk is pretty well contained in the current environment: NAV's varied in a very narrow range (9.88-9.90) since April 15, per Yahoo historic price tables.
Again, it's mostly floating rate, 74% per the current fact sheet.
Good luck out there -- AJ
P.S. I've been thinking of dumping one of the rate-sensitive funds I own now and partially replacing it with SEMRX next time there's a dip in T rates. I don't think holding a slug of intermediate and long duration is going to be the winner it was for a while there, and if another big rate dive does materialize, it's easy enough to rent exposure thru TLT or IEF.

Shadow must be taking the day off :-)
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000139834419017760/fp0046737_497.htm
The fund just reopened a year ago. I wonder if it will reconsider that decision now.
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/45333/seafarer-capital-partners-announces-reopening-of-seafarer-overseas-growth-and-income-fund
https://www.seafarerfunds.com/message-to-shareholders/2018/11/13/
Fund tickers: SFGIX (closed), SIGIX (open, $25K min)

Hi @Art, (FWIW) I'd say you are conservatively invested at about 70% (cash & bonds) /30% (equity) more so than me being at about 60% (cash & bonds) /40% (equity). With this, you know your risk tolerance better than me. I'd would stay invested along the lines of the long term asset allocation you plan to use going forward in retirement. I'm also thinking the asset allocation is more important, in the near term, over fund selection since you will be reconfiguring your portfolio in six months or so. For me, though, I'd add some small/mid caps along with some emerging markets and follow a global mix of about 70% domestic and 30% foreign. I'm thinking there is presently better value to be had in foreign equity over domestic; but, I would not venture to far towards foreign.
However, some say, you really don't need foreign holdings since about 40% of the revenue found in the S&P 500 Index now comes form abroad. Perhaps so.
I sincerely wish you the very best in the years ahead.
Skeet

jeez, the next half-year, leave half-half in the vang500 and the pimco, or all in the pimco
or, indeed, if there is a ~2% mmf, put all in that
I mean, you already have something of a conservative bent (principal preservation)