Unfortunately, PRIDX is closed to new investors.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/313212/000031321218000042/idfpta-march11.htm
Purchase and Sale of Fund Shares
Effective at the close of the New York Stock Exchange on Monday, April 2, 2018, the fund will be closed to new investors and new accounts, subject to certain exceptions. Investors who already hold shares of the fund at the close of business on Monday, April 2, 2018, will be permitted to continue to purchase additional shares.

"This marks the first time that the ETF share class will charge less than the Admiral share class." (That is, no cuts in the ERs of other share classes, including Admiral class.)
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/915885/vanguard-cuts-etf-fees.html

FYI: Not to be left out of the fee conversation—the first zero-fee exchange-traded funds were filed on Monday—Vanguard Group’s ETFs reported lower expense ratios, annual prospectuses filed Tuesday show. However, fees were cut by one to two basis points at most, suggesting there isn’t much more juice left in the continuing fee wars.
The 10 ETFs that show lower expense ratios are:
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/vanguard-group-makes-tiny-etf-fee-cuts-51551203965?refsec=funds
WSJ Article:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/vanguard-ups-the-ante-in-an-etf-race-to-zero-11551184467

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/225997/000093247119006422/ps_adm112018final.htm
497 1 ps_adm112018final.htm ADMIRAL SHARES MINIMUM
Vanguard 500 Index Fund
Vanguard Balanced Index Fund
Vanguard Developed Markets Index Fund
Vanguard Dividend Appreciation Index Fund
Vanguard Emerging Markets Government Bond Index Fund
Vanguard Emerging Markets Stock Index Fund
Vanguard European Stock Index Fund
Vanguard Extended Market Index Fund
Vanguard FTSE All-World ex- US Index Fund
Vanguard Global ex-U. S. Real Estate Index Fund
Vanguard Growth Index Fund
Vanguard Intermediate-Term Bond Index Fund
Vanguard Intermediate-Term Corporate Bond Index Fund
Vanguard Intermediate-Term Treasury Index Fund
Vanguard International Dividend Appreciation Index Fund
Vanguard International High Dividend Yield Index Fund
Vanguard Large-Cap Index Fund
Vanguard Long- Term Corporate Bond Index Fund
Vanguard Long- Term Treasury Index Fund
Vanguard Mid -Cap Growth Index Fund
Vanguard Mid -Cap Index Fund
Vanguard Mid-Cap Value Index Fund
Vanguard Mortgage -Backed Securities Index Fund
Vanguard Pacific Stock Index Fund
Vanguard Real Estate Index Fund
Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index Fund
Vanguard Short-Term Corporate Bond Index Fund
Vanguard Short-Term Inflation -Protected Securities Index Fund
Vanguard Short-Term Treasury Index Fund
Vanguard Small- Cap Growth Index Fund
Vanguard Small- Cap Index Fund
Vanguard Small- Cap Value Index Fund
Vanguard Tax-Exempt Bond Index Fund
Vanguard Total Bond Market Index Fund
Vanguard Total International Bond Index Fund
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund
Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund
Vanguard Value Index Fund
Supplement to the Prospectuses and Summary Prospectuses for Investor Shares and Admiral"Shares
Effective November 19, 2018, (i) Admiral Shares have an investment minimum of $3,000, and (ii) Investor Shares are generally closed to new investors. Investor Shares will remain open to existing investors and certain new institutional investors. You may convert your Investor Shares to Admiral Shares at any time by contacting Vanguard.
It is anticipated that all of the outstanding Investor Shares will be automatically converted to Admiral Shares beginning in April 2019, with the exception of those held by Vanguard funds and certain other institutional investors. At that time, Investor Shares will be available for ongoing investment only by Vanguard funds and certain other institutional investors.
© 2018 The Vanguard Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
Vanguard Marketing Corporation, Distributor.
PS ADM 112018

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1199046/000139834419003316/fp0039746_497.htm
497 1 fp0039746_497.htm
February 26, 2019
SYMONS VALUE INSTITUTIONAL FUND (the “Fund”)
Supplement to the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information dated February 25, 2019
Class II shares were added by a prospectus effective February 25, 2019. The Board of Trustees of Unified Series Trust has approved the conversion of the Fund’s Class I shares into Class II shares, which is expected to take place after the close of business on March 27, 2019. Class II shares are not available for purchase until after the conversion has taken place.
Shareholders who currently hold Class I shares will receive Class II shares equivalent in aggregate value at the time of conversion, and affected shareholders will experience lower net operating expense ratios. The share class conversion is not expected to be a taxable event for federal income tax purposes, and should not result in the recognition of gain or loss by converting shareholders.
Effective immediately following the conversion of Class I shares into Class II shares, Symons Capital Management, Inc. the Fund’s investment adviser, has contractually agreed to reduce the management fee on Class II shares to 0.90%, and to reduce the expense cap for Class II shares so that total operating expenses (excluding certain expenses described in footnote 2 to the fee table shown below) do not exceed 0.97% of the Fund’s average daily net assets.
The Fees and Expenses of the Fund and Expense Example sub-sections in the Summary Section of the prospectus will be deleted and replaced as follows:...

FYI: A mutual fund builds on Richard Thaler’s Nobel Prize-winning research.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/when-investors-make-mistakes-and-they-always-do-this-manager-pounces-and-profits-2019-02-26/print
M* Snapshot FTHAX:
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/FTHAX/quote.html

FYI: Retirement planners can relax on one point, according to IRA specialist Ed Slott: The Roth IRA is not going away.
Slott, an IRA consultant and president of Ed Slott and Company, told advisors at his 2019 Instant IRA Success workshop in Las Vegas on Saturday that he often hears investor concern about whether Roth accounts, where funds are contributed on an after-tax basis and are allowed to grow and be distributed tax-free, will lose their tax-advantaged status.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.fa-mag.com/news/ed-slott--why-roth-iras-are-probably-here-to-stay-43488.html?print

Well, international markets have not been great in the last few years and those active funds that kept more money in cash did better than the index fund. Index funds area almost always 100% invested.
If you prefer a little less volatile fund take at FMIJX.

@MikeW: I've got just about all I want in emerging markets. So, I'm now prospecting.
Often times I reference Ron Rowland's Leadership Strategy which I have linked below for easy viewing.
http://investwithanedge.com/market-leadership-strategy
Notice that the most out of favor position within the strategy is micro caps. Well, I've been thinking for sometime to add a micro-cap fund to my portfolio. Now might be a good time for me to open a starter position before the micro caps get discovered and start catching strong money. In this way I can start the holding through a position cost average process and build it over time as it moves up in the pecking order within the strategy.
I have linked below a micro cap fund that I've had under review for a while. It is off its 52 week high by a little better than 10%. Once you open the link click on fact sheet. Perhaps, its available load fee on some platforms.
https://www.gabelli.com/Template/fundinfo.cfm?tid=MzA4NWM=&pid=det&rid=7111=edoc_dnuf
I wish all ... "Good Investing."

Interesting article. From that you can jump to the article containing the calculator.
https://dqydj.com/net-worth-percentile-calculator-united-states/
Here there is an interesting graph towards the end comparing 2013 vs 2016. Wealth has increase in every decile but the top earner's income grew seems to have grown faster than the others. Maybe, this can be attributed to that group having more assets in the markets, people living in the main street saw their incomes largely stagnating.

Here’s a well diversified equity fund from T. Rowe Price: T. Rowe Price Spectrum Growth Fund PRSGX (.78% ER). I love this one - but don’t think I’ve ever owned it. While termed a domestic equity fund, it’s currently got 35% invested in foreign stocks. Very well diversified among a dozen or more Price’s actively managed funds.
Alright - it’s slightly over that .70 figure, but blend it with a 25% slug of their Inflation Protected Bond Fund PRIPX (ER .41) and you’re under below the .70 figure.

One area in which I'm in agreement with @MJG is that I don't publish my portfolio. How I invest may be totally wrong for someone else. My investments are spread over a wide variety of families, though some of my largest holdings by family include Vanguard, T. Rowe Price, DFA, Harbor, Lazard, American Funds. Institutional class shares when I can get them.
Most of those families tend to run in the 0.60% to 0.90% ER range. Vanguard and DFA of course are much lower, and since Vanguard is my largest fund family by weight, those funds pull my average ER comfortably below 0.7%. @hank pointed this out also.
I've got real (i.e. more than placeholder) positions in only a couple of funds costing substantially more than 1%. Small cap int'l - hard to hold that down, and a mid cap fund (but that one's still just a small part of my portfolio).
The key to keeping one's ER low is not to go wild with funds costing over 1%. If you do that and make liberal use of low cost families, you'll have a modest cost portfolio.
Sadly, my bond funds don't do much to improve my average ER. While vanilla bond funds (including my vanilla core fund) can be found easily for around 0.45% (see, e.g. DODIX above), multisector and some other categories of bond funds tend to run higher.

My blended ER is less than 70 bps. I run everything independently via Fidelity. The core of my portfolio passive equity exposure as it's my belief that active manager add little value in most market segment.

JoJo26, well done with your overall ER with other advisor fees! Over time, these fees really add up quickly. There are more ETFs and actively managed ETFs with NO trading commission at large brokerages (Fidelity and Schwab) available today. Vanguard is working hard to catch up in this offering.

My blended ER is also less than 70 bps. I run everything independently via a variety of channels (including direct, brokerages, insurance companies, banks). The core, in fact all of my current portfolio is actively invested, whether equity or fixed income.
As OJ wrote, if you like American Funds, and if you have enough invested with them, you can construct a substantially different type of actively managed portfolio than mine and not have to scurry from channel to channel. No broker fees, no loads, low cost.
If you want to work at it, it may be possible (without using a 401k) to buy R5 shares for some American Funds at an "all in" cost that's lower than A shares (or F-1 shares) cost. Though sometimes saving a just few bucks may not seem worth the effort. Especially if it takes a long term commitment to pay off.
Nevertheless, that's how you shave a quarter percent off of TCMPX (TCMIX avail at Fidelity and Vanguard with a $25K min + TF in IRAs); that's how you cut a few basis points off FMIMX (FMIUX avail at Fidelity with a $2500 min + TF in IRAs), and how you save a whopping 37 bps on QUSOX (QUSIX at Fidelity w/$2500 min + TF in IRAs).
I don't know what "Vanguard is working hard to catch up in this offering" means (ETFs?). Vanguard is the

second largest sponsor of ETFs. Schwab and Fidelity are pumping out PR about selling 500 ETFs without fees, while Vanguard offers about 1800 ETFs without TFs.

May I ask what actively managed funds you're using to to have a total blend of less than 70 bps when they're all active.

Probably nothing better that MAINX for Asian bonds. 35% China, 15% Hong Kong. It's a ride, but I like the fund.

@MikeW: The barometer follows the S&P 500 Index. Another means that I use to find value is to see how far below a fund is trading form it's 52 week high. Take my two emerging market funds. DWGAX is off its 52 week high by about 12% while NEWFX is off its 52 week high by about 8%. With this, I'm finding more value in DWGAX than NEWFX. One of my investment strategies through the years has been to buy some in my most out of favor holdings in belief that they will again find favor with investors. Most of the time they do. And, for me, this has worked better through the years than momentum based strategies (buying what is hot and in favor).

FYI: More Chinese companies are defaulting on their bonds. That’s a good thing in the long term. It could also be a good thing in the short term for investors who know what they are doing. But it’s not an asset class you can easily navigate from an armchair. “As risk is priced more accurately in Chinese credit markets, it creates opportunities for experienced investors,” says Paul Lukaszewski, head of Asian corporate debt for Aberdeen Standard Investments.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/chinese-bond-investing-gets-too-tricky-for-small-investors-51550270821?mod=djem_b_Weekly barrons_daily_newsletter

My blended ER is less than 70 bps. I run everything independently via Fidelity. The core of my portfolio passive equity exposure as it's my belief that active manager add little value in most market segment.

JoJo26, well done with your overall ER with other advisor fees! Over time, these fees really add up quickly. There are more ETFs and actively managed ETFs with NO trading commission at large brokerages (Fidelity and Schwab) available today. Vanguard is working hard to catch up in this offering.

My blended ER is also less than 70 bps. I run everything independently via a variety of channels (including direct, brokerages, insurance companies, banks). The core, in fact all of my current portfolio is actively invested, whether equity or fixed income.
As OJ wrote, if you like American Funds, and if you have enough invested with them, you can construct a substantially different type of actively managed portfolio than mine and not have to scurry from channel to channel. No broker fees, no loads, low cost.
If you want to work at it, it may be possible (without using a 401k) to buy R5 shares for some American Funds at an "all in" cost that's lower than A shares (or F-1 shares) cost. Though sometimes saving a just few bucks may not seem worth the effort. Especially if it takes a long term commitment to pay off.
Nevertheless, that's how you shave a quarter percent off of TCMPX (TCMIX avail at Fidelity and Vanguard with a $25K min + TF in IRAs); that's how you cut a few basis points off FMIMX (FMIUX avail at Fidelity with a $2500 min + TF in IRAs), and how you save a whopping 37 bps on QUSOX (QUSIX at Fidelity w/$2500 min + TF in IRAs).
I don't know what "Vanguard is working hard to catch up in this offering" means (ETFs?). Vanguard is the second largest sponsor of ETFs. Schwab and Fidelity are pumping out PR about selling 500 ETFs without fees, while Vanguard offers about 1800 ETFs without TFs.

American Funds typically have ERs of about 70 basis points. If you can purchase those funds at NAV (no load) they are frequently a pretty good deal. American Funds does not use "star fund managers", but has long employed an investment committee approach, which I prefer for stability. For example, I have no interest in depending on "bond kings" to not lose their "golden touch", their wives, or their bloody minds.
As far as American Funds being an "asset accumulator" (whatever that means) I couldn't care less.

@Old_Joe, a couple important notes here.
1) AF is an asset gatherer and historically has not shown a willingness to control growth. The platform is simply trying to take in assets to increase dollars earned from management fees. May not matter to some, but is a big deal to me. You could say, AF is a mega shop that invests in mega caps, generally (I know there are AF that invest down the cap spectrum). Well then I'd say, might as well index for a few bps rather than pay active fees.
2) While AF has multiple PMs for each fund it manages, it IS NOT, IMO, an investment committee approach. Each PM has a sleeve of capital that he/she has discretion over so they are effectively "star" managers, but just operating without a construct that provides diversification. The PMs are not collaborating to come to a single investment decision. I don't think many retail investors know this is actually how AF manages its funds.

He may be right. Blackrock’s Larry Fink recently appeared on CNBC and mentioned “The Law of Unintended Consequences”. If, as appears likely, the China trade deal improves the U.S./ China trade balance (by their buying more U.S. products), China will need to unload part of their huge slug of U.S. Treasuries to pay for the increased imports. Less demand from China for U.S, Treasuries spells higher interest rates in order to attract new buyers.
I also continue to believe we’re going to see a ramp-up in inflation. Folks forget that it’s cumulative. So get into a 3+% annual and you’re looking at a 10% increase in prices over just 3 years.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/24/larry-fink-on-us-china-trade.html

Thank you @Old_Skeet for drilling down more into your methodology. Your definition of overbought largely coincides with that of Investopedia - https://www.investopedia.com/terms/o/overbought.asp. While valuation is mentioned by both of you, it appears to be a largely inferential determination based on recent market price behavior: ie: S&P falls 12% over 2 months and becomes oversold. Than it rises 10% over 2 months and becomes overbought. Inferentially one might conclude that the underlying assets had greater intrinsic value when the market was depressed than after it became elevated. That sounds to me very much like a technical indicator based largely on recent market price trend lines.
I’ll agree that’s one good way to describe near-term conditions and to time one’s entry and exit points if one is a market trader. But it doesn’t help much with understanding valuations over longer periods (5, 10, 20 years). You said: “... markets can stay overbought and oversold for extended periods of time.” That may possibly be. However, if it were really the case there would seldom be a need to change the barometer from oversold to overbought within a few weeks’ or months’ time. So I’d modify that statement to read: “... markets can stay overvalued and undervalued for extended periods of time“.
What’s the difference? Valuations are based on the intrinsic worth of the individual companies within the index. While complex, that involves appraising different attributes like: underlying assets, debt levels, bond ratings, profit margins, P/E ratios, pending litigation, competitive market advantages and long term growth prospects. In a nutshell: Valuation is much harder to measure than a temporary overbought or oversold condition based largely on a 3-6 month chart.
Warren Buffet was on CNBC this morning and so is on my mind. I do feel his successful methodology leans very heavily towards the “valuation” end of the spectrum and much less so towards temporary technical overbought / underbought nomenclatures.
There are many successful ways to invest. Thanks for your insights into your barometer and how you apply it.