https://finance.yahoo.com/news/irs-bitcoin-and-virtual-currency-tax-form-193503386.html
I own zero "crypto " currency, do you ?
Stay Safe, Derf

CGVIX $1M to get in. Ork!

IMHO, if one of these alt funds did produce decent returns with limited volatility, one of 2 things would happen: the minimum investment would suddenly increase to 5 or 10 million to prevent too much cash coming in, or the fund manager would leave the fund company and set up his own hedge fund based in Bermuda to maximize his income !

@wxman123
Here is the answer: pay businesses to be closed:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/12/15/false-choice-between-economy-containing-virus/

I can tell you have a “PHD” @BenWP :)
(PHD = “pile it higher and deeper”)
Kidding aside - It’s a fascinating fund. I’ve held it from the start. But I still haven’t figured out how the 5 different managers keep from shooting one another. TRP tried a 2-manager approach with PRWCX 10-15 years back and it didn’t last long.

Nothin.
Unsure about travel in 2021. That’s the biggest discretionary expense. So, like 2020, next year might require little drawdown from investments. That argues for staying the course rather than building cash. Somehow wish it were other. (But have reduced spec positions while waiting for the next 25-30% selloff).
Nice bounce today across the boards. DJI is up 300 in early afternoon - above the 30,000 mark.
Energy’s strong with Brent over $50 and NYMX close behind.
And a pop of about $25 for gold, with miners up a couple percent today.
I remain convinced a lot of the action is of “the elephant chasing his tail” variety, with folks investing $$ they’d have spent on things without the Covid related restrictions. But “don’t fight the tape” (or do so at your own peril).
In the meantime .... What’s not to like?
At this point I view bonds as the wastewater of the investment plumbing infrastructure. They still serve some purpose - but don’t expect them to contribute to your prosperity.

To implement this strategy, the Multi-Strategy Total Return Fund may:
- Invest in the Global Stock Fund
- Short a basket of equity futures
- Use a variety of total return swaps, consisting of both long and short positions, on specific stocks that align with the Global Stock Fund’s portfolio relative to its benchmark.
@BenWP - Surely you jest!
I’ve not come across another fund that seems to “play off” or “key on” one of the sponsor’s own funds. Generally, funds try to beat or approximate some index. Here, T Rowe’s managers are actively engaged in trying to capture only the above benchmark return of one of their own funds (not its total return). It’s as if they’ve got two different benchmarks in play.
The ER (1.22%) seems reasonable considering the machinations of the fund. However, over time, that’s quite a bite out of long term compounded return. I’d suggest using the fund sparingly. It’s typically 12-14% of my holdings - firmly in the alternative category.
I’ll note (as does @JD_co above) that more of these type funds fail than succeed over time - so hats-off to T. Rowe for their success thus far in running this Rube Goldberg contraption.

Interesting it so outperforms QQQ.
From 2.5y ago; author Kam's writeup is interesting, sort of:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenkam/2018/06/01/the-6-greatest-mutual-fund-managers-of-the-last-decade-to-use-now/?sh=4d83fd94e678
(Turns out Kam died a year-plus ago.)

Just nine (1/9th) of them have a greater turnover rate than BAMPX.

Wow. A focused fund ("normally hold[s] a core position of between 20 and 30 common stocks") no less.
Prospectus
Gives a whole new meaning to "investing with conviction."
"Portfolio turnover is greater than most funds due to the investment style of the Fund."
Annual Statement

When it comes to allocation, it is meant to be equally allocated to the underlying funds...

Source? De facto ≠ de jure
Prospectus:

Investment Objective
The fund seeks long-term growth of capital.
----
Principal Investment Strategies
Normally investing assets in a combination of five Fidelity ® funds, each of which normally invests in equity securities of companies that represent a disruptive theme.

• Fidelity ® Disruptive Automation Fund ...
  
• Fidelity ® Disruptive Communications Fund ...
  
• Fidelity ® Disruptive Finance Fund ...
  
• Fidelity ® Disruptive Medicine Fund ...
  
• Fidelity ® Disruptive Technology Fund ...

Fidelity’s disruptive strategies seek to identify innovative developments ...

That's the complete description of how this fund operates in the statutory prospectus.
Just "a combination" of funds, not an equal combination.

I still have FGDFX on my watch list and continue to be quite impressed by its excellent risk/reward profile since its inception in May. Its total return since then is 41%, and over the past one and three months, it gained 5% and 15.4%, respectively, all with a fairly reasonable P/E of 24.6.
M* puts the fund in the large blend category but classifies its investment style as large growth. It's current standard deviation, according to Portfolio Visualizer, is 18%.
However, as I said previously, I am still not comfortable with the fund's current management structure. In a "team managed" environment, who, for example, is in charge of asset allocation from among the five underlying funds? What about risk control across the portfolio of FGDFX? Who has the final decision making responsibility? Wish Fidelity would provide some clarity in the fund's prospectus.
For the time being, I am still sitting on the sidelines. If this intriguing new fund continues to do well in the future, I may well pull the trigger and "test drive" it to "see where it goes".
Fred

I'm not sure I understand your concern on the team and allocation. My understanding is the "team" environment is given the multi-fund structure. When it comes to allocation, it is meant to be equally allocated to the underlying funds... The work to accomplish that is deminimis as it would only require periodic rebalancing...

What am I missing? The only plain old regular vanilla Domestic stock fund I see is SPY.

@dryflower,
I track plenty of plain old regular vanilla domestic stock as well. They just didn't make the list for low risk stocks. Here are the large cap core funds that I track. I also track multi-cap, median, and small cap.
Regards,
Lynn
Name, Symbol, Rank, MaxDD, APR, Rtn 3 mon, Trend, Flow, Yield, SMA10
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust, (SPY), 72.9, -19.5, 16.7, 3.9, 6, 4.7, 1.57, -1
Vanguard Large-Cap Index ETF, (VV), 67, -19.6, 18, 4.5, 6.3, -4.2, 1.56, -0.2
Schwab 1000 Index, (SNXFX), 66.8, -20.3, 17.6, 5.1, 6.7, 0.1, 1.57, -0.8
Fidelity US Sustainability Index, (FITLX), 66.4, -19.1, 17.3, 4.1, 6, 5.4, 1.11, -1.1
BlackRock iShares ESG Aware USA ETF, (ESGU), 66.1, -19.3, 19, 4.6, 6.5, 8.7, 1.34, 0.4
Schwab US Large-Cap ETF, (SCHX), 62.9, -20, 17.8, 4.8, 6.5, 0.8, 1.81, -0.5
Hartford Core Equity Y, (HGIYX), 60.7, -19.9, 18.3, 5.6, 6.2, 1.7, 0.79, -2.1
BlackRock MSCI KLD 400 Social ETF, (DSI), 59.3, -18.8, 18.5, 4.1, 6.1, 2.9, 1.28, 0.4
BlackRock USA Quality Factor ETF, (QUAL), 58.3, -19.4, 17.5, 4.9, 6.3, 15.4, 1.47, -1.4
Vanguard 500 Index Admiral, (VFIAX), 57.4, -19.6, 16.8, 3.9, 6, -8.9, 1.6, -1.1
Fidelity SAI US Large Cap Index, (FLCPX), 54.8, -19.7, 16.8, 3.9, 6, 7.9, 1.92, -1.1
BlackSwan Growth & Treasury Core ETF, (SWAN), 42.3, -5, 16.2, 0.8, 3.1, 0.4, 0.57, 5.1
T Rowe Price Dividend Growth, (PRDGX), 37.2, -18.8, 15.2, 5.8, 6.1, 0.5, 1.1, -3.6
Vanguard Growth & Income Inv, (VQNPX), 29, -20.4, 15.6, 3.6, 5.9, -17.9, 1.39, -1.4
Provident Trust Strategy, (PROVX), 19.1, -15.3, 16.6, 5.5, 6, -0.1, 0.45, 1
Fidelity Magellan, (FMAGX), 16.5, -16, 21.7, 0.6, 3.9, -0.6, 0.26, 5.8

I was in a side branch of this business and see a lot of grey in the topics. One thought, when determining how much solar capacity is needed the studies need to include 7 to 10 days worth of batteries to allow for a string of dreary winter days. Or, as an alternative, a supply of natural gas plants that can run when necessary. And to insure those plants are always available, they need to be duel fuel - diesel fuel - backup.
If you want to question your beliefs (on both sides?) I recommend you check out Judith Curry’s site.
Also books such as: Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarm Hurts Us All, by Michael Schellenberger reinforce racqueteer’s points. His primary recommendation is that the world focus on developing nuclear power.

@WABAC
My 11am link for FSMEX is a non-member at M*. We've never had an account.
I've not had any problem with any of this holding data.

Do you mean any other funds of funds, or funds in general?
You may remember the Strong Advisor funds of the 1990s and early 2000s, with their turnover ratios of
 60.3% (Small Cap Value, 2000),
 87.8% (Opportunity Fund, 2001),
 88.1% (International Core Fund, 2003),
 95.4% (Common Stock Fund, 2000),
116.1% (US Value Fund, 2001),
116.6% (US Small/Mid Cap Growth Fund, 2004),
174.2% (Utilities and Energy Fund, 2003),
184.5% (Technology Fund, 2003),
186.8% (Emerging Growth Fund, 2000),
199.4% (Growth and Income Fund, 2003),
221.6% (Large Company Core Fund, 2001),
234.1% (Balanced Fund, 2001),
268.5% (Blue Chip Fund, 2003),
269.3% (Large Cap Core Fund, 2002),
285.3% (Large Company Growth Fund, 2001),
399.8% (Growth Fund, 2001),
416.8% (Endeavor Fund, 2002),
420.4% (Endeavor Large Cap Fund, 2002),
437.3% (Select Fund, 2002),
468.7% (Large Cap Growth Fund, 2001),
501.7% (Discovery Fund, 2001),
605.7% (Focus Fund, 2001),
629.8% (Enterprise Fund, 2001),
658.7% (Growth 20 Fund, 2001),
683.7% (Mid Cap Growth Fund, 2000)
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/723257/000119312505044665/dncsr.htm
Aside from such "believe it or not" figures, the ICI reports that turnover ratios have been trending downward. The ICI's 2020 Fact Book has a graph (Figure 3.7) showing this trend in the asset-weighted average turnover ratio of equity funds. There's a peak in 1987 a bit over 80% turnover, and another peak around 2000 at just under 80%. The current figure is 28%.
Still, some funds like Magellan (FMAGX) have turnover rates north of 100% today.
With respect to funds of funds, the M* premium screener reports 123 distinct funds of funds (about 12%) with turnover rates above 100%, including what seems to be a favorite here, Columbia Thermostat (CTFAX). That fund has a turnover ratio of 158%.

Your brokerages provide the up to date top 10 holdings of your mutual funds and ETFs. Fidelity and Schwab do a solid job.

Isn't there some way to find the top 10 portfolio holdings for a given mutual fund in morningstar.com? I'm sure there used to be, but I was looking for it just now and couldn't find it. Did they remove it?

I can't understand why SWAN has a low ranking. It has to offer amongst the best risk-reward over it's short life, CAGR 15.9 Sharp 1.59 Max DD 5.06.

@waxman, Thanks for reading and commenting. Here is an explanation that I just posted on Seeking Alpha:
The Ranking system is good but not perfect. This article exploited some of areas, such as my lowest ranked funds, where an investor may follow shorter term trends instead of the ranking system. The benefit is that the spreadsheet does millions of calculations and provides good insights that would be impossible to keep straight without it.
One thing that hurts SWAN is its Lipper Category, "Large Cap Core", because I use the average bear market performance of the Lipper Category for the past three bear markets. It would be better classified as an "Alternative" in my opinion. Low yield also hurts. Momentum has been low during the past three months. Finally, Consistency is the percent of times the fund performed average or better during its life up to 13 years. It did great in 2020, but not 2020 for the Large-Cap Core Category.