Hi @Old_Joe
Thank you. I'm perplexed why WSJ would use an internal Fidelity fund for such a list.
Their notation of this fund surely is of no benefit for the overwhelming majority of their subscriber base, eh? A bit like giving the "bird" to those of "small" wealth.
Not unlike a list of the best of: autos, appliances, etc.; but you regular folks do not have access to purchase, at any price. We just wanted to let know what you're missing.
The fund composition, IMHO; happens to be in a happy place at the time. Not unlike my mention of Fidelity's FTEC etf. But, the happy place will eff and flow; as the markets dictate.
Thanks again.
Catch

@Catch22- Ask, and you shall receive. (Maybe... but don't count on it.) The following excerpts from the Wall Street Journal article, which I believe that you were interested in, were selected and edited for brevity.
"The magnitude and speed of the market’s recovery [so far this year] helped three Morgan Stanley mutual funds land in the top six in The Wall Street Journal’s first quarterly Winners’ Circle contest of 2019.
Top laurels, meanwhile, were again won by two Fidelity Investments funds that focus on growth companies. Fidelity Advisor Series Growth Opportunities Fund (FAOFX) repeated as the best-performing stock fund over the previous 12 months. (Under our contest rules, funds must be diversified U.S.-stock funds, actively managed, with at least $50 million in assets and a record of no less than three years.) The fund posted a 12-month return of 38% as of March 31. Fidelity Advisor Growth Opportunities (FAGOX), was again No. 2 with 33.5%.
Readers shouldn’t treat this as a list of recommended funds. Often, the managers recognized in our contest are reaping the fruits of investments made several years ago and have endured periods of underperformance en route to their moment in the spotlight. It is also worth noting, this month, that our top-performing fund can’t be accessed directly by investors; instead, it is an underlying investment in Fidelity Freedom Funds and certain asset-management programs. Our rankings exclude passive investment vehicles, sector funds, funds that use leverage to amplify returns or manage risk, and quantitative funds that employ screens to select their holdings."

Possibly a graduate of The Bernie Madoff School of Accounting?
Haven’t watched entire video. From the mentioned discussion point it seems he’s attempting to demonstrate that an equal probability of risk (ie loss) can be achieved by investing 8X the amount of money in 2-year T Bills as in stocks. And at the same time he seems to be suggesting that the potential gains would be 8X higher with his bond position as for stocks with only equal amounts of downside risk. Be suspicious of his claim that “everybody in the business knows this”. (Get the feeling you’re being talked down to?)
The analysis is incomplete / faulty on many levels. His 16% assumption about the “average” stock market sell-off / gain is out of thin air. He cites a 16% sell-off last December as some sort of proof. Obviously, a stock sell-off / gain can be of greater or lesser magnitude (and not necessarily equal). He claims treasury bonds were the only asset class to increase in value in December 2018. Misses completely that gold climbed 5% during the month.
He seems to imply that a half-percent cut in the fed rate would translate into a 2% increase in the value of 2 year Treasury. That might be true, I can’t find any charts or calculators that might prove or disprove the assumption. But I also doubt that the correlation is as direct as he suggests.
His case rests on the assumption that by multiplying the bond term (2 years) X 8 you come up with a risk quotient equal to that magical (probable) 16% gain or loss in equities. Somehow this is supposed to translate into 8X the gain potential in 2 year treasuries as for equities. Makes no sense (he’s comparing entirely different concepts). However, it’s impossible to analyze precisely without at least knowing how much the value of that 2-year bond would be affected by a half-percent drop in rates.
Confuse, offucsate and misdirect - Maybe no one will notice. :) Possibly Mack didn’t understand - or it’s equally possible she decided to let the idiot’s words speak for themselves.

@Derf: Not unless there was prior April 11th. I believe this is what you are referring too.
Regards,
Ted
3 Tax-Efficient Bucket Portfolios for Minimalist Retirees: 4/8/19
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/922631/3-taxefficient-bucket-portfolios-for-minimalist-re.html

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
While investors are often urged to focus on their tax-sheltered accounts for their retirement savings, there are many good reasons to stash assets in a taxable account, too.
A key reason to do this is if you’re a supersaver who has maxed out the available tax-sheltered vehicles and still have assets to invest. Once you’ve made all of those 401(k) and IRA contributions, investing in a taxable account may be your only option. (Just be sure to investigate whether health savings accounts and/or aftertax 401(k) contributions might be an avenue, too.)
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/922966/3-taxefficient-retirement-saver-portfolios-for-min.html

Seems to me he is saying - if the Fed cuts rates 1% his market projections predict stocks will fall 16% and 2 yr treasuries will increase 2%. With that in mind, maybe for every 10% you have in stocks you should be leveraged to 80% in 2 yr treasuries.
He doesn’t make the point clearly & Consuelo seems to brush it off really quickly. If that is true, it is Interesting that she was aware that that’s what he was saying.

Take a look at WAMCX . Strong performance over the 1,3, and 5 year timeframes.

Purchased MSCFX after it made 2018 distributions. It is a small cap core fund. Also have PRDSX being a quant fund for growth.
If you don't care about expenses, WMICX (small cap core) has been on a tear the last several years.

I think I've suggested PRDSX to you before? I'm sticking with it. If I'm not mistaken, its mandate and methodology became explicitly "quant" along the way, and I'm pretty happy with the change. Strong long-term performance: +17.72% compounded over past 10 years. In the current run-up, it's up +18.68, putting it in the middle of the pack.
But consider: "Quantitatively driven T. Rowe Price QM U.S. Small-Cap Growth Equity is an excellent option for investors seeking low-priced exposure to the MSCI U.S. Small Cap Growth Index...." So, if Morningstar's analyst is not "all wet," PRDSX is not MEANT to actually stand out from all the rest.

With respect to BA, the Wall Street Journal has a current article titled "Boeing and Its 737 MAX Jets Have a China Problem".
A quick and dirty summary of this article has been added to the MFO post: "737 Max Second Deadly Crash / China Grounds Plane / Others Follow Suit / FAA Finally Grounds Jet".

@Derf: FYI:
Regards,
Ted
https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2019-us-self-directed-investor-satisfaction-study

& the answer is:
https://www.financial-planning.com/list/jd-power-announces-2019-best-self-directed-investor-firms
Derf

FYI: Vanguard no longer sits atop the leader board in J.D. Power’s annual U.S. Self-Directed Investor Satisfaction Study: The firm’s two-year run was ended by Fidelity and Charles Schwab.
With a score of 807 out of 1,000, Fidelity took the No. 1 spot in the Seeking Guidance Satisfaction Index Ranking, which J.D. Power describes as representative of those who don’t have a financial advisor and are looking for guidance.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.fa-mag.com/news/idelity--schwab-ranks-high-in-j-d--power-self-directed-investor-satisfaction-study-44260.html?print

Nothing ... if I’m reading the charts correctly.
The S&P has risen around 15.5% since the first of the year. The DJI isn’t far behind at +12.5%.
Either of those numbers would be a fine return over a full year - let alone a bit over 3 months. Price’s Blue Chip TRBCX has done even better, up 18+% YTD. So where’s the beef? Day-traders and novice investors might focus on short term market moves. Most of us not.
BTW - If you’re focused strictly on short-term moves, take a look at BA. Off about 17.5% since the most recent 737-MAX fatal crash one month ago. So yes - if you were waiting in cash until the crash and than dove in and bought BA in the immediate aftermath you could be sitting on a one month 15% loss on BA vs the 15% YTD gain the S&P is sporting.
Some charts: https://www.barchart.com/stocks/quotes/BA/performance

In addition to John Oliver’s focus on investing in mobile homes, you might also want to invest in mobile home parks. Some reasons (From Mobile Home University):
- “From the New York Times to Bloomberg, mobile home park investing is starting to be recognized as an attractive real estate sector ... Mobile home parks have the highest yields in commercial real estate, with starting cap rates often over 10%, and cash-on-cash returns of 20% standard fare.”
- “If you believe that the U.S. economy will continue to decline in the years ahead, ... then mobile home parks are virtually the only form of real estate that performs better in a recession. ... Over 20% of the U.S. population has a household income of $20,000 per year or less (which is nearly the poverty line). As America gets poorer, mobile home parks are the only form of housing devoted to this demographic ...
- “One reason that mobile home parks have long held their value is the simple fact that virtually no city or town in the U.S. will allow new parks to be built. Why? Nobody wants a mobile home park as a neighbor, and their vocal dislike for mobile home parks eliminates any chance of political approval.”
- “Another interesting barrier is the difficulty tenants have in moving their home out of a mobile home park. It costs around $5,000 to move a mobile home, so virtually no tenants can ever afford to move. As a result, the revenues of mobile home parks are unbelievably stable.”
https://www.mobilehomeuniversity.com/articles/why-invest-in-mobile-home-parks.php

We have AKREX in three different family accounts. Latest shareholder letter points out that cash is building up because of new purchases. Now that AUM are north of $10B, it's no longer under the radar. For our money, the ER charged is well worth it. Akre is so good and so steady that the only possible complaint is boredom or complacency. What's exciting about American Tower? Just kidding...I love those returns and low tax bill.

huh? 10yo this LD, it says

Agreed! I'd pay up to maybe .90 for that (which I do for PRBLX) but 1.32 is too much.
Also noted this fund has only been around for 5-ish years so it's really thrived as growth funds thrived. Let's see how it handles the ext GFC before getting too excited..

If the fund has little turnover (a good thing), then what do they do that requires a 1.32% ER (not a good thing)?

@BenWP @davidrmoran
I noted, too; that the M* chart indicates price and NAV.
The M* function for "performance" is reported to include all distributions, as is the the case with Stockcharts. I did not attempt a performance compare at M*.
David mentioned the 3 year period for these two, which is linked next. The returns for this period are very close.
3 year chart of the two

When turnover is so low, why not just mirror their book in your PA and skip the 1%+ ER...

if you have the nerve:
http://portfolios.morningstar.com/fund/holdings?t=AKRIX&region=usa&culture=en-US