M*'s at it again. Instant X-ray and Portfolio Manager are failing to identify the style of many funds. I just tested a few (T. Rowe Price seems to be particularly problematic):
PRWCX - 100% unknown
PRIDX - 100% unknown
FLPSX - 100% unknown
TRSGX - 16.39% LCV, 32.74% LCBlend, 29.97% LCG, and a smattering of others
So it's not just T. Rowe Price funds, and it's not all Price funds. Whatever it is could be an overnight problem. Just don't rely on what M* shows you for your portfolio now.

@hank : PRSIX appears to be holding close to 13.5 % cash at this time. Is this a (normal) % for cash or are they building some dry powder ?
Just wondering , Derf

@Derf - It may be a bit of an illusion. Lipper puts the stock holdings today at 40%, which is the fund’s target equity allocation. More likely, the cash buildup represents a retrenchment from bonds into cash / shorter duration securities. No doubt, however, they’ve also moved away from equities to a lesser extent (from a slightly overweight position).
Here’s what I’ve been able to dig up .....
From T. Rowe’s website on (April 14) https://www.troweprice.com/personal-investing/tools/fund-research/PRSIX / Click on “Portfolio” option at top.

Domestic Bond 26.90%
Domestic Stock 26.40%
Foreign Bonds 16.10%
Foreign Stock 13.40%
Cash 10.80%
Other 5.80%
Convertibles 0.50%
Preferred Stock 0.10%
Here’s the fund’s Semi-Annual Report from November 2020. Reserves are listed at 10%. Contains a foot-note stating that reserves include the “cash underlying futures positions such as the Russell 2000 futures” https://www.troweprice.com/literature/public/country/us/language/en/literature-type/semi-annual-report/sub-type/mf?productCode=PSI¤cy
Here’s its published March 31, 2021 update . https://www.troweprice.com/literature/public/country/us/language/en/literature-type/portfolio-update/sub-type/portfolio-update?productCode=PSI¤cy=USD
Curiously, above March update puts “cash benchmarked” at 23%. Some of the 23% reflects cash underlying futures positions . I’d take that 23% number with a large grain of salt. Especially since It appears the linked March 31 report was intended for professionals and not ndividual investors. Stated cash gets “funky” sometimes when funds engage in derivatives, short sales, futures trading, etc. (all a bit beyond my comprehension).
Lipper puts cash now at 14%. And M* has it at 13.5%. T. Rowe’s own investor website lists cash as 10.8%.
Note: Money managers and individuals generally have shifted from longer duration bonds into shorter duration bonds, and cash / cash alternatives over the past 3 months. So the cash build for PRSIX likely reflects a similar move by PRSIX’s managers.
*** I’m still puzzled by that high “benchmarked cash”. Wondering if it might reference the cash held by the fund’s benchmark index)? I can’t imagine one of their conservative allocation funds getting that high. TRRIX, by comparison, has virtually no cash, preferring to use intermediate / short duration TIPS in that spot.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxbusiness.com/markets/coinbase-ipo-cryptos-first-what-to-know.amp
https://www.businessinsider.com/dogecoin-price-today-record-high-market-capitalization-doge-meme-cryptocurrency-2021-4?amp
Going off the roof
Buy more???
Don't let train leave station /left behind...don't be last one leaving train

@hank : PRSIX appears to be holding close to 13.5 % cash at this time. Is this a (normal) % for cash or are they building some dry powder ?
Just wondering , Derf

This s a great thread with a lot of good analysis. Thanks for the replies to my post. Wanted to circle back on my comment re: MGGPX vs. PRGSX. After reviewing it further... I think one big reason I selected MG over PRG was the turnover. T Rowe’s turnover is 112% vs Morgan’s 22%. Perhaps I’m missing other criteria. But that was a big one when I first bought.

@fred495 ...
PRSIX is where I’d like to be someday when I’m too old to know which end is up - or much less care. One of T. Rowe’s strengths is their intelligent macro-reads and ability to steer funds like that in the right direction. Of course, they have a lot of good funds to start with. (Currently, I’m only 7-8% allocated to it.)
My take (a bit overstated) on TMSRX: a Rube Goldberg concoction, consisting of 5 different managers each pulling in a slightly different direction with the expectation that at least 1 or 2 of them will get it right at any particular time. Because it can short stocks or bonds, expenses run high. Difficult trick to pull off. They’ve done a great job keeping it above water. It’s nice to own because it will dampen down your overall volatility by moving differently than the stock / bond markets quite frequently. Don’t expect to make a lot with it. (It’s about 18% of my holdings.)
Of the two I mentioned, TMSRX is probably “less risky” in that it shouldn’t fall as far in a bad market. But PRSIX is pretty tame and should generate at least a couple more percentage points on the upside over 5-10 year stretches.
BTW - A very close fund to PRSIX is TRRIX. My take is that the former is slightly more aggressively positioned.

I can't link the article because of a paywall. Sorry. Read this on my brokerage account page.
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Market participants this week staked out their positions on how to fix systemic risks in the $4.9 trillion U.S. money market fund industry, in what is shaping up to be the first big fight for U.S. President Joe Biden's financial regulators.
After taxpayers bailed them out for the second time in 12 years during the pandemic-induced turmoil in March 2020, money market funds - a key source of short-term corporate and municipal funding - are facing a regulatory reckoning which could potentially change the industry beyond all recognition."
BY PETE SCHROEDER AND MICHELLE PRICE, REUTERS - 1:23 PM ET 4/13/2021

Just for the h*** of it, last night I sorted my 16 funds from “best” to “worst.” Very unscientific. No particular criteria other than my perception of potential risk / reward - much gained looking at Yahoo’s excellent historical data. I think that for the 10 minutes or less it took, it’s a useful endeavor. (#3 and #5 probably aren’t available thru Fidelity.)
1. PRWCX
2. PRSIX
3. DODBX
4. PRPFX
5. DODLX
(I realize #4 is a contentious pick and have no desire to argue my case)
At the bottom of the heap were cash equivalent / short term bond funds like TRBUX and TSDLX. It’s hard to justify paying an ER for their minuscule return.
Sorry - Just remembered PRWCX isn’t available - period - unless you already own it.
RPGAX came in #6 on the list. I think over time it will outperform. But the internationals haven’t kept pace with domestic. I doubt the hedge fund exposure to date has added little more than an extra layer of fees. Things do and will change.

@Fred TMSRX's have been low, but maximum draw down was only 4.7% during the past three years. One year return is 18% and three year return is 5.4%. Their goal, if I remember correctly, is to make 6% plus the rate of inflation over time.
For me, TMSRX fits in as a low risk fund that will not lose much and will make decent returns. It fits in between bonds and stocks. Below are the funds that I am researching now. During changes in market conditions they do better or worse. I look at mixing and matching to have a consistent performance over time.
CRAAX, TMSRX, FMSDX, CTFAX, ETIMX, GAVIX, MNBAX, RBBAX, VWIAX, VTINX

TMSRX's total returns have been a real disappointment so far this year:
1 Week = -0.4%
1 Month = -1.2%
3 Months = 0.1%
YTD = 0.4%
Just an observation, but the fund will stay on my watch list in the hopes that its performance will eventually show some improvement.
Fred

@Anna and @davidmoran,
Thanks for the great discussions about inflation.
The article below shows the estimate for consumer inflation came in higher than expected at 2.6% YOY in part due to higher oil prices.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/13/us-consumer-price-index-march-2021.html
High debt levels and aging demographics are deflationary. I don't expect a 1970's style high inflation, but I do think that supply chain delays, high stimulus, and pent up demand will increase inflation in the short to intermediate term.

@JonGaltIII
I worry about a 1970's style period of inflation. ...

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/blog/2021/04/12/pandemic-prices-assessing-inflation-in-the-months-and-years-ahead/

I used to spend Saturday morning reading Barron's and it was filled with lots of information. $12.50 per month is a reasonable for digital subscription. Will check again if I can get it on my iPad. I also subscribe to Apple News Plus for $10 per month and I get assess to many news publications. Some includes Barron's and Bloomberg, only give a few articles. I like to support many worthy news such as NPR.

Thanks for comment @Sven.
Sounds like some here manage portfolios exceeding 1-2 M. And I’d hazard a guess the vast majority are well into 6 figures. When managing that amount of $$, one need glean only a relatively small amount of market insight from a $10-$15 monthly subscription (to Barron’s or other publication) to make a meaningful difference in portfolio value over a year’s time frame.
*Amazon’s Barron’s Kindle Edition = $12.50 monthly.

FSRPX and FSMEX paid capital gains 4/9/21. I did finally see it posted on Fidelity's website. I'll check out M* thanks @DaveSch...good stuff...that worked:

“There will be growth in the spring!” So advised Chauncey Gardiner, brilliantly played by Peter Sellers in the classic 1979 film satire Being There. In actuality, he was the dimwitted Chance the gardener, who through a series of misunderstandings was seen as a savant of sorts and whose advice on economic stimulus was sought by the president of the United States.
As the first green buds finally begin to appear on trees hereabouts, there are manifestly signs of growth. And after the application of trillions of dollars of fiscal and monetary Miracle-Gro, plus roughly one-third of the U.S. population having gotten at least one vaccination jab, it should be no surprise that things are blooming and, in many cases, booming.”
From: Up & Down Wall Street by Randall Forsyth - Barron’s April 12, 2021
Some quick & incomplete take-aways from Forsyth’s always engaging weekly column:
- The VIX (fear / volatility sentiment) has retreated to a relatively low 16.69 reading as of Friday.
- Investor sentiment (polling) is 60.8% Bullish / 16.7% Bearish (a contrarian indicator).
- A client of UBS reputedly placed a large options bet anticipating a significant increase in the VIX 3 months out.
- Extensive discussion of Federal debt / Fed Reserve policies / Potential Dollar reactions / Crypto & Gold

I found this very interesting and worth sharing.
...
https://theretirementmanifesto.com/your-bucket-strategy-questions-answered/

A good, common sense piece with a bit of substance to it. A few items there worth highlighting:
- Asset allocation. Rather than work with fixed percentages, the allocation is done by time: so many years in cash, so many years in bonds, and the remainder in equities. In his case, he came up with 63% (not 60%) in equities. He's actually got a pretty conservative cash (3 year) / bond (8 year) allocation. The cash/bond allocation lets you invest the remainder (however much that is) in equities without worrying about sequence of return risk, volatility "risk", etc.
- Annuities. He avoids the question of what bucket this income stream (or pensions, or SS) falls into. If one were targeting a particular asset allocation, then this question would matter. But because he's basing cash and bond allocations on how much extra income he needs, this question never arises.
He touches on annuity strategies, which seems beyond the scope of bucket strategies. But since he went there, it's worth reiterating that for many people, using retirement assets to defer SS until age 70 is the optimal strategy.
In a new paper summarized here, 401(k) assets would be used to automatically provide an income stream until age 70. A temporary life annuity can provide the same income stream while enhancing value with mortality credits. (The downside is that if you die before age 70, you don't get the full value of the temporary annuity.)
https://www.kitces.com/blog/understanding-the-role-of-mortality-credits-why-immediate-annuities-beat-bond-ladders-for-retirement-income/
- HSAs. He keeps his in cash, presumably to spend as expenses are incurred. For investing, he recommends bucket 3 (equities). My take is different - I suggest bucket 2.
HSAs are like Roth IRAs - withdrawals are tax-free - so long as one can pair them with past medical expenses. I would put my slower growing Roth-ish assets into HSAs to limit the risk that the HSAs grow too fast. You don't want more money in the HSAs than you can withdraw tax-free (not enough medical expenses). Keep the faster growing assets in the genuine Roth IRAs.

Congratulations. You have shown that Morningstar's software does not pass the Turing test.

What we're trying to do with quantitative analysis is to create an auto-generated report that provides the information to the investor as far as: what is the reason behind the rating, what are the inputs that drove the rating, whether it'd be positive or negative, and we've tried to kind of mimic the analyst style in the report. So, in the end we try to hope that the investor couldn't even tell that it was auto-generated versus written by an analyst.

https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1030233/how-to-use-the-morningstar-quantitative-rating-analysis
HAL, should I buy this fund?
I'm sorry Dave, I can't answer that.

It's a bit early for the 2021 postings, but CHTTX posted huge gains on 3/25 of what pretty much sums up as a split.

FYI and FWIW, below are excerpts from a somewhat confusing, at least to me, recent M* Quantitative Analysis Report.
On the one hand, M* claims that HMEZX has "a weak portfolio-management team" but, on the other hand, it also states that a "sign of strength at Highland is its management team, which boasts an average asset-weighted tenure of 15 years at the firm. This accumulation of experience builds confidence that the group can navigate a variety of market environments adeptly." Which is it? What am I missing?
"NexPoint Merger Arbitrage Z earns a Morningstar Quantitative Rating of Negative because of negative contributors including a weak portfolio-management team and a questionable investment process. [...]
Despite the portfolio managers with industry-standard experience and its longest-tenured manager's experience, the team managing NexPoint Merger Arbitrage Fund has a considerable number of weaknesses, warranting a Low People Pillar rating. The team is led by James D. Dondero, the longest-tenured manager on the strategy, who brings 23 years of industry experience. They’re also the named manager on eight additional funds, a total of $1.30 billion in assets. The funds have an average Morningstar Rating of 2.3 stars, demonstrating disappointing risk-adjusted performance. The team is small, but adequately equipped, with only two other supporting managers. Together, the three boast an average of nine years in the industry. [...]
Highland has a way to go to become an industry-standard steward, resulting in a Low Parent Pillar rating. Highland products are costlier than similarly distributed funds at other highly-rated asset managers, on average in the second most expensive quintile of category peers. The higher expense profile contributes negatively to the firm's overall stewardship rating and creates a larger performance hurdle. The firm has not had a durable fund lineup. Specifically, its five-year risk-adjusted success ratio demonstrates that only 21% of products both survived and beat their respective category average on a risk-adjusted basis,. A low success ratio not only indicates poor performance but also raises flags about a firm’s discipline around investment strategy and product development. A sign of strength at Highland is its management team, which boasts an average asset-weighted tenure of 15 years at the firm. This accumulation of experience builds confidence that the group can navigate a variety of market environments adeptly.
Mar 22, 2021"