The U.S. has bombed the Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan sites.
Trump's corresponding Truth Social posts are below.
@realDonaldTrump . 1h
We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. All planes are now outside of Iran air space. A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow. All planes are safely on their way home. Congratulations to our great American Warriors. There is not another military in the World that could have done this. NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE! Thank you for your attention to this matter.
@realDonaldTrump . 52m
I will be giving an Address to the Nation at 10:00 P.M., at the White House, regarding our very successful military operation in Iran. This is an HISTORIC MOMENT FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ISRAEL, AND THE WORLD. IRAN MUST NOW AGREE TO END THIS WAR. THANK YOU!
Edit/Add: BBC Live Reporting provides additional info.
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/ckg3rzj8emjt

As for Global Trade, Brazil and China move closer together as trade partners.
china/china-brazil-pledge-defend-free-trade-presidents-meet-beijing

@hank and @Crash for some excellent discussion(s) on CEF's check out this forum Early Retirement
dickoncapecod (read his bio) is an excellent resource, knowledgeable and helpful. There are also a number of other well versed posters. Hope you find it worth your time.
Note: the "CEF Holdings ---- June 2025" thread the link should take you to changes by the month should you decide to keep visiting.
I usually hold 10-12 CEF's in a mixture of equity and bond versions. I think that most people hold them for the income that is thrown off but as @hank may have mentioned the trick is to know when to buy or bail. Buying at a discount works most of the time for me but not always. Sometimes it's a signal that the fund has lost its mojo but not always. Also be aware that at some brokerages (Fidelity) distributions are reinvested at a 3-5% discount but not every CEF provider provides that on the platform.
I also follow (subscribe) to a service provided by Doug Albo (mostly equity CEF's) on SA. ADS Analytics is also a highly regarded resource there.

A quick look - MCI lost about 30% in ‘08, but only 6% in ‘22. Looks like they’re doing something right. Not only is it priced at a large premium to NAV, but that premium is significantly above its 52-week average according to CEF Connect. Some funds consistently trade at double-digit premiums or discounts, so don’t buy based just on that. But when the current pricing diverges significantly from the norm it might represent a buying or selling opportunity.
FWIW - CEFs are best bought in smaller quantities because of highly volatile nature. I hold 11 but (with the exception of GDL) each is only 1-2% of portfolio. Fidelity’s basket option facilitates such grouping. One possible advantage of owning a basket of conservative CEFs is that in a severe market downturn one might be able to swap some of them out for more aggressive / attractively priced ones. Pure conjecture, however. I also appreciate that while the CEFs are inside a Roth, the $5.99 monthly basket fee is pulled from my taxable account.
There are several CEFs or ETFs that hold a conglomeration of CEFs - not a bad choice. Some I’ve owned before: FOF, CEFS, CCEF, PCEF
Glad you found what you were looking for @Crash

CNBC has a story up about Japan's efforts to insulate it from China: Dinky linky. You may need to turn off your ad blocker to read it.
Pull quote:

Gracelin Baskaran, director of the critical minerals security program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a Washington-based think tank, said the U.S. and European Union will need to work together to create a market for non-Chinese rare earths.
“The West is creating a nascent rare earths industry outside of China at a time when prices are low and companies are grappling with profitability,” Baskaran told CNBC by email.
Tax credits and subsidies will be “essential” to ensure that non-Chinese projects can build and scale up, Baskaran said, noting that rare earths go into nearly every modern industry.

I don't see much chance for US-Euro cooperation anytime soon, but I'm not getting any offers from think tanks either. :). The salient point though is the actual low-price of these materials and China's ability to flood the market when it chooses to.
Also in the story is a reference to a US company making those fancy magnets with iron and nitrogen, i.e., without rare earth elements. Yet another dinky linky.

BLX fell quite a bit this week. HQ in Panama City.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/21/panama-declares-emergency-in-western-province-after-deadly-pension-protests
"Hands Off!" Reminds me of the April protests in the USA.

The Week in Charts (06/20/25)
The State of the Markets, including...
00:00 Intro
00:25 Stocks
16:37 Bonds/Fed
29:30 Real Estate/Housing
35:07 Commodities
39:06 Currencies
42:33 Crypto
44:36 Intermarket
49:04 Economy
Video
Blog

”What a screwed up species we are”.

Wow. That’s right out of Twain. The Damned Human Race (1905)
A few excerpts:
I have been studying the traits and dispositions of the “lower animals” (so-called), and contrasting them with the traits and dispositions of man. I find the result humiliating to me. For it obliges me to renounce my allegiance to the Darwinian theory of the Ascent of Man from the Lower Animals; since it now seems plain to me that the theory ought to be vacated in favor of a new and truer one, this new and truer one to be named the Descent of Man from the Higher Animals.?
In the course of my experiments I convinced myself that among the animals man is the only one that harbors insults and injuries, broods over them, waits till a chance offers, then takes revenge. The passion of revenge is unknown to the higher animals.
The higher animals engage in individual fights, but never in organized masses. Man is the only animal that deals in that atrocity of atrocities, War. He is the only one that gathers his brethren about him and goes forth in cold blood and with calm pulse to exterminate his kind.

I do not know but I am 99% certain that CGCV is the ETF version of AMFFF, minus 31 basis points of ER.

There are some differences, at least in the first ten positions on the M* quote page. CGCV holds more cash and has Marlboro (PM) in the tenth slot vice Meta.
So I added it to my watch list and I see that its YTD performance of 5.67% falls between AICFX @ 6.32 and AMFFX @ 5.63. At three months, and one month, (the period of recent excitement), it is under-performing AMFFX.
The fund isn't old enough to add to my watch list

This may be helpful.
https://www.capitalgroup.com/individual/investments/fund/amffx
https://www.capitalgroup.com/individual/investments/exchange-traded-funds/details/cgcv#holdings

From today's NYT: "... the Federal Reserve gave the markets another reason for concern on Wednesday when it held interest rates steady. Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, said that the economy faced the risks of both higher inflation and stagnating economic growth, but that the central bank needed more evidence before it could decide where the greatest dangers lay.
“Right now, it’s a forecast in a foggy time,” he said. Even more than usual, the path ahead isn’t clear. Still, there was barely any reaction in market prices. Nor has anything else seriously disrupted major markets.
That’s noteworthy, when you consider the crises that are looming: the highest tariffs in decades; a contentious crackdown on immigration and a swelling budget deficit in the United States; and, in the Middle East, an escalating war between Israel and Iran that could sharply reduce global oil supplies."
Thanks for your comments. Much appreciated.
In this "foggy time", I have marginally increased my cash position by 5% and reduced my equity exposure accordingly. As I said, at my age, I prefer to err on the side of caution and will keep dancing near the exit.

I do not know but I am 99% certain that CGCV is the ETF version of AMFFF, minus 31 basis points of ER.

There are some differences, at least in the first ten positions on the M* quote page. CGCV holds more cash and has Marlboro (PM) in the tenth slot vice Meta.
So I added it to my watch list and I see that its YTD performance of 5.67% falls between AICFX @ 6.32 and AMFFX @ 5.63. At three months, and one month, (the period of recent excitement), it is under-performing AMFFX.
The fund isn't old enough to add to my watch list

I track about 95 funds in the domestic equity category, including many of the usual suspects often mentioned here. Here are the top ten:
SEQUX (Which I happen to own in the taxable, and which is also now categorized as global)
CGDV
HFCVX
AIFIX
AICFX
AMFFX
VFMV
GQHPX
FEQIX
WSHFX
MLAIX (This would be tenth if I moved SEQUX to my foreign/global list
Notice which American investment company stands out? I'm guessing some of that is due to considerable overlap in their top ten holdings, but I haven't looked closely yet.
In case anyone is interested, QQQ stand at #30 on my list. SPY is at #50.
My foreign/global watch list only tracks thirty funds because there aren't as many that interest me, and there are just fewer of them on offer from the places where I do my shopping--mainly Fido:
BISRX
FIVLX
FHJMX
TRIGX
MEURX
BIIEX
SGOVX
DIVI
CIHIX
HDIVX
I don't track specific regions or categories like emerging markets, and I don't do indexes.
That is all.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/34273/000093041325002005/c112473_497.htm
497 1 c112473_497.htm
Virtus KAR Global Quality Dividend Fund,
a series of Virtus Equity Trust
Supplement dated June 20, 2025, to the Summary Prospectus and
the Virtus Equity Trust Statutory Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”),
each dated January 28, 2025, as supplemented
IMPORTANT NOTICE TO INVESTORS
As approved by the Board of Trustees of Virtus Equity Trust, pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization, Virtus KAR Global Quality Dividend Fund (the “Acquired Fund”) will merge with and into Virtus KAR Equity Income Fund (the “Acquiring Fund”) a separate series of Virtus Equity Trust, on or about September 12, 2025. The Acquired Fund and the Acquiring Fund have the same Board of Trustees and subadviser, as well as the same portfolio manager. The Acquiring Fund’s investment advisory fee rates are contractually identical to those of the Acquired Fund, and the Acquiring Fund’s expenses are or will be contractually limited by the investment adviser to levels the same as or lower than those of the Acquired Fund. The fundamental investment restrictions of the Acquired Fund are the same as those of the Acquiring Fund.
The Acquiring Fund’s investment objective and principal investment strategies are similar to those of the Acquired Fund. Therefore, the combined fund after the merger is expected to be managed similarly to the way that the Acquired Fund was managed before the merger, with higher assets and the potential for lower fees and expenses. Under normal circumstances, each of the Acquired Fund and the Acquiring Fund invests at least 80% of its assets in dividend paying equity securities. Each of the Acquired Fund’s and the Acquiring Fund’s investment strategy emphasizes companies the subadviser believes to have a durable competitive advantage, strong management and low financial risk and to be able to grow over market cycles. Each Fund typically invests in the securities of medium to large capitalization companies, but neither is limited to investing in the securities of companies of any particular size. Generally, each Fund invests in approximately 25 to 50 securities at any given time. However, whereas the Acquired Fund invests in companies that are tied economically to a number of countries throughout the world, the Acquiring Fund invests in U.S. companies, or companies with significant economic ties to the U.S.
Pursuant to the Agreement and Plan of Reorganization, the Acquired Fund will transfer all or substantially all of its assets to the Acquiring Fund in exchange for shares of the Acquiring Fund and the assumption by the Acquiring Fund of all liabilities of the Acquired Fund. Following the exchange, the Acquired Fund will distribute the shares of the Acquiring Fund to its shareholders pro rata, in liquidation of the Acquired Fund, and shareholders of the Acquired Fund will therefore become shareholders of the Acquiring Fund in the same class of shares they owned of the Acquired Fund immediately prior to the reorganization.
The merger is expected to be carried out pursuant to Rule 17a-8 under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, which means that shareholder approval is not required for the merger to be carried out.
Investors should retain this supplement with the Prospectuses and
Statement of Additional Information for future reference.
VET 8019/Global Quality Dividend Merger (06/25)

Fed member Waller (a liberal on monetary policy) suggested they might cut short term rates at the next meeting in a speech or interview today. Markets danced a little. But the longer end of the rate curve isn’t too excited.
Part of my risk reduction has been to move a big slug needed for an ongoing infrastructure project from more aggressive holdings into cash 2-3 months ago. I know that sounds like simple good planning. But for me it was a big deal. And I sleep a little better knowing the cash can be accessed as needed to fund the work over the summer. It’s hard to use Fido’s analytics right now with all that cash sitting inside the Roth. But I’d imagine (not considering the cash stash) I’m about 35-40% exposed to equities at present - about equally divided between domestic & international + another 5-10% in real estate / hard assets.

If we are in a bubble, then what could possibly pop it? Stocks bounced back after the tariff fiasco. "Resilient" markets, we call them. The one rule that sticks in my mind is that the markets will never drop when you would most expect them to. The bubble remains strongly in tact.

How true. If your home was adjacent to a large tinder-dry forest or near an earthquake fault you’d likely go along living there as usual knowing someday you could lose your home. Some risks we just accept.

Was researching EUFN, an ETF that holds European banks.
From their AI-generated 'research' page:
...analysis of the strategy's portfolio shows it has maintained a significant overweight position in liquidity exposure and an underweight in volatility exposure compared with category peers (Such gobblydegook!) High liquidity exposure is attributed to stocks with a high trading volume, lending managers more flexibility. And low volatility exposure is rooted in stocks that have a lower standard deviation of returns.
< - >
The investment seeks to track the investment results of the MSCI Europe Financials Index composed of developed market European equities in the financials sector. (So ... it's tracking a financial index; that's fair given its name.) The fund generally will invest at least 80% of its assets in the component securities of the underlying index and in investments that have economic characteristics that are substantially identical to the component securities of the underlying index. The index is a free float-adjusted market capitalization-weighted index designed to measure the combined equity market performance of the financials sector of developed market countries in Europe......
...The portfolio is overweight in financial services by 10.5 percentage points (ya think??) in terms of assets compared with the category average, and its utilities allocation is similar to the category. The sectors with low exposure compared with category peers are technology and consumer cyclical, with technology underweighting the average portfolio by 2.7 percentage points of assets and consumer cyclical similar to the average (Gee, I would hope so!) The portfolio is composed of 113 holdings and is diversified among those holdings.
< - >
Just another reason to take anything authored by "Morningstar Manager Research" with a healthy grain of salt. Because, who wants utilities and consumer cyclical stocks in an ETF tracking a Financial Index?

Other than US utes, most of my recent new money put to work has gone into foreign stocks. Between our national debt, weakening dollar, and political chaos/uncertainty, I think that's a pretty good diversifier at the moment. As to a bubble? Maybe. But even though I'm up on the year so far, the past 6 months' choppyness doesn't bode confidence for a sustained bull run, so I'm DEFINITELY gone both defensive and international.
(If I was using ETFs instead of individual stocks, I think currency-unhedged would be the way to go.)
* I have a few exceptions for US stocks I've been tracking, of course.
A little voice in my head is telling me to move ±50% of my 403(b) to cash for a while now that the mid-term LTCGs were paid and there are no contributions again until the new academic year starts, but I'm not entirely sanguine on the idea yet.

Here a near term prediction on how the market may dance:
Following +500 RASI

Bernstein recommends a rule of thumb, based on annuity payouts and spending patterns late in life, that you should have 20-25 times your residual living expenses (after pensions and Social Security) invested solely in safe assets. No stocks at all. This should be in TIPS, SPIAs, and short-term bonds. If you have more than that, that's your “risk portfolio,” which he describes this way:
The above is my biggest problem with Bernstein.
What percent of retirees have the above? small percent. It's utopia. It means they should never retire. I like to see real solutions for them.

"Wouldn't that would remove major concern about Iran effectively retaliating against any state assisting Israel?"
Almost 100 ships a day traverse the Strait of Hormuz and it's only 20 something miles wide at some points. About 20-25% of the global supply of oil. They could cause significant global turmoil if they want, maybe sink a ship or 3. What would losing 20%+ of the worlds oil supply do? It would also effect them so they might think twice about doing it but if the &*^*( hits the fan you never know.

Since the 80s, about 40 years, wars didn't influence the markets short-mid term, why would it happen now?
The period of 2000-10 SPY lost close to 10% in 10 years, nothing to do with war.
Several institutions suggest the next 10 year about 5-6% for stocks and 4-5% for bonds, that's great for my style of mostly unique bond funds. I will take 6% for the next 10 years.

Just to set the record straight here there was a nearly 20% decline in 1990 during the Gulf War. Regardless I am still in the bull camp based on what occurred on April 9.

It is true that the SP500 went down in 1990, but it was before the war.
The Gulf War started in Mid-January 1991 and the SP500 went up over 25%.
Surprisingly, markets are nervous before the actual war but not after the start because there are no more unknowns. It was clear the US would win the war.
https://schrts.co/TTZMpgVH
BTW, EIS=Israel ETF is up 5% since the beginning of the war last Friday, June 13.

Iraq invaded Kuwait August 2 1990. Oil spiked from $15 to over $40 - hence the reason the S@P declined almost 20%. The day we began dropping bombs on Iraq in January 1991 the market surged and never looked back. How it plays out this time is anyone’s guess. Some are thinking if we enter by bombing the uncertainty will be gone and the market will surge again. Who knows.
https://www.history.navy.mil/our-collections/art/exhibits/conflicts-and-operations/the-gulf-war-1990-1991--operation-desert-shield--desert-storm-.html
And BTW. We already mentioned the action of the Israel stock market here the other day
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/64151/israel-stock-market-closes-at-all-time-highs#latest