Down 20% today......lol
Unless he's already approved to be selling, they better warn the housekeeping staff at Mer-de-Lardo, since they may be stuck wiping ketchup off the walls by the market close. ;)
Oh, wait - maybe this is why? "...it had a net loss of $58M in 2023 on $4.1M in revenue."
Then this from BBG ... nothing concerning there!!
"Unlike traditional social-media companies that tout metrics like active users or revenue per user, Trump Media “believes that adhering to traditional key performance indicators” could “divert its focus from strategic evaluation with respect to the progress and growth of its business,” according to the prospectus. When regulators inquired about Truth Social’s number of signups and users, the company pushed back, and ultimately disclosed only the signups, filings show"

did the portfolio visualizer analysis as suggested above and it came in at 5.9% vs. my 5.54% return so maybe it's not so bad after all.

I don’t ever buy CDs with automatic rollover. When they mature, I either reinvest in CDs with the highest rates, Treasuries or short-term to intermediate bond funds. I also have set up several CD ladders extending out 5 years, with yields averaging more than 5%. If yields drop, I’ll continue to get good yields from my ladders.
Look at it this way, I don’t own or track a single bond fund that has returned 5% over the past 10 years. My CD ladders will provide me a guaranteed yield of 5%. What’s not to like about that?

FDIC Limits Insurance with Tricks
Gone are days for piling on the FDIC insurance at the same bank with various tricks - trusts, POD/TOD, etc.
The basic FDIC insurance is still $250,000, but that using all tricks at the same bank is $1,250,000.
These rules will apply to new accounts, and retroactively to existing accounts.
It's no April Fools' joke (4/1/24 release).
https://edie.fdic.gov/index.html
https://www.fdic.gov/news/fact-sheets/final-rule-trust-mortgage-accounts-01-21-22.pdf

@yugo. 5.1%. For 12 months. Nuff said. Better than this retirees withdrawal rate by 5.%.

"3.85%", "4.1%", "4% elsewhere"... + lock in and auto renewals.
Perhaps, someone can explain to me why anyone is investing in CDs these days?

@MikeW, I doubt that any would link to Fed TSP. There are 2 issues:
1. Fed TSP isn't very user-friendly.
2. TSP funds aren't listed, so don't have tickers.
But you can use the correspondence table in the link below, and use #1 - #5 for analytics. So, inputs would be manual, but you will get lots of analysis.
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/thread/112/federal-tsp-funds-etfs

Portfolio Tracking & Analytics

1. Old M* Portfolio is still around on year-to-year basis, but may go away eventually. It had a limited free version and also subscription Premium version.
https://www.morningstar.com/portfolio-manager
2. New M* Investor allows brokerage link(s).
https://investor.morningstar.com/
3. Stock Rover (SR) allows brokerage links(s).
https://www.stockrover.com/
4. You can also maintain an Excel spreadsheet with portfolio holding % and run MFO Premium for analytics; these portfolios can be saved.
Format: TICKER1 [?] TICKER2 [?] ..... TICKERn [?]
https://www.member.mfopremium.com/
5. You can maintain Excel spreadsheets with portfolios in the following format to upload and run 3 portfolios at a time with Portfolio Visualizer (PV):
TICKER1 xxx
TICKER2 yyy
TICKER3 zzz
.
.
TICKERn ???
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio
So, #1, #4, #5 require some manual work for inputs.
#2, #3, #4 require subscriptions; #5 has free and subscription versions.

The burden on the fund manager is to provide all regulatory disclosures and the burden on the fund holder is to read the disclosures, manager commentary, etc. If the manager is not doing anything to prevent the holder from knowing what the manger is doing (e.g., month end or quarter end window dressing, or intra period trades, etc.), not sure what the issue is.
IMO, for an emerging market fund to invest in developed market stocks is like US stock funds holding more cash than needed for redemptions. Some US stock funds hold as much as 80% cash for long stretches of time and several hold 20% cash. Even many balanced / allocation funds hold good amount of cash, now yielding 5%, and why not.

Just posted all ratings to MFO Premium site through March using Refinitiv's data drop of 29 March. The Friday holiday helped provide early look into 1st quarter performance.
S&P500 up nearly 11%.
Berkshire Hathaway up nearly 17%.
Momentum, energy, Nikkei, quality, growth, Europe, large-cap, mid-cap, commodities all double-digit gains so far this year.
Core bonds off a percent or so.
Long bonds -4.4%.
ADX Adams Diversified Equity CEF up 10.7%.
DODGX Dodge & Cox Stock up 8.1%.
VIG Vanguard Dividend Appreciation ETF 7.7%.
JEPI JPMorgan Equity Premium ETF 6.4%.
DFSVX DFA US Small Cap Value 4.6%.
PFF BlackRock iShares Preferred Income ETF 4.8%.
BIL State Street T-Bill ETF 1.3%.
PIMIX Allianz PIMCO Income 0.8%.
PRHYX T Rowe Price High Yield 0.2%.
A bit surprising that high yield is lagging.

To each his own. :) Did I read that you are a new subscriber to the data side of MFO? I hope you have as much fun with it as I do.

Yeap. Very much looking forward to it!

A five year run at MFO runs from March through February at this point. I am curious where you got the negative alpha for VSMIX? Portfolio Visualizer also shows a positive number starting from January 2019.

MStar. Currently showing: 0.11 / -4.48 at 5 / 10 y for VSMIX, which is a notable improvement in just a couple of days. One might say that m-stars are moving in your favor...

Is my approach "simpler" than leaving the allocations to a few managers like Cinnamond? I suppose most would say not. OTOH, I'm reasonably certain that the funds I own are actually investing in what they advertise, rather than waiting for Godot. And none of my funds charge me a buck 38 for the pleasure of their company.

To be fair, unlike Godot, Mr. Cinnamond does come by bearing gifts worth more than a buck 28 from time to time. Though, those who have chosen to wait for him always hope that he does so sooner rather than later... :)

M* now provides Drawdown data for 3, 5, 10 yrs only. How did you get the data for 2009? From M* Chart? Old file data?

Yeap. M* Chart.

Depending on the time window used, M* charts may display daily, weekly or monthly data.
Max Drawdowns at M*, MFO Premium, etc use monthly data.
My guess is that M* Chart display you looked at around 2009 had daily or weekly display that made MaxDD higher.

Indeed, I used the daily. That would explain the difference.
Wonder why the standard MaxDD calculation is not based on daily data - the differences look to be quite significant even in this one case and a refinement from monthly to daily data does not appear to be that computationally taxing?

M* now provides Drawdown data for 3, 5, 10 yrs only. How did you get the data for 2009? From M* Chart? Old file data?

Yeap. M* Chart.

Depending on the time window used, M* charts may display daily, weekly or monthly data.
Max Drawdowns at M*, MFO Premium, etc use monthly data.
My guess is that M* Chart display you looked at around 2009 had daily or weekly display that made MaxDD higher.

The main problem with

I've not been a fan since losing money investing in ARIVX (I think that was Cinnamond's first solo adventure with his "disciplined" style).

I won't try to defend Mr. Cinnamond's record or explain why I find his approach compelling - I've done this on a

different thread - and I can sympathize with the feelings one gets from a losing investment that sometimes takes year not to pay off. But to correct something you have said for others: ARIVX was Cinnamond's third fund as a manager and, I believe, second as a lead after ICMAX.
In my experience (and I've invested in three Cinnamond funds), his funds tend to go through a long period of flat performance, followed by fairly rapid appreciation bursts, followed by another period of flat performance. All of this can be readily understood within the technicalities of his style. So, when one is unfortunate to invest towards the end of the run, losses - though rather modest losses - would follow should one sell out before the next run or if Cinnamond decides to liquidate the fund (as he - rather objectionably, imo - did with ARIVX).
To be fair, if you wait for and hold on through the run, the returns might be quite impressive. I've invested early in ARIVX and did make money on it. Similarly, ICMAX returned ~ 100% over Cinnamond's tenure there (roughly, 2006 - 2011) while SP500 barely broke even during that time.

I think you touched on several good points. I mentioned Arnott before. Both did well when markets went down, but since 2009, PAUIX had a terrible performance compared to the easy SPY. Finding compelling risk-reward funds is what I have done since 2000. It is part of my system, but I stopped following Cinnamond more than 10 years ago.
The guy also jumps from one fund to another = not a great idea.
The main problems:
1) Is he going to be another Arnott in the next 5 years?

I hope not. I have years of experience w Cinnamond and have a reasonable expectation that this will be the case, but most cannot predict the future w 100% accuracy. Those who can grow their money at a double-exponential rate, causing them to spend less time on forums...

2) How much patience is someone supposed to have?

My personal investment horizon is 5 - 10 y.

3) What % of your portfolio are you investing with him? The less you invest, the more it's insignificant. For me this is major.

Currently ~ 10% of retirement, but I have just learned of his new fund and may invest more in the future. The main thing holding me back is not Cinnamond's investment approach, but what he did in liquidating ARIVX. To put it bluntly, imo, that was gutless and he let a lot of people down who trusted him to work through the cycle. If that is something you find significant, I am with you 100%.

4) How do you know when in the start, middle, or end of the cycle? Remember, markets can be irrational for a lot longer than you think. Prof Shiller claimed in 2012, based on valuation, that SPY would make only 4% after inflation in the next 10 years, it made 11%
(link)

As I tried to explain before, I do not believe myself to be a capable market timer. At most, I pick an investment and look for a good entry point over a few weeks. However, if I were to judge a good entry point for myself, based on my experience w Cinnamond ("flat-burst-flat" [repeat]), I would be most comfortable doing so when his fund has been flat for a while - one of the reasons I invested a substantial amount in PVCMX right after learning about it a few days ago. His max DD's also tend to be rather small, so the main risk - in my eyes - is opportunity cost.

5) Cinnamond plays timing hugely, owning less than 20% in stocks is difficult to grasp.
But, I'm a flexible investor who looks beyond categories and is interested in total portfolio risk-reward performance.
Someone's style and goals matter a lot when selecting funds.
How many funds do you own, what trading are you doing,

I think you are misinterpreting Cinnamond's strategy - or, else, I misunderstand it. The way I see it, he looks for "value" and will buy it in any market irrespective of timing. If he is low on equity, it means he simply cannot find enough value available.
I own a whole bunch of funds but most with only a toe-hold position: either closed or ones I'd like to make myself keep track of more closely.
Sadly, I am often time-constrained and cannot properly focus on investing for extended periods. When I have time, I sometimes do a bit of equity trading, but that's about it.

I've invested early in ARIVX and did make money on it.

What % did you make less than SPY or PRWCX?

Unfortunately, MStar no longer provides the record for ARIVX and I could not find another place to chart it w div. I'd invested very early on, perhaps, in the first couple of months - since I followed Cinnamond from ICMAX - w a decent entry point. I remember I was net positive in the end but would not venture on the %. If you can find where to chart it, I would be curious of the PRWCX comparison, since I also own that fund.

Hi yugo,
I invest where markets tell me.
1995-2000 US LC 100% indexes
2000-2010 Value, SC, international mainly in 3 funds FAIRX,OAKBX, SGIIX
Since 2010 mainly US LC+ PIMIX until 2018. Then mainly bond funds.
In 2009 PAUIX(Arnott) + Cinsmond looked great, 6 months after the bottom they lagged badly, I sold both and never bought again.
The idea is not to fight markets but to join them. In my world managers must be at the top 30% in the last 3-6 (maybe 9 months). If they don't I sell, I don't care why they lag. So, this easy system guarantee that my funds are at the top. I also look at risk-adjusted performance.

Hi FD100,
That sounds like you are market-timing, albeit on a year-scale.
For that to work, one needs, imo:
1. To either have a really good "intuitive" feel for it. I know people like that, but - unfortunately - am not one of them. Or
2. To have a strategy, which works over years. This is a bit problematic, imo, since any good strategy typically gets "discovered" and arbitraged out on the scale of years.
It sounds like you are relying on the "strategy" approach and it had worked for quite a while for you. This is great! (Though, if you've been mainly in bonds since 2018, you might have lost quite a bit in potential equity returns - but perhaps your personal circumstances warrant that.)
My personal approach is rather different. As an absolute return investor, I mainly care about how much I make on the annual bases irrespective of what the market does. So, if my manager delivers, say, 10% on average over 5-10 y w good risk/volatility metrics while some market segment goes up 50% in a particular year - I am happy for both myself and for the guy that got the 50. It takes talent as well as investment expertise superior to mine, however, to do it across different markets. This is why I put so much stock in selecting the right person to manage my investments - one who has the skills to, as you put it, "fight the market" when it goes against them and to get the superior returns when the market - inevitably - turns. Just a different approach...

I don't find FPACX compelling.

I think FPACX is a good fund and would not have raised the issue if we were discussing funds per se. It just looks to me - especially after the above attempt at analysis - that active management has not contributed much to its performance. It's like an index+ fund: e.g., a better version of ~ VBIAX w > $50B, some of which might be better served by FPACX, imo. If one is looking for a manager to steward their investments, though, the above would suggest that Mr. Giroux/PRWCX might be the better choice. (But, perhaps, I have overlooked something and so welcome any evidence to the contrary.)

M* now provides Drawdown data for 3, 5, 10 yrs only. How did you get the data for 2009? From M* Chart? Old file data?

Yeap. M* Chart.

And it's all about finding an edge for the next game.

Investing is analogous to sport in many aspects - finding the business with compelling underlying value at the right time. That is Warren Buffet’s approach. For most of us, investing in S&P500 index would capture most of the recent tech sector advancement. Some active managers did an excellent job in navigating the market. Bonds are more tricky in my opinion.

5.75 years is far too short a time frame to characterize your investment prowess. (If it will make you feel any better, famed investor John Hussman has managed an annualized return of 0.09% over the past 5 years with his flagship fund, HSGFX, according to M*.)
The others are spot-on. The S&P has been on a romp for many years. Value stocks have suffered. Most of us reach an age where not losing money becomes more important than out-running the indexes. So a defensively positioned investor should not expect to beat the market. Plus, indexes are just that. They do not reflect the impact of management fees, trading costs, record keeping and other “real world” expenses. Take all fund ratings with a grain of salt. Sometimes they’re indicative of future performance. But not always.
You are correct that most balanced funds didn’t protect in 2022. With the 10-year sitting somewhere around 1 or 2% bonds were a dicey proposition in the years preceding ‘22. I’m not even confident the 4.2% today is attractive - but it’s a lot better than a few years ago. That said, I think 2022 was a bit of an outlier in terms of the carnage bond funds suffered.
All depends on needs and your own risk tolerance, but for future reading you might take a look at alternative funds. They’ve received a lot of press in recent years owing perhaps to the issues with balanced funds you mention. Like any sector - some good ones and plenty of bad as well.