I'm not sure it's so much an ad for advisors as a somewhat numerically illiterate article.
It says that the "majority" of employees using advisors (43.9%) are Gen X, while Boomers came in second at 43%. It says this is surprising. It is not. It is arithmetic.
There are more Gen Xers (82M in the US) than Boomers (75M). Of those, many have retired and rolled over their employer plans. So there are many more Gen Xers in retirement plans than Boomers. Even if they're using advisors at a lower rate, the absolute number of Gen Xers with advisors should easily exceed the absolute number of Boomers using advisors.
https://www.kasasa.com/articles/generations/gen-x-gen-y-gen-z
The writer seems to think that Boomers would be more likely to use advisors. Let's assume that's true. Boomers tend to have (much) larger account balances. Putting these together, it's easy to see how the average advisor account (skewed by the large Boomer accounts) could be significantly larger than the average self-managed account, even if the advisor adds no value.
Let's say 32% of Boomers use advisors, and 16% of everyone else uses advisors. Let's say that Boomers represent 1/4 of all employees. (That means that 20% of everyone uses an advisor, as given in the article, since 32% x 1/4 + 16% x 3/4 = 20%.)
Boomers, being older, have larger accounts. Let's say on average, they have $1M in their accounts, and everyone else on average has $50K. Of all the employees, 20% use advisors, 80% don't.
The average advisor account value is: (32% x ¼ x $1M + 16% x ¾ x $50K) / 20% = $430K
The average self-managed account val is: (68% x ¼ x $1M + 84 % x ¾ x $50K) / 80% = $251,875.
This is not a sales pitch for using advisors. It's a sales pitch for growing your 401K as you get older. With or without advisors.

There's nothing to read beyond what Crash posted, and that's the point.
Here's M*'s description of the AI methodology it uses
https://www.morningstar.com/content/dam/marketing/shared/research/methodology/813568-QuantRatingForFundsMethodolgy.pdf
The idea is that you train a classifier (positive, neutral, negative) for a pillar based on some of the funds that analysts have rated. You train another classifier on a different subset of the data, and so on. Then you run all these classifiers and see what the majority thinks.
Here's a simpler page on how this part of the process works:
https://towardsdatascience.com/understanding-random-forest-58381e0602d2
The bottom line is that even if you could get an explanation out of each classifier, what you're doing is polling a lot of classifiers ("pseudo-analysts") to get a consensus. There's no explanation for why some classifiers voted one way, while a larger number voted another.
Regarding the ratings themselves, Charles gave a fine writeup at the beginning of last year, explaining why the price pillar (1.5% vs. 0.85% category average) and the parent pillar are viewed negatively.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2018/02/lightning-in-a-bottle-alphacentric-income-opportunities-fund-iofix-february-2018/
I think Lewis is on the right track regarding performance and process. While the fund is classified as multi-sector bond, by its own description it is a fund that is focused on a small niche. So while its niche has done well in the past (relative to the universe of investments open to multi-sector funds), its fortunes may shift as other investments in the multi-sector universe begin to look better.

Ted is the messenger with this link, not unlike any of us here who post a linked article, and there is nothing directed his way, for this write; for the following observation.
Perhaps those who read this may offer their opinion; either to the article or to me, too.
This is a bit of tongue in cheek; but a serious review of what we investors may read,see or hear on any given day.
My Sunday morning self-assessment: normal good sleep, 2 cups of coffee, blood pressure within normal readings, don't feel dizzy and can perform household duties without difficulty. Being a senior citizen, one may do these type of assessments to establish a baseline of normal; as muscle aches may only be from over doing physical work and feeling a little rough may not mean I'm going to have a heart attack or a stroke, but that I shouldn't have eaten so many baked beans to night before.
So, I read this article (twice) and come to the conclusion that either I am loosing my ability to process information properly or that this is a poorly written article that appears to be little more than an AD for Schwab and advisers to obtain fees. Perhaps I'm too ANAL or beginning to suffer from cranial/rectal inversion. I find that the data and numbers are very scattered and can't make heads or tails of any decent reference points. Those who are not investors might simply assume that they need an adviser, and that may be the case for many. On the other hand, one could invest in a moderate allocation/balanced fund that may be available. I have advised to this method over the years, to those who know me well.
From conversations over the years, I do know that offers to 401k/403b folks to have their accounts managed is growing; for a fee of 1% or so.
Conclusion: If I'm not following what this article is really about; then I need to consider that it is time to move all of our monies into FBALX. A 9.2% annualized return since inception in 1983 is a tough baseline return to beat from meddling with one's money.
Help me decide whether it is time for the FBALX tactic at this house.
Thank you for your time and comments.
Catch

For funds that have a minimum balance of $1 million, does Firsttrade hold you to that or can you invest at lower levels?

FYI: Estate planning is one of those tasks that makes almost any other job look appealing, no matter how lowly--cleaning the filter on the vacuum cleaner, dealing with the Equifax breach, you name it.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/829271/how-to-tackle-estate-planning-basics

FYI: Argentina imploded. Beijing let the yuan slip to the lowest in at least a decade. Global central banks signaled they’re spooked about slowing growth by rushing to cut rates. By almost any measure, August was a month to forget for emerging-market investors.
Consider the following: Developing-nation currencies had their worst August in at least 22 years, puncturing a carry trade bet that had just begun to turn positive. Investors yanked so much cash from exchange-traded funds that flows are poised to turn negative for the year. On top of that, dollar-bond sales fell to a 42-month low.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-30/emerging-markets-are-often-bad-in-august-but-rarely-this-bad

FYI: Most retirement plans, such as 401(k)s, typically lock you into a plan that offers a small selection of mutual funds for the participants to invest in.
However, more retirement plans are letting participants have a brokerage account within the plan. This allows investors to invest outside the plan's investment offerings, and put their money into any mutual fund, exchange-traded fund, stock or bond they choose.
Among these self-directed brokerage accounts (SDBAs) only 20% of the participants worked with an advisor, according Charles Schwab's SDBA Indicators Report for the second quarter of 2019. The study found that the SDBA participants who worked with an advisor had an average balance of $448,515 – nearly twice as much as the $234,673 held by non-advised participants
Regards,
Ted
https://www.forbes.com/sites/lcarrel/2019/08/31/investors-in-retirement-plans/#2d5acbfc4467

Thanks @Crash! The US News site shows 8/23/2019 as the last day of price quotes for PRDIX. It looks like it vanished after that date.

Not to mention Sinopec and PetroChina.
But Vanguard is hardly in the, well vanguard, of fund families holding companies accountable. It still seems to prefer working in the shadows to letting some sunshine in. For example:

We did not, however, support a shareholder proposal that called for greater disclosure on pesticide use. Environmental topics like this one are important to us, but we thought the proposal was unwarranted given that the company already had appropriate procedures to monitor use.

Also, Vanguard has devolved responsibility for a portion (9%) of its proxy voting to its funds' outside advisors.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/25/vanguard-to-give-up-some-of-its-voting-power-to-external-fund-managers.html

Could be of interest to those who might transfer accounts in September:
https://bankrate.com/investing/best-brokerage-account-bonuses/

Through Sept. 5, Merrill is offering up to $1K (better than the $600 mentioned at Bankrate).
https://www.merrilledge.com/offers/1000offer
(Definitely not intended as a recommendation for Merrill Edge.)

Vanguard was not listed because it declined to participate, as stated in the article. Also mentioned in the article is that Vanguard offers 1800 ETFs with no commission. This alone would make it worth my consideration if I were a big investor in ETFs.
Everyone is different and cares about different things, which is part of why the Kiplinger article was disappointing. It provided numeric scores of features with little in the way of explanation for readers to weight according to their own needs.
I'm almost exclusively a buy-and-hold fund investor, though I do dabble in ETFs (also long term).
Firstrade is excellent for funds because it offers access to advisor shares that you cannot get anywhere else (that I know of). I view its totally free trading as a nice temporary feature, much as it was at Scottrade, at Scudder (yes, it had a brokerage), at WellsTrade. Nice while you've got it, I just don't count on it lasting.
Years ago, Schwab seemed to offer more funds NTF or with lower mins than elsewhere. Many funds were offered under special tickers ending in "1Z" for this purpose. For example, CHH1Z is Schwab's pseudo-share class for buying CHNAX.
These days, it seems that either the fund company is making A shares available NTF through brokerages (as with CHNAX) without requiring a special ticker, or it's shutting down access (as with DWS funds class S, SCQGX offered by Schwab as SCQ1Z). Schwab offers a solid set of funds and has excellent service, but it seems to have lost the edge it had decades ago when fund supermarkets weren't as common.
To some extent, Vanguard seems to have taken its place. It offers some institutional class shares with lower mins than you'll find elsewhere (notably PIMCO funds @ $25K), and provides access to institutional class shares that you can't get from other discount brokerages (such as Diamond Hill funds like DHSIX).
I've used TDA and wasn't impressed with the fund offerings. Too high a cost for TF funds ($49.99 to buy or sell).
Fidelity offers institutional class shares on many funds with relatively low mins, especially in IRAs. Because it enables you to buy additional shares (once you have established a position) for $5/buy (and $0 to sell), this is very cost effective for the long term investor.
Thinking in terms of fund offerings (variety, min purchase, share class access, transaction costs) and quality of service generally, Schwab and Fidelity top my list. I wouldn't look to Vanguard just because it gives access to some unusual third party funds. But if I did have an account there to purchase Vanguard funds, I would take a closer look at its third party fund offerings, including 1,800 NTF ETFs.

@Crash: Thanks for letting me know, try this .
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/living-with-negative-intrerest-rates-51567187649

Thanks @Ted
Russo discussed the value of investing in family owned businesses
US List:
businessinsurance.org/the-10-biggest-family-businesses-in-the-u-s/
International List:
https://businessinsider.com/the-worlds-21-biggest-family-owned-businesses-2015-7
The World's Top 750:
https://famcap.com/the-worlds-750-biggest-family-businesses/
and,
5 Mutual Fund that are holders of BRKA and /or BRKB:
https://investopedia.com/articles/investing/090215/5-mutual-funds-hold-berkshire-hathaway-stock.asp
Why Own Berkshire Hathaway rather than a Mutual Fund:
4-reasons-to-buy-berkshire-instead-of-a-mutual-fund-and-buffett-aint-one-of-them/

FYI: Vanguard today released its global 2019 Investment Stewardship Annual Report, which details company engagements and voting records of its mutual funds for the 12 months ended June 30, 2019.
In the report, Vanguard calls for greater diversity among boards of directors at public companies. Vanguard believes that diverse boards make better decisions, which can lead to better results over the long term. Vanguard is asking boards of directors to publish their views on board diversity, disclose their board diversity measures, broaden their search for director candidates, and report progress against those outcomes. The report also addresses sustainability’s role in long-term investing and the importance of standardized risk disclosure frameworks.
Regards,
Ted
https://pressroom.vanguard.com/news/Press-Release-vanguard-Releases-Annual-Investment-Stewardship-Report-083019.html

FYI: Investors are piling into an exchange-traded fund that appears to promise protection at a time when stocks, and the economy in general, look to be their most vulnerable in years. The problem: The fund may actually be one of the riskiest investments in the market right now.
Related Data
The iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol U.S.A. ETF (ticker: USMV) has attracted nearly $9.5 billion this year, second only to the broader and much better known Vanguard S&P 500 (VOO). The iShares ETF has swelled 42% in the past eight months to $32 billion, and is now the largest of the low-volatility ETFs, more than twice the size of its next largest rival, the $12 billion Invesco S&P 500 Low Volatility (SPLV), which has also been attracting assets.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/how-to-choose-a-volatility-etf-51567200240?refsec=funds

FYI: “I have been involved in the investment business for over 50 years,” reader Dave Goebel of Damascus, Ore., led off his letter in last week’s Mailbag, “and I can make absolutely no sense out of what is going on in today’s markets. Having lived through the years of double-digit inflation and interest rates in the early 1980s, it makes no sense to me how we can have over $16 trillion in worldwide bonds with negative yields, and 2) how the Federal Reserve can be concerned with pushing inflation up to 2%.”
That makes two of us. A 50-year man myself, I wonder what impulse leads the same human brain that spurned a 15% bond yield in 1981 to chase a subzero bond yield in 2019.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.marketwatch.com/articles/living-with-negative-intrerest-rates-51567187649?mod=investing

FYI: As investor needs and preferences change, brokerages must adapt. Brokerages’ mobile apps have grown more sophisticated as more clients have demonstrated that they like to do business on the go. And as investors have demanded lower costs, brokerages have trimmed commissions and fees across the board.
But brokerages also need a keen ear for clients’ particular needs. Some clients want to be left alone to do their own thing, while others want their hand held. Some want to pay as little as possible to invest, and others are willing to pony up enough in assets to gain access to their own personal planner
Our 2019 online broker ranking recognizes that no brokerage can hit the bull’s-eye for every type of client, and that the firm with the broadest appeal may not meet your specific needs. But ultimately, we favored firms that could do the most for most investors.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.kiplinger.com/slideshow/investing/T052-S002-best-online-brokers-2019/index.html

FYI: Lazy, hazy, crazy days of summer?
August certainly was crazy for the global financial markets, and the outlook is unquestionably hazy as the season unofficially ends with Monday’s Labor Day holiday. Lazy might have been the best investment strategy, however, if that meant setting and forgetting a diversified stock-and-bond portfolio.
August saw wild swings in the U.S. markets, buffeted by the three Ts: tweets, trade, and Treasuries. Through Thursday, the SPDR S&P 500 exchange-traded fund (ticker: SPY), which tracks the U.S. large-capitalization market, had a total return for August of minus 2.85%, according to Morningstar data. That surely stings most readers.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/when-the-stock-market-is-this-crazy-you-should-just-invest-lazy-51567213413?mod=hp_INTERESTS_funds&refsec=hp_INTERESTS_funds

B-b-b-but Obama wore a tan suit once. (I think Fox Noise ran 3 prime time specials about it.)

Could you imagine the reaction if Obama had done this:
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-hosts-ted-nugent-white-house-c0da4b94c51/

Could you imagine the reaction if Obama had done this:
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-hosts-ted-nugent-white-house-c0da4b94c51/