This still works but not enough criteria(https://screen.morningstar.com/fundselectoraol.html)
Thanks!
Worth noting is that M* hasn't maintained its basic screener (its "official" one as well as this one) for years. This can be seen in its selection of fund categories.
For example, it lists "market neutral". That hasn't been around since April 2021, so a search on this category turns up empty. And it doesn't offer the replacement categories: equity market-neutral, event-driven, and relative value arbitrage.
For 93.567+% of investors, this doesn't matter. Or more accurately, it might matter only if you're searching for one of the new categories. If a category was merged into an older existing one (e.g. long-short credit into nontraditional bond), you'll still find funds, but under a different category.
Here are the category changes:
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/introducing-new-alternative-morningstar-categories

Thanks for the feedback @raqueteer. hard to find a consistently strong performing fund in the small cap space if you look at the 1 3 5 and 10 year time frames that also has good downside protection. Large cap has so strongly outperformed small cap over last ten years. Best example I have found that meets these attributes is PKSAX. AVUV and CALF look interesting.

Fidelity screener should be good for 93.567+% of investors. Schwab has more funds, let's give it 95.25%. Both have many criteria to select from. That looks like a good solution for a little imperfection.
If I can't buy a fund at Schwab or Fidelity I don't care because I'm not opening other accounts.
Others who look for perfection may have to pay a fee.
This still works but not enough criteria(https://screen.morningstar.com/fundselectoraol.html)
MFO is pretty good (https://www.member.mfopremium.com/quicksearch/)

A couple of somewhat obvious questions come to mind:
- What defines a "plan" (for the 15 year rule requirement)? "It is unclear whether this 15-year period restarts when there is a beneficiary change", according to one site. Another suggests that "changing designated beneficiaries ... will likely restart that 15-year clock."
https://www.daypitney.com/insights/publications/2023/06/fog4-secure-2-0-permits-rollovers-529-plans-roth-iras/
https://www.savingforcollege.com/article/roll-over-529-plan-funds-to-a-roth-ira
Another wrinkle to this question: what happens when you roll over the 529 plan from one state to another? With a Roth-to-Roth rollover, the Roth clocks don't restart. But this is a new rule and involves a 529-to-Roth rollover.
- Will your state follow the federal rules? Or will it tax the 529 rollover as a distribution?

While no one is sure which states will play along with federal rules and which ones will choose to tax 529 to Roth IRA rollovers, California is one state that seems likely to levy income taxes on these rollovers. This is based on the fact the state hasn't updated their rules to match federal laws regarding 529 plans, including ones built on student loans and using 529 plan funds for private K-12 tuition.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertfarrington/2023/11/21/warning-ability-to-convert-529-funds-to-roth-ira-could-be-problematic/?sh=5accc8a04abc.
Maybe there's something more definitive. These are just questions, not answers.

Why use M* screener at all when Fidelity is a robust one, includes ETFs, and free?

Because Fidelity's excludes funds that Fidelity doesn't carry.
For example, in the global small/mid M* category, the Fidelity screener returns 74 OEFs (including closed and leveraged funds) and 15 ETFs; Portfolio Visualizer's screener returns 138 OEFs (same as M* Investor's screener), 14 ETFs, and 7 CEFs. Figures are for share classes, not distinct funds.
(FYI the ETF it misses is FIXT, an ETF that M* rates gold at the top of the page, but silver in the text that says it was downgraded.)
Part of the difference is that Fidelity doesn't sell all share classes of funds, e.g. AGCVX (investor class shares) are NTF at Schwab but not sold at Fidelity, so they don't show up in the screener. Since Fidelity does sell the institutional shares AGCSX (albeit w/TF and $5M min), at least the fund shows up in its screener.
Other funds are completely missing, e.g. TSYNX. This is available even at Vanguard NTF. Not at Fidelity, so not reported by the screener. Not recommending it, just observing that its launch was written up at MFO in 2018.

”I could never understand why anyone has more than 7-8 funds (they are usually the ones who say, there is no right number). You go over 10 funds and you are over-diversified.”

Silly remark from FD. You’ll have a hard time documenting that the number of funds or portfolio holdings alone has an appreciable effect on average return over time.
One example: Leuthold’s LCR (ETF) sports a gold rating at M* and straight 5’s at Lipper (except for 3 on expense). This ETF invests in a basket of other ETFs - currently numbering 32, Maybe you know more about managing assets than these guys do?
Sounds like you might be referring to me in the quoted snippet. I did say the number of funds doesn’t matter in itself. I did not say I have 10 funds. (Go back and read it.) I have only 8 funds which should elicit your great approval as that falls inside your ordained allowable number. There are 2 additional non-fund components in my 10/10 portfolio. One consists of assorted cash holdings (totaling 10%) The other is a group of individual equities in which I have a high conviction. (10% in aggregate)..

I could never understand why anyone has more than 7-8 funds (they are usually the ones who say, there is no right number). You go over 10 funds and you are over-diversified.
What usually happens with over 10 funds? you are not sure and/or you have owned lagging categories for years. You already know that the SP500 beat most funds over 15-20 years so why do you own so many funds? This was my initial start (1995-2000) investing 90+% in VG Total index and the rest in VG growth.
If you are into more analysis looking for generic funds with great risk/reward how can you have more than 8 funds? How many great ideas can you have? I never had more than 5-6 funds.
While most think that you can't find great funds that have done well for years, history proved them wrong. PRWCX has done it. PIMIX did it for 9-10 years.
More at (https://fd1000.freeforums.net/thread/2/generic-ideas)
Let's use the above link. How about running a screener every 4-6 funds and buying good risk/reward funds? This way you are not stuck in a lagging category/fund for years.
First, I select allocation+international equity+US equity (link)
Second, select the risk tab on top, then Sharpe + sort Sharp (link)
Third, select overview again (https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/fund-screener/results/table/overview/sharpeRatio3Yr/desc/1?assetClass=BAL%2CDSTK%2CISTK&category=AL%2CCA%2CCH%2CCV%2CDP%2CEI%2CEM%2CES%2CFA%2CFB%2CFG%2CFQ%2CFR%2CFV%2CIH%2CJS%2CLB%2CLG%2CLS%2CLV%2CMA%2CMB%2CMG%2CMQ%2CMV%2CPJ%2CRI%2CSB%2CSG%2CSV%2CSW%2CTA%2CTD%2CTE%2CTG%2CTH%2CTI%2CTJ%2CTK%2CTL%2CTN%2CTU%2CTV%2CWB%2CWG%2CWV%2CXM%2CXQ%2CXY&order=assetClass%2Ccategory).
The above list is sorted by Sharpe from best (high) to low. All you have to do is look at performance for YTD,1,3,5 years.
Funds to consider:
GOODX=MC value
HIMDX=SC value
FMILX=LC value
BISMX/BISAX=SC+MC international value
SP500 is always a choice
Just 5 funds and good diversification.
============
MFO also has a great screener and Charles Lynn Bolin posted great articles about it.

(Snip)
2024 will determine whether I stick with PSTL. David Sherman warned about share dilution in the REIT sector, and that DID happen in '23. Very attractive dividend, though, and lots of room for growth.
9% undervalued. (Morningstar.)
1-year return: +6.74%.
Price/Cash Flow 10.37%
Yield: 6.52%. Payout ratio: 728.85% is NUTS. What gives with that?

@Crash, payout ratio uses “dividends” divided by GAAP earnings.
The best measure of “earnings” (or distributable cash flow) for REITs (due to accounting rules like depreciation etc. which don’t affect cash flow) is funds from operation/adjusted funds from operation (FFO/AFFO)….a quick Google search found PSTL’s AFFO is $1.01, with a distribution of 95 cents. That’s a mid 90’s% payout ratio, which doesn’t allow much retained capital for growth (meaning debt or equity issuance will be required for growth).
Sorry if you know all of this! :)
Happy New Year

A good explanation. Thank you!
EDIT to add: Just remembered that REITS are REQUIRED to pay-out something like 90% of profits, yes? So, then......

(Snip)
2024 will determine whether I stick with PSTL. David Sherman warned about share dilution in the REIT sector, and that DID happen in '23. Very attractive dividend, though, and lots of room for growth.
9% undervalued. (Morningstar.)
1-year return: +6.74%.
Price/Cash Flow 10.37%
Yield: 6.52%. Payout ratio: 728.85% is NUTS. What gives with that?

@Crash, payout ratio uses “dividends” divided by GAAP earnings.
The best measure of “earnings” (or distributable cash flow) for REITs (due to accounting rules like depreciation etc. which don’t affect cash flow) is funds from operation/adjusted funds from operation (FFO/AFFO)….a quick Google search found PSTL’s AFFO is $1.01, with a distribution of 95 cents. That’s a mid 90’s% payout ratio, which doesn’t allow much retained capital for growth (meaning debt or equity issuance will be required for growth).
Sorry if you know all of this! :)
Happy New Year

Some thought my 10% per fund too high. Than @Roy chimes in @ 95% with Giroux.
All my funds are team-managed. None of them can compete with a rock star.

”Well, it's one for the money, Two for the show, Three to get ready, Now go, cat, go!”

The Sept 2023 portfolio has 35.9% in fixed income and cash. That breaks down into:
2.6% a STRIPS maturing in 2036 (12 year duration),
1.0% a STRIPS maturing in 2041 (17 year duration),
1.1% a STRIPS maturing in 2049 (25 year duration),
2.8% health care convertible bonds maturing in 2024 (or earlier, in default),
28.4% money market funds
That's a barbell, with nearly all the weight on the short end (including the MMF). Very conservative. Just a little speculation on interest rates falling, in which case the STRIPS will pop.

The year turned out pretty good! The Great Normalization Bull is now in its 15th month. And, like has happened with each bull market for the past 100 years, the S&P 500 has recovered all previous drawdown and sits at a new all-time high, month-ending December.

@hank
Since we've moved cash we had parked in a MM and a couple bond funds to TRP Cap App & Income (PRCFX), we are back to 95% with DG. 17 years and counting. Whenever I've moved some dollars away from DG through the years it has always cost me money.

Proportions: I continue to be severely overweight PRWCX, approaching 40% of my stuff. 5 single-stocks = 14% of total. Gonna bring it down to 4, rather than 5. I guess there's no magic recipe for avoiding "Di-worse-ification."

REITs.
I recall @davidmoran likes FRT. Still 26% undervalued (Morningstar.)
Stock Rover pegs the target price @$107.50, just 4.32% from where it sits at the end of 2023. I continue to track it.
2024 will determine whether I stick with PSTL. David Sherman warned about share dilution in the REIT sector, and that DID happen in '23. Very attractive dividend, though, and lots of room for growth.
9% undervalued. (Morningstar.)
1-year return: +6.74%.
Price/Cash Flow 10.37%
Yield: 6.52%. Payout ratio: 728.85% is NUTS. What gives with that?

Ahh, the age-old difference in opinion on how many positions are ideal in a portfolio. Many go for the perceived (index like?) comfort of volume and others can be decisive and have less holdings. Personally, I do think having many or "toe hold" positions can lead to more in-and-out decisions and therefore reduced return. I, admittedly and begrudgingly, tend to go both ways. I feel very comfortable with a few balanced funds making up the bulk of my portfolio. On the other hand, do I need 3 SC funds and 3 LC's? No. But I can be undeceived at times. If I can exist with ~15 funds, I'm feeling pretty good about myself.

I don’t think it’s about “making more” or how many is the “best number”. Might be if someone trades too much as @MikeM says. I just think it’s a lot easier to hold a few large equally weighted positions. (Obviously stocks would need to be in smaller amounts). I got tired of the hassle and associated tracking / record keeping / trading a large inventory requires. As for specific funds, I have opportunities today I never dreamed of while largely parked at TRP. So it hasn’t been hard at all settling on a few I think I understand well and am willing to sink 10% into.
It’s never “set in cement”. If you have 10% in a somewhat aggressive fund that’s done well for a while - maybe shift the 10% into a similar but more conservative fund to protect the gains. Conversely, if some area of investments (equities, commodities, bonds) falls sharply, you might want to shift that 10% into a more aggressive holding to take advantage of lower valuations.
No. I don’t believe there’s any “right” number of funds. A lot of ways to skin a cat!

Ahh, the age-old difference in opinion on how many positions are ideal in a portfolio. Many go for the perceived (index like?) comfort of volume and others can be decisive and have less holdings. Personally, I do think having many or "toe hold" positions can lead to more in-and-out decisions and therefore reduced return. I, admittedly and begrudgingly, tend to go both ways. I feel very comfortable with a few balanced funds making up the bulk of my portfolio. On the other hand, do I need 3 SC funds and 3 LC's? No. But I can be indecisive at times. If I can exist with ~15 funds, I'm feeling pretty good about myself.

I don't know if I would sleep well with 10>% in a fund. At one time that may have occurred. Only T bills & notes in that 10% or higher range as of late.
Happy New Year to All, Derf
P.S. @hank
How did you make
out with Draft Kings.
Last I saw up 74% on the year !

@Derf. As I’ve remarked before, the last (DKNG) buy was at around $10 early in the year and I dumped it for a $3 - $4 p/s gain in only a few weeks. (Never could stand success.) Current price: $35
I have no desire to own any gaming stock - especially this one. Have commented elsewhere on the extent these buzzards now go to steal from lure-in unsuspecting lower income folks and empty their pockets (with assorted bells & whistles under the guise of “gaming”) . They’ve expanded far beyond being a simple way to put a $5 bet on your favorite team. Hell - I now believe this type of predatory practice should be outlawed.
It’s your money @Derf - But 10% in a single fund does not strike me as outrageous. Of course it depends on which fund. From the early 70s until mid 90s I was 100% in a good diversified global equity fund from Templeton (later Franklin/Templeton). In the early going when you’re DCA ‘ng in it’s probably an OK approach.

Hi @MikeM et al You're welcome. The graphic link I use goes to Barcharts and doesn't include distributions. Generally, this is not a large problem to still allow for a quick and dirty look at an etf sector performance. The longer the time frame, and/or larger distributions begins to NOT provide correct information for 'total return'. An example especially shows in the fixed income areas or etf's that may provide high dividend rates.
An example: The Barcharts indicates a 52 week gain of 4.3%. This works as an 'almost' YTD for this last trading week of the year; BUT the real YTD is 9.4% from both M* and Stockcharts, which include the total returns with distributions. One may always go to the source (issuer) of the etf for correct return data.
An example of smaller total distribution amounts is for the QQQ etf. M* and Stockcharts indicate a total return for 2023 of 54.9%, and Invesco (QQQ) indicates 54.84% YTD, while the Barcharts link indicates 53.7% YTD.
However, the Barcharts link I use still offers the best broad range of etf performances that I am aware of. And YES, we may all look back upon 2023 and wonder why didn't I/we invest in that sector. :)
I will add a note in future posts.

Changes under 10% have minimal effect, and under 5% are meaningless.

That's my approach to investing/allocations as well. For me, generally anything under 10% is either a starter position, placeholder, or a speculative thing -- I don't expect anything under 10% to move the needle much either way unless it's levered (which I don't use anyway).