Thanks @Sven for the story. I always enjoy these hyperbolic headlines. Crash is too strong a word if you compare the price of spot gold now with one year ago. But it is such a volatile market you probably can argue in either direction based on the dates chosen. As for the recent sell-off? It could be a lot of newbies added gold to portfolios prior to the election and than sold all or some of it sometime after.
As the chart shows, gold near $1900 today is still about $400 higher than a year ago when it traded under $1500. That’s a 20+% gain over the past year. Yes, it topped $2,000 - but only briefly. I think a lot of investors got in before the election and perhaps sold after.
I have a small toe-hold in OPGSX, which invests in miners. It’s gained 46% over the past one year - again making it difficult to apply the word crash. Bottom line: Gold and / or miners are crazy volatile investments and largely unpredictable.

@FD1000 Which cash back credit card allows you pay property taxes with no fee?

@FD1000, Warren plans on doing just that with his wife's money.

The 90/10 plan
Buffett's plan is about as simple as it gets. In his 2013 letter to Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE:BRK-A) (NYSE:BRK-B) shareholders, he wrote that the instructions in his will state that the trustee is to invest 90% in a low-cost S&P 500 index fund, with the remaining 10% to be invested in short-term government bonds.

warren-buffetts-investing-plan-for-his-family-why

1. Your first lost is your best lost.
2. Evaluate every strategy not just on a benefit of being right basis, but more importantly on the cost of being wrong basis. Sometimes its not always how much you can make, its how much you don't lose.
3. Behavioral Economics high level summarization: overconfidence is the #1 enemy.

SPY beat CWS for 1 and 3 years + since inception with lower SD.
ER needs to fluctuate between 0.3 to 0.5 and not 0.65% to 0.85%...and maybe they will have a chance.
I have a better idea if I make the rules :-)
Every fund must follow an index and it must stay within it. It can't say I follow a bond index and invest in stocks. We can work on the specific rules later but I like the idea.
At the end of each year is must beat the index to keep its ER. If the performance is lower, ER goes to 0.3% max for the year (=12 months). It must beat the index the next year in order to have a higher ER than 0.3% for the next year.
This above will eliminate so many funds :-)

I don't see any reason to own BRK.A
SPY beat it easily for 1-3-5-10 years and with lower voltility.

See this link in inprivate browsing window for explanation:
https://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/news/2020/11/19/t-rowe-price-to-launch-new-investment-subsidiary.html

Citing data from EPFR, the bank said inflows into global stocks in the last two weeks soared to $71.4 billion, the biggest ever. The flows were led by U.S. and emerging market stocks.
Still, investors were not ready to pull the plug on high-flying technology stocks, which saw $2.4 billion inflows last week. BofA said the feedback was “we’re on it (the rotation to value stocks), but we ain’t selling tech”.
Value stocks, typically companies that are more sensitive to economic cycles, have been soaring since Pfizer’s announcement earlier this month of positive data from its vaccine trial, raising hopes of an economic recovery.

https://reuters.com/article/us-markets-flows-bofa/investors-rush-to-buy-equities-dump-gold-in-vaccine-euphoria-idUSKBN2800RO
Advances in market indices have broaden to smaller caps and overseas. If this a forward looking view of 2021, perhaps there is light at the end of the pandemic tunnel. What do you think?

I received email yesterday from TRP about this but had been too occupied to take a close look at this (or much of anything else). Structurally, it looks like the parent company, T. Rowe Price Group (TROW) is "merely" splitting its investment management subsidiary T. Rowe Price Associates into two separate RIAs. The operations of the funds themselves should not be affected, except insofar as some of them will now be contracting with T. Rowe Price Investment Management instead of T. Rowe Price Associates for fund management services.
It's not unusual for fund companies to have separate teams including managers and analysts to oversee different groups of funds (see, e.g. Baird). Still, the "Chinese wall" that TRP is establishing seems different.
The closest structure that comes to my mind is the separate facility Janus set up for Bill Gross. And we all know how well that went. Though Gross was strapped for resources: "Indeed, he [was] starting with just a handful of associates supporting him." I expect the new T. Rowe Price firm to be on better footing.

The cap gains in 2018 and 2019 (there were no dividend distributions) did average 6%+, but over four years I can't see how, even after adding income divs and cap gains together, one could average 6%.
My data source is Fidelity's distribution page for the fund. I've verified the total distribution figures at the source: https://knowledgeleadersfunds.com/

Thank you, @msf
I looked at your sources, and something is not right on the SA GAVIX Dividend TAB.
Regards, Lynn

Here’s M*’s take on the split: https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1011769/is-t-rowes-split-a-smart-way-to-handle-growth

Looks like they want to create seperately managed account-type services based around some of their strategies. Other reporting makes it sound like these advisors will continue to advise/run their mutual funds despite being in this new organization. (I also own large amounts of PRWCX and am curious!)
More @ https://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/news/2020/11/19/t-rowe-price-to-launch-new-investment-subsidiary.html

FINALLY
Just know Quicken added ability to make 10 customized Asset classes in addition to old standard Asset Classes. "Investing goals " and "security type" are unchanged
Will help but no way to make sub classes ( ie Munis under Bonds) nor to breakdown % within classes or within other descriptions. ie run a report of Bonds broken down by type or duration, equities by type etc. You can jury rig this by only searching on one asset type or security type at a time but cumbersome

https://www.troweprice.com/content/dam/trowecorp/Press_Release_USEQI2020_US_Mutual_Fund.pdf
I own PRWCX, which is involved. Maybe one or two others. My eyes glazed over...

@Sven, I re-entered the link above...see if that works for you.

Some of those subsidiaries--Geico, Duracell, See's Candies--

Just as Berkshire owns and controls entire businesses, so does See's in turn:

See's Candies owns and operates all of our own retail shops. We do not sell franchises, but we do offer a Licensee Program that allows businesses who meet our selling profile to offer See's products in their stores.

https://www.sees.com/help/faqs/
There's one exception to that. A See's retail shop opened three years ago in Greenwich Village in NY. Unlike all its other stores, this is a joint venture between Buffett and the NY owner.
https://www.villagevoice.com/2017/03/21/sample-ready-sees-candies-finally-arrives-in-nyc/
A bit of trivia on this trivia: I believe the corner that the store is near is the corner Joni Mitchell wrote about in her song "For Free". I caught an old video where Ms. Mitchell said it happened at 6th and 8th. There is no 6th St and 8th Ave intersection, so it must have been 8th St and 6th Ave.

As The Shadow has previously noted on this board, DFA is rolling out new ETFs.
However, Heather Bell @ ETF.com observes that there is a newish wrinkle to DFA's announcement. [emphasis added]

Don’t expect DFAU [US Core Equity] and DFAI [International Core Equity] to be the only DFA ETFs for very long, however. The firm just filed with the SEC to convert six of its tax-managed mutual funds into ETFs. That has never been done before, but at least one other firm, Guinness Atkinson, is attempting a similar conversion with one of its mutual funds.

Earlier this month, David provided an update on the G/A conversion, which he originally discussed in his June 2020 MFO article.

The idea of sunk costs applies as much to liquid assets like fund shares as to less liquid assets like the real estate mentioned in the article.
Once you invest $1K in a fund, that cash is gone; what you have is N shares. Aside from tax implications, there's no reason to continue holding shares until you break even. Whether you are up 20% or down 10% doesn't matter, because that calculation is based on a sunk cost that you can't do anything about. What matters is whether the fund is something you would buy today.
The same holds true for individual bonds. Again disregard tax and transaction costs for simplicity. If you hold to maturity, you won't "lose money". But whatever you paid for the bond is gone. What you have today is a bond with a given coupon and a given maturity (or call) date and a current market price. The question is not whether you have lost money to date, but rather would you buy that same bond today at its current price? If not, if you could do better elsewhere, then why continue holding the bond?
Of course transaction costs and tax implications shouldn't be ignored. They add friction, so that it's not enough to say you could do something better with the value of the asset. A change has to make enough of an improvement to overcome that friction. Hence instead of two choices, buy or sell, there are three options, buy, sell, or hold.

+1 @bee. There is that.

@FD1000. Control. Less bullshit.

Please let me know where is the BS, be specific.
============
Fred495: That's all well and good, FD, but why do you keep bringing up PRWCX when it is closed to new investors
First, I have posted about VLAIX several times and said it was a good fund. See one (example)
Second, many investors I know own PRWCX and why I still mention it.