Rollover IRA is just a label for convenience. It's a T-IRA.
With multiple T-IRAs:
1. Find yearend balance for T-IRA#1, calculate the RMD#1, roundup;
2. Repeat for T-IRA#2, T-IRA#3, etc;
3. Add them up (RMD#1 + RMD#2 + RMD#3 + ), and that's the RMD you can take from any one of the T-IRA.

@Crash. I'm in my 3rd year of RMDs, and the complexities of it all was something I worried about going into it the first time. I don't know how other major brokers are, but Schwab makes setting up RMDs VERY EASY. They will tell you how much and when you need to withdraw, no math needed on your part.
I have mine set up to take 1/12 of the annual total each month, and how much % I want to withhold for taxes, including state. You can choose the percentage; Schwab automatically sends this to the gov and your history page will show all the numbers each month.
I have the net amount transferred automatically to my taxable account cash position and reinvest or withdraw from there as needed.

Thanks for the reminder @yogibearbull. I earlier this morning bought a fed-agency bond and moved money to the sweep right after to cover it.

Schwab's cash management is really giving me the desire to open a Fido account, since T-1 wouldn't be a problem as Fido would auto-liquidate MMFs to cover purchases. But sadly, i hear Fido doesn't DRIP preferreds, and Schwab doesn't DRIP many exchange-listed foreign stocks ... so it's kind of a tradeoff. *shrug* I dunno.

Today is the day for T+1!
Stock trading in 1920s was T+1. Then, the volume rose and it was too much to handle manually. So, it became T+5. But with computers around for 60 years, it became T+3, then T+2, and now, finally, T+1 again.
When will be T+0?
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/wall-street-returns-to-t-1-stock-trading-after-a-century-1.2077882
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/wall-street-returns-t-1-000000851.html

Bought a callable10 year Federal Agency bond in my Schwab IRA, yield 5.97%. Yield-to-call is 6.175%. First call is 2/24/25, which I assume will happen.
I've been playing the same callable game as @BaluBalu on these bonds, and they do readily get called. So, you have to check out the first call date to decide if it's worth it. This one was like buying an 8 month CD, in my mind.

From Barron's May 6, 2024,
Frequent changes in the RMD rules are confusing. For tax-deferred accounts (T-IRA, 401k, 403b), the RMD age is 73 now (was 72 in 2023, 70.5 in 2020) and it will remain so until 2033. The RMD amount depends on the yearend balances, age-related IRS factor, and other factors such as marital status, very young spouse, beneficiaries. The 1st RMD can be delayed to April 1 of the following year but beware of the tax impact of double RMDs then. The RMD can be postponed if working. (There is a special 55.0-59.5 rule that avoids 10% penalty for premature withdrawals from a current 401k/403b; not so for old 401k/403b or T-IRA). The RMDs from T-IRAs can be aggregated and taken from any one T-IRA, and it’s similar for 403b, but not for 401k. There are different rules for inherited accounts for spouses, nonspouses, trusts, and whether the deceased had started taking the RMDs. The QCDs are allowed from T-IRAs. The Roth IRAs no longer require RMDs. (R-IRA rules are simple in retirement if 5 years beyond Roth Conversions, but nightmarish otherwise.)

The future KKR bond fund sounds a bit like the fund I mentioned on May 1 on FD’s site that is heavy in ABS and the rest in non agency MBS and commercial MBS. Rarely has had a down day for some time now and everyone seems to be piling into as evidenced by their rapid increase in AUM. Never a good sign when the boat gets tilted in one direction as we have recently seen in some of the catastrophe bond funds. Another sure thing with rarely a down day until it wasn’t. The KKR fund will also probably be heavy in CLOs since that seems to be the rage in Bondland now.

@Sven, I do not recall seeing new issue non-callable Agencies in the past two years. I suspect, if they exist, the spreads over comparable Treasuries would be miniscule (10-20 bps) and may not be worth chasing such Agencies, especially because of their lower liquidity and transaction cost to sell - not to mention the potential to get caught in the DC political football.
So, what I am doing is banking on the callable Agencies offering higher yield at least through the first call date and any extension is gravy but with the risk that rates might go up and at some point I might end up owning an agency that yields less than a comparable Treasury. I am assuming the probability of that risk is low relative to the extra yield I am picking up.
Thanks for the auction schedule. I do not see an auction for 1 yr or later Treasuries until June 10.

Watch the middle part of yield curve moving up in recent week tells a different story about the bond market. I move part of intermediate investment grade bond funds back to T notes. I much prefer treasuries over CDs in taxable accounts on their after tax-return.
Here is the schedule for Tbills and notes for this year. Enjoy.
https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/221/Tentative-Auction-Schedule.pdf

Same here- going to move another 10% of Schwab SUTXX MMKT into 2 or 3 yr Treasuries- looking to get income spread to 50% MMKT / 50% fixed, out to 2028.

Enclosed please find the breakdown of FRDM (Fidelity): 25% Taiwan (9% Taiwan semiconductor manufacturing), 19% Chile, 18% South Korea, and 14% Poland.
https://digital.fidelity.com/prgw/digital/research/quote/dashboard/composition?symbol=FRDM
P.S. Warren Buffet sold his entire TSM stake in late 2023 even though he held that in less than several months.

@BaluBalu, I have been looking for non-callable agency bonds at Fidelity. Have no luck so far. Secondary offerings are what I found. Please share your experience.
Selling (recent weeks): utility and commodity funds.
Buying: 6 and 12 months T bills and this week’s 2 year T note as part of rebuilding the ladder. Extending the duration now will alleviate the 6 month T bill reinvestment risk down the road.
Also adding to hedging for equity: LCR and FMIJX/ARTKX (better valuation than US stocks).

@shipwreckedandalone, the article had several good points.
Quote: "By highlighting the “full market cycle” as the right period for judgment, they’re reminding investors that over shorter spans within the cycle they’ll look,"
FD: is now the start of the market cycle? Is it a good choice to start in the middle?
Full market cycle also means you must stay in the fund for many years to get the benefit of this fund....and now we get to the second problem
Quote: "Since most investors have limited patience, most absolute value investors have limited careers."
FD: can you stay long term in this fund? probably not, Cinnamond never managed the same fund for 15-20 years. His record shows 5 and 6 years, he is already in his fifth year at PVCMX. Since the fund has so much cash, it's obvious Cinnamond can't find valuable stocks, he may quit soon. In 2016 he said "Mr. Cinnamond recommended return of capital to his investors, noting that the market was fundamentally hostile to his investment style and that he was unwilling to charge investors “equity fund prices” while sitting at 90% cash."
==========
Do I think this fund can serve a goal?
Absolutely, if you are a retiree who has enough and just needs 6-7% with lower SD, go for it. This is where I am, but I use bond funds for that and do my own timing going to cash. On the other hand, a fund like RSIIX may generate 6-7% with lower SD but you can own it for years. MM have been paying over 5% for months now.
How strong are you going to be in years when the fund is lagging badly...2021 PVCMX made 3.2% per M* same category made over 31%.
Another idea...use it instead of VWIAX. The problem again is the fact I can own VWIAX for the next 30 years.
Another idea...it can be a good choice for someone EXPLORE portion.
Trade it? not a bad idea, but if you are a good trader you can do better or you know when to use it.
Lastly, another problem is when many investors like to mention funds that have done well in the last several years and start using them when markets start to take off or avoid stocks for years.

@bee, I don’t think a new outside CEO will ‘right’ the ship at this point. @msf summarizes the message appropriately and Vanguard wants to exit many of the less profitable business. Ironically, Vanguard was our initial 401(k) administrator and they were very good. Web support has always been barebones and clunky but we managed.
Having to upgrade their human customer services take lots of $ that Vanguard don’t want to do. We learn to use this web service well even though we have been Flagship clients for many years. Right now, we have moved all retirement accounts out from them. Next is our joint account.

@JD_co
Just checked Yahoo for two funds I own
Lists the minimum for PVCMX as $500,000 which is incorrect at least at Schwab and Vanguard
and $1,000,000 for RKCIX ( (wrong) and only our brokerages Schwab no among them
It als claims you can buy GCCELX ( GMO Climate Change fund) at Fidelity which is incorrect
I used the M* data frequently but found it was incorrect about 25% of the time
With an app it is pretty easy to search for a fund at the brokerage website

@FD1000,
1) I questioned information you provided and raised concerns about accuracy, relevance, and endless repetition.
After all, isn't this a site to discuss investing information?
I did not attack you personally.
2) I do have two different user names for investing sites. What's wrong with this?
The relationship between these two accounts can be readily ascertained by people who are curious.
Just because you have the same user name on a number of sites doesn't mean
everyone should follow your lead!
You evaded many points brought to your attention earlier in this thread.
Hopefully, you are receptive to constructive criticism and use this opportunity to meaningfully
improve the quality of your content and become a valued contributor to this wonderful community.
This is my final post in the thread pertaining to this topic.

You question accuracy? mmm...did you prove it? Did I question your accuracy or the way you invest or even mention your name?
When someone question accuracy it is usually about a fund, performance NOT someone else long-term.
The only thing I did and what I usually do was analyze funds. I never base my investment on someone else unless I verify it myself. These posts are only ideas.
I am very constructive, always was, but please analyze funds, style, and generic investment ideas.
If you ever find I made a mistake please post it with the proof.
Why use 2 names? The best posters I know have the same name on several sites. There is nothing to hide.

@Observant1, no response (yet) to my email about 4 hours ago to PV/SRL Global support.
After you posted about access, I checked it too and it works.

OK, the reply just came:
From: Analytics Support
Sent: Monday, May 27, 2024 10:37 AM
To: xxx; Analytics Support
Subject: Re: Portfolio Visualizer - HTTP 500 Error
This issue should be fixed. Apologies for the inconvenience.
Thanks,
PV Support Team

@Observant1, no response (yet) to my email about 4 hours ago to PV/SRL Global support.
After you posted about access, I checked it too and it works.

@yogibearbull,
Thanks for sending an email about the 500 Application Error.
As you mentioned, this is a very generic error which doesn't provide much information.
I'm curious if you received a response regarding the cause of the issue.
Here's one way to run a basic diagnostic test for an HTTPS connection from a Windows computer.
If the TcpTestSucceeded value is True, the destination computer is listening on port 443.
1) Open Windows PowerShell.
2) Input Test-NetConnection -ComputerName www.portfoliovisualizer.com -Port 443
ComputerName : www.portfoliovisualizer.com
RemoteAddress : 52.36.151.217
RemotePort : 443
InterfaceAlias : Ethernet
SourceAddress : 192.168.63.10
TcpTestSucceeded : True
Note: Although a computer may be listening on port 443, other issues may impede proper website functionality.
This is a good "quick and dirty" test.

IF you want a fund NTF at a brokerage, you're likely going to buy a share class with a higher ER. This is to help the fund pay the higher shelf space fee for being offered NTF.
It doesn't really matter how the fund assesses the higher ER; what matters is only that it is a higher ER than the TF share class. Many funds get to a higher ER by charging a 12b-1 fee, but not all do. Some may charge a "service fee" without having a 12b-1 plan, so this fee is not shown as a 12b-1 fee. Rather it is buried in the "other fees".
Or the fund may simply charge a higher management fee for the NTF share class and then the management company "pays" for the shelf space (out of its higher management fee). You can see this with TWCUX (0.95% management fee) and TWUIX (0.71% management fee). TWUIX is available w/TF and a $500 min at Vanguard.
At many brokerages, TRP investor shares are available NTF without extracting a higher fee to pay for the NTF shelf space. The advisor shares (that add a 0.25% 12b-1 fee) were designed in part for brokerages that charged even more for NTF shelf space.
Years ago I invested in a TRP fund, advisor share class, at Citicorp Investment Services. Citibank required a $5K min (combined bank/brokerage) for free checking. i was willing to eat $12.50/year (0.25% x $5K) for the "free" banking services. I later transferred the shares to TRP in-kind and exchanged the shares for cheaper investor shares.