+1 Mike Wilson just turned bullish. Sell all? :)

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1014913/000110465924063686/tm2414610d1_497.htm
497 1 tm2414610d1_497.htm 497
Filed pursuant to Rule 497(e)
Registration No. 333-07305
1940 Act File No. 811-07685
FRONTIER FUNDS, INC.
Supplement to Prospectus Dated October 31, 2023
Frontier HyperiUS Global Equity Fund
Institutional Class Shares (FHYPX)
Service Class Shares (FHGSX)
The Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Frontier Funds, Inc. (the “Company”), based upon the recommendation of Frontegra Asset Management, Inc. (“Frontegra”), has determined to liquidate the Frontier HyperiUS Global Equity Fund (the “Fund”). Frontegra is the Fund’s investment adviser and Hyperion Asset Management Limited doing business as H.A.M.L. is the Fund’s subadviser. After considering a variety of factors, the Board concluded that it would be advisable and in the best interest of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund be closed and liquidated as a series of the Company, effective as of the close of business on the liquidation date, June 10, 2024.
The Board approved a Plan of Liquidation that determines the manner in which the Fund will be liquidated. Pursuant to the Plan of Liquidation and in anticipation of the Fund’s liquidation, the Fund will be closed to new purchases, additional investments and incoming exchanges, except for purchases made through an automatic investment program or the reinvestment of any distributions or a purchase exception that is approved by the officers of the Company, effective after market close on May 22, 2024. After the Fund is closed to new investments, shareholders will be permitted to exchange their shares of the Fund for shares of the other available Frontier Funds or to redeem their shares of the Fund, as provided in the Fund’s prospectus, until the liquidation date. No redemption fees will be imposed by the Fund in connection with redemptions or exchanges; however, please note that your financial intermediary may charge fees in connection with redemptions or exchanges.
Prior to the June 10, 2024, liquidation date, the Fund will no longer actively pursue its stated investment objective, and H.A.M.L. will begin to liquidate the Fund’s portfolio. The Fund’s portfolio managers will likely increase the Fund’s assets held in cash and cash equivalents in order to prepare for an orderly liquidation and to meet anticipated redemption requests. As a result, the Fund is expected to deviate from its stated investment objective, policies and strategies.
Pursuant to the Plan of Liquidation, any shareholder who has not exchanged or redeemed their shares of the Fund prior to the liquidation date of June 10, 2024, will have their shares redeemed and will receive one or more payments representing the shareholder’s proportionate interest in the net assets of the Fund as of the liquidation date, after the Fund has paid or provided for all taxes, expenses and any other liabilities, subject to any required withholdings. The automatic redemption of Fund shares on the liquidation date will generally be treated the same as any other redemption of Fund shares for tax purposes, so that shareholders (other than tax-exempt accounts) will recognize gain or loss for income tax purposes on the redemption of their Fund shares in the liquidation. In addition, the Fund and its shareholders will bear transaction costs and tax consequences associated with the disposition of the Fund’s portfolio holdings prior to the liquidation date. The Fund expects to have declared and paid a distribution or distributions, which, together with all previous such distributions, will have the effect of distributing to the Fund’s shareholders all of the Fund’s investment company taxable income and net capital gain (after reductions for any available capital loss carryforward), if any, realized in the taxable periods ending on or prior to the liquidation date. The distribution or distributions will include any additional amounts necessary to avoid federal income or excise tax. Shareholders should consult their tax adviser for further information about federal, state and local tax consequences relative to their specific situation.
This supplement should be retained with your Prospectus for future reference.
The date of this Supplement to the Prospectus is May 21, 2024.

If the press would just continue to beat the drum on "AI" and "Rate cuts", equities can easily move up another 10% this year. The market is bogging down a bit here. Just a pause?
Seems all boats have been lifted. Like Blondie sang, the tide is high.
Getting 5% ain't so bad. Reaching for >10% is more fun....as long as the party lasts. Talk of rate cuts might carry us through 2024 in nice shape.
I keep adding small amounts to PHEFX, while mainly earning ~5% from cash (CDs).

If one were "back testing a portfolio to forward implement" a retirement Withdrawal Strategy using PV as @yogibullbear has outlined above, what funds would you choose?
We can't count on the same results going forward but the hope is past performance at least rhymes with future performance and we adjust as we go.
Criteria:
ER under 1%
3 Fund Portfolio
4% WD Yearly
Minimum 7% total return on a 3,5,10 and 15 yr basis
No COLA - I prefer the portfolio's yearly balance and 4% WD be the determinant of the dollar amount of the WD
Here are some funds for consideration and comment:
90% + Equity Portfolio (VFINX, FBGRX, PRMTX, FSMEX, PRNHX)
Other Choices:
- I often see these choices as being index funds that capture the market as well as sector funds that attempt to capture the outsized gains of a sector.
aggressive-allocation
70/30 or 80/20 Allocation Funds (PRWCX, TSAIX, looking for more choices )
Other Choices:
- Manager risk can be a larger dynamic with these investments. When these funds get it right they often captures more of the upside while reducing some of the downside risk.
moderately-aggressive-allocation
60/40 or 50/50 Balanced Funds (FBALX, VBINX, VWELX, FPURX, VGSTX, GAOZX, DODBX, RBAIX, RGPAX, VGWAX)
Other Balanced Funds:
- Not all balance fund are created the same. This article separate balance funds into three categories - US-centric, Global, and Diversified
balanced-funds
Other considerations:
Low Draw Down / Low Volatility Funds
- Funds that focus on Bonds, Utilities, Preferred stock might fit in this category.
12-battle-tested-low-volatility-funds
and with ETFs:
7-yield-solution-4-etf-portfolio
(JEPI, NUSI, HNDL, HIPS)
These funds should consistently produce a minimum 7% total return that I'll call The 7% Solution - where a retiree "spends down" (WD 4% yearly) while allowing the remaining 3% to grows the portfolio for future inflation adjusted 4% WDs.

the distinction between cost method and lot selection
Exactly. Further, each - cost basis and lot selection - is a distinct legal (accounting) fiction. In reality shares owned are nothing but fungible writings in an electronic ledger. For the tax purpose of computing gain, the IRS offers two different methods of ascribing cost - average and actual. If there is no gain to be calculated for taxes (as is the case for tax-sheltered accounts), then there is no cost basis.
That doesn't preclude investors from thinking about how much money they made in buying and selling shares, regardless of whether they are taxed on cap gains. To facilitate this, brokerages often provide their own tax-sheltered "cost basis" calculations for investors to track gains in their minds. Though not on their 1040s.
To illustrate this dichotomy between tax purposes and investor perceptions, consider income averaging. Say you make $100K in a single year, but the IRS lets you average that income over five years. From your perspective, you made $100K up front; you've got $100K in your pocket. From the IRS perspective, you made $20K that year, and you'll make $20K over each of the next four years. Which is real, $100K all at once or $20K each of five years? You may say the former, since you've got $100K now, but if you're talking taxes, the $20K/year is the "real" interpretation.
Likewise, funds and brokerages have their own rules for calculating holding periods. These rules need not be consistent with each other or with tax rules.
Typically, funds (a) waive short term redemption fees on shares purchased via div reinvestment (including cap gain divs), and (b) apply the redemption fee (e.g. 2%) only to those shares sold within the short-term period as opposed to all shares sold in the transaction.
In contrast to (b), brokerages typically charge a flat short term trading fee if any of the shares sold are subject to the brokerage's short term fee. Fidelity, at least, explicitly waives fees on reinvested divs:

[Fidelity's short-term trading fee] does not apply to ... shares purchased through dividend reinvestment.

https://www.fidelity.com/bin-public/060_www_fidelity_com/documents/Brokerage_Commissions_Fee_Schedule.pdf
Finally, to illustrate the difference that ordering rules make, consider the following transactions:
Jan 4 - purchase 100 shares
Nov 25 - purchase 100 shares
Dec 28 - div reinvest - purchase 10 shares
Jan 16 (next year) - sell 110 shares
On a strict FIFO basis, 10 shares (purchased Nov 25) will have been sold within 60 days of purchase. If for the purpose of calculating a short-term redemption fee, reinvested divs are deemed to have been sold first, then the 110 shares sold will be the 10 purchased on Jan 16 and the 100 purchased on Jan 4. No fee will be assessed (assuming no fee is charged for redeeming div reinvestment shares).

"Senior bank examiners texted female employees photos of their penises."
Yikes!

Presumably no problem with the photos being too large for the texted message to handle? ;-)

It seems that BlackRock lost a court case on the proxy voting procedure that it had adopted. It had called for a majority of all votes outstanding to win. This may work for small committees, even House and Senate, but not when millions of votes may be outstanding.
Alternate is to define a quorum, and then the win is defined by specified % of votes cast (abstain count for the quorum, but aren't counted otherwise). Boaz Weinstein was arguing along these lines.
The court sided with Boaz Weinstein.
Anyway, distribution of 20% of the 12-mo rolling average of NAV of BCAT seems like a panic reaction to these events. It would mean a huge ROC. But this can be changed later by the board if BlackRock can hang on.
BlackRock probably took note of the recent victories by Boaz Weinstein over Franklin Templeton, Nuveen, etc, and decided to do something unconventional to defend itself in the proxy voting.

Withdrawal Studies with Updated PV in 2 Steps
This 2-STEP trick will work with the updated PV. This month is 05/2024 (May), so the free PV will run without issue from 5/1/2014 - 4/30/2024 (the new 10-yr limit). But the PV will also run without limit for start and end dates prior to 5/1/14 (i.e. no limitations on older data beyond the recent 10-yr window; this was found by experimentation with the updated PV). So, the current month provides the unique break point (10 years ago) for these 2 steps.
In this demo, the PV run for Bengen-type 4% withdrawal with annual COLA will be from 1/1/1985 - 4/30/2024 (the maximum possible at PV) in 2 steps.
STEP 1, PV Run 1/1/1985 - 4/30/2014 (dates beyond recent 10 years)
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&sl=3qDAqcuhRZT8zHPzoUQlPT
Initial Principal Amount $100,000, initial Monthly Withdrawal $333 (= 4,000/12 rounded).
A limitation of PV is that these inputs must be integers; to reduce the effect of rounding errors, $100,000 initial was used instead of the default $10,000. 3 funds used were VWELX, FPURX, DODBX and 1 benchmark used was VFINX.
STEP 2, PV Run 5/1/2014 - 4/30/2024 (recent 10 years), with VWELX only (asset % for FPURX and DODBX were cleared to avoid confusion). To start the 2nd PV run, use the VWELX balance and Monthly Withdrawal on 4/31/2014.
“Initial” Principal Amount $1,264,742, “initial” Monthly Withdrawal $745 (=$2,979/4 rounded; this is the payment for 4 months in 2014 divided by 4).
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&sl=6Hbd9noxhDMxTtlIuqR4ns
On 4/30/2024, Final Balance $2,530,484, Monthly payment $978 (=$3,911/4 rounded; payment for 4 months in 2024 divided by 4).
Step 2 can be repeated for FPURX (Step 3), DODBX (Step 4), VFINX (Step 5).
This is more complicated and tricky than the old single-step PV runs. One can subscribe to PV to still have that capacity.
LINK

I wasn’t able to copy BCAT’s portfolio from Morningstar. But here’s the rough allocation as M* presents it.
20% equity
42% fixed income
2% other
47% cash
I believe it’s the use of leverage that allows these totals to top 100%. Also, a high cash position might indicate some substantial short positions (or use of derivatives?) . Just an interesting one to watch. Not for my conservative taste. But fans of Rieder might enjoy watching. If you want to own something much tamer run by the same manager, the etf BINC is one option, and BRTR is another.

Per CNBC:
Trump Media & Technology Group, the parent company of Donald Trump’s Truth Social network, reported a net loss of $327.6 million, with total revenue at $770,500 in its first fiscal quarter.
< - >
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/20/trump-media-djt-q1-2024-earnings.html
.. I found the key bullet points of their earnings press release pathetically amusing, too. Sounds like they're desperate for some positive talking points....
~ Completed the Business Combination with Digital World Acquisition Corp. (DJT), Successfully Debuted as Public Company, and Now Has Over 621,000 Retail Shareholders. ~
~ Commenced Trading on Nasdaq, Under Symbol DJT on March 26, 2024 ~
~ Company Has Sufficient Working Capital as a Result of a Going Public Event ~
~ Signs First Contracts for Deployment of its TV Streaming Platform ~

BCAT a tactical-allocation term-structure CEF (liquidation 9/25/32) that was trading at 11% discount. Probably a big change in discount.

BCAT - Fairly new CEF. Owned it for a while in ‘23 after reading a positive take in Barron’s by Forsyth. One of the funds I watch every day. Quite a bounce for 1 day. Wonder what supercharged it?

As Ipostd on the other recent Vanguard thread, I moved the last two of my wife's accounts last week. She opened her first VAnguard account in 1983
They had to really work hard to drive us away

I just moved our last two accounts from Vanguard
We have had accounts there in one form or another since 1983
They really had to work hard to force us out!

Really interesting discussion. I’m swayed by a tough experience in the early 90s where I ended up with way too much credit card / revolving debt. ISTM the bottom was reached sometime after I received a CC that had some type of cash-back incentive. Anyhow, I stopped using credit cards, paid off all that debt over a year or two and then tackled paying off motor vehicle loans. Eventually I began to save. I’m sure that’s an often-told tale.
That’s when I began living on a written budget, updated once a year. Major expenses like travel, health care deductibles, taxes, new furniture, home maintenance, auto maintenance, etc. are pre-funded with monthly deposits into a bank or money market fund. Those lend themselves to being paid by credit card (which I often do), since every purchase is recorded and the “books need to balance” at year’s end. I believe Elan provides cash back for hotels. Not sure what else.
Where I have a problem using a credit card is for the “incidental / discretionary” items like food, beverage, media subscriptions, motor fuel, and odds & ends. These are paid with what I consider “pocket money”. It’s the balance in the checking account remaining after making the monthly deposit to cover pre-funded (major) expenses. It’s self regulating. Once the checking account falls to near 0, it’s time to stop spending. Since I receive SS mid-month and a pension payment around month’s end, it works well.
True, the budget process could be reworked, I suppose, to put more of those “pocket” expenses into the pre-funded camp. One problem is that it’s difficult to set up a one year budget with items that are likely to change during the next 12 months (adding or cancelling newspaper subscriptions for example).
It remains my belief that most of us mere mortals tend to spend more on incidental items (especially food, beverage, attire)) when shopping with a credit card than with cash. So if my total at the checkout is 5% higher due to the cash back incentive I’m trying to garner reap and the credit card gives me back 2% of what I spent there at the end of the month … am I coming out ahead?
Do Consumers Tend to Spend More With A Credit Card?

I searched for credit cards with good overall cash-back policies and minimal hassles.
I didn't want to play games with rotating categories, travel rewards, or some other BS.
Show me the money!
My experience with PenFed credit cards is that their points are worth less than $0.01 when redeemed for cash back or statement credit. So, the 5x points for gas and 3x points for supermarkets isn’t quite equal to 5% and 3%.
There are two different matters here - how you earn rewards (flat rate, special fixed categories, rotating categories) and how you redeem them (cash, miles, unrestricted bill credit, restricted bill credit).
On the earning side, rotating categories are the most nuisance to deal with. Even here, one can get some benefit by using a card for bills you pay automatically, like a gym or a cable/streaming service. When a rotating category card starts giving more rewards for a category, change your autobilling for services in that category to use the card. Change your autobilling back at the end of the three month rotation period. You don't have to think about categories any other time.
Fixed categories like PenFed's Platinum Rewards card (gas, supermarkets) let you avoid the hassle of dealing with continually changing categories. You can mimic this effect with Citibank Custom Cash by selecting a single category for which to use the card. Though with fixed categories you still need to remember which card you have dedicated for which category.
Truly minimal hassle means fixed rate bonus, no limit, no expiration.
On the redemption side, anything other than cash back (cash or statement credit) or actual frequent flier miles reduces redemption value. If you've got $30 in value that you redeem for a gift card (unless at a discounted price) you'll get $30 of purchasing power in the gift card, but you'll lose the opportunity to earn more cash back when you spend that $30. You'll be using the gift card and not your credit card.
Then there are redemptions that are worth less than a penny per point. This is a problem with PenFed's Platinum Rewards and even with Fidelity's credit card (if not redeemed into a Fidelity account). It is not a problem with Pen Fed's Cash Rewards card (flat 2% if you have a free Penn Fed checking account).
Some cards let you get statement credits for full value, but restrict how much you can redeem. This is often tied to travel. Capital One Venture miles can be redeemed for credit against past travel expenses (or for cash at a reduced redemption rate); BofA's travel card restricts mile redemptions to credits for past travel. If you do any traveling this is merely a hassle. If you have no travel expenses at all, this is a major impediment.
Each person's tolerance for pain (hassle) and each person's spending pattern are different. I'm okay with rotating categories, but only for supplemental cards. I keep it relatively simple by using a primary card that credits me with dollars, flat rate rewards, and no redemption restrictions. Secondary is a fixed category card. Tertiary are rotating category cards, if I remember what the categories du jour are.

@yogibearbull, I follow. Hmmm
You can start and end before 2015... up to ten years
You can start and end after 2015... up to today's date (almost 10 years)
But you can not start before 2015 and end after 2015 without PV shortening your inputs dates.
Hopefully they'll be a fix coming.

@bee, now try to run 10 years to 2020, i.e. 2010-2020 (i.e. 1/1/2010-12/30/2020 under Year-to-year), but you can not. The result is truncated to 1/1/2015-12/31/2020 (well under 10 years). Then see my post just before yours - my guess is that your 10-year test periods were all pre-mid-2014 except the full 2014/2015-2024.
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&sl=1F7QzYmcVWRuBv5WmY6L5B

Looks like a halfway decent choice. Examined it this afternoon.....
10% disc to Fair Value, per M*.
https://www.morningstar.com/stocks/xnas/ccap/quote
Dividend payments are profuse, and defy any predictable schedule, but that's to the good, not a negative.

Playing around with the new version of PV and the Backtesting Asset Allocation Portfolio tool:
1. I first select "Custom Portfolio" and eliminate the four funds that are preloaded as the "Sample Portfolio".
2. I enter a single ticker for Asset 1 (I used PRWCX) for my purposes. Change this as you please.
3. I keep SPY as the Specified Benchmark ticker. Change this as you please.
4. I run "Analyze Portfolio".
5. I then select the "Link" option and copy this link to a location such as an email to myself or as a hyperlink in a spreadsheet file.
6. I now have my own personal link to PV backtesting and my personal "Sample Portfolio".
Here's my Link to my personal "Sample Portfolio" that I could further customize.
7. Eliminate or keep the Asset 1 as Portfolio 1, enter assets for Portfolios 2 & 3 as you have in the past.
My PV Sample Portfolio
note:
Changing setting to stress test your Portfolios
To Stress test Custom Portfolios, select individual 10 year periods. I have used 2002 - 2011 as one stressful investment period. To choose your 10 year period, click on the setting tab adjusting the start and end dates.
To stress test your portfolio further (say by taking annual withdrawals), I set my withdrawal amount by selecting the "Cashflow" options . I use 4% withdrawals as my annual withdrawal.
With only a 10 year look back period I segment my look backs into distinct time periods.
One of most stressful decades (10 years) to have started retirement would have been the start of the Tech bubble followed by the GFC say, 2002 - 2011.
I compare these withdrawal results to other 10 year time frames, including the last 10 years (2015- 2024).