@davidrmoran etal
I did a quick chart of the funds you noted. I'll leave the link fully visible to view the fund tickers there, too.
As many equity fund sectors were at "highs" near Halloween, 2007, this is the start point for the chart; and the end point at May, 2010 is when some of the funds in this chart were attempting to obtain a break even point from Oct. 31, 2007. Also, May, 2010 is the beginning of a somewhat sideways/rough period, as Europe was still in deep poop with Greece and other countries.
https://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?TWEIX,DODGX,FCNTX,PRWCX,PRBLX,FLPSX&l=2220&r=2849&O=011000
NOTE: the market bottom lows (%) indicated around March 6, 2009 are not for the year, 2008; but relative from the chart start date. EXAMPLE: FCNTX reported a year 2008 loss of -37.2%.
Lastly, for those inclined; the M* expanded view at the performance TAB still shows the 2008 return for a particular fund. The 2008 returns will leave the 10 year chart soon.
Say good night, Catch.
Good night

"These reforms require prime institutional money market funds to “float their NAV” (no longer maintain a stable price) and provide non-government money market fund boards with new tools — liquidity fees and redemption gates — to address runs. These changes took effect on October 14, 2016."
https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/money-market.shtml
From the FNSXX prospectus:
"The fund is a retail money market fund. Shares of the fund are available only to accounts beneficially owned by natural persons."
It is not offered for sale to institutions, except to the extent that they are buying shares for (the benefit of) their customers (e.g. brokers may buy shares to be held in street name for their clients).
This is why I tried to clarify the distinction between institutional MMFs (a legal term of art) and institutional class shares (a fuzzy term generally meaning a share class of a retail fund with a high minimum, whatever high may mean).
Here's a good page by Vanguard with both chart and text explaining the differences between government, retail, and institutional MMFs:
https://institutional.vanguard.com/VGApp/iip/site/institutional/investments/MoneyMarketReform
(Note that the Vanguard page is wrong in saying that government MMFs cannot use gates. None will, but they are allowed to opt in, with adequate notice to investors. See https://www.sec.gov/oiea/investor-alerts-bulletins/investor-alerts-mmf-investoralerthtm.html )

That fund (OPCHX) no longer exists. A search (as I did) of current funds that did badly a decade ago will miss the ones that died off.
But another issue with that particular fund is that it was heavily leveraged. Again I question the wisdom (sanity?) of anyone who rode a leveraged fund all the way down in 2008.
Though in fairness to the poor suckers investors stuck with this fund,

The 2008 prospectus for the Champion fund didn’t adequately disclose the fund’s practice of assuming substantial leverage in using derivative instruments. ...
The SEC’s investigation found that the Champion fund’s 2008 prospectus was materially misleading in describing the fund’s “main” investments in high-yield bonds without adequately disclosing the fund’s practice of assuming substantial leverage on top of those investments. While the prospectus disclosed that the fund “invested” in “swaps” and other derivatives “to try to enhance income or to try to manage investment risk,” it did not adequately disclose that the fund could use derivatives to such an extent that the fund’s total investment exposure could far exceed the value of its portfolio securities and, therefore, that its investment returns could depend primarily upon the performance of bonds that it did not own.

Hence a $35M settlement payment to the SEC.
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2012-2012-110htm
More important for the investors was a $52.5M payment to settle the investors' class action suit.
https://www.labaton.com/cases/oppenheimer-champion

https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2009/01/08/390620/157284/en/Stoltmann-Law-Offices-Files-FINRA-Arbitration-Claim-for-Losses-in-the-Oppenheimer-Champion-Income-Fund-Against-Oppenheimer-Investor-Services-and-Fund-Manager-Angelo-G-Manioudakis-O.html
@johnN again is talking nonsense through his scared hat --- time to recover for TWEIX was ~<20mo, plus or minus, and for DODGX, FCNTX, PRWCX, PRBLX, FLPSX the same or less. Interesting to graph. That is hardly even buy and hold, so just hang in.
But this is in hindsight. Of course a sharp drop and bad headlines concern all of us. Dow went from ~12k summer 08, less than half what it is now, to half of that by March 09,
Still.
If you really lack faith, you oughtta not invest and probably should not be publicly on this site, fretting away.

All Institutional designated funds can have potential floating NAV's and the other issues as noted by MSF above. From my research they are NOT required to do so though. Fidelity in their literature states though this can happen ,they do not expect this to occur with FNSXX, as the company wishes to do everything possible to maintain the $1.00 NAV. So in the past 12 mo the NAV has been $1.00. without any changes. FDPXX does float and has done so in the past 12 months As always read the prospectus before you invest!

M* (quote page) shows that this bond matures 2/15/2025, so in all likelihood it is CUSIP 645913BD5. As you said, a zero.
According to EMMA, it is currently trading at a YTW of about 4.2% (priced about 77 where 100 is par). While the underlying bond is rated BBB+, its insurance wrapper raises it to somewhere between A and AA (depending on the rating agency).
That seems like a pretty reasonable yield on a six year taxable bond of that quality. (Fidelity shows AA corporates maturing in five years to be yielding around 4%.). Otherwise I'd be wondering what a muni bond is doing in a taxable bond fund. 30% of the fund is in munis (even though M* doesn't show munis among the fund's top sectors).

Many folks lost more than 55% in their portfolios? ... They must have had some really creative portfolios, because I can only find around 110 funds that lost that much in 2008 ...

Maybe they had it all in Oppenheimer’s Champion Income Fund? (Sounds safe enough. :))
“Oppenheimer's Core Bond fund -- presumably suited to serve as an investor's core bond holding -- lost nearly 36 percent last year (2008). But that return looks stellar compared to their high yield Champion Income fund, which was off more than 78 percent.”
That was, of course, a junk bond fund. But many had been lulled into thinking high yield bonds were relatively safe compared to equities. Why they believed that? I don’t know.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505123_162-37640185/oppenheimers-bond-fund-blowup-worse-than-you-think/

For clarity: you're referring to institutional (high min) share class of retail MMFs, not to institutional MMFs. Institutional MMFs are required to float their NAV. For example, FDPXX.
In theory, institutional MMFs are open to retail investors, but they generally have high minimums, similar to institutional share classes of retail funds.

Institutional prime and institutional municipal money market mutual funds are funds that do not qualify as retail funds—i.e., they may be held by institutional investors. These funds are subject to potential liquidity fees and redemption gates, and will price and transact at a floating NAV (meaning that the NAV will be priced to 4 decimal places, e.g. $1.0000, and will experience fluctuations from time to time).

https://www.fidelity.com/learning-center/investment-products/mutual-funds/what-are-money-market-funds

Many folks lost more than 55% in their portfolios?
They must have had some really creative portfolios, because I can only find around 110 funds that lost that much in 2008, and a sizeable portion of those are ProFunds and Rydex leveraged funds. Were that many folks riding these funds all the way down, especially with the 2000 market still in the rear view mirror?
Admittedly, M*'s list is the result of survivorship bias. Still, there just weren't that many mainstream funds that lost that much. The one exception seems to be EM funds, though they're not likely to have constituted a major portion of many folks' portfolios.
That's not to say that some people didn't see their portfolios drop by a lot.

SPRXX at Fidelity has a 7 day SEC yield of 2.09% and a $0 minimum.
https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/summary/31617H201
You may be able to buy Vanguard MMFs at Vanguard and then transfer the shares in kind to Fidelity. At Fidelity, there is no commission to sell the shares. Not a good day-to-day strategy, but could work for holding cash.
I think I did something like this many years ago, well before Vanguard forced people into brokerage accounts. So I don't know whether such a transfer from Vanguard would even be free now.
You might also look at Firstrade accounts. They currently charge no transaction fee on any mutual fund they carry. You can't look up MMFs there by ticker, but if you go to their fund research page and select a fund family, you can find money market funds that are open at Firstrade. I found that VMMXX is open. Its current (Dec 7) SEC yield is 2.33% ($3K min at Vanguard; don't know about Firstrade's min for the fund.)
https://investor.vanguard.com/mutual-funds/profile/VMMXX
https://www.firstrade.com/content/en-us/researchtools/mutualfund
Here's Barron's list of top yielding MMFs (I don't know why Vanguard doesn't show up). The funds listed tend to be high min share classes, but there are usually lower min shares, albeit with somewhat lower yields.
http://barrons.wsj.net/public/page/9_0204-trmfy.html

Unfortunately, TDA does not allow search on money market funds, and Fidelity shows only a few taxable MM funds with minimum contribution 100K and above. Any advice on NTF taxable MM funds and source where to perform research on MM funds.

I'm 2 months short of 4 years since I got into PRSNX. I got nothing but love for that fund. It's held up nicely in terms of share value. TRP tells me I'm down YTD by just a quarter percent. That's -.25%. I've added a big bunch to it a couple of months ago. INCOME for the duration: $2,126.68. SHARE VALUE has sunk by a mere -$187.73. Actual, hard-dollar figures. The TRP performance number, tailored to my own account, tells me that over the past THREE (3) years, it's up +4.16%. No complaints.

https://www.fairfieldcurrent.com/news/2018/12/07/is-prsnx-a-strong-bond-fund-right-now.html
Posted by Gemma Cottrell on Dec 7th, 2018
inShare
Any investors hoping to find a Diversified Bonds fund could think about starting with T. Rowe Price Global Multi-Sector Bond Investor (PRSNX). PRSNX carries a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank of 3 (Hold), which is based on nine forecasting factors like size, cost, and past performance.

I think no bear market survivor list is complete with Yacktman focus fund on it regardless of it's fees being over 1%. Here is an interesting blurb on it https://www.amgfunds.com/content/dam/amgfunds/Perspectives/Shared_PDFs/INS_Yacktman_ManagerForRiskierTimes_INS006.pdf

I've been thinking about VMVFX for when I add to my 401K early next year. It really looks like a buy-and-forget-about-it, hold forever fund.

FYI: Which stock funds suffer the least damage when the market goes into a bad stretch?
Regards,
Ted
https://www.forbes.com/sites/baldwin/2018/12/03/mutual-funds-bear-market/#388f2c175690

FYI: It was a busy week in economic data with 33 releases out of the US. Of these 33, only 10 beat estimates or the previous period’s reading while about half came in worse than expected. Manufacturing data kicked this week off with Markit Manufacturing PMI coming in slightly below estimates and the ISM Manufacturing Index saw a healthy beat, although prices paid missed big. Tuesday had no scheduled releases. Wednesday only saw mortgage applications and the Fed’s Beige Book release as all other releases were postponed or canceled due to the observance of President George H.W. Bush’s funeral. Things picked up with a busy end to the week. Thursday we saw the counterparts to Monday’s releases with Markit Services PMI and ISM Non-manufacturing index both coming in strong. The week concluded with a weaker Nonfarm Payrolls report indicating a slowdown of an extremely hot labor market.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bespokepremium.com/think-big-blog/next-weeks-economic-indicators-12-10-18/

:)
Wonder why in 2018 this cannot be accounted for in real time ...

WHOA ! Ya must have done a select all for that paste.
Well, anyway..........ya, got a push the metal story from a push the metals site......I'm sure there is not bias, only data.
I'm reminded of a partial lyric from a '60's song.
"It's your thing, do what you want to do..."
Just for the heck of it........took a look at these that came fast to the mind..................about 8 years worth of data.
https://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?GDX,GDXJ,IAU,GLD,SIL&p=6&O=011000
ADD: @rono has the proper eye for this area; being, if one pays proper attention, good money may be made in the silver's equity areas.
Good Night, folks.

https://www.kitco.com/news/2018-12-06/ETF-Gold-Holdings-Rise-Second-Straight-Month-In-November.html
Kitco News
(Kitco News) - Gold holdings of global exchange-traded funds and similar products rose for the second straight month in November, this time by 21.2 tonnes, the World Gold Council reported Thursday.
Holdings now stand at 2,365.2 tonnes. They are still down 6.1 tonnes for the year to date, although the WGC said ETF flows are now positive for the year to date in U.S. dollar terms.
ETFs trade like a stock but track the price of the commodity, with metal put into storage to back the shares. This gives investors exposure to gold prices without undertaking certain expenses such as storage and assaying of physical metal.
“November flows were positive across all regions,” the WGC said. “European funds led global inflows, with strong flows into U.K.-based funds as Brexit concerns increased and sterling weakened. North American funds saw inflows for a second straight month but remain negative on the year. Asian funds reversed two months of weak performance, adding 2.3% to their assets.”
Holdings in European funds rose by 10.5 tonnes, while those based in North American had inflows of 8.4, the WGC said. Funds listed in Asia posted an increase of 2.1 tonnes, while those for other regions were up 0.2 tonne.
Sponsored By Stansberry Research
Former Hedge Fund Manager: "Get Out Of Cash Now"
The man who called the DotCom crash, the housing boom & bust, and the market’s surge since 2009 warns of a new panic ahead. Click to find out more.
The world’s largest gold ETF, SPDR Gold Shares, led global inflows by gaining 7.7 tonnes. Next was iShares Physical Gold, which gained 5.4 tonnes. China’s Huaan Yifu Gold added 2.7 tonnes.
By Allen Sykora
For Kitco News
Contact [email protected]
Florida Millionaire Predicts 'Cash Panic' In 2019
Popular In the Community
Kitco
Home
All Metal Quotes
Charts & Data
Markets
News
Commentaries
Mining
Connect
About Us
Kitco Media
Careers
Contact Us
Advertise With Us
Tools
Kitco Gold Index
Interactive Gold Chart
Bitcoin in USD
Currency Converter
ScrapIt!
Mobile Application
Site Map
Online Store
Be Informed of our special offers, alerts and news.
sign up
We appreciate your feedback.
Android, iPhone Kitco apps
Visit Kitco Mobile Apps
How can we help you? 1 877 775-4826
Drop us a line [email protected]
App Store Google Play
Kitco Metals Inc.
Website Terms of Use
Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy
gumgum-verify