Through today YTD the average high yield junk bond fund is up 1.05%. Some of the better managed ones of course are outperforming the average. But overall I would say “barely” continuing its winning ways. Been a lot better places to be in Bondland in 2018.

http://www.pionline.com/article/20180820/ONLINE/180829966/high-yield-fixed-income-continues-its-winning-ways
By Trilbe Wynne · August 20, 2018 12:01 am
Morningstar's Emory Zink
Morningstar’s Emory Zink
High-yield bond strategies led the list of top fixed-income performers for the second consecutive quarter, taking seven of the top 10 spots for the year ended June 30, according to Morningstar Inc.'s separate account/collective investment trust database.

If we were talking about the current Fed policy of raising interest rates, could we disregard the report that the President over the weekend once again questioned Mr. Powell's actions?

@BenWP - Absolutely - You just need to think outside the box. No need to link words or actions to any particular politician. That’s the whole reason Merriam Webster invented the indefinite and third person personal pronouns - to protect politicians against criticism for what they say or do.
Here’s a “sanitized” version of a Reuters report on today’s utterances - which may hopefully serve as a suitable model for future posts on the matter.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - (Someone) said on Monday (he / she) was “not thrilled” with Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell for raising interest rates and accused China and Europe of manipulating their respective currencies. ...
The independence of the Fed is seen as important for economic stability. U.S. stocks dipped after the comments to and the dollar .DXY edged down against a basket of currencies.
“I’m not thrilled with his raising of interest rates, no. I’m not thrilled,” (he / she) said in the interview, referring to Powell. ... “We’re negotiating very powerfully and strongly with other nations. We’re going to win. But during this period of time I should be given some help by the Fed. The other countries are accommodated.”
The Fed has raised rates twice this year and is expected to do so again next month.

(Edited) excerpts from : https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-fed-exclusive/exclusive-trump-says-not-thrilled-with-feds-powell-for-raising-rates-idUSKCN1L5207?ref=hvper.com&utm_source=hvper.com&utm_medium=website

@LB,
Roger all about policy and this kind of misguided soul.
14% / yr is a miracle absolutely as well as relatively, but we have all benefited from this literally incredible longlived bull market;
and at the same time no one but Buffet would have stuck w JNJ and FCNTX for 40y without bailing or cashing in.
BUT screwing Peru and trying to hijack ships in Ghana simply to equal the best of the market, quite aside from all this ill will, is a kind of alpha nobody needs, at least not me.
I am surprised no attempts on Singer's life. (He was an AEPi frat brother at the U of R.)

@BrianW, the Wilshire 5000 Index has 3500 companies...because there are only 3500 "public" companies. Consuelo Mack weekend guest, Joel Greenbatt, mentioned that it cost $2-3 million a year to meet regulatory paperwork to be a "public" company and so many companies stay "private" or go "private".
Great interview if you missed it:
consuelo-mack-s-wealthtrack-encore-guest-joel-greenblatt-overcoming-destructive-investor-behavior

immense creation of ill will and hair-raising destruction in order to achieve results since 1977 the same as JNJ or FCNTX:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/08/27/paul-singer-doomsday-investor

I was just listening to Liz Claman (commenting on this issue) and she made the comment that the number of companies traded publicly have been cut in half during her career from around 7k to 3.5k. Honestly, I had never paid attention to it. Made me go looking for information and I found this article on Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-04-09/where-have-all-the-u-s-public-companies-gone

Over the past couple of decades, there have been a few $0 TF services. Not surprisingly virtually all have fallen by the wayside. Mutual funds are generally not sold short, so there's no money to be made in lending the shares. Unlike Fidelity offering up a couple of loss leaders (losing but a few basis points) to draw profitable business traffic, providing a full menu of competing products below cost won't drive customers to proprietary products and services.
A good reference for 2001 brokerages and rates (I take 0 TF funds offered to mean all are NTF):
https://www.aaii.com/journal/article/discount-broker-shopping-guide-mutual-fund-supermarkets
At the time, Baker & Co, NetVest, Scottrade, and York Securities sold all the funds they offered without a transaction fee. I've never heard of the first two. Scottrade offered all funds NTF from roughly 2001 (based on skimming Wayback Machine pages) to the end of 2004.
I do recognize the name York Securities, but never tracked it. It's still around, though no longer selling all its fund offerings without commissions.
FWIW, here's Baker & Co's site (I think). Finding NetVest is trickier. The website listed with NetVest in 2001 takes you to an investing app startup. Possibly NetVest became NetVest Financial. In any case, Baker and NetVest Financial are now focused on financial services, not low cost brokerage services.
Apparently, Firstrade also offered all the funds it sold without commissions in the early 2000's (though not in 2001). That rings a faint bell with me.
Other financial institutions have tried to offer all funds without transaction but only to investors keeping significant assets with them:
WellsTrade required you to keep a PMA account ($25K+) with Wells Fargo to get 100 trades/year. Grandfathered accounts, no new ones for the past several years.
Scudder Preferred Investment Plus ($100K+ in assets) - 1998-1999 unlimited trades
Vanguard: 25 free trades/year for Flagship customers ($1M+ in Vanguard funds), 100 trades/year for Flagship Select customers ($5M+ in Vanguard funds).
Vanguard looks to be in it for the long term, but think about how they're doing it. You must funnel seven figures to their money managers, not just into their brokerage account. Fidelity may offer some good funds, but I don't see their customers having the same loyalty to their proprietary funds. Their customers are not likely to commit $1M to Fidelity funds just to be able to trade non-Fidelity funds without a fee.
Who else could make a go of this business model? T. Rowe Price? It recently upped its min in proprietary funds from $100K to $250 for a free M* membership. Would its customers spring for $1M to invest in outside funds w/o a fee? Or could they make a go of it with a min below $1M?

Tanks @Ted...great read. My favorite comment:

Saut: I have said for months now that the economy is stronger than a garlic milkshake, and I'll continue to make that statement.

As for Small Cap suggestions...
the Pudd AKA @Puddnhead always like DISSX, a Small Cap Index fund, that seems to show up regularly on my personal screener which searches for funds with low ER, high alpha, low beta, and 1,3,5 year out- performance compared to its peers.

@slick: Where is the other 10% invested, if I may question ?
Derf

Like so many I was too conservative when I shoulda been more equities, but you know this is bull hindsight.
We have all been insanely fortunate to have lived in this time.
I had a lot of balanced and AA things in the 1980s and 1990s, also gogo equity funds (worked in tech; Robertson Stephens!!), and gradually moved more and more to LCV funds w some MC and SC and some balanced. Kids in college through the 2000s, plus lots of unemployment (freelancing).
But now I am 71 and do not have anything like your situation, and this have moved to 75-25 equity-bond (more 50-50 if you count SS as a bond), and it is chiefly DSENX and PONAX w/ a few other things here and there (FLPSX, PCI, FRIFX ...). I really think I should be tilting back toward 50-50, and shall. With SS it will be effectively much more bond-heavy than 50-50.
But ymmv, bigtime.
I do think sleep-at-night is a high criterion.
I like your diy approach but no reason not to mooch off edelman or equivalent, plus your ML friend as she is willing, plus free Fido. Depends on how much time you want to give to pondering. I assume you have a competent trust and estate atty already to help with your needs.

Edelman does this kind of thing all the time and I have heard various of their CFPs talk (they have a good weekly radio show) about just this subject. However, they are a bit more than 1%, I think. Like any good CFP outfit they are plugged into local trust and estate and special situations attorneys. I am not saying they are better than what you can find elsewhere, but they are honest and low-key from all repute and their radio show is good.
https://www.edelmanfinancial.com/financial-planner-offices/washington-dc/north-bethesda
https://www.edelmanfinancial.com/financial-planner-offices/washington-dc/

Good read on the fund/s performance - March 2018 summary:
https://ctpf.org/
and,
https://ctpf.org/fund-performance

HI folks,
I wonder if I could ask for the board's advice on how to identify a good fee-only financial planner. I have had an initial meeting with an advisor at Merrill Lynch and he seems to be good. However, he only provides financial planning if I turn over my assets to him. He will create a financial plan and then charge me 1% for assets under management on an ongoing basis. I'm not sure that I want to go that route. I need to do some retirement planning that will evaluate my financial picture with the intention of retiring in 10 years. But I'm more of a buy and hold investor. I think that I might want to go the route of working with a financial planner who can develop the plan but that I would continue to manage my own assets. I'm not sure that the ongoing fee of paying 1% for someone else to manage my assets is worth it. I'd value your thoughts on how to identify a good planner. If anyone has had good experience with someone in the Washington DC area please message me.. Thank you.

Dream on. If 'twere only so simple.
Vanguard's fees are tiered and on both buy and sell. Fidelity's and Schwab's are buy side only, with Schwab having a (sort of) set fee for all TF funds, Fidelity charging more for some funds (e.g. Vanguard's).
Fidelity has a back door for buying additional shares one time for $5/transaction. That's by using its automatic investment system and cancelling after one buy. Vanguard has an automatic investment system too, and it charges only $3/buy, but you have to let it do at least two buys before cancelling, so it's not an effective "on demand" tool. AFAIK, Schwab only allows automatic investments on OneSource (NTF) funds.
Here's the comparison:

Transaction    Schwab            Fidelity       Vanguard 
Buy           $76 or            $49.95         $20 (online)
8.5% if less    $75 some funds   $8 ($500K+ in VG funds)
($0 for < $100 buy)  (e.g. Vanguard)  $0 (first 25 w/$1M+ in VG funds)
Sell          $0                   $0          same as buy
Automatic       -                   $5          $3 
Buy                             cancel after 1  cancel after 2

Impressive performance for 3y, but I might be jittery going forward about a fund comprising "securities backed by credit card receivables, automobiles, aircraft, student loans, and agency and nonagency residential and commercial mortgages ... also ... corporate debt securities".
@Junkster,
>> A 1% drawdown in my nest egg is a big deal to me and represents more than a half year of living expenses
Inferring from this that steadiness and maintenance are more important than volatile growth, have you ever looked at GABCX?

Mark, because more often than not I have my entire nest egg at risk in one or two bond funds, Back in the days It was the same way when I traded open end equity sector funds. At this point in my life though I can’t handle the volatility associated with bond CEFs and ETFs. A 1% drawdown in my nest egg is a big deal to me and represents more than a half year of living expenses. There is also a one day lag at times between the action in the ETFs late in the trading day when major adverse/favorable news hits the markets. I can use that to my advantage if necessary as the NAV of the open end bond funds aren’t normally affected until the next day. December 16, 2008 comes to mind of such a day and one I will never forget.
catch, I am an agnostic on most traditional technical indicators especially when it comes to bond funds. There is one though I monitor real closely and use for entries but not exits though. But that is a story for another time.
Edit: Actually the major reason I don’t fool with CEFs and ETFs is it prevents me from making bonehead intraday trading moves in my positions. No exaggeration, I would estimate my retirement nest egg would be half of its present value had I been allowed to react to intraday trading news during the trading day. In other words, the open end funds force discipline upon me. Admittedly an odd statement coming from someone who originally daytraded stock index futures which became the building block for my nest egg in the first place.

"An important factor for me is reducing minimums to get into institutional funds. For example, you can get into PIMIX with $25K at Vanguard. At Schwab, you'll need $100K."
Thank you msf ... I did not realize that.
I suspect the trading fee remains about for $50 for non-NTF funds between all three houses.
c

I'll share...
What seems to be working in my portfolio YTD:
FSUTX - strong steady Mo (momentum) since March 2018
FSMEX - Strong Mo
FSRPX - Strong Mo
POAGX - Aggressive active management
PRMTX - Keeps on impressing. A category over-achiever
VHCOX - Aggressive active management
PRNHX - a small position that has had a big year YTD (investors remorse, wish I owned more)
USNQX - Volatile, but rewarding
Steady Eddy's (have good risk-reward characteristics):
PRWCX - Love this funds goal... "achieve market returns with 2/3rd the downside risk"
VMVFX - a new fund that seems worth DCA into
FMIJX - A short lived fund (2011) that offers exposure outside the US
BRUFX - Manager continues to reduce downside risk while optimizing upside
BTBFX - I was impressed with how this fund navigated 2008
VHT - Healthcare seems to be a fund for all seasons
PRHSX - ditto HC
What seems to have faltered:
PRIDX - Struggling, but a hold for me...down 2% YTD
SFGIX - Highly correlated losses with EM losses...down 11% YTD
VWO - Strong US currencies are making EM markets less profitable...down 10% YTD
HJPSX - A country that has relied very heavily on QE for Equity-Inflation
VWINX - having a rare negative year
MINDX - Seems to catch cold when EM sneezes
PONAX - We've parted ways...small position
PARWX - A new position
Ticker YTD Perf Port WT
VHT 12.20% 0.21%
VHCOX 11.10% 5.43%
VWINX -1.04% 2.26%
PRHSX 13.72% 6.53%
PRNHX 20.11% 0.11%
PRIDX -1.96% 4.87%
PRMTX 9.70% 2.88%
PRWCX 6.19% 14.64%
BRUFX 3.46% 4.89%
POAGX 13.08% 15.53%
VWO -9.95% 1.58%
PONAX -0.39% 0.27%
SFGIX -11.26% 4.51%
FMIJX -1.27% 4.58%
MINDX -2.07% NA
USNQX 15.82% NA
FSRPX 19.47% 4.82%
FSMEX 19.62% 4.34%
VMVFX 6.28% 2.38%
BTBFX 5.67% 2.38%
FRIFX 1.84% 2.28%
HJPSX -5.11% 2.10%
FSUTX 10.25% 2.45%
PARWX New 3.96%
USAXX Cash 7%
Allocation Weights/Returns YTD