Yes consider yourself very lucky. Half way through my career the private sectors were either trimming then eliminating the pension plan. So only define contribution plan is left.
For those who work for federal and state, they still have their pension plus (401)k plan.

Chapter I -Too complex for me. Fortunately I purchased the DejaOffice App at Apple around the time I retired. It has proven highly reliable and very versatile for creating various files and keeping backups. Updating the most recent backup to all devices (weekly) works reliably. So I have basic records of just about everything related to investing since retiring 20+ years ago. Annual returns, additions from other sources, withdrawals by year, total withdrawals to date, total gains to date, Roth conversion dates and amounts, etc. etc. I also record every fund exchange, transfer or sale I make, but normally discard those files after 3 years. The thought of having to maintain all that garbage in some type of paper file (as might have been common 25 years ago) is daunting to say the least.
Chapter II - I don’t worry too much about any overarching plan. Looking at those detailed records gives me some degree of confidence I’m heading in the right direction. We’ve skated around the related issue in the past of whether it’s better to keep a 3-5 year cash reserve to smooth out those market shocks or to just pull what you need from the overall blend of assets. The former allows for a more aggressive investment approach of course (but with fewer dollars). Good arguments both ways. I’m in the minority here as I believe in not maintaining a separate cash reserve. However, am quite conservatively invested,
Chapter III - In terms of how much and when to withdraw? Depends on needs. Pull substantial amounts for a new car or home renovation maybe every 5 years. Lesser amounts for other years. If worried about market levitation I do a 6 month “advance” by transferring the next year’s anticipated needs into cash still within the tax-sheltered domain. I did that mid-way through 2019. Not planning on doing that this year. Politicians have gone spending crazy in an election year. A trillion here ... a trillion there ... Hell to pay some day. But I expect the markets to hold at least until November. As far as those drawdowns for major purchases go ... if the market’s sucking air and your investments are way down, postpone whatever you’d intended. Wait for a better time. I suspect that in that regard the human brain is better enabled to make the decision than would be MonteCarlo or any other computer simulation.
Chapter IV - Can’t quite get my head around the popular notion of “spending down” assets. My invested assets have increased (in nominal terms) during retirement. I expect them to continue to increase. (That’s after whatever withdrawals were taken.) There’s something to be said for having an increasing “net worth” at any age. In fact, it seems counterintuitive to me to be “investing” (presumably for growth) while at the same time planning how to divest oneself of said assets. Maybe it’s because I have a decent pension. Don’t know. But it’s a real brain stopper for me.

perhaps further of interest:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/stock-buybacks-and-a-shaky-economy/2020/07/19/5d31791a-c84c-11ea-8ffe-372be8d82298_story.html
https://www.nber.org/papers/w26958

M* bond rating doesn't guarantee or forecast future returns and/or volatility, especially with managed funds with more moving parts. Even "simple" funds can't.
Examples:
VCIT=all IG(investment grade bonds) and simpler - M* rating BBB.
PTIAX-M* rating BB
PUCZX-M* rating BB
2002 Peak to trough Feb to March of 2020:...VCIT lost over 11%...PTIAX over 10%...PUCZX over 18%
PTIAX with lower rating bonds than VCIT lost less than VCIT.
PTIAX lost less a lot less than PUCZX with similar rating bonds.
Another Myth is duration: it can't predict accurately price movement based on rates even with simpler funds. Rates change fluctuate over time with up/down movement.

This might be a very strange post.
I had a new electrician over my house the other day. A real sharp guy with 50+ years of experience & a streak of the philosophical. My house which was built in the 1970s is a landmine of aluminum & copper wiring. Typically I handle most of the wiring myself but for this I needed a professional. I was mentioning that it was sort of like detective work trying to figure out where the short was when while standing on the ladder looking at the wiring issue, he turned to me & said "you know this might sound really weird but I do my best problem solving when I'm sleeping". I didn't think it was weird at all.
Which brings me to this post.
I really respect & appreciate someone like Old_Skeet's barometer postings which lays out a very robust systematic way of investing using numbers.
However, that's not how I roll even though I have at times tried. I've most likely left good money behind in the process but fortunately also avoided any major blow-ups along the way. I have tried to put as much on auto-pilot regarding finances as I can & have tried to idiot-proof the process along the way (to guard against my own bad decisions).
The encounter with the electrician (who is now my go-to electrician for me when needed) crystallized how I do approach investing as with most of my life. My best problem solving & subsequent decisions come to me while either on a walkabout (hike of some sort) or sleeping. Not very scientific but has worked out extremely well for me throughout my life. I have been out on my own since I was 16 & have done okay. I also have done either yoga or tai chi throughout my life which I find helps immensely in clearing my mind. The more I consciously think about investing, the worse decisions I generally make. I tried rule-based investing for stocks for a short time, but wasn't very successful. Yikes, I sold Amazon at $400.
I do try to stay stay informed & am not data-phobic. Information gathering (from a multitude of sources including here at MFO) is important & helps the unconscious processing.
This process also is helped if one does not carry a lot of expectation. One has to be okay with the unknown.
Why 'Sleeping on It' Helps
So that's my strategy for investing.
Any thoughts or comments?

I remember Ed’s depth of knowledge as well as the “wickedly sarcastic sense of humor” Mark references. His last post ISTM was to the effect he didn’t want to participate in a board he characterized as “Links Central” or something fairly close to that. So often when people leave - or threaten to - they’re back again. In Ed’s case I can’t remember his ever posting again. A true loss.
I’m fairly certain that remark might be buried in the board’s extensive archives, as it was after we transitioned from FA to mfo.
@msf - Thanks or all the digging.
@bee - Thanks for the link to a 2001 Fund Alarm page. It appears that was before my time. Being a science buff, I surely would have remembered a handle like Neutron. How clever and unique!
For convenience, here’s that link again.
https://web.archive.org/web/20011205080443/http://64.45.57.12/wwwboard/wwwboard.html

@wxman123, I am keeping my position in Pimco Income as well which accounts for about an eight percent position in my income sleeve. I'm thinking it is pretty tough right now in bond world ... but, equities are so richly valued that I decided to overweight the income side of my portfolio over staying overweight in equities. Take care. Skeet

The simple way of computing an average credit rating would be to score AA's as 1, BB's as 2, etc. (with fractional adjustments for AAA, A, etc.). That's what many sources do.
M* instead weights each grade by the risk it represents. BBB bonds have around 4-5x the default risk of AAA bonds, CCC bonds have around 50-100x the default rate of AAA bonds. So it's pretty clear that a simple average won't do if what you're interested in is a sense of average default risk.

Source:https://www.livewiremarkets.com/wires/quantifying-the-risk-of-bonds-with-s-p-credit-ratings
Add to this the fact that M* counts non-rated (NR) bonds as BB or B, and one begins to see how PTIAX could have a weighted credit risk "score" of BB.
Ted posted a thread last November entitled Are Bond Funds Misreporting Their Portfolio Holdings?
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/54229/are-bond-funds-misreporting-their-portfolio-holdings
This linked to a story about an NBER white paper, Don't Take Their Word For It: The Misclassification of Bond Mutual Funds. The thesis was that funds themselves are overstating the quality of their holdings. That would tend to make even M*'s fund credit ratings too optimistic.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3474557 (Actual research paper)
This paper generated some back and forth between the authors and M*. I don't know if the M* page below represents the tail end of that exchange, but it should help anyone who's interested get started in sorting through the issues.
https://www.morningstar.com/learn/bond-ratings-integrity
One of the papers M* links to gives this hypothetical fund scoring:

Credit Quality	Weighting %	Default Score	 Average Score
AAA		15.00		  0.00			0.00
AA		24.00		  0.56			0.13
A		18.00		  2.22			0.40
BBB		34.00		  5.00			1.70
BB		 9.00		 17.78			1.60
B		 0.00		 49.44			0.00
Below B		 0.00		100.00			0.00
Not Rated	 0.00		 49.44			0.00
Average Score						3.83

Since M* considers all funds with weighted average scores between 3.47223 and 9.02778 to be of BBB quality, this hypothetical fund would get a BBB rating from M*.

If one of you bond meisters (maybe msf?) can explain this to me it would be surely appreciated. I am looking heavily into bond funds now as I reach retirement .M* rates the PTIAX bond avg rating as BB in the style box area . Yet it then reports these bond rating percentages as present in the fund. AAA 32.71%,AA 31.37% A 10% BBB 5.75% BB 1.33% B 0.92% Below B 8.59% and NR 9.13%. I have seen similar numbers on M* where the bond avg rating is far below the actual percentages which are much greater among the higher rated bonds. It would seem to me that the above PTIAX bond rating avg would be more like A and not BB as noted. Am I missing something here?

Hi guys,
In looking back though the thread I see where the last report was made on July 4th with a reading of 125 indicating that the S&P 500 Index was extremely overbought. Since then, not much has changed with the barometer reading; and, as of Friday July 17th it scores the Index with a reading of 121 reflecting that the Index remains extremely overbought.
Recently, Jim Cramer made a call based upon some charting that he believes we might be in for a pullback towards the end of July. We will see if this comes to be. For me, I'm also thinking that there is some near term downside coming.
Here is the link to Mr. Cramer's call https://www.marketwatch.com/story/cnbc-mad-money-host-jim-cramer-uses-this-chart-to-predict-the-exact-date-the-stock-market-could-hit-the-skids-2020-07-15
Since last report ... I have reduced my equity allocation from about 45% equity to 40% equity and raised cash by a like amount. This now puts my asset allocation at about 15% cash, 45% income and 40% equity. From here I do not have any buy or sell activity planned; and, I await the next stock market pull back building cash from my portfolio's income generation. Most likely, I'll do a little equity buying should we get into a stock market pull back which would be a decline, for the Index, of -5% (3065) to -10% (2900) from its near term high of 3225. Currently, the Index is off it's 52 week closing high of 3386 by about -5% and is up off it's 52 week closing low of 2237 by just short of +45%. That is a strong run upwards, form the 52 week low, without a major pull back.
For me, a dip is a decline of up to -5%, a pull back is a decline from -5% to -10%, a correction is a decline of -10% to -15%, a downdraft is a decline of -15% to -20%, and a bear market is a decline greater than -20%.
Generally, stocks go soft during the summer ... so be cautious. I know, I am.
Take care ... and, be safe.
Old_Skeet

Hi guys,
Yes, have owned PONAX even before it was that and the ER increase. ...
God bless
the Pudd

PONAX's ER bounces around quite a bit because the SEC requires it to include the costs of traditional leveraging. These are genuine costs: borrowing $1 to make $2 still costs you interest on that dollar. But there are also ways to create leverage that have costs that aren't included in the ER.
This makes some funds appear cheaper than others, even though they're not.
Here's a M* article on this phenomenon and how M* adjusts the ER figures it reports.
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/969612/one-expense-ratio-to-rule-them-all
Currently, 0.55% of the ER for PONAX (and other share classes) is this interest expense.
See footnote 1 in the summary prospectus.

The PIMIX assessment was based solely on PIMIX previous years. In 2018 it was at 18% in its category but making 0.6% is pretty low when PTIAX made 2% and SEMMX made 3.9%.
Possibly the comparison with PTIAX alone was deemed not sufficiently persuasive. Regardless and for whatever reason, the ringer SEMMX was tossed in - a fund that isn't a multisector fund (per M*). Which begs the question: why stop with just the third best nontraditional fund of 2018?
Instead of cherry picking SEMMX, a 1* fund with a tarnished reputation, one could have cherry picked CLMAX, a 5* fund. Its 2018 performance of 7.58% not only nearly doubled that of SEMMX, but it made PTIAX look anemic.
==========
Argentinian fiasco? PIMIX had just a 2% exposure to bonds that dropped in value to 71¢ on the dollar.
https://www.pionline.com/markets/pimcos-bet-argentine-bond-paying-75-rate-hit-peso-rout
As that column noted: "PIMCO's profits or losses on the bonds would depend significantly on the extent to which it hedged its foreign-exchange exposure." PIMCO stated that half of PIMIX's position (i.e. 1%) was dollar-denominated.
The proof is in the pudding. In August, PIMIX dropped 1.11% vs. the category's 0.83% gain. It made up that 1.94% underperformance in the remainder of the year by outperforming monthly by 0.65%, 0.40%, 0.36%, and 0.50%. (Data from M*)
Interesting how attention is called to some some black swan events with small impact, while others are disregarded ("You can't look at PIMIX YTD and compare it to BND (high rated bonds) when we had a black swan")
========
PDBAX is not a M* Multi category fund but a Intermediate core plus fund
People here generally understand that M* categories are not the be-all end-all (see, e.g. RPHYX). I mentioned PDBAX specifically because M* does not calls it multisector, writing:

I ...suggest[] again to take a look at core plus funds. Generally core plus funds carry a bit less credit risk than multisector funds, though there's a fair amount of overlap between the most aggressive core plus and the more tame multisector funds. ... For example PDBAX.

The data I presented and that you quoted supports that thesis. What was your point?
FWIW, ADVNX is not a Lipper multi-sector income fund but a flexible income fund.
=========
2) SD(volatility) lower than 5
3) Morningstar return above average or high
These are effectively the same test. Since standard deviation is a second moment, a single outlier will skew the calculation. If a fund's SD is not distorted by March's performance figure, then March's performance must not have been an outlier. This in turn virtually mandates that the fund's return be relatively high (i.e. without a significant dip).

@msf, I remember an "Ed" from when I 1st found FundAlarm discussion board, maybe sometime around '06. If memory serves, he was an older gentleman you made thoughtful, knowledgeable comments. I remember he did not want to make the transition from the FundAlarm format to MFO. I wish he did.

Schwab seems to have most of the information I need for planning & reporting purposes. I even have my external accounts located there so I can get a sense of aggregation, but they don't allow you to count those accounts in any calculations such as monthly income. The monthly income tab for my Schwab accounts is a very handy & easy way to see the monthly income generated. Schwab will also generate a retirement plan for me at least once a year, maybe as often as I'd want as I seem to get a lot of emails asking me to do so. They are good at working with me regarding changing any variables (such as inflation, rate of return, etc) to see how it might impact the future. I'm sure they would like to get my accounts under management but they have not been pushy at all. Overall, I'm very pleased with Schwab & at some point might transfer my wife's Roth IRA & a small Roth of mine from TRP there.
The retirement plan that Schwab generates is the most comprehensive that I've used. It shows a year-by-year cash-flow analysis which includes annual income, withdrawal of assets, & taxes due plus more. I've also used TRP's FuturePath Tool too. I've looked at the OpenSocialSecurity tool as well as neither my wife or I have taken social security yet.
I also still use Quicken which is helpful for budgeting but most of that is on autopilot which is how I like things set up. I would still refer to my account statements vs Quicken for any exact information that I would need.
I like a bucket approach not so much that I think it generates the best results but it's easy for me to wrap my head around as well as makes it easy for me to leave my equity portion alone.
Next year will be the first year that my wife & I will need to take from our retirement accounts but we actually have the cash so that we won't need to take much. I retired at the end of 2016 due to health reasons but was fortunate enough to have taken out a personal disability policy. It was equally fortuitous that I had been paying for it out of our personal funds vs through my corporation. The money has been tax-free (with multiple benefits beyond the obvious). I would strongly recommend for anyone getting a personal disability policy that if you can afford to, pay for it out of personal funds.
@Old_Skeet, "Nope, I just spent less and lived within my means saving some along the way plus I have been a good prudent investor and grown my wealth through the years." I totally agree with that plan.

Looking for usenet files that I've got scattered all over the place in backups of backups of backups, I ran across a posting of Ed's that I saved, from mid 1999. We can reasonably figure that I moved to FundAlarm some time early this century.
That post (after stripping headers):

Mike Roberts wrote:
> Please tell me which funds for the next 1,3 5, and 10 years will outperform
> the S&P 500 Index. What's that - I'm waiting............
Hi Mike,
I'm not Sal, but here's a list:
FSPHX, FSDCX, FSCSX, FSPTX, FDLSX, FDCPX, NTCHX, VGHCX, JAMRX, JAOLX,
JASSX, JAVLX. Do you need more?

The S&P 500 (as represented by VFIAX) dropped 19% over that span. Half of the six Fidelity Selects did better, half worse over 5 and 10 years. Only two did better over 3 years. Here's a graph for the Fidelity funds.
As for the Janus funds:
JAMRX was Janus Mercury at the time (it was renamed around 2006)
JAOLX was Janus Olympus at the time, and was merged into Janus Orion JORNX in 2006; this in turn was renamed Janus Global Select (with a new, global investment policy) in 2010.
JASSX was Janus Special Situations, which barely survived three years; it was merged into JSVAX Janus Strategic Value and renamed Janus Special Equity, which was renamed Janus Contrarian in 2004.
JAVLX was Janus Twenty, which was merged into JACTX Janus Forty in 2017.
Between the dot com bust and the 2003 timing scandal, Janus did not have a happy turn of the century.
As for the non-Fidelity, non-Janus funds, I think people know that VGHCX has always been a great performer, though it slowed down a bit in the past decade. NTCHX underperformed the S&P 500 in all timeframes in question.

PIMIX was a great fund until the beginning of 2018. PIMIX is still a decent fund
I would go with PTIAX. LT good record + good downside protection. 2 more option are TSIIX and ADVNX
2018 returns:
PTIAX: 2.01%
TSIIX: 0.68%
PIMIX: 0.58% (still top quintile)
Multisector bonds: -1.52%
ADVNX: -1.99%
Typo? 2019 perhaps?

These 3 funds are based on the following(which I post already):
1) 3 year average annually over 4.3%
2) SD(volatility) lower than 5
3) Morningstar return above average or high
4) Morningstar risk low/below average.
The PIMIX assessment was based solely on PIMIX previous years. In 2018 it was at 18% in its category but making 0.6% is pretty low when PTIAX made 2% and SEMMX made 3.9%. PIMIX was unique investing more in MBS but in the last years diversified to more global and HY but kept the distributions high. I used to own a very high % in PIMIX for years but sold in 01/2018. In 08/2019 we found out about the Argentinian fiasco bonds PIMIX had.
===============
PDBAX is not a M* Multi category fund but a Intermediate core plus fund (you can maybe called it Multi light because it has about 20% below IG per M*).
It's more global with over 30% abroad
It has 18.9% derivatives.
===============
Basically, PIMIX used to be the easiest fund to recommend but it's getting harder and why I trade :-)

PIMIX was a great fund until the beginning of 2018. PIMIX is still a decent fund
I would go with PTIAX. LT good record + good downside protection. 2 more option are TSIIX and ADVNX
2018 returns:
PTIAX: 2.01%
TSIIX: 0.68%
PIMIX: 0.58% (still top quintile)
Multisector bonds: -1.52%
ADVNX: -1.99%
Typo? 2019 perhaps?

@msf Thanks, your questions have helped greatly in my thought process
I am concerned about my category selection rather than my fund selection.
I purchased an active bond fund because I think active management can add value over passive index bond funds. I purchased a multsector fund bond fund to give the bond managers latitude in their holdings decisions. ... Thanks!

Glad to be of help. I completely understand the idea in looking for wider ranging funds, else why pay for the active management?
I originally started looking at multisector funds for myself as a way to dabble in foreign bond exposure, while, as you wrote, giving the manager leeway to decide on the allocation. I was left with the impression that multisector funds tend not to wander too widely. They may be very different from one another, but over time, each shows a decided preference for certain types of bonds.
Not that many seem to invest significantly in foreign bonds. So making my original selection was easier. (I've since tinkered with foreign bond funds, so my own reasons have changed over time.)
I mention all of this by way of suggesting again to take a look at core plus funds. Generally core plus funds carry a bit less credit risk than multisector funds, though there's a fair amount of overlap between the most aggressive core plus and the more tame multisector funds. Beyond that, it's not easy to tell the categories apart.
Here's how Vanguard describes the M* categories:
Core Plus:
- Consists of funds that invest primarily in investment-grade U.S. fixed income issues including government, corporate, and securitized debt.
- Has greater flexibility than core offerings to hold noncore sectors such as corporate high-yield, bank loan, emerging markets debt, and non-U.S. currency exposures.
Multi-sector:
- Consists of funds that seek income by diversifying their assets among several fixed income sectors, usually U.S. government obligations, U.S. corporate bonds, foreign bonds, and high-yield U.S. debt securities.
- Typically holds 35% to 65% of their assets in securities that are not rated or are rated BB and below
M* shows 24 core plus funds to which it gives a credit rating of BB (junk). Same as the typical multisector fund. For example, PDBAX (not a recommendation, just an example).
Here's M*'s description of the PGIM family's bond strategy. It notes that this family's funds take on more credit risk than their peers. The way M*puts it, PGIM has "a distaste for Treasuries and agency mortgages, which PGIM has almost universally found too expensive for its tastes." M* goes on to note that "while the [PDBAX] portfolio bounced and rallied strongly in the weeks thereafter, it fell roughly 10% during the first three weeks of March." That was the cost of greater credit risk.
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/980651/one-bond-managers-trip-through-the-latest-storm
Here's a graph showing how the relevant categories performed between March 1 and March 31. It also shows how PIMIX along with some other funds mentioned here did worse than the average core plus fund, but better than the typical multisector fund. The losses were:
Multisector category: 13.4%
PIMIX: 12.4%
PDBAX: 10%
PTIAX: 9.3%
Core plus category: 7.1%
US Agg Bond index: 2.6%

Thanks @zenbrew. I have not looked to much into the unemployment option since I'm not part of the production group being furloughed. I have seen the notes from our HR office though telling exactly what to put into the NY state unemployment forms to receive the added $600 for the week of 7/26 to 7/31. If HR has the rules wrong there will be many unhappy faces coming back to work after the 1 week furlough. I agree though that the $600 rule has to be the same for each state.

Hi @Bitzer. I have to acknowledge, for me bond funds seem harder to dissect and understand what is in them than equity funds. There seems to be so many moving parts, liquidy, multiple sectors and categories, duration, quality ratings, number of holdings, assets under management.
With all that said, PIMIX and PIMCO as a company have some of the best proven managment and analysis talent in the bond world. Hard to beat Ivascyn as a fund manager. The 2 core bond funds I hold now are BAGSX and MWTRX. If you are unsure whether to sell or hold PIMIX, why not split the decision and "swap" 1/2 your PIMIX holding for another option to pair with it? Plenty of good options in this post.