@bee, thank you for the detail posting. Got my homework for the weekend. Is M* portfolio manager is still available at T. Rowe Price? Lately the Portfolio X-ray tool is only available when the total asset exceed $50K.

I began reading a white paper from Schwab this weekend and this quote caught my eye:

In 1986, Gary Brinson, Randolph Hood and Gilbert Beebower studied the allocations of 91 pension funds and concluded that asset allocation decisions, on average, explained more than 90% of pension fund risk, as measured by the volatility of returns over time

Source:Schwab Intelligent Portfolios™ Asset Allocation White Paper
https://intelligent.schwab.com/public/intelligent/insights/whitepapers/asset-allocation.html
Also, I believe @MikeM invests a portion of his portfolio with SIP™ (mentioned in this thread):
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/97608/#Comment_97608
Obviously a dated quote (1986), but probably still true today.
Question: Where does one turn to for Pension fund information?
I review my pension fund's performance periodically. It is state run and has a easy to access website (linked below).
My plan going forward is to benchmark my personal non- professional portfolio against my pension fund's results. There is usually a delay of a month or two for their results to post on the state's website, but for my purposes (quarterly/yearly reviews) this delay shouldn't be a big problem.
As of Feb 28, 2018:

My YTD Performance (through 4/27/2018):

Further, I like to also compare the pension fund's allocation to mine (I use M* Portfolio Manager). The pension fund's allocations are as follows:
Notice that they have a Policy Wt and and upper and lower Range for that policy weighting.

Via M* Portfolio manager (free service through T Rowe Price) my top 10 Holdings (70% of assets):

Going forward, as I become more risk averse (moving into retirement), I plan to lean on this professionally run pension information as a benchmark to my personal investing. I am no where near as diversified as the pension fund, so I will continue researching good investment choices for my portfolio.
Pension fund is linked here:
ott.ct.gov/pensionfunds_overview.html
Fund Performance Page:
ott.ct.gov/pensiondocs/fundperf/FundPerformance02282018.pdf

Obviously counter intuitive, but down markets are buying opportunities. For long term investors, down markets are the most important "buy & hold" time frames for investing success.
In periods of market stress (I'd mentally try and change this wording to market opportunity), non-correlated assets, that have a higher relative value than equities, can help re-balance portfolios and provide downside risk when equities sell off severely.
Cash or "near cash"(ST Treasuries):
1. You can spend cash to get you through the stressful period instead of selling equities low... Cash is what you spend so you can "hold" equities long term.
2. You can "buy" opportunistically with cash when equities are relatively low... The term "Cash is King" fits well here.
Gold (as part of a basket of commodities):

It may take a substantial allocation to commodities to enhance the risk-adjusted returns of a balanced portfolio. Our third graph shows the performance of four hypothetical balanced portfolios over the last 30 years and how they might have been affected by the introduction of a 10% stake in commodities. Only one portfolio—the 90% stock/10% bond portfolio, adjusted to become 81% stocks/9% bonds/10% commodities—would have recorded improved risk-adjusted returns, and the improvement would have been marginal. An allocation to commodities would have increased the volatility of a bond-heavy portfolio and would have reduced returns across the board.

Source:
researchcommentary/article/InvComVIPSCommodityInvestments

Articles related to Non-Correlated Assets & Portfolio Risk:
Long Term Bonds (VUSTX):
The Best Diversifier Has Been the Simplest

Bonds Get It Done
As you can see, the (U.S. OE) long-government category is the only category with a strong negative correlation with both the U.S. large-blend and foreign large-blend equity categories, as well as the moderate-allocation category. That's not just a phenomenon of the bull market, either. While the correlation between long-government bonds and stocks isn't quite as strongly negative during the trailing 10-year period as it has been in the past three years, it's still the most negative relationship depicted on the 10-year chart.

Article:
morningstar.com/articles/697751/the-best-diversifier-has-been-the-simplest.html
Asset Allocation White paper from Schwab:

This paper outlines the appropriate asset mix, based on that evaluation, for different types of investors and explains the process of constructing a diversified portfolio.

https://intelligent.schwab.com/public/intelligent/insights/whitepapers/asset-allocation.html
Finally, will their be a place for a fund like Permanent Portfolio (PRPFX) as we move forward?
is-the-permanent-portfolio-permanently-broken

Hello,
This week was much the same as the week before with Old_Skeet's market barometer closing the week with a reading of 154 (boarderline between fair value and undervalued). The 2/10 treasury yield spread narrowed a bit from 0.51 to 0.47 indicating that the yield curve flattened a bit more. The short interest for the 500 Index remains at 1.6 days to cover. Starting in May an interest rate feed will be added to the barometer as a secondary feed now that interest rates seem to be having an influence on the markets. The primary feeds remain the same and consist of an earnings feed, a breath feed and a technical score feed.
For the past week the things that worked best, for me, were my value funds found in the growth & income area of my portfolio along with my infrastructure fund found in the growth area.
Have a good week ... and, I wish all "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet

MSAUX is available through Fidelity load-waived with a minimum initial investment of $2,500.00

Vanguard Article:

History suggests that commodity-related investments may at least partially hedge the risk of inflation. It also suggests that exposure to metals, agricultural products, oil and gas, and other hard assets can help to diversify portfolios of stocks and bonds. So why do commodities account, on average, for just 2%–4% of pension funds and nonprofit investment portfolios?1 And why does Vanguard include them in some multi-asset funds but not others?

Findings:

It may take a substantial allocation to commodities to enhance the risk-adjusted returns of a balanced portfolio. Our third graph shows the performance of four hypothetical balanced portfolios over the last 30 years and how they might have been affected by the introduction of a 10% stake in commodities. Only one portfolio—the 90% stock/10% bond portfolio, adjusted to become 81% stocks/9% bonds/10% commodities—would have recorded improved risk-adjusted returns, and the improvement would have been marginal. An allocation to commodities would have increased the volatility of a bond-heavy portfolio and would have reduced returns across the board.

What Vanguard Funds hold commodities?

Only two Vanguard funds, both specialty offerings, tend to invest in commodity futures. As of December 31, 2017, our Alternative Strategies Fund had a target commodities allocation of 20% of net assets, and our Managed Payout Fund had less than 5% of assets invested in commodity futures

Source:
researchcommentary/article/InvComVIPSCommodityInvestments

An add short write regarding top 5 most promising A.I. companies, which have been discussed a bit in this thread. But, a few extra added info pieces via video, too.
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/268342-the-5-most-promising-companies-in-ai-development

So this is way Social is actually Anti-Social. Opinion is News. Facts are Twisted. Everything is true. Nothing is true. Fake News.
Examples...
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/early-retirement-may-be-the-kiss-of-death-study-finds_us_57221aa3e4b01a5ebde49eff
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18952037
https://hbr.org/2016/10/youre-likely-to-live-longer-if-you-retire-after-65
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-23/americans-are-retiring-later-dying-sooner-and-sicker-in-between
If I recall correctly, the Dr. Wu ANALysis in Hardvard Business Review was twisted in another article to reach conclusion SS and M are overfunded. However, I can't find that article right now.

Not sure why @Ted decided to post this - but I personally enjoy these Off Topic posts. Watching my money resting comfortably / growing in a handfull of funds day in and day out wouldn’t make very interesting conversation. Doing a little traveling - so this contribution isn’t well researched and can’t follow up. Seems to be a lot of confusion re Amazon and the reported pay to workers. Just a few observations.
The first linked article comments on the reported yearly medium compensation of Amazon workers and also contains some refutation by Bezos. He contends those numbers include many overseas workers where compensation levels are much less than in the U.S. (Yep - having tried to work out issues with employees who sounded like they were in India and could barely speak English, I’d say many are overseas.). Bezos also contends that the low numbers cited actually included part time workers. Further, he contends many receive health care and other additional benefits. Additionally, he puts the average hourly wage of Amazon’s U.S. warehouse workers at $15 per hour - higher than earlier reports suggest. I dunno. Just trying to paint with a broader brush.http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2018/04/23/amazon-employees-median-pay/
As other (media) observers have noted in recent days, those very low reported pay figures don’t seem consistent with Amazon’s large cloud computing business. Unlike warehouse workers, whom I envision packing and labeling boxes, cloud computing would seem more dependent on highly skilled technical workers. This article alludes to the size of that growing business. So, likely, the numbers that are flying around pertain only to the fulfillment center employees. http://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-cloud-bigger-than-microsoft-google-ibm-combined-2016-10
The third article notes that even the CIA uses Amazon’s cloud computing capabilities. And $28,000 per year hardly seems appealing to those handling our nations top secrets. Just doesn’t sound right. (It’s actually about half of what one reported government high security phone booth cost.) :) https://www.nextgov.com/it-modernization/2017/11/amazon-web-services-announces-secret-cloud-region-cia/142662/
All this makes me think that that $28,000 medium figure pertains only to warehouse (read “low skilled”) workers. Perhaps somebody has the time or research savvy to sort all this out.

some of these are pretty easy and have been bruited for years
https://www.kiplinger.com/article/retirement/T051-C000-S002-ways-to-fix-social-security.html
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2014/11/14/5-potential-social-security-fixes

@davidrmoran, nice addition. Not only are safe withdrawal rates important, but (the ORP calculator) optimally selects which savings to spend first to maximize tax efficiencies.
From the ORP website:

The Optimal Retirement Income Planner (ORP) uses the facts of your individual situation to compute a tax-efficient savings withdrawal schedule that maximizes your retirement disposable income. ORP uses the same Linear Programming technology that Operations Research practitioners have, for more than 50 years, been using to manage oil refineries, blend chicken feed, schedule air line crews, schedule corn harvesting, timber harvesting, and now, retirement planning.

ORP Calculator:
https://i-orp.com/fees/index.html

FYI: All signs point to gold. The safe haven metal took a hit as bond rates jumped in the fourth-quarter of 2016, but has been trending higher despite the rise in real interest rates. Gold bulls should take note of how gold prices have behaved in relation to long-term treasury bonds because they appear to be behaving differently than they have in the past.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/commodities-now-all-roads-lead-to-gold-1524762275
http://www.cetusnews.com/business/Commodities-Now--All-Roads-Lead-to-Gold-.H1QDfBuYKJ6G.html

FYI: Below is one of the many charts included in this week’s Sector Snapshot, which highlights the percentage of stocks in each S&P 500 sector that are trading above their 50-day moving averages. As shown, breadth for the S&P 500 remains below 50% with 45% of stocks in the index currently above their 50-DMAs. Unfortunately, the key cyclical sectors of the market like Industrials, Consumer Discretionary, Technology, and Financials all have readings below 45%.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bespokepremium.com/sector-snapshot/bespokes-sector-snapshot-42618/

@bee, thanks. The first one seems to be the one that best follows the idea of seeing how different portfolio strategies compare.
With the managed futures link, beware of investment costs. Nearly all papers/simulations are done without considering costs. These days, that's not unreasonable, with index funds costing a handful of basis points. Managed futures are different. The paper cited within that column specifically refers to M*'s managed future funds as a way of implementing. M* puts the average cost of these funds around 2%. If you take 10% of that (the proposal was to allocate 10% of the portfolio to managed futures), you've reduced your returns by 0.2%. Since the simulated advantage of the portfolio (over a 50/50 stock/bond portfolio) was 0.5%, this advantage is roughly cut in half after considering costs. Still worth a look.
I'm still perusing the last couple. (You should correct the last link, it includes an extra http : // at the end). I like the overview in that paper. It mentions some papers that describe a method for adjusting next year's withdrawal based on the probability of success from that point forward.
I'm going to have to spend some time digesting its Withdrawal Efficiency Ratio (WER). The paper asserts that this incorporates both maximizing income and minimizing the odds of running out of money. The term for this is an "objective function". It mathematically encapsulates what is to be optimized. That reduces the problem to a search exercise - find the portfolio strategy that maximizes WER.
It should be apparent that maximizing income and minimizing the odds of running out are in conflict. You don't invest 100% in stocks, because there's a good chance that a bear market could come along and wipe you out in retirement. But if it doesn't, that's how you maximize your income - higher income with greater odds of failure. I'm not sure yet to how WER balances these objectives. My own objective function would be one that maximizes income subject to the constraint that the chance of failure is 0.

@msf, this article reminded me of your forgetfulness:
Seeking Alpha Article:
long-term-growing-income-open-end-mutual-fund-possible
Also came across this strategy,
Adding Manage futures to a retiree's safe withdrawal plan:
trend-following-managed-futures-safe-withdrawal-rates/

@Old_Joe, we are all children and GrandPa knows best
And the median income of Amazon employee is $28,500. This child knows "median" means HALF of Amazon workers make less than quoted number. So just like McDonald's and Walmart, Amazon is the beneficiary of the largess of the US Govt so companies can simply employ people on food stamps.

Couple other things about this etf/the fund company in general:
1)I think this was the first fund/etf to own bitcoin. I think they began buying in 2015. The bitcoin helped it to return better than 80% last year. Bitcoin however is less than 1% of the fund currently. It made it to close to 10% various times last year.
2)It is not simply a tech fund but instead a tech/biotech etf. The biotech is the reason why its performance in 2015 and 2016 was not so hot. Biotech crashed in 2015 and didnt really come back fully until end of 2016 beginning of 2017.
3) The .75% ER is around average for actively managed etfs.
4)It is definitely not the place to be if a large market correction is in the offing.

@msf, even a well diversified allocation fund (in this case a retirement fund) IMHO still poses risks. My thinking (not @MikeM) is to understand the risks that haven't been properly diversified away or hedged very well by the fund's construction.
For example, many retirement date funds do a poor job of diversifying away equity draw down risk during severe market pull backs. Many other allocation funds are guilty of this as well, including retirement funds. To mitigate this risk, additional non-correlated assets...commodities (including gold), RE, and specific bonds...act as an equity hedge during these serve draw down periods (flight to safety).
Also, sequence of return risk (withdrawing from a single retirement fund) might be another reason to own a "near cash" / "low volatility" fund to serve as "a place to withdraw from", especially when the equity market under performs for extended periods of time.
Further thoughts:
PRPFX was the poster child as an "all weather fund" for a very long time until (commodities & PM) tanked. I'm wondering if it might not be a bad entry point into PRPFX if one believes commodities have bottomed.
Anyway, using Portfolio Visualizer, I combined BTTRX, PRPFX and TRRCX (portfolio three) as an example of adding 2 funds to help smooth out TRRCX. I have to admit that over the long term TRRCX rebounded nicely all by itself (portfolio 2).
Chart:

FYI: A swift rise in bond yields in 2018 has sent fixed-income investors scrambling, with major categories of bond exchange-traded funds seeing steep outflows, while other groups have found favor.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/investors-are-retreating-from-these-bond-etfs-as-yields-rise-2018-04-25/print

"So tell us something "special" about BIVRX."
What caught my eye was the +6.8% return in 4Q 2017, followed by YTD +3.45 return.
Not too many funds are up much YTD with all this market volatility. Does that make it a good fund? No way.
Its just something "alternative" to watch. Most of the L/S funds tend to flare out.
P.S. Another alt fund I've been stalking is "Absolute Convertible Arbitrage Fund" (ARBIX). Its very tame and has been pretty steady. But similar to BIVRX, its new and unproven.