I agree with hank about the declining service at T. Rowe Price. Performance of their allocation funds merits a closer look, however.
TRPBX is a global allocation (60/40) fund, with about 1/3 of stocks and 1/3 of bonds invested outside the US. For comparison, Vanguard's VSMGX is a global allocation (60/40) fund that's as vanilla as one can get, comprised of Total Stock, Total Bond, Total Int'l Stock, Total Int'l Bond. The bonds are 1/3 foreign, the stocks are 2/5 foreign.
These two funds have run neck and neck since the beginning of 2020. See PortfolioVisualizer. 3.83% annualized for TRP, 3.87% for Vanguard.
It's difficult to classify these funds. M* lumps them in with domestic moderate allocation funds, and they both rate three stars on that scale. As Tarwheel observed, foreign holdings have underperformed. If compared strictly among global allocation funds, these funds would likely have garnered more stars.
Lipper calls TRPBX a mixed asset target allocation moderate fund, while calling VSMGX a mixed asset target allocation growth fund. So it's not surprising that Lipper rates TRPBX a 4 (out of 5) for total return while rating VSMGX only a 1.
The point is that these funds are doing what they said they would do and are performing as expected given what they invest in. If a global allocation fund with dynamic allocations is of more interest than a fund with static allocations, TRP offers RPGAX. PortfolioVisualizer shows that it has done a bit better than the other funds since 2020.
M* calls RPGAX fund a global allocation fund, while Lipper calls it flexible portfolio fund. It is competitive with CIBFX and MDLOX. M* calls both of those global allocation funds; Lipper calls MDLOX a flexible portfolio fund but calls CIBFX a global equity income fund.
Regarding TRRIX, some of the same comments apply. Long term, it has paced VSCGX, Vanguard's 40/60 global allocation (index based) fund. Since the beginning of 2020, it has surpassed VSCGX by a full percentage point (3.18% vs 2.11% annualized).
I agree that it is unfortunately burdened with PRCIX. That's a risk with in-house funds of funds (one that Vanguard circumvents by using underlying index funds). FWIW, TRRIX has somewhat more invested in TRPZX than in PRCIX (TRRIX fact sheet). Though those are the two elephants in the fixed income room.
Lipper loves TRRIX - 5's across the board (except for tax efficiency), since Lipper considers it a Target Now fund. The Vanguard fund is in Lipper's doghouse, since Lipper considers it a Target Allocation Moderate fund.

@Tarwheel: "TRP also started investing about 10% of its assets in hedge funds, which from my view hasn’t helped performance a bit."
RPGAX (Global Allocation, now 10 yrs old IIRC) also has like 10-15% exposure in a black-box. To my knowledge they never really explained what *exactly* Blackrock was managing/investing in for the fund. But wow ... I didn't know their Spectrum funds also had a PE component, too!
I agree w/Hank that their fund offerings are kind of 'meh' and definitely have proliferated over the years -- frankly I'd think they should consolidate/close some of them if for no other reason than to make their offerings list less cluttered with a lot of me-too funds that invest similarly to each other.
I only hold PRWCX but am keeping its income-oriented cousin (forgot the symbol) on watch as a possible holding down the road. I'll also track TCAF out of curiosity, but don't really have a need for it in my portfolios.

I own it in the wife's IRA. Only just more than 4% of the entire portfolio's total. Rates coming down ought to help, whenever that may start. Seems to me they "forgot" to take the annual small IRA maintenance fee.
I have lotsa free time. I check every day. BRUFX is heavy with SMIDs. Surely, that's a drawback. The elder Bruce died, yes, and I couldn't believe my eyes when Morningstar downgraded it because of personnel changes. Jayzuz. I admit I'm getting itchy. That big cash stake hurts.
"...The strategy's portfolio management team does not stand out and still needs to prove it has a competitive advantage. This earns the strategy an Average People Pillar rating, recently downgraded from Above Average. The strategy's effective investment approach earns an Above Average Process Pillar rating. Independent of the rating, analysis of the strategy's portfolio shows it has maintained a considerable underweight position in the Europe-Developed region and has a considerable overweight in developed markets regions compared with category peers. The strategy's parent organization is industry standard, albeit with some strong attributes like an experienced bench of portfolio managers, but is held back by low portfolio manager retention. This earns the firm an Average Parent Pillar rating...." ---Morningstar.
Ridiculous, risible. The ONLY Manager now is the younger Bruce, the son. Unless I missed an announcement?
Not only is the Fund heavy with SMIDs, but it's got a VALUE tilt. Looking back, it's not been VALUE'S time in the sun lately, right?
Fixed Income: 4.59%.
"Cash" 32.31%
There's something less than half a billion dollars AUM. If Mr. Bruce is bound and determined to be contrarian, I'd say the Fund's results are showing it. If that is the case, then performance comparisons won't be very-well focused, targeted. But no one should be pleased to end-up the year at THE very bottom of the pack.
YTD and 1-year: 100th percentile.
But looking backward over several years, performance has been quite good IN COMPARISON to its peers. But... who are its peers?

+1
Nice write-up @Tarwheel. I’d been a happy camper with TRP since the mid to late 90s. Kept anywhere from 40-60% of my retirement funds there over more than 25 years with the rest spread around different fund houses. I left about 3 years ago after noticing their phone based client support had become abysmal to the point where i began to worry about (unwanted) paper statements ending up in someone else’s mailbox. Repeated calls didn’t help. Couldn’t stop the unwanted sporadic and unpredictable statement mailings. And when I finally moved out, they screwed up the transfer to Fidelity royally.
Their fixed income funds lagged up until the late 90s when a very talented woman took over. For a few years, under her leadership they got a lot better. Not sure when she moved on. ISTM she left sometime after 2000 to take a government position in Washington DC. Fixed income fell back to mediocre not long after.
The Giroux affectionados here love the guy and everything he touches - with good reason. Maybe they’ll discover a way to clone him and put the clowns clones in charge of everything. But I agree with you that their allocation funds ain’t what they once were. Likely it’s the fixed income component that’s causing the lackluster performance. I do own a slug of TRRIX (a 40/60 fund). ISTM it lost 10-12% in 2022. Worst showing I can ever remember (umm … other than 2008). It keeps most of its fixed income component in their New Income Fund (PRCIX) and most of the remainder in a short-immediate term TIPs fund. The former has always been a bit of a dog.
The world turns over every 24 hours. I’m sure the move to ETFs is hurting their bottom line and maybe (a guess) causing either some talent drain or cut-backs in research. Just guesses. BTW - their offerings have multiplied at least 5X since I joined them in the mid-90s. Not sure that kind of shotgun approach is in their best interest. But definitely got problems in River City Baltimore.

Here's Motley Fool:
https://www.fool.com/investing/stock-market/basics/santa-claus-rally/
Understanding the Santa Claus rally
Generally, the Santa Claus rally refers to the stock market's history of rising over the last five trading days of the year and the first two market days of the new year.
Also, the venerable Art Cashin has worked the NYSE for over 50 years. I really can't count how many times I've heard him say EXACTLY what MF states and EXACTLY what I've posted.

Interesting article in Financial Times about TRP’s loss of investors. I’m one of the long term investors who’ve been bailing out. Although I still invest in TRP funds, I transferred our Roth IRAs from there to Fidelity a couple years ago. Convenience was a big factor because now all of our investments are with Fidelity. However, it was also due to a growing lack of confidence in TRP. A lot of my investments are in allocation funds, and I’m not pleased with TRP’s offerings, aside from PRWCX, which has been closed to new investors for a while. My wife and I have invested with TRP for more than 25 years, with more than $200K in our Roth IRAs, and they still wouldn’t let us invest in PRWCX.
So we invested heavily in TRPBX, which has been a major disappointment. It was considered a top moderate allocation fund when we started using it, but performance has steadily declined— which is ironic because PRWCX has been so successful. Much of the problem seems to be their asset allocation, with heavy stakes in foreign and emerging markets. Although the fund’s volatility is not bad on a day-to-day basis, it has been hurt by the high foreign allocations in down and up markets. TRP also started investing about 10% of its assets in hedge funds, which from my view hasn’t helped performance a bit.
We still own several TRP stock funds that have performed well, through the Fidelity funds network. However, we’ve ditched their bond and allocation funds. The Fidelity funds that replaced them have all had better performance. We’ll probably drop some of our remaining TRP funds if they don’t improve soon. At one time, I considered using TRP for all of our investments, but we decided to use Fidelity as well — and my Fidelity investments as a whole have greatly outperformed my TRP holdings.
https://www.ft.com/content/7cdd7cd9-f465-48ae-af18-aa8201f8fab8

Sold Vanguard International Growth (VWILX) yesterday.
Used proceeds to purchase Seafarer Overseas Value (SIVLX) today.
VWILX holdings overlapped with my core foreign stock fund.
My portfolio also had minimal EM equity exposure.
I haven't owned a dedicated EM equity fund for ~5 years.

This fund appears to be over concentrated in pharmaceuticals and energy; not diversified at all. When benchmarked against the S&P500 (may not be the most appropriate benchmark for this portfolio) it has underperformed steadily for the last 12 years. I'd definitely move on and look for a more diversified fund that is performing competitively against a broad market index. Some good things to say about Bruce: low expense ratio, low turnover, no-load.

You would think M* would be embarrassed to publish that under their brand.
As far as BRUFX quick looks shows 35% cash and overweighting in healthcare and underweight tech. Exactly the wrong positioning for this year
Do they produce any data about how their stocks do without the cash? Sometimes that helps determine how much is asset allocation alone

Don't look to M* for insight. Its brilliant quantitative analysis suggests that in light of the recent management change you noted the fund could do more to retain its portfolio managers. What exactly does M*'s crackerjack computer have in "mind"?
The fund itself did very well, relatively speaking, in 2022 - 15th percentile. It was the stock and bond markets that didn't. This year is different, but for a fund with a single digit turnover rate Dad may still have a sizeable impact on the fund.
But that was as of June 30th. More than 10% of the shares of the top six holdings (comprising over 1/4 of the fund) were pruned between June and September. So perhaps you're seeing a rapid change now.

Yep, as I predicted, RPHIX has a good chance to do better since the Fed blinked on Nov 1st and later even more in mid-Dec. It means rates have stabilized. It made about 1.5% since 1/1/2023 and much better than MM/CD.
RPHIX is the "best" risk/reward bond fund as a "sub" MM replacement (I know, nothing can replace MM).
Per M*: RPHIX has a 3 year SD=0.84 + TTM yield=5.79%.
Schwab SNAXX still pays 5.42%

IMO, the big news of 2023 was that boring/lagging cyclicals DJIA made an all-time high. Prior/current sprinters SP500 and Nasdaq Comp may just have to wait for 2024 to make new all-time highs. Then, the CNBC would have new-highs specials again.
StockCharts View 2.5 yrs https://stockcharts.com/h-perf/ui?s=$INDU&compare=$COMPQ,$SPX&id=p83812329512

During the last 6 months, RPHIX gained $2.84%. If it continues, this will be 5.7% per year with minimal risk. If not a secret, can you tell us about better opportunities that you see now? Or do you have in mind what may happen with other funds when the rates go down?

Looks like RPHIX will wind up the year with a return in excess of that 5.7% forecast (outpacing the YTD performance of all of the CDs I purchased). Pretty admirable for a low risk, low volatility product.

“US futures were steady on the last trading day of the year, with the S&P 500 a whisker away from a record high and global shares on track for their best annual performance since 2019. The S&P 500 (SPX) traded just a few points away from its all-time peak on Thursday, extending its 2023 advance to nearly 25%. The Nasdaq 100 has already posted its best year since 1999 on expectations the Federal Reserve will cut interest rates aggressively in 2024.”
(Excerpted from Bloomberg Media Website before the open this morning - subscription required.)

I’ve had a fairly large stake in FMSDX for about 2.5 years. Unfortunately, I bought it just before the last big market drop, and it’s just broken even during the past month. I’m sticking with it because it has a great record and I trust Fidelity’s management of its allocation funds. It pays dividends monthly, if that’s important to you. It has greatly outperformed most funds with similar asset allocations since its inception and hopefully that will continue.

Tabular data on %Loss & %Gain needed to recover that %Loss:
-1% /+1.01%
-5% /+5.13%
-10% /+11.11%
-20% /+25.00%
-30% /+42.86%
-40% /+66.67%
-50% /+100.00%
-60% /+150.00%
-70% /+233.33%
+
-80% /+400.00%
-90% /+900.00%
-100% / Never

I-bonds are an option especially for people in high tax states, who don't need the cash flow and are looking for a 4% CD (taxable) yield. Assuming a long term inflation rate of 2.5% and assuming a state income tax rate of 5%, the current I-bonds (1.3% + inflation) are roughly equivalent to a 4% CD.
That's because the 5% tax clips 0.2% of the 4% CD yield, leaving 3.8%. That's about what you get with the I-bond assuming 2.5% inflation. If you're in a higher tax place (e.g. MN), or you expect inflation to remain higher than 2.5% for an extended period, then the I-bond looks even better.
I did buy some I-bonds. Though if I want to back out, I can sell off lower yielding I-bonds I also own. If I do that, I'm effectively swapping out lower yielding I-bonds ones for higher yielding ones, not adding to my I bond holdings. IOW, I'm able to buy the I-bonds without making a long term commitment.
I also recently purchased a callable CD in my (inherited) Roth matching my 2024 RMD. 5.35% (long gone), matures in 9 months, callable in 6. If it gets called, I take the RMD a little early. If not, I take the RMD at the end of September.
This is an example of a special circumstance where there's little downside in getting called, and a little upside in taking the callable CD with a better rate (about the same rate as I could have gotten on a non-callable 6 month CD).

If you invested $1K at beginning of 2022 & lost 67% & then your investment gain 73.7% the next year, you're still trying to dig yourself out of a hole !! $1k investment is worth $573.21

@Derf. That 3% cut off makes sense unless MM and on line savings are paying .15% and the equity allocation is maxed. Remember not long ago the likely suspects included preferred etf’s,,,, bank loan etf’s and junk,,,, I mean high yield. At some point risk becomes just too risky. And then 3% seems not so bad.

Not a math wizard , so if you invested $1K at beginning of 2022 & lost 67% & then your investment gain 73.7% the next year, you're still trying to dig yourself out of a hole !!
$1k investment is worth$573.21
Timing is everything, Derf