PRGTX - T Rowe Price Global Technology, It was closed in 2017, it reopened this year.

Notes from the interview:
On the equity side... trading the gains in QQQ (Thank Q, Thank Q, Thank Q) into under valued allocations of Small Caps, Emerging Markets, and commodities.
On the Bond side... no longer a hedge for equity risk. 10 year treasury is at 0.7% . A 60/40 portfolio may successfully return 1- 3% over the next 10 years (Grantham has felt this way for the last 10 years). Retirees don't want a potential 50% equity side draw down.
Gold and commodities have upside potential of 10-12 % increase due to inflation pressure as a result of a secular weak dollar and price increases in resources (industrial output).
Be Bullish
- China Stocks & Asia Satellite Countries
- US Small Cap
- Commodities
- A weak dollar makes the rest of the world's markets strong with more stimulus on the way which may also be good for silver and gold.
- A Global approach to equities exposure might look like (25% US / 75% Foreign)

Stock valuations are at an all time high while bonds are at an all time low...where do we go from here and how will today's valuations impact your portfolio allocations going forward.
The Portfolio Puzzle of Our Lifetime

Koch Industries spends tons of money to buy the minds of people like wxman123. Obviously, successfully.

@wxman123

Climate change is real. Causation debatable

Follows the Fox News rationalization perfectly. For decades Fox and by proxy the fossil fuel industry, the views of which Fox follows to the letter, publicly denied climate change was happening even though internally the industry's own scientists knew otherwise. Now that the evidence the change is happening is irrefutable they try a different tactic of obfuscation. "We don't know the cause," except the evidence for that is irrefutable too to any climate scientist who isn't a paid industry shill or a nut. The cause is us, and curbing emissions matters.

I'd stick with ARKW and ARKG.

Sorry, wxman, but as a retired and somewhat conservative investor, ARKW's standard deviation of 29 and ARKG's of 36 are not exactly in my comfort zone. But, thanks anyway.
Good luck,
Fred

I'd at least hold off awhile with this new fund. It's not clear how it is managed and ISTM you are comparing its performance with the wrong benchmark.
Fidelity's prospectuses are typically vague, but this one more than usual. This is a fund of funds, but the prospectus doesn't make clear who is responsible for the asset allocations or even say anything about how they're done. I'll contrast it with the prospectus for FMRHX, another Fidelity fund of actively managed funds.
Investment strategies.
FMRHX: "The Adviser, under normal market conditions, will use an active asset allocation strategy to increase or decrease asset class exposures relative to the neutral asset allocations [previously specified] by up to 10%..."
FGDFX: silent. The only info I could find was in the SAI, where it says that "The fund may not purchase the securities of any issuer if, as a result, more than 25% of the fund's total assets would be invested in the securities of companies whose principal business activities are in the same industry." This doesn't really help understand the allocation among the underlying funds.
Investment Risks. Similar verbiage for both funds: "The fund is subject to risks resulting from the Adviser's asset allocation decisions." What decisions? By whom?
That gets us to the managers who are supposedly responsible for the asset allocation. It looks like Fidelity just threw the same eight managers at all the disruptor funds. Completely opaque as to who is steering which ship.
Is the ship being steered at all, or is it on autopilot? I looked at the latest monthly holding filing. That's a legal document, so it has to tell you what the fund is holding directly. That's different from Fidelity's sheet listing the securities it holds indirectly via the underlying funds.
The number of shares of the underlying funds are very similar. Given that the fund with the lowest value has the highest number of shares and so on down, the figures suggest that Fidelity is simply shooting for an even allocation (20%/fund) and periodically rebalancing. No asset allocation management, at least so far. This is a reason to wait - to see whether the fund really is on autopilot, or if it will change once it has more AUM.
As to the underlying holdings... Aside from the finance fund which is off in its own world, there's significant overlap among the underlying funds. Disregarding MasterCard (MA) and Capital One (COF) (which are in the finance fund), all of the other holdings in the top 15 are held by 2-3 of the underlying funds. Not unexpected, but it does call into question how much diversification you're getting.
Which brings us to the classification of this fund. I suspect M* classified it as LC Blend because it has to put new funds somewhere, and Fidelity didn't give any indication of how it would do asset allocation.
The underlying technology fund is 75% LCG. Communications is 53% LCG. Automation is 46% LCG. Medicine is slightly more LC blend (33%) than LCG (26%), but when you add in its MCG (23%) and SCG (4%), it's still a majority growth fund. Only Finance isn't a growth fund. But it's not the value fund one might expect, with only 22% invested in value, less than the 30% it has in growth stocks.
The fund as a whole is 45% LCG. Remember this is with a fairly neutral mix (finance currently constitutes 19.6% of the portfolio). So it seems fair to consider this a LCG fund, and those are the funds one might compare this with. Alternatively, one might compare it with some LCG global funds. This fund is 70/30 domestic/foreign. About 40% of the funds I could find with roughly this mix are world large stock (per M*).

BST or BSTZ or other CEFs might work as well. Also keep an eye on mutual fund expenses (loads, 12(b)-1s, annual expense ratios) ... not sure some of those listed are worth what they charge, even if they look kind of interesting.

Thanks @bee I’m locked-out of this one as I read Bloomberg several times daily (for market data) and it’s all too easy to exceed their cap on free access to stories. But, it’s an intriguing question nonetheless. Sure I remember them.
In around 1975-80 with double-digest inflation soaring and bank rates to savers paltry, average savers learned they could get extraordinarily high rates of return with MM funds. My first was from Deleware Investments - which no longer exists. 15-20% interest rates on short term savings in theses vehicles were prevalent and came with the “promise” (vs “guarantee”) of safety due to their $1 NAV. I even opened an account in one for my aging parents and gifted it to them. But, being children of the Great Depression, they quickly cashed it out and deposited the $$ in a local bank savings account - not trusting anyone from “out of town” to safeguard their money. (I could be wrong on this point ... but I think back than there were limits / controls set by government on the rates banks could pay savers.)
Low prevailing rates today plus tighter restrictions on how they invest have pretty much wrecked these once popular savings vehicles. There are repercussions still to be fully realized IMHO.
- Investors today are “reaching for yield” through less secure and more exotic cash substitutes.
- Investors are taking greater risks than they otherwise would in the equity arena.
- This has helped fuel a bubble in certain asset classes. Which ones is a matter of conjecture depending greatly on whom you ask and what their time horizon is.
Finally, early money market funds were to an extent precursors to the now widely diverse mutual fund offerings. To a degree, they helped break down public distrust / reticence towards riskier forms of investing (ie equity funds, precious metals, selling puts).

+1.

FGDFX is a new fund that M* places in the large blend category. I have been "test driving" the fund in my 2020 Challenge Portfolio over at the M* Discussion Forum with very encouraging results. Comparing it to SPY over its short history shows an excellent risk/reward profile, however the mangers are unknown to me:
Total Return Max DD Sharpe Std Dev
FGDFX 25.8% -3.1% 3.0 16.0
SPY 13.4 -6.1 1.7 15.5
According to Fidelity, the fund's "disruptive strategies seek to identify innovative developments that could signal new directions for delivering products and services to customers. Generally, these companies have or are developing new or unconventional ways of doing business that could disrupt and displace incumbents over time. This may include creating, providing, or contributing to new or expanded business models, value networks, pricing, and delivery of products and services."
Normally, FGDFX invests in assets of five Fidelity funds that concentrate in the following areas, respectively:
- automation
- communication
- finance
- medicine
- technology
I am considering using this rather intriguing new fund in my personal portfolio, perhaps up to a max. of 10%. Would appreciate comments or suggestions from investors in the fund, or others who may have followed or have knowledge of the fund.
Thanks,
Fred

Crash - Yes, reversion to the mean can take a really long time. In 1998, markets were screaming higher as we watched the dot.com bubble grow more and more (very frothy). In 1999, the markets marched even higher and the party continued (before reality finally hit in 2000).
So 2021 may well hold a solid year of market returns. But I feel like I've seen this movie before.

Rich valuations don't matter.... until they do. Markets correct, and this one will as well. For now, the bravado continues. We are waiting on another stimulus injection to keep the party going. Earnings mean nothing these days because the market is assuming a snap-back in 2021. That assumption may turn out to be folly.

Can you imagine what the unemployment rate would be if most of the on-line merchants were not hiring emergency staff to handle the pandemic business increase? Amazon alone has hired 427,300 new employees in the past ten months: that's 1400 people PER DAY, each and every day since January.
Source: NY Times

MSEGX, WCLD, ARKK, although the latter has some uncertainties with operational control in 2021.

Thanks! I rebalance in early January, always. Not always with the same goal in mind, now, in retirement. 80 high, 71 low temp in Kaneohe today. I was at the beach in Kailua yesterday. Nice, though quite breezy. But you don't feel any breeze in the water! Water temp was 80, too.
https://www.best-of-oahu.com/kailua-beach-park.html

@wxman123,
My comments were generic and not directed towards any particular political party or president.
You may be conflating the economy with the stock market.
They are not one and the same.
Values for some important economic indicators are listed below.
The U.S. unemployment rate was 6.9% for October which is nearly double the 3.5% rate in February.
Wage growth for 2020:
Jan: +4.27%
Feb: +4.67%
Mar: +0.75%
Apr: -6.64%
May: -3.66%
Jun: -1.54%
Jul: +0.07%
Aug: +1.08%
Sep: +1.89%
Oct: +2.11%
Quarterly GDP estimates for 2020:
Q1: -5.0%
Q2: -31.4%
Q3: +33.1%

The DOW is an archaic, price-weighted index which does not accurately represent the economy.
DOW 30K is not a great milestone and is of little significance.
This just happens to be a nice, round number that certain writers unjustifiably emphasized.
Also, the U.S. president generally doesn't deserve all the credit when the stock market performs well nor does he deserve all the blame when the market underperforms.
There are too many other factors involved.

Virtually every index is at a record high. The economy is doing better than anyone had a right to expect. Keep on with this denial nonsense, it's great for the GOP... right up there with "mostly peaceful protests" and "defund the police." Mark my words, the dems are going to be splintered with the Squad crew on one side and white elitist wanabees on the other. Meanwhile the GOP will pick up more minority voters over time to join with the heartland of the country, people who want safe streets and cash in their pocket rather than worrying about greenhouse gases.... and the suburban moms (who won the election for Biden, this time) will be wondering "what was I thinking." Nothing about this administration is going to benefit them.

+1

Sorry wxman123 but to me you implied that Dow 30K was some great achievement and all should be happy across the land. You failed to address how that's important to the average person on the street or the world in general. Also neither you, I or anyone else knows how the market would have performed had Hillary gotten elected but history shows that the markets do better under a democratic administration (Google it yourself) and the markets were already on the upswing during the last few years of the Obama administration. Lastly it seems that plenty of people including many world leaders like Mr. Kerry even if you don't. From what I've seen he does a credible job free of corruption and ethical transgressions. I'd settle just for that.

The fact that the DOW hit 30K is a great milestone and especially given the circumstances. There is a tremendous disparity between main street and wall street, true enough, but it's been that way for years. Trump didn't start the issue. Even if DOW 30K merely shows an economy that's holding it's own, that's still good. Operation Warp Speed, also good. Enterprise Zones, good. Paris Climate Treaty, Kerry's priority, maybe good for our grandkids but aside from that it's nothing more than interesting cocktail conversation for rich people who will be utterly unaffected by its economic consequences in the here and now. You are correct in that one can never prove what would have happened had circumstances been different, but all in all we are in a reasonable place as a country all things considered. What people who post about the supposed Trump disaster don't get is that they are as much a part of the problem as the other side in terms of divisiveness, which may be the biggest problem our country faces. Yes, Biden won, and I'm not going down the voter-fraud road, but there is a reason so many people still voted for Trump despite his notable flaws...and they are not all rednecks or idiots.