Hello metfan
We do have VWO and EEM
We want to add Mathews Asia, or SFGI, maybe next on our buy lists
Here you go
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/2071/how-do-you-invest-in-china

PRIDX is still closed to new investors. Look at TBGVX. MDIDX RPICX (See if there isn't a different share class that will let you in for less than $1M..... PRCNX ?)

Here is my problem with this article
1) I appreciate his explanation but I don't think an average and above investor should buy single bond. I'm mainly a bond investor and always bought mutual funds. It's easy, cheaper and I can switch any time.
2) Munis is one of my biggest category sometimes a huge % like now. The chance I will invest in the article choices are slim. I like HY Munis. A 5 year chart (link) is all you need. BTW, I sold all my munis at the end of 02/2020 and started buying on 04/2020.

Jobs gone forever, yep.
.....Basically, the gap will increase and create more problems

Yes. This all seems probable. Which just makes it more important to implement programs that will assist those who have been displaced to transition to a new place in a changed post-covid world.

Here's the prospectus supplement announcing the change from diversified to non-diversified (and the vote required). The funds affected are "Vanguard U.S. Growth Fund, Vanguard Health Care Fund, Vanguard Energy Fund, VVIF – Growth Portfolio, and VVIF – Real Estate Index Portfolio "
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/52848/000168386320012214/f6514d1.htm
IMHO it's reasonable if not expected for sector funds to be non-diversified since they are already focused and they have far fewer securities to select from.
As to US Growth, ISTM that this change highlights a potential problem with funds that use multiple management firms. While each firm is selected for its style of investing, and they are intended to be complementary, they may overlap on the selection of individual securities.
Usually, even if each firm's style is focused (e.g. Jackson Square choosing 25-30 securities), a given security a firm selects can't constitute a large part of the whole fund portfolio. But, as alluded to by @WABAC, if there are "obvious" securities such as Amazon that most of the managers would independently select (regardless of investment style), then the fund could wind up holding too much of those securities.
There are a couple of ways around this. One is to weight each manager's sleeve so that the ones with heavily concentrated portfolios don't have too much influence. The other is to coordinate their sleeves or put caps on how much they can invest in a given security. The latter impedes their style and this is what it sounds like Vanguard is concerned about.
To get a sense of how three of the management teams function, one can look at PGIM Jennison Growth PJFAX (54 stocks; Amazon, Microsoft, Apple over 5%), Jackson Square-managed DUGAX (26 stocks; Microsoft, Amazon, and Visa over 5%), and Baillie Guifford US Equity Growth BGGSX (42 stocks; Amazon, Shopify, and Tesla over 9½%).
Combined, these three managers used to control 50% of the fund (with Vanguard Quant and Wellington dividing the rest). After the merger with Vanguard Morgan Growth, they control 58% of the fund. It's gotten hard to keep holdings under 5% without cramping their styles.
Figuring that this ballot measure is going to pass no matter what all the small investors vote, the more pragmatic question is: do you stay or walk? IMHO these are all fine management companies. But the portfolio holds all the usual suspects in spades. Maybe that's good, if only 5% of companies are worth owning. Or maybe you want to invest in a more wide ranging fund.

Jobs gone forever, yep. I worked over 35 in IT and can tell you that the systems I coded and implemented were faster, better and cheaper than humans. So I knew it's coming in the 80" already.
These processes got faster and better and why many can't compete and lost their jobs. Add to it globalization and now you can hire cheaper labor in other countries.
If you are part of STEM(link) you will do OK. Most others may be in trouble.
The next step is the middle class and up will start losing their jobs too. Think professions such as investment career: thousands got fired, how long can you charge too much about nothing, real estate: commission FINALLY are been cut to 5-4 and now 3% (Redfin will sell your house for just 4% and if you buy thru them will pay you 1%), many other white collar jobs in travel and more will be gone. If you can fix things (Plumbing, AC, vehicles) you will be ok too.
Basically, the gap will increase and create more problems
So, if you are crazy about history and go to university, you better pick another major. I gave my kids this option. We will pay for your tuition only if you select one major that we think you have a chance to find a job, and we only pay for 4 year, so you better get serious. My daughter had a hard time, and she selected 3 majors (2 what she wanted and third for her dad) and eventually got PHD in third and loves it now. Now tell me who is your daddy?

what's to study?
ask fd1k
I am not the only investor who bailed (not march, but mid-may) and is waiting since

We are already seeing price inflation in real estate prices as a result of low interest rates (fed policy).
It doesn't look like that's been the case over the past three years. Though what's missing from the graph below is median square footage. The multi-decade trend has been toward larger houses, but I believe the trend over the past few years has been slightly downward. Factor that in and you might see a bit of inflation per square foot.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=ubtE
Obviously housing trends vary widely from region to region, so YMMV.
Also, "The CPI also does not include investment items, such as stocks, bonds, real estate ..."
https://www.bls.gov/cpi/questions-and-answers.htm#Question_10
Real estate prices are incorporated into the CPI only indirectly, to the extent that they affect the cost of shelter:

Housing units are not in the CPI market basket. Like most other economic series, the CPI views housing units as capital (or investment) goods and not as consumption items. Spending to purchase and improve houses and other housing units is investment and not consumption. Shelter, the service the housing units provide, is the relevant consumption item for the CPI. The cost of shelter for renter-occupied housing is rent. For an owner-occupied unit, the cost of shelter is the implicit rent that owner occupants would have to pay if they were renting their homes.

https://www.bls.gov/cpi/factsheets/owners-equivalent-rent-and-rent.pdf

VWUSX currently has 251 holdings, the top 10 representing 40% of the portfolio.
MFOP shows that in its 60+ year life, the fund has returned -0.1% APR vs. the S&P 500 and its MFO Risk and MFO Rating both as 1 (Worst).
OTOH its more recent performance shows that its 10, 5, 3, 1, and YTD TR has outperformed the Index by 4.2, 6, 12.1, 27.4, and YTD 11.3% as a "diversified" portfolio but one "less differentiated from its benchmark (the Russell 1000 Growth Index) and becoming more like the Index, according to M*. Its active share percentage has dropped.
So that may be one reason why Vanguard is proposing the change IDK.
Also note that the fund has five portfolio advisers, not a single PM.
It will be interesting to see how it performs as a non-diversified product if the shareholders approve it. I don't own the fund.

Hi Sir @_Catch22 -
just what the 'Doctor' ordered
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/14/retail-sales-july-2020.html
stay safe

Due to elevated asset valuations (stocks & bonds) I'm now back to a cash build mode while I await the next stock market pullback (5% to 10% range, or better, from 52 week high). In addition, I'd like to see a dividend yield for the S&P 500 Index in the 2.0+% range. Although growth has been where the momentum has been of late I'm thinking better value can presently be had in value stocks over their growth cousins.
For the past month a good number of my value type funds have been the better performers within my portfolio with some having dividend yields in the three to four percent range. Now being retired and an income focused investor two domestic value type funds that I own which are good dividend payers are SVAAX and IDIVX with yields of 4.2% and 3.7% respectively. In addition, they have returned better than ten percent over the past 90 days and are now starting to find some traction with returns in the five to six percent range over the past thiry days.
Another good dividend paying global fund that I favor, with a dividend yield of about 3.3%, which has had a three month return of better than twenty percent and a little better than six percent return over the past 30 days is EADIX. This fund is listed by M* as LCB but has a good number of growth stocks in it.

Just noticed the link to the original article was not included.....
https://apnews.com/89992979ca3c3ba72eb2cd31a9ca0e5d

Order placed to close out my VDIGX position as part of portfolio simplification. 14% gain since Feb.
Going into the rest of the year I expect to re-open and significantly fund a PRBLX holding as a core position in the OEF part of my portfolio.

25% of stores nearby outlet mall closed or facing bankruptcy including wifey favorite Nordstrom rack. So much sales now/get everything cheap. I am pleasantly surprised you still can get much for your dollar. Good news see many folks shopping and traffic steady.
The Waterpark closeby have at least +300 teenagers/kiddos teenagers no masks/ As Mr Rono stated > 90s% wear masks (even though mandatory or fine few hundreds)
10% need new tenants though at mall.

Once the economy picks back up inflation may as well. We are already seeing price inflation in real estate prices as a result of low interest rates (fed policy). Short duration TIPS seems like a way to hedge Inflation for the cash-like part of one's portfolio. Short Term TIPS have performed very well this year. VTIPX is up 7.45% YTD. VTIPX had a Max DD of about 1.57% that began in March and ended in May. In it's short history, Nov 2012, most of its gains have occurred in 2020.

This article discusses some of what needs our attention during the transformation in the economy now underway.

Jobs are fully back for the highest wage earners, but fewer than half the jobs lost this spring have returned for those making less than $20 an hour, according to a new labor data analysis by John Friedman, an economics professor at Brown University and co-director of Opportunity Insights. Though recessions almost always hit lower-wage workers the hardest, the pandemic is causing especially large gaps between rich and poor, and between White and minority households. It is also widening the gap between big and small businesses.
Some economists have started to call this a “K-shaped” recovery because of the diverging prospects for the rich and poor, and they say policy failures in Washington are exacerbating the problems.
“The stock market continues to reflect big businesses increasing their market share during #COVID19. If a small business closes, a larger business fills the void. We need to contemplate what this means for Main Street USA going forward. Is this really the future we want?” Cohn tweeted.

https://washingtonpost.com/business/2020/08/13/recession-is-over-rich-working-class-is-far-recovered/

Here is the link to the above story:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-small-subset-of-vanguard-investors-moved-entirely-into-cash-when-the-market-tumbled-heres-how-they-did-2020-08-13

Yeah his stuff was interesting --- but I hated how you had to log in to pull down the weekly report ... in 2016 (or 18, whenever it was) he should have been able to send it to subscribers via email. Forcing readers to login was inconvenient and I let the subscription lapse.

More Facebook! More Amazon! More Apple!
Just buy the NASDAQ 100.