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.

Boeing is glad this story is out.

@linter. Definately multiple accounts. Currently have 5. Why. Reports of people getting locked out of accounts for multiple reasons. Possibility of technical issues at brokerage with no availability of account. Availability of securities and cost differences among the multiple brokerages. SIPC coverage max is 500K per distinct account types. Yes it is a hassle but I save money and sleep better at night.

So his 'bible' is selling for $59.99. Which also is '666' upside down. Irony!
Semi-relatedly, I seem to remember the old saying that fascism will "come to America wrapped in a flag and carrying a bible."

What do Magazine Covers say about things? Guess what is Barron's Cover tomorrow?
https://www.barrons.com/articles/donald-trump-djt-stock-truth-social-net-worth-election-1005340a?mod=hp_HERO
Edit/Add, 3/30/24. For details, see LINK.

Determination of whether to buy 60-40 or 100-0 should be made before the purchase. No point analyzing the results in hindsight, just as it's pointless to analyze races that have been run, or games that have been played. If we had time machines, we would all be in NVDA or MSTR (why just stop at SP500?).

The most simple of a lazy portfolio (2 holdings) having a 50/50 mix using a Total U.S. equity and Total U.S. bond funds for holdings. The account has an auto re-balance once a year, as is required. This data (except the dollar amount) is an active 529 account. The CAGR over the time frame you suggested, of 6.90% is fully acceptable. There were not any withdrawals or additions to the account during this time frame.
NOTE: the formatting is a bit clunky.
Personal summary/note: one doesn't need to be excessively involved in a complex portfolio to have a decent return over time.
Of course, this portfolio would not be a money maker or not a likely suggestion from an adviser.

Portfolio performance statistics
Portfolio Initial Balance Final Balance CAGR Stdev Best Year Worst Year Max. Drawdown	Sharpe Ratio Sortino Ratio Market Correlation
Portfolio 1  $10,000	$15,176 	6.90% 	10.59%	19.81%	-16.32%	-19.72% 	00.73	               0.97

Using portfoliovisualizer again you can compare 3 different 50/50 portfolios starting June 2018. An example of DODIX and SCHD had a CAGR of 7.65 % with a worst year of -7.04%.

An annual return of 5.54% is quite respectable for a 50/50 allocation for the past 5.75 years. Think you are not having a balance between growth and value stocks. Realistically you need to have both and make small adjustments in rebalancing. For example, S&P500 index returned 26% in 2023 while the value index returned 9.2%. The use of Great Owl or Honor Roll would be a starting point. The overall allocation and individual choices could make a sizable differences.
You made the correct decision on short duration bonds in a rising rate environment (2022-2023). What you planning to do when the FED cut rate in June/July? Moving to intermediate term bonds incrementally would be appropriate to take advantage of increase bond prices.

Friday, 29 March, '24:
TS has bumped-up quite nicely for me. All within just a couple of months. Up 23 percent since start of Feb. After transferring the brokerage to Schwab, I'm told there's mandatory withholding on dividends of 15%. Stinky poopy. I just hate mandatory withholding. But if the thing continues to rise, I'll live with it. The other ADR that I dumped was NHYDY and they mandatorily withheld 25%. That was truly unacceptable.

PCE +2.5%, core +2.8%.
https://www.bea.gov/news/2024/personal-income-and-outlays-february-2024

@realityspeaks. If you are familiar with portfoliovisualizer.com (it’s great) input VWINX 50% and VWELX 50% and set the appropriate dates and your dividend reinvestment plan. Then compare to your collection. Just because something is a great owl or 5 stars /gold at Morningstar doesn’t make it so. Or make it so for your situation or mix. IMHO.

Multiple Funds with the overall allocation at the 50-50 ratio. Again almost all my choices on the funds have been from the Great Owls or honor roll listed within this website.

Clarification please. Do you mean you employed one or more “Balanced Funds”? Or a group of equity and bond funds to have a 50/50 asset allocation? One could be 50/50 holding Wellesley and Wellington or the same allocation with lots of moving parts.

I am 66 years old and have managed my own fund choices since 2018 and I have dutifully followed the advice of lowering my exposure to the stock market as I get closer to retirement. So, since June of 2018 I have been very close to a 50-50 Stock Bond portfolio with the stocks weighted towards the value end vs the growth end. The bond portfolio was weighted to the short end of the duration. Almost all of my fund choices can be found in the Great owls or the Honor Roll as described on this website. I just did an analysis of my past 5.75 years relative to if I had just left everything invested in the S&P 500.
The results are disappointing, and I do not understand the reasoning now of the balanced fund approach etc. So my overall return in this time period was 32% which works out to be 5.54% annually. The S&P 500 returned 84.09% or 14.62% annually. In real dollars I went from 660K to 871K. The S&P 500 would had taken me to 1.44Million.
In the up markets I got on average 61% of the return of the S&P 500 which I am okay with because I was not exposed as much to the market.
It's the down market. I managed to capture 85% of the down market, The Bond portfolio failed to moderate the losses. In 2022 in a down market I captured 107% of the loss suffered by the S&P 500 I was invested at 52% stocks and 48% the whole time period in 2022.
I am slowly learning that almost all financial advisor advice is BS sorry for my French.