@John N:
1 Toe:
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/52116/chuck-jaffe-the-latest-pricing-glitch-spooked-vanguard-shareholders#latest
2 Toes:
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/52042/vanguard-funds-appear-to-lose-half-their-value-as-company-blames-pricing-glitch#latest

Now you tell me, except the key is almost never. Investing is more than just absolute performance.
It is often equally important to review the loss during severe drawdown periods and the recovery duration. Take your pick during 2000-2002, 2008, and the 4 quarter 2018. For those who are subscribed to MFO premium you can review your holdings and get better picture of your overall portfolio.

FYI: It’s the active-passive paradox – almost every investor agrees that it’s nigh impossible to beat the market, and almost every investor tries to anyway.
Regards,
Ted
http://money.com/money/5651576/vanguard-active-funds-performance/

FYI: Pop culture lionizes the dazzling brilliance of money managers on the autism spectrum. Reality rarely measures up.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.institutionalinvestor.com/article/b1gq9tqwk8z108/They-Get-Fired-All-the-Time-And-They-Have-No-Idea-Why

Hi @Crash.... Yes a great owl fund. @Charles ran some screens in this article and VWELX is one of the top funds based on risk/reward. https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2019/08/are-how-well-do-mfo-great-owls-perform/

What's not to like? Other than how very bloated it is? Thinking of rolling over wifey's 403b (also with Vanguard, administered through MassMutual) into V. Wellington as a Trad. IRA. She's 46. Is a Roth better? The rollover will happen before the end of the year. VWELX= $106.3B. Quarterlies are crazy-good, eh?

+1. Cool. I'll check Fido. I'm very new there, myself. Unfunded, still. All I've done so far is to create the account.

A low cost VA is somewhat like a nondeductible IRA - a tax sheltered investment that you fund with post-tax money, and that you pay ordinary income taxes on when you take your money out.
The cost of paying ordinary taxes on earnings tends to outweigh the tax sheltering benefits of VAs. That is, unless you trade frequently or hold bond funds in your VA. It sounds like you're thinking about the latter. That can make sense, though one should fully fund other tax-sheltered vehicles (IRAs, 401(k)s, etc.) before looking into VAs.
When it comes to really fixed income (think CDs), fixed annuities may be reasonable alternatives. Insurance companies have traditionally paid more than banks. These days, though, that doesn't seem to be the case. For example, the best three year rate I'm seeing is around 3% whether for a fixed annuity or an NCUA (credit union) insured CD.

While I agree that VAs are widely oversold, you'll notice that the second and third paragraphs above are comparing VA deferred annuities with fixed income immediate annuities. Not especially meaningful, but it makes for a great sound bite.
Do you care what the average VA costs, any more you care what the average fund costs? Or do you care what your annuity or your fund costs? Vanguard offers a VA that costs 0.48% (average across the funds offered in the annuity). And unlike the "usual" VAs that charge "stiff penalties", low cost annuities like Vanguard's charge no penalties.
https://investor.vanguard.com/annuity/variable
Likewise, do you care what the average SPIA pays, or what you can get by shopping around? BlueprintIncome.com says that the best current payout rate on a $100K joint life annuity for a 60 year old couple (i.e. younger than the example in the article) is 5.586%. That's quite a bit more than the 4.38% average rate cited in the article. (Admittedly, I'm ignoring the quality of insurer, but then so is the article.)
The article says that according to Vanguard's Monte Carlo Nest Egg Calculator, using the 4% rule with a retirement investment portfolio (with what asset mix, it doesn't say), you've got a 9% chance of having no money left over for heirs. That's a euphemistic way of saying that you have a 9% chance of running out of money while you still need it.
The point of insurance is to protect against worst case events. What happens if the worst happens and you live longer than 30 years? :-) Your odds of being left destitute increase.
The articles presents a particular perspective, and in doing so shades wording, frames numbers, and speaks in generalities that advance this perspective. That's not to say there isn't validity in the picture it draws. Just that it's drawing only part of the picture.

" Individuals are limited to purchasing $10,000 of I bonds each year"
In addition, tax filers may also purchase $5K of paper I bonds, using their tax refunds to pay for them. That means that if you file jointly, you and your spouse are still limited to just $5K of bonds.
https://www.irs.gov/refunds/using-your-income-tax-refund-to-save-by-buying-us-savings-bonds
If you're not expecting a refund but still want to buy I-bonds this way, you can make an extra estimated tax payment to the IRS. The IRS doesn't care why you sent them too much money. All that matters is that you're getting a refund.

What does "pound for pound" mean? ISTM that family net inflows per family AUM would be a reasonable metric. But this article talks about a family's net inflows per fund. It gives EJ as top gatherer ($75M/fund), with runners up gathering $65M/fund.
By that metric, Vanguard seems to have done much better. Morningstar reports that Vanguard pulled in $14.9B in July. M*'s premium fund screener reports that Vanguard has 128 distinct mutual funds. That comes out to $116M/fund. (Note Vanguard reports 134 funds excluding MMFs.)
Even if we count Vanguard's 59 ETFs (number from Vanguard site) as separate funds (though they're generally just another share class of OEF funds already counted), that brings us to 187 funds, give or take. That's $80M/fund, still enough to top the per-fund figure given for EJ.
I don't know if "pound for pound" Vanguard was the top fund family. All I'm saying is that is that Vanguard and possibly others did better than the obscure fund families mentioned in the MF Wire piece. (Okay, Jensen isn't obscure.)
Morningstar Reports U.S. Mutual Fund and Exchange-Traded Fund Flows for July 2019 ("News provided by Morningstar, Inc.)
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/morningstar-reports-us-mutual-fund-and-exchange-traded-fund-flows-for-july-2019-300902024.html
If you're really into this data (why?), th3 wire story above contains a link to a seven page M* Direct report. (You have to provide name, email, etc. to receive it, but it's free.)

https://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/sectors/sp-500-recession-proof-stocks-hold-up-good-times-bad/
These Recession-Proof Stocks Beat The Market No Matter What
FacebookTwitterLinkedIn
MATT KRANTZ 8/16/2019
Is a recession near? That's the question S&P 500 investors are asking themselves — especially after the yield curve inverted again. But why worry when you can profit from recession-proof stocks like TJX (TJX) and Walmart (WMT)?

FYI: The investment world is caught in a vise between the collapse of long-term interest rates and the relentless (if understated) rise in the cost of living.
Some $16 trillion of global bonds yield less than zero, and the downturn in yields seems to be only accelerating. While textbooks say that should pump up the value of other investments, the action of the past week says otherwise. The plunge in Treasury yields spooked the stock market on Wednesday, sending the Dow Jones Industrial Average into an 800-point swoon.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/how-to-get-bigger-bond-yields-and-beat-the-big-money-51565983394?mod=djem_b_Weekly Feed for Barrons Magazine
Treasury Direct.Com
https://www.treasurydirect.gov/indiv/research/indepth/ibonds/res_ibonds.htm

FYI: A broker-dealer's proprietary, subadvised fund family regained the lead last month, pound for pound.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.mfwire.com/common/artprint2007.asp?storyID=60105&wireid=2

@MikeW: After two up days.
VMVFX =+1.49%
SPLV =+ 1.94
XMLV =+ 2.16 Looks good !
SPHD =+ 1.78
USMV =+ 1.79
@MikeW: Just some other numbers to throw into your thoughts.
Have a good weekend, Derf

BRUFX
+1

My memory might not be perfect, but I recall that when Dessauer pushed the stock, it was a Thai food distribution company. I think the shares were listed on a US exchange, probably the pink sheets, because I’m sure I’ve never bought a stock on a foreign exchange. The Asian currency crisis of 1997 took the bloom off EM shares for a while.

Thanks MikeW. It's a Junkster term. The idea would be to screen for funds over say the past 3, 6, 10, or 12 months that have: 1) no drawdown, 2) low volatility, 3) high dividend, and 4) positive excess return. Something like that. IOFIX behaves that way. So does PIMIX. Most of the time. c

Hi @BenWP
This is a link from the Forbes article, that you may have already checked; but I'll place regardless. The Senate version is also within the article.
Secure Act............. non-spousal inheritance tax implications.
Go to the money, eh? IMHO, this proposed legislation travels directly to what is likely one of the biggest pools of money at this time........IRA's and related held by the boomers.
Michigan in 2012 (Republican governor/legislature) successfully traveled this road, requiring the MI Supreme Court to uphold legal challenges. The road being, changing the taxation of pension monies; but targeting a narrow age group of boomers. This in itself, was immoral, IMHO.
I argued every which way of the negative side(s) of this with emails to legislators and the state treasurer. As the years have moved along, some of the negative has shown its face. I personally know a number of retired boomers who decided to make the move to Florida (no pension monies taxation); due in part to the Michigan pension taxation changes. So, this tax base is now gone from Michigan......tax base = monies spent locally and anything else one may imagine that these folks would have spent in their state (Michigan). So, the state no longer gets the tax on pension monies, or other monies that would have been spent here. $'s gone, gone, gone and never to return. I do believe I'm becoming redundant here. :)
Just my 2 cents worth.
Take care of you and yours,
Catch

This is a biggie for me. Thanks, @catch22, for that Forbes link, which contains an excellent article. It even quotes a financial planner in my area whose services may become even more in demand if this legislation passes. My 1040 may have become simpler to fill out, but these changes in rules for distribution of tax-sheltered accounts will really complicate matters.