Call me a fool -- albeit one who sleeps well at night -- but i don't give a fig about beating the indexes. The indexes are topheavy with momentum players and subject to all sorts of pressures from funds and ETFs which make them (to me) artificial and not as trustworthy as folks think.
Give me active & well-allocated/managed, low-cost funds and selected quality individual stocks, let me pull down roughtly 6-8% growth rate per year with a portfolio diversified according to MY analytical due diligence, and I'll be happy. I don't want or *need* to wring every single nickel out of the market just because it's there for the taking. If that portfolio eeks out 10% or more because of the "rising tide" phenomenon, so be it, I won't complain. But I refuse to use indexes as the arbitrary sign of my investing 'success' or goal posts.

Thanks for the story. At around 1% returns on cash that’s an expensive seat cushion. :)
“ ‘If I’ve got some spare cash, I’d like to just keep it as dry powder until I get a little bit more clarity on this coronavirus,’ Yardeni said.“
Keeping dry powder ? Gosh - That one goes way back. Younger ones here may not know it.
- “Dry Powder” INVESTOPEDIA
Another oldie I like - (opposite of keeping powder dry): Backing up the truck .
- “Back Up The Truck” INVESTOPEDIA

The link includes a link to the interview....

That’s Yardeni pointing to the possibility of a 10% drop from recent market highs in an interview on CNBC on Friday.....
Yardeni, who says he’s going to keep cash on the sidelines until he gets more clarity on the coronavirus, remains bullish longer term.
“Interest rates are so extraordinarily low,” he said. “The central banks have basically provided no interesting reasons to buy in the fixed-income markets and lots of reasons to buy in the stock market.”

https://marketwatch.com/story/heres-why-one-longtime-market-bull-is-keeping-powder-dry-even-with-the-fed-giving-a-green-light-to-buy-stocks-2020-02-09

Carew, since you asked about BMPAX, and I have not previously discussed this fund, I thought I might add a few comments. It is from the Intermediate Core Bond category, which is a little more in line with funds, that have higher investment grade holdings with low risk, in the intermediate duration category. It is almost exclusively devoted to securitized mortgages, with AA investment grade holdings, that M* categorizes as lower risk. It had a nice 6% total return in 2019, but historically the total return is much lower--not that different than other well known funds in that category. It seems to be a pretty conservative fund, and could provide some ballast and lower risk option in a conservative investors portfolio. BMPAX performance pattern is that it is a strong fund in down markets (2015 and 2018, etc), so it could be a nice fund if your portfolio is focusing on preservation of principal. Its Standard Deviation is below 2, bond holdings are strong investment grade holdings, and overall you can see the rationale for why M* rates this fund as a low risk fund in its category

Ha, we heard the same thing during the 2013 Taper Tantrum.

have read this article before, many times

Yes, like in 2017, 2018, 2019... That stopped clock will be correct sooner or later I suppose.

The link that the page gives for Treasury yields is correct, but the yields it quotes for January 30, 2020 are way off on the long end.
"The current rate of the 30-year T-bond as of January 30, 2020, is 2.33%."
According to the Treasury page, the 30 year rate was 2.04%, while the 10 year rate was 1.57%, not the 1.88% given in the article.
The figures it's giving are for Jan 2, not Jan 30. Which shows that in the past month or so the yield curve has flattened considerably. That in turn makes long bonds (always a play on rate movements) an even higher risk proposition.
Looking at 10 year and below, yields are mostly between 1.5% and 1.6%. Meanwhile, VUSXX has a 7 day SEC yield of 1.52% with no interest rate risk, unlike individual Treasuries.
If you expect Treasury yields to drop more, then locking in a slightly higher yield on T-notes may make sense. Otherwise, ISTM that it's worth a handful of basis points to have the stability of a MMF.
Or forgo Treasuries altogether and stick with CDs. Why invest in a 1 year Treasury yielding 1.49% (as of February 7), when you can get a no-penalty 11 mo FDIC-insured CD yielding 2.0%?

In terms of pure returns, I think you've got it right. Hank analogized paying off the mortgage with buying a AAA rated 4% bond, and that's a good way to think of it.
However, there are also risk factors that go beyond guessing which investment will have the greater cumulative return at the end of ten years.
Suppose you invest the $150k in equity funds, figuring that over 10 years you'll do better or at least as well as a 4% guaranteed return. Consider the risk of an economic downturn. You could lose your job and the ability to generate the $1500/mo cash flow. At the same time your equity investment could be taking a nosedive, hurting your ability to make the monthly payments out of reserves.
On the other hand, suppose you paid off the mortgage, and then rates dropped a percent. You couldn't take advantage of this and "re-leverage" you home. If you took out a new, lower rate mortgage to invest the money, I don't believe the new mortgage would be deductible (you wouldn't be using it to buy or improve your home). If instead you kept your mortgage, then if rates dropped you could refinance and benefit from a lower (and deductible) monthly payment.
More generally, because mortgages come with put options (you can prepay at any time), mortgages are different from vanilla AAA rated bonds.
IMHO there's more to consider than just which option may get you the better return over the next ten years. FWIW, I've had to make this decision a few times. Sometimes I went one way, sometimes the other.

FD, I don't disagree with your statement above. The government bond oef category is a very high investment grade category, but within the category you do find some variance regarding duration and interest rate risk. Most of the intermediate duration bond funds above, had total return in 2019 in the 5.5% to 6+% range, but their 3 year performance is slightly below 3%. Interest rates have been very very low since the 2007/2008 financial crisis, and then we started seeing spikes in interest rates in the 2015/2016 period, and since then there has been a steady pressure to raise interest rates, with 2018 being a tough year. In 2019, we saw the Feds decide to take a "pause" in raising interest rates, and it appears they will continue that policy for most if not all of 2020. It is hard to predict rates, as you noted above, so I am of the general opinion that you need to know the difference between one year performance, and longer history of performance of at least 3 years.

I have a one year CD maturing tomorrow...that 2.65% yield was pretty sweet/fortunate for bucket 1 money. Based on recent comments and research, that will be split between IOFAX and SEMPX. These securitized offerings should hold up well if rates remain somewhat stable over the next 12 months or so. These 2 will pair with ZEOIX in equal weight.

https://einvestingforbeginners.com/cash-allocation-ladder-treasuries-daah/
How to Earn Interest on Your Cash Allocation with Low-Risk Treasuries
Dave Ahern 0 comments
When large investors have trouble finding great companies to buy or invest in, they’ll see an increasing cash allocation in their portfolio. So what do they do? Most invest in treasuries, and investors can do this with the cash in their portfolios too.

I have been reading for years that
1) Interest rates can only go up
2) That EM stocks are a better value and soon will do better
3) That diversification is better while the SP500 performance + volatility was better
and one it's going to be true :-)

I agree with this article. Rates now are at one of the lowest levels ever seen. You can still make 4-5% in bonds using Multisector+Non Trad funds which I posted about at Bond mutual funds analysis
Several funds to consider are
SD lower than1=SEMMX,ANFIX,ANGLX
SD lower than 1.5=IISIX,TSIIX
SD lower than 2=VCFIX,/VCFAX,JMUIX/JMUTX,PIMIX
SD lower than 2.7=IOFIX,PUCZX,DPFNX,JMSIX

High rated bond funds did great since 2019 because rates decrease dramatically and this category has a higher correlation to rates change. If rates will stabilize or will not go down a lot these funds will not make anything close to 5%. Predicting rates is tricky but rates now are at one of the lowest levels ever seen.
Example: I selected FSTGX because it was the first on the list. If you look at longer-term performance for 3-5-10-15 years FSTGX annual performance is between 1.85% to 3.1%. I don't expect this fund to generate more per average annually than the above range in the next several years.

Thanks bee--I agree it is an excellent option. VFIIX standard deviation is 2.04, duration is 2.68, Credit Rating of AAA, M* Risk is average, 1/3yr Total Return is 5.75/2.97. In categories like Government Bond OEFs, Vanguard benefits with its very low ERs.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepatton/2020/02/08/bond-fund-investors-face-rough-times-ahead/#12bf43581116
Bond Fund Investors Face Rough Times Ahead
Do you own one or more bond funds? If so, 2019 was a very good year, but don’t expect that to continue. You see, bonds do well when interest rates trend lower – as they did last year – but typically lose money when rates rise. And, with interest rates stuck at artificially low levels, at some point rates will rise, and bond funds will struggle to achieve a positive return. Here’s why.

This post is about Government Bond OEFs. Historically, this has been a very popular choice for safe haven, ballast, and alternative to cash roles. These are dominated by AAA and AA investment grade bonds, so they are excellent for avoiding credit risk. The real variable is that longer durations are doing very well, as the Feds appear willing to keep interest rate risk stable--as a result longer duration government bonds are having record total return years, compared to their longer term histories. Here are a few funds that are very good options, some of which you might not have heard of:
1. FSTGX: Standtard Deviation 2.28, Duration 3.79, Credit Rating AAA, M* Risk Average,
1/3 yr Total Return 5.78/2.58
2. CRATX: Standard Deviation 2.18, Duration ? , Credit Rating AA, M* Risk Average,
1/3yr Total Return 6.21/2.94
3. SNGVX: Standard Deviation 1.33, Duration 2.4, Credit Rating AAA, M* Risk Average,
1/3yr Total Return 3.88/2.37
4. LEXNX: Standard Deviation 1.96, Duration 3.21, Credit Rating AAA, M* Risk Low,
1/3yr Total Return 5.22/2.65
5. FGMNX: Standard Deviation 2.93, Duration 2.93, Credit Rating AAA, M* Risk Average,
1/3yr Total Return, 5.55/2.75
6. EALDX: Standard Deviation .47, Duration .33, Credit Rating AAA, M* Risk Average,
1/3yr Total Return 1.45/1.74
Comments: FSTGX, CRATX, LEXNX, and FGMNX had 1 year total returns in the 5% to 6% range which is a pretty good return for a safe haven option. Their longer term Total Return performance is traditionally in the 2+% range, but there is no fear of interest rate increases 2019 and apparently not for 2020. EALDX is the ultra short duration fund, that has lower total return, because interest rate risk is not a concern right now. LEXNX is the only M* Low Risk fund but it still has excellent total return performance.

Sorry for the delayed response; I have been off-line for a few days!
Thank you ALL for your sage input and analysis!!!
I follow most of what is expressed/stated and if I interpret it as intended, it appears to me that:
1) paying off the mortgage immediately is not desirable
2) paying additional principle to reduce the loan duration is acceptable
Is that accurate?
To restate: the 1,500/mo P&I does include additional principle in order to reduce the loan duration to almost ten years.
As some have mentioned, what if future stock market & bond market returns are not what they have been over the last "several" years (I presume, that's likely). We've had one heck of a ride the last decade or so!
Would it not make an expedited pay-down of the loan more advantageous? 4% mortgage; 3.5% portfolio return over the next decade (for example).
If I am still missing the point, please help me understand.
Thx, Matt

I don’t whose decision at TRP made the call, but they didn’t distribute any LT Capital Gains in 2019. Only short term came out. I moved what I had back into PRMTX.

I wrote: The fund did well out of the gate, for its first two years, but has been essentially flat over the past three. My guess is that the star rating will nevertheless go up in a couple of weeks when the fund hits the five year mark.
The fund now has a five year rating, and its overall rating did go up to 2 stars. Still poor, pulled down by its last three years of performance. The point is that it is a good idea to look beyond summary figures, even ones that summarize the past 3, 5, or 10 years. Look also at how the fund has done over time, year by year, cycle by cycle.