@FD1000 congratulations on breaking your old record! 22-I's and 1-I'm.

Just posted all ratings to MFO Premium site through May, which includes month to date performance through Friday, 14 June.

@dpf749, I created a thread for you here https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/62401/is-tr-of-an-oef-directly-proportional-to-the-amount-of-distribution-paid-by-the-fund
If you would like me to change the subject or OP, please draft how you like it to read and I am happy to edit the OP. Let @old_Joe know if you would like the previous discussion copy pasted there. Instead if you would like to start new on the topic at that new thread, that is fine too.
Welcome!

I'm a bit confused by all the complaints.
1) I never used debit cards, a few showed up many years ago and I just cut them up immediately. CC have better protection = end of story.
2) I got/replaced/opened several CC, including this week, none is made out of metal because I just cut one of the new ones I got. They sent me 2 by mistake.
I don't own frequent flyer/travel/foodie cards and never will.
3) I never signed any CC because no merchant ever denied them.
4) Sure, I get chip malfunction rarely, but after one try I swipe and it passes. Lately tapping works in more places. Wait, lately, I have used Wallet (replaced Google Pay).
5) In Europe, in several countries in the last 2-3 years, Google Pay works everywhere, I don't need to show my CC. Even when I couldn't use Google Pay, tapping can be used everywhere. I don't like to give my CC to anyone, as they do in the US. I prefer the merchant to use a small machine and bring it to me for tapping.
In 2022-3 we were in several countries in the UK and I never used my CC even once, even the public transportation in London accepted Google Pay, what a pleasure.
6) I have been using my CC everywhere, even to charge $1, I hate coins + I get cash back.
7) I use ATM, the worldwide Schwab one. Schwab pays me back all the fees by the end of each month, but I hardly take out cash anymore.
Yes, I know, that technology is a a challenge for some. I made mistakes too but try to learn quickly. It took me several times to get the tapping placement thing right because the placement wasn't the same.
OK, what bothers you next?...maybe your new TV setup?...mmm...technology again.
I play Bridge with people in their 80-90s. The ones that hate technology and refuse to learn, keep suffering and complaining. The ones that learn it are happier.
You can't run away from it. The old way is dying quickly, in most cases, you pay much more.

My own "beef" runs deeper than merely learning to deal with newfangled junk. My point is that systems don't work. Technology works until it doesn't. So many "time-saving" technological "improvements" are far from fail-safe and are in fact unreliable. Underneath it all is the fact that people don't care, just go with the flow; no one takes responsibility to make sure systems and procedures are responsive to people's needs. There is no accountability--- whether you talk about government or private enterprise. What happens to people doesn't matter. The only priority is to worship Mammon. Gov't is supposed to serve the public? Forget it. Government has divested itself of its own responsibilities. Few are to blame, but all are responsible. And no one will stop and say: "yes, it's my fault, and I'll get it fixed."
Call it The Human Condition? Original Sin? No matter; a rose by any other name... And no one in a position to get things back on track (CEOs, elected officials, etc.) will admit that things don't have to be this way, either. This ethical element is just never, ever spoken about.

I'm a bit confused by all the complaints.
1) I never used debit cards, a few showed up many years ago and I just cut them up immediately. CC have better protection = end of story.
2) I got/replaced/opened several CC, including this week, none is made out of metal because I just cut one of the new ones I got. They sent me 2 by mistake.
I don't own frequent flyer/travel/foodie cards and never will.
3) I never signed any CC because no merchant ever denied them.
4) Sure, I get chip malfunction rarely, but after one try I swipe and it passes. Lately tapping works in more places. Wait, lately, I have used Wallet (replaced Google Pay).
5) In Europe, in several countries in the last 2-3 years, Google Pay works everywhere, I don't need to show my CC. Even when I couldn't use Google Pay, tapping can be used everywhere. I don't like to give my CC to anyone, as they do in the US. I prefer the merchant to use a small machine and bring it to me for tapping.
In 2022-3 we were in several countries in the UK and I never used my CC even once, even the public transportation in London accepted Google Pay, what a pleasure.
6) I have been using my CC everywhere, even to charge $1, I hate coins + I get cash back.
7) I use ATM, the worldwide Schwab one. Schwab pays me back all the fees by the end of each month, but I hardly take out cash anymore.
Yes, I know, that technology is a a challenge for some. I made mistakes too but try to learn quickly. It took me several times to get the tapping placement thing right because the placement wasn't the same.
OK, what bothers you next?...maybe your new TV setup?...mmm...technology again.
I play Bridge with people in their 80-90s. The ones that hate technology and refuse to learn, keep suffering and complaining. The ones that learn it are happier.
You can't run away from it. The old way is dying quickly, in most cases, you pay much more.

It would help if you could advance some explanation of why the price of a fund, determined by the prices of over 300 underlying securities, would appreciate merely because it distributed a dividend.

You missed my point by 180 degrees here. My position is that dividends are ultimately beneficial to total returns. Although a divided payout negatively disrupts share price trajectory temporarily, mean price reversion and the compounding effect tend to push net asset value gains in subsequent periods.

Actually it took slightly more than two months (until Feb 22) for the price to rise to its record-date price, but let's not quibble over days...

I appreciate all the work you put into this post, really, but I am afraid I don't understand your overall point. Combining share price gain and dividend payouts, the total returns of FBALX vs. PRWCX for 12/19/2023 - 2/22/2024 come to 3.86% and 3.80%, respectively, according to M*. FBALX is an excellent fund, sure, but PRWCX has delivered better overall returns over longer intervals, helped in part (I believe) by stronger dividend performance. This thread is about disappointing-looking PRWCX returns YTD. I reiterate my prediction that the fund will pay another outstanding dividend this year and re-establish itself as the category leader shortly afterwards, as it usually does. Also, in general, when comparing otherwise similar investments, higher dividends are better than lower dividends.

+1 Good stuff @Old_Joe & Thanks for sharing.

About this allocation: 55% Moneymarket, 45% Fixed Income: 51% Treasury, 49% CDs
Note that while we have outrageously conservative investments at this time, I'm now 85. Our situation is almost identical to Tarwheel, and when we were at his point our investment spectrum was very much like his. It's only in the last couple of years that we've pulled in our horns. Why mess with a good situation?
There have been a number of threads/comments lately regarding investment simplification driven by a partner's lack of interest in financial affairs, and consequent inability to navigate within a brokerage website. My wife has always been interested in our financial situation, but has never really been comfortable with complex internet sites.
As a radio tech for SF 911 I was the "documenter" for our group. So I told myself that I needed to use that skill set to print a step-by-step for navigating the Schwab website.
I am both proud and happy to report that, armed with her new guide, my wife is now reasonably comfortable there and can now perform all of the basic operations. And she is eager to continue learning some of the more complex operations such as finding and purchasing CDs and Treasuries. That's next.

While it is obviously true that distributions dilute NAV on the day of posting, almost all high quality funds prices will revert to mean fairly quickly. PRWCX posted its last dividend on Dec 18, 2023 and NAV fell over 3.5% on the day, but price fully recovered in less than two months.

Actually it took slightly more than two months (until Feb 22) for the price to rise to its record-date price, but let's not quibble over days.
Your theory is that the dividends adds to total return, rather than just "swiping" value from share price. Specifically, PRWCX had "a massive dividend and CG payout in December, putting it squarely back in the pre-tax Total Return lead."
The evidence presented is that PRWCX's price recovered in two months. The problem here is that you have not distinguished between price appreciation due to normal market movement (i.e. peers moving somewhat in tandem) and additional price appreciation due to mean reversion (i.e. recovering price drop when div distributed).
Between Dec 19 (PRWCX ex-date) and Feb 22, PRWCX appreciated from $33.66 to $35.05, for a gain of 4.13%. (The distribution of $1.4075 was 4.03% of the record date price.)
For reference, FBALX, from its ex-date of Dec 21 to Feb 22 appreciated from $26.81 to $28.07, for a gain of 4.70%. (The distribution of 29.1¢ was 1.08% of the record date price.)
In case the two day difference in the time periods seems problematic, rest assured that it doesn't matter. The price of PRWCX was identical on Dec 19 and Dec 21.
As I understand your theory, PRWCX should have appreciated substantially more than FBALX to make up for its larger distribution (4.03% vs 1.08%). But it didn't. PRWCX appreciated roughly the same amount as FBALX; in fact it appreciated about 1/2% less. Normal performance difference between similar funds. Nothing to suggest that the funds were appreciating in part to make up for their ex-div price drops.
Not that this disproves your theory. But it dismisses your numeric data. It would help if you could advance some explanation of why the price of a fund, determined by the prices of over 300 underlying securities, would appreciate merely because it distributed a dividend.
Maybe, perhaps, you could make such an argument for an individual stock (e.g. investors think they're getting value from the div so they bid up the stock price). But such an argument doesn't fly when it comes to mutual funds.

My wife and I have been retired about 8 years. We both have pensions and are receiving Social Security, so we are investing more aggressively than many people our age (70). We haven’t had to tap our IRAs since retiring, but required distributions will start in a couple of years.
Currently, we are invested as such:
- 45% in domestic stocks, virtually all in mutual funds
- 11% in foreign stock funds
- 32% in bond funds (including balanced and allocation)
- 10% cash in CDs, Treasuries and money markets
- 4% other options in mutual funds, such as REITs and convertibles
We own many funds, and I’m too embarrassed to count them up, generally at least 5% of total assets in each account. We have five separate accounts— two traditional IRAs, two Roth IRAs and a taxable brokerage account. I have no compulsion to simplify matters because I have no trouble keeping up with our accounts and I like each account to be well diversified. I don’t trust any fund or small collection of funds to invest most of our money in because I’ve seen many excellent funds falter or go through prolonged dry spells over the years.

Great contributions all. Thanks for the insights.
I didn’t state my allocation earlier. I’m currently at 40% equity, 30% bond, 20% short-term fixed income and 10% “other.” The equity stake usually fluctuates between 40% and 50%. Anywhere in that range is fine with me. Recently sold an equity heavy CEF and replaced it with a somewhat aggressive bond heavy CEF. So the percentages changed by 5% overnight.
All for simplifying / consolidating. A few years ago portfolio was at about 18 holdings. Down to 12 today plus cash.

There seems to be a lot of ink on this forum about short-term impressions of investing with Schwab, Fidelity, Vanguard, etc. I could care less. Long term is what matters to me. I first started investing about 1990 (outside my 401k). I wanted to invest with Vanguard but their minimums were too high for small investors like myself, so I chose T Rowe Price instead, as well as several boutique funds touted by M*. A few years later, tired of getting bombarded by statements and other paperwork, I consolidated all of my investments except for TRP funds with Fidelity. The funds network provided me access to a range of fund companies with greatly simplified paperwork.
What I’ve found investing with Fidelity over three decades is that it’s a well-run company with excellent customer service. Over the years, I’ve sold many of the boutique funds from other companies and reinvested the proceeds in Fidelity funds. Here is why. Fidelity has a deep bench of managers and analysts. If a fund underperforms at Fidelity, they generally fix the problem and assign new management. If a skilled manager retires, they generally replace them with little change in performance. On the few occasions when I’ve experienced problems, I spoke with a Fidelity representative and the problem was fixed immediately.
I handle all of my investments on-line, and Fidelity’s website in my opinion is excellent. I used to rely on M* for investment research, but Fidelity’s website now surpasses M* substantially in my view. I have found M*’s recommendations and star ratings to be next to useless. Using Fidelity’s on-line tools, I feel that I can make better choices about fund options than I could using M*. Fidelity also posts many articles about investing that are excellent. I have been so satisfied with Fidelity that I moved all of my TRP funds to Fidelity once they became available on their funds network. In my view, TRP’s customer service had declined and their funds network and website couldn’t compare with Fidelity. I still hold some TRP funds in my Fidelity account, but exchanged the under-performers for Fidelity funds or other funds available through their network.
Fidelity also makes it very easy to invest in CDs and Treasuries, with no additional fees and a wide range of offerings. Their money markets are competitive, and all cash is automatically invested in the MM fund of your choice. Fidelity has assigned me an advisor, who we meet with once a year at no cost. If I die before my wife, she will have someone she trusts to turn to. I don’t know if Fidelity will waive fees or minimum investment amounts for institutional classes of funds because I don’t ask for or expect special treatment not available to others.
My post is not intended to slight Schwab, Vanguard or other fund companies— but merely to describe why I am a satisfied customer after using Fidelity for about 35 years. I have no intentions of switching.

I spent years in what SS calls "non-covered" jobs. WTF is THAT? It means you did not pay in. That's junk. I've ALWAYS paid in. Finally, I was asked to come in, in person, with last 2 tax returns. My SS monthly jumped from $700+ to $1,200.00. That was pre-Medicare.
Retired early, pension started lower than it would otherwise. But it is very prudently managed. I'll get a raise of 4.5% in July along with everyone else. Active workers will be given a 4.5% bump-up in "pension credits." They do that mid-year, rather than January. Silly. But I'm glad for it.

5 accounts = 2 Roths, 1 IRA, 1 Joint Taxable & my wife's current work plan which is a savings annuity. I don't have access to a work plan or pension, most of my working life I never have.
2 mutual funds = 90.7%
1 ETF = 2.6%
2 stocks = 3.2%
1 MM Fund = 3.5%
60.2% Stocks
29.4% Bonds
10.4% Cash, MM, Other
Because I get bored, I allow myself a small part of the portfolio to play with but leave the overwhelming majority to people who are far more intelligent than I (think Giroux & team)...so far, it has worked well, we are blessed.

Like almost everything else, it’s best not to generalize about pensions. My wife and I both have pensions with the state of North Carolina. It is very conservatively managed, although I’m sure it has some private equity. The pension is funded roughly half from employees paychecks and the rest from the state legislature. The state also has an optional 401k plan, but does not contribute to that except for state troopers. Unlike Social Security, the NC pension has no automatic inflation adjustments. I have been retired 7 years and my wife 9 years, and we have not received any inflation increases, although the legislature has awarded a few one-time bonuses some years. So, for those people whining about fat government pensions, that certainly isn’t true for NC. I would wager that most private workers with 401k plans have more generous retirement plans than NC government employees. The NC pension plan is essentially an annuity with no inflation adjustments. Fortunately, my wife and I both voluntarily contributed to the state 401k plan, which provides our inflation adjustment— again with no contributions from state taxpayers.

@Observant1,
I am with HealthEquity and they do not allow in kind transfers either and my State does not recognize HSA which means State taxes to liquidate and move. I may still do it if the market crashes in 2025.
But you may have leverage I do not. UMB has a relationship with Fidelity and see if you are able to use that to your advantage.

3 Accounts.
1Stock ETF
6 Fixed Income Mutual funds.
1 MM fund.
43 stocks which are 60% of total.
No dedicated International.

@Observant1,
I have a non-Fidelity HSA and can not transfer out but based on everything I read and researched, I can vouch for Fidelity HSA.

@gman57,
Nice job consolidating your holdings!
I currently have 11 holdings across 6 accounts.
I'd like to decrease the number of holdings but it would be counter-productive at this stage.
Important factors for me include taxes, fund availability,
and varying risk levels associated with different accounts.