Morningstar emailed a note about CG exposure today. Let me know if you think it warrants a separate post. It reads, in part
Morningstar’s associate director of equity strategies, Christopher Franz today published the Capital Gains Roundup for 2021, evaluating distribution estimates for some of the largest fund families.
Highlights include:

• Based on preliminary estimates from fund families large and small, growth funds once again will make significant distributions, but this year resurgent value strategies will make some big distributions, too.
  
• A confluence of another year of robust performance and the ongoing trend of investors swapping out of traditional active vehicles and into exchange-traded funds and other, mostly passive, vehicles have led many managers to realize gains to rebalance their portfolios and meet redemptions.
  
• Many prominent T. Rowe Price funds will make meaningful distributions, and some are closed to new investors, which can cause managers to realize gains to meet shareholder redemptions instead of satisfying them with cash inflows.
  
• Several Fidelity funds are expected to pay a distribution of more than 5% NAV; the large, widely followed, and Silver-rated Fidelity Contrafund expects to payout 8% of NAV on December 13.
  
• A few passive funds at Columbia Threadneedle, which are supposed to be more tax-efficient, estimate they will distribute gains of almost 10% NAV in December.

maybe women follow winners (he said, unsurprised)
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1064755/the-losers-curse

I am thinking somewhat more of this has to do w the bull market than acknowledged ...

Vanguard ...
Oh and another thing. They sense of "rounding" is illogical regarding how many shares they give you for whatever price even when you are investing nice whole $ amounts e.g. $1000.

It seems every institution has its own calculation quirks that show up in penny differences.
I just looked at a Fidelity brokerage account in which I have a single position (no cash or MMF, just a single equity fund). So the account totals should match the fund totals. But the account percentage increase for the day is 0.01% higher than the fund percentage increase. All the other numbers match.
It could be that the fund line calculation is truncating the percentage increase while the account calculation is rounding it up. Not worth the effort to figure out what's going on.

I'm a little surprised that one could circumvent the $10K limit per year by using a revocable trust. For tax purposes, revocable trusts are treated as an extension of the individual. That's different from irrevocable trusts which (except for grantor trusts) are independent tax entities.
This is from an old Bogleheads thread regarding transfers of savings bonds into revocable trusts:

The transfer to our Trust account transpired, but we received the following email
"Your purchase exceeds the annual savings bond purchase limitation. Please be advised the limit is $10,000 per series and TIN per calendar year. Repeated violations mayresult in an action by this office; for example, a refund of account holdings and/or account closure may occur.

From TreasuryDirect stating that $10K limit is per TIN:

Effective January 4, 2012, the annual (calendar year) purchase limit applying to electronic Series EE and Series I savings bonds is $10,000 for each series. The limit is applied per Social Security Number (SSN) or Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN). For paper Series I Savings Bonds purchased through IRS tax refunds, the purchase limit is $5,000 per SSN.

Is purchasing savings bonds in a revocable trust legal? Yes. Is it legal to use revocable trusts to circumvent the $10K/TIN/year limit? I have my doubts. It seems to work, but that doesn't mean that it is legal.
From Nolo (regarding TINs for revocable trusts):

A revocable living trust does not normally need its own TIN (Tax Identification Number) while the grantor is still alive.
During the grantor's life, the trust is revocable and taxes are paid by the grantor as an individual, using the grantor's SSN (Social Security Number). In other words, when an institution requests an SSN or EIN (Employer Identification Number) for trust property, the grantor just uses his or her own SSN. When the grantor dies, the living trust becomes irrevocable and the successor trustee will get an EIN from the IRS to pay the trust's taxes.
For shared property in shared living trusts, the grantors can use either person's SSN. When choosing which SSN to use, keep in mind that income on trust property will be reported through the SSN you select. This won't matter to couples who file taxes jointly, but it could make a difference to couples who file taxes with separate returns. For individually owned property in a shared living trust, use the owner's SSN.

I have tried a number of different managed futures funds over the years, and find that AHLPX has the best track record. BLNDX has beaten it with about the same risk, but I assume that is because BLNDX can use equities.
M* says BLNDX started in 1/2020 and lost 8% during Covid, beating other hedged equity funds like JHQAX and GATEX, as you might suspect. AHLPX made money that month, however.
Another MFO hedging favorite CTFAX also lost 9%
Lots of different ways to hedge the downside, but it is hard to predict in advance which one will be most effective.

I rarely own Alternative funds but have again been scoping some recently. So please bear with me with this question.
AHLPX is in the same Alternatives subcategory of "Systemic Trends" as PQTAX. Not sure of their respective managed futures exposures and portfolios could be significantly different,
That said, if it were me deciding between the two, all performance metrics I usually review would point me to selecting PQTAX over AHLPX. Volatility is not as an important a metric to me as I subscribe to the axiom of a venerable, former M* who routinely reminded us, "Volatility is the price you pay for growth."
Could/would you have time to compare/contrast these two funds, especially their holdings which are a wee bit above my pay grade, and state why you would/did select AHLPX over PQTAX.
TIA and understand if not interested in responding.

I have tried a number of different managed futures funds over the years, and find that AHLPX has the best track record. BLNDX has beaten it with about the same risk, but I assume that is because BLNDX can use equities.
M* says BLNDX started in 1/2020 and lost 8% during Covid, beating other hedged equity funds like JHQAX and GATEX, as you might suspect. AHLPX made money that month, however.
Another MFO hedging favorite CTFAX also lost 9%
Lots of different ways to hedge the downside, but it is hard to predict in advance which one will be most effective.

IMHO, this is the best "cash" option available today if your holding period is at least one year.
However, you can only purchase $10K of I-Bonds per year (additional $5K possible using tax refund).

The $10k limit is per individual/account. Spouses can buy an additional $10k. If you have a business (LLC, partnership, self-employment), you can set up an entity account that can purchase another $10K.

Yes, and you can also create a simple revocable living trust designated specifically for I-Bonds to purchase an additional $10K. This should not be construed as advice since I'm not certain about the potential risks of creating a trust for this purpose.
Link

IMHO, this is the best "cash" option available today if your holding period is at least one year.
However, you can only purchase $10K of I-Bonds per year (additional $5K possible using tax refund).

The $10k limit is per individual/account. Spouses can buy an additional $10k. If you have a business (LLC, partnership, self-employment), you can set up an entity account that can purchase another $10K.

Taxes apply when redeemed
Just one tax - federal. Savings bonds, like Treasuries, are exempt from state and local taxes. Making their rates look even better.

If it’s more beneficial, you can pay taxes annually as the interest accrues.

IMHO, this is the best "cash" option available today if your holding period is at least one year.
However, you can only purchase $10K of I-Bonds per year (additional $5K possible using tax refund).

Came across this elsewhere. Thought I’d pass it along.
Story on I Bonds
READ the conditions. The rate is guaranteed only for the first 6 months before it resets. Must keep for 1 year. 3 months penalty if redeemed in under 5 years. Taxes apply when redeemed.

Hi, guys.
And thanks!
I think the Standpoint Multi Asset fund is worth a look. That combination of "bonds priced to return zero, stocks priced to return zero, both susceptible to a sharp correction" has me wondering about options that generate some combination of safe, simple and sensible.
Too, you might enjoy Robert Gardiner's October letter. He covers a range of issues, comes across as smart and principled, and is pretty honest about his firm's struggles to attract talent beyond that white/male/Utah base. I appreciate both his efforts and his openness about them. (Also hints about a growth correction and China risks.)
Voted today. For myself, among others. When we got to the polls, no one was standing for election to the board of trustees for the local community college. That seemed sad, so I wrote myself in. Chip (allegedly) did so too. It's the nature of these things that if I'd talked to 10 people about it in advance, I might well have won in a landslide.
Take great care,
David

reserving the right to reject orders exceeding ...
You were given imprecise information. Fidelity, like most fund sponsors, puts in boilerplate allowing them to reject any purchase, including a purchase via an exchange if they feel it would disrupt the fund. But not sell orders. If they did, the funds would no longer be classified as OEFs.

An open-end fund is required by law to redeem its securities on demand

https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2015/33-9922.pdf
Based on the purchase dollar limit you were given for FCNTX, and the limit that I actually hit on a very new and very small Fidelity fund, it looks like Fidelity sets its fund limits at 0.1% of AUM. (M* shows FCNTX as having $139.5B, or roughly 1,000x the purchase limit.)
Regarding redemption in-kind, Fidelity (or any fund company) would distribute securities owned by the fund. Obviously if the fund were to sell some securities just to purchase other ones to hand you, it might as well hand you the cash since that would be no more disruptive.
...
According to the latest semiannual statement, Fidelity Contra redeemed 293,065 FCNKX shares in kind, worth $5,071.454. It does happen.

'Imprecise', well, sort of. It does appear to be an online issue and an editing problem, said the editor. (No one has said anything at any point about purchases.)
Today's trade-block message says
(009073) The order you have entered exceeds the dollar amount that may be traded in the mutual fund as specified in the prospectus. Please review your order or call a Fidelity representative at 1-800-544-6666.
So I used chat to talk w a rep who researched and then reported
Purchases, exchanges, or redemption cannot exceed $500,000 per day. Anything over that requires a call in request which will even need approval from someone higher up than me.
to which I said 'So the text does not exactly mean what it says; I suggest a change to yada-yada "greater than $500k cannot be accomplished online but require human approval ..." and he said he would so note that and escalate it. We'll see. I cited the SEC footnote.
Plus I sent email just to get something more official in writing.

To buy a house costs more, but to rent an apartment in a big covid-wracked city costs less than before the pandemic in many cases:
https://cnbc.com/2021/05/08/us-cities-where-rents-are-going-down-apartment-guide-report.html
https://zumper.com/blog/rental-price-data/

Our state (MI) sets spirit prices for some weird reason. Retailers can charge more if want - but rarely do. Overall, Scotch hasn’t moved much over past several years. One of the better values is Dewars 12-Year at $30 - a noticeable cut above their popular White Label. JW Black, a favorite of mine, runs $40 - occasionally $2 less. Aberfeldy (single malt) at $40 is the best buy going IMHO.
Services seem to be where the prices have risen the most. Noticed big jump picking up a few shirts I had laundered recently. As I remarked on another thread, there’s a 2-3 week wait in our area for car / truck repair. A $335 bill for replacing a front wheel bearing on my pickup nearly knocked me over. But when I checked online, the price was right in the ballpark.

@lynnbrolin2021:
In November's Commentary said:

Taxes will have to be paid on this portfolio as required minimum distributions take effect so I want to be more conservative in this portfolio, and more aggressive in a Roth IRA.

I believe @davidmoran linked this portfolio planning tool that does a pretty good job of allowing the inputs (your numbers) to be iterated for optimization...tax optimization being one output. Might be helpful.
link here:
https://i-orp.com/Plans/extended.html
You mentioned utilizing a Roth conversion strategy.
I like to remind myself that the best time to execute Roth conversions might be during times of market pull backs. During times of market pull backs equities are temporarily undervalued, especially aggressive equities. So don't hesitate to convert TIRA shares (especially those that are conservatively positioned) as a result of a down market since you may actually have the opportunity to buy more Roth shares while markets have pulled back.
This makes Roth conversions not only a great option when your income is low from a tax perspective, but also a great option when markets are under performing from a valuation perspective.

Thanks for mentioning; I hadn't looked in a while. How about NEAIX? You'd have to be convinced about tech, though!

NEAIX is more growthy and multi-cap (it’s about evenly split between large, mid, and small caps) than I’m looking for. Has a higher max drawdown and lower upside/downside ratio.

MSSMX and NESGX are the two Fido NTF SCG funds that always end up being my final two funds to select from after screening that cat.
NESGX is more expensive, less volatile and similar TRs over standard interim periods, and a very worthy candidate in this cat.

The institutional class, NESIX, has a lower ER than MSSMX and Schwab only requires a minimum investment of $2500/$1000 with a TF. (Fido, unfortunately, has a $100K minimum.)

MSSMX and NESGX are the two Fido NTF SCG funds that always end up being my final two funds to select from after screening that cat.
I owned MSSMX for part of its 2020/2021 heyday move. It started to crash in 1Q/2021 and I sold it well UP, and before too much damage was done, moving proceeds to ITOT. It continued to go DOWN and then sideways. I have recently re-opened a position in it but only 1/2 the value I previously held in it. VERY volatile fund but very rewarding LT. Expecting a BIG pop to the upside in the coming months.
NESGX is more expensive, less volatile and similar TRs over standard interim periods, and a very worthy candidate in this cat.

Nobody needs to know all the stuff they want to know. Whenever I'm required to give an email address on a web-form in order to proceed--- that's why I have a spam email address with false EVERYTHING in it. False name, gender, address, planet. I like to have some fun with it, often. Address? Same as Elwood Blues: 1060 W. Addison.
https://foursquare.com/v/wrigley-field/40dcbc80f964a52081011fe3?openPhotoId=51c8a543498e037455e74f49