JEPI was advertised pretty heavy on Morningstar, Bloomberg, CNBC in 2021. and then 2022 happened which sent inflows to the moon on this thing. /investing on reddit had gobs of 20 somethings building JEPI/SCHD heavy portfolios which was interesting.
JEPI's stated benchmark is the sp500 but tries to match it with less volatility. it gets the volatility part right but for probably most of the dollars invested in this thing, its been a flop.
Hopefully people learn their lesson and build a portfolio with these products for the long term but thats not how it seems it goes. people will still pile into good performers and then sell when it doesn't go their way.
see ARKK.

When selling or exchanging shares, you should be aware of the following fund policies:
For accounts held through a financial intermediary, each fund typically expects to pay sale proceeds to the financial intermediary for payment to redeeming shareholders within two business days following receipt of a shareholder redemption order; however, each fund may take up to seven days to pay sale proceeds."
Bizarre wording given that you can buy them only through intermediaries and not directly through the fund.
In any case, the above general settlement time language is similar as in many mutual funds' prospectus. Below is the link to the prospectus (strange that I pulled it in my Schwab account and I get a morningstar.com link.)
https://doc.morningstar.com/docdetail.aspx?clientid=schwab&key=84b36f1bf3830e07&cusip=808515605

It is not all that unusual for fund families, especially boutique firms, to sell funds only through third party distributors.
At one time Janus closed off its direct sales channel to new investors. It allowed only existing investors with class D shares to continue investing directly. Everyone else had to buy T shares through third parties.
Schwab originated as a brokerage and likely leaned on that distribution channel when it started running funds.
With respect to M*, as I recall it used to make prospectuses available to users of its websites. As with much of M*'s content, M* seems to have monetized its fund documents:

The Clients We Serve
The Morningstar Document Library is ideal for brokerage firms or retirement plan service providers that want to outsource costly document collection and maintenance. In addition to this web interface, the Document Library can also be private-labeled or provided through APIs. Advisors and plan providers can grant investors direct access to the library via their own websites, ensuring investors receive immediate access to key documents. Fund companies and compliance officers find it a valuable resource for current and archived proprietary and competitor filings.

https://doc.morningstar.com/home.aspx
Note the "clientid=schwab" argument in the URL.
M* is providing all of the fund documentation for Schwab, not just for Schwab funds. For example, here's Schwab's page for FCNTX and the link to the fund's prospectus.
https://www.schwab.com/research/mutual-funds/quotes/summary/fcntx
https://doc.morningstar.com/docdetail.aspx?clientid=schwab&key=84b36f1bf3830e07&cusip=316071109
M* is not the only third party provider of Schwab fund prospectuses. Here's your same SWVXX prospectus hosted by righprospectus.com
https://connect.rightprospectus.com/Schwab/TVT/808515605/SP?site=FundDocs
And links to all the Schwab fund docs hosted there:
https://connect.rightprospectus.com/Schwab/

Providing the right document solutions at the right time, every time
Donnelley Financial Solutions′s RightProspectus is the next generation in compliance communications for mutual fund, variable annuity, and retirement product providers, as well as broker/dealers and clearing firms. With RightProspectus, documents in our repository are automatically tracked and updated as changes are filed with the SEC, ensuring constant access to the most current and accurate prospectuses. RightProspectus represents a quantum leap forward featuring a new, state-of-the-art online platform.

https://rightprospectus.com/

I have done the following for years at Schwab.
Suppose I have $100k in MM and want to buy $100k PRWCX.
I sell $100k of MM and buy PRWCX in the morning. At night I see the results, no problem.
If you do the reverse, same results.
If you sell all the shares of PRWCX, you don't know the exact results, just buy 95%. The next day buy the rest of the MM.
Yes, Schwab made money on that small amount.
It doesn't bother me.

I bought in in Feb and am up about 10% It seems to be doing about as well as many other Value funds ,although VTV is ahead. Among the other actively managed value funds I follow or use are pretty much 100% invested, so MRFOX 25% cash makes their results more impressive

I was trying to follow up on the irritating Schwab MM settlement of T+1 Schwab implements and checked their prospectus which says,
"To purchase, redeem, exchange or convert shares held in your Schwab account or in your account at another intermediary, you must place your orders with the intermediary that holds your shares. You may not purchase, redeem, exchange or convert shares held in your intermediary account directly with a fund.
When selling or exchanging shares, you should be aware of the following fund policies:
For accounts held through a financial intermediary, each fund typically expects to pay sale proceeds to the financial intermediary for payment to redeeming shareholders within two business days following receipt of a shareholder redemption order; however, each fund may take up to seven days to pay sale proceeds."
Bizarre wording given that you can buy them only through intermediaries and not directly through the fund.
In any case, the above general settlement time language is similar as in many mutual funds' prospectus. Below is the link to the prospectus (strange that I pulled it in my Schwab account and I get a morningstar.com link.)
https://doc.morningstar.com/docdetail.aspx?clientid=schwab&key=84b36f1bf3830e07&cusip=808515605

@ hank. I'm wearing big-boy pants today.

Yep. Thanks @WABC / There was someone here a month or so back who intended to do some stock or index shorting. Admire that kind of bravery.

That was me. And I got my face ripped off as a result, but the total outlay was only $250 which helps offset my end-of-year gains elsewhere.

I’m “dead in the water”
45% equity
30% cash
15% bonds
10% other
Anybody have any shorts on?

@ stayCalm: MRFOX LT Returns as of 9/30: APR 17.0%; MAXDD -15.7% (202003; Recovery Mos. 7; ST Dev 13.2%; DSEV 7.3%; Ulcer Index 3.2%; Sharp Ratio 1.14%; Sortino Ratio 2.07%; Martin Ratio 4.76; MFO Rating 5 (Best); Peer Count 108; APR vs. Peer 3.6%; APR Rating Best; APR vs. SP500 2.3; Fund is 8.8 years old. Good reasons why you own it.

@msf,
Interesting Chart.
I do remember paying for college tuition with a part time job back in the 1980's... now college tuition equates to taking out a mortgage.
I'd argue that "food away from home" has had a higher increase than the chart suggest.
A Happy Meal is still a cheap option, but a Happy Hour out at a restaurant has lost its Happy. A bottle of middle tier beer at home which you refrigerate and remove cap = $1-$1.50. The HH price for those 2 services 400% - 500% higher.
Truck (say a F150) prices are also much higher today on a percentage basis compared to 1980 prices.
Don't get me started on the price of Legos. :(

This is an example of an economic concept called Baumol’s cost disease. "It explains why barbers make more in San Francisco than in Cleveland and why services such as health care and education keep getting more expensive. "
https://www.vox.com/new-money/2017/5/4/15547364/baumol-cost-disease-explained
In a nutshell, as technology increases productivity in some areas like manufacturing, they become cheaper relative to labor-intensive areas like education where productivity can't rise much. Consider too how few farmers we have today producing more than ever.
From the cited piece:

Thanks @hank for doing the legwork and posting this. From what I gather from rapidly reading from the links provided, most of those who participate on this board may not qualify for the new ETFs. The strategy appears aimed at people who have north of $500,000 invested in a limited number of highly appreciated stocks and who could « seed » a new ETF for the purpose of avoiding CG taxes. This does not appear to be a DYI mechanism, nor does it pass my whiff test.

It sounds like something that cobbles together lots of different tax and investing rules to make it seem new, legitimate, and "democratizing". I agree that one should tread very carefully here.
Start with the second line in the prospectus's description of principal investment strategies:

Utilizing its own quantitative model, the Fund’s investment sub-adviser, Cambria Investment Management, L.P. (“Cambria” or the “Sub-Adviser”) selects value stocks with lower dividend distributions, which are generally taxed as ordinary income.

Say what?? My dividends are taxed as cap gains, how about yours?
The Bloomberg/Yahoo piece quotes Faber as saying that you exchange cap gain bearing securities for shares of the ETF in a tax free exchange. Bloomberg then goes on to say that this works like an "exchange fund" aka "swap fund" by way of explaining how your security exchange can be made tax free.
Here's a good primer on "exchange funds".
https://usecache.com/companion/what-is-an-exchange-fund
In short, a bunch of investors pool their appreciated assets into a partnership (the exchange fund). Since that's done as a tax-free swap, each investor retains their original cost basis and gets a pro-rata share of the partnership. Voila, instant diversification.
There are lots of government restrictions on exchange funds, including a seven year holding period and being limited to accredited investors. The $500K min does not appear to be a legal requirement, just a pragmatic one. The entity running the show doesn't want to deal with a lot of small potatoes in constructing the portfolio. It looks like that portfolio remains static (not sure about that).
Where the magic comes in (I think): once seeded, the partnership is converted into an ETF. This is the part that to me looks suspicious. It has the effect of removing the holding requirement on fund seeders and possibly some restrictions on the exchange fund portfolio composition.
I don't see how this "seeding" process (swapping securities for ETF shares) can continue once the ETF is up and running. The prospectus describes a conventional ETF where only Authorized Participants can buy and sell shares via creation units. To the rest of the world, this should look like any other ETF, including being open to all comers on the open market.
From that perspective, I would evaluate it like any other fund that hasn't launched yet.

what age groups purchase what?
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/10/business/social-security-benefits-increase-2025.html

From linked article:
”But the index tracks a range of goods and services that are purchased primarily by younger working people, not by retirees, who often spend more of their income on housing and health care. The costs experienced by Americans over age 62 tend to outpace the index, Ms. Ghilarducci said, making the annual adjustment fall short of what retirees actually need.
“The adjustment is often mostly eaten up by the increase in Medicare Part B premiums, which are automatically deducted from Social Security checks. Some experts, including Ms. Ghilarducci, say Social Security beneficiaries also need an increase in their base-line benefits to maintain their buying power.”
What becomes clear with the medical issue is if you live long enough costs increase at a faster and faster rate.
d

Maybe @msf could check my math and simplify further
Eyeballing (mentally multiplying $12K by yogi's 1.3+x to get approximately $15.6K+), things look about right.
It's been a looong time since I graded math papers. I'm not restarting now :-)

Hi Ben. Thanks for the comments. Faber spoke in terms of “small investors” in the interview I watched, so the mention of $500,000 surprised me. Fortunately, the video is already available on Bloomberg. Scroll ahead to 16:00 if anyone wants to view. It’s the last of several segments on etfs.

I suspect Meb is a bit of a publicity hound. I’ve been listening to a trove of his old podcasts going back several years (The Meb Faber Show) for a month on a regular basis. These consist mostly of hour-long interviews with different money managers. 1 is 3 is pretty good. I don’t need to tell people that Cambria has more losers than winners. Or that it is very small player in a field of giants. That said, I like their global allocation fund (GAA) and have owned it a while - primarily for the exposure it provides to foreign markets, precious metals, commodities and bonds - although it is broader than just that.

Thanks @hank for doing the legwork and posting this. From what I gather from rapidly reading from the links provided, most of those who participate on this board may not qualify for the new ETFs. The strategy appears aimed at people who have north of $500,000 invested in a limited number of highly appreciated stocks and who could « seed » a new ETF for the purpose of avoiding CG taxes. This does not appear to be a DYI mechanism, nor does it pass my whiff test.

Zero or low costs for all our meds too (Optum, Costco, CVS)
The good news is that starting in 2025, drug costs will be capped at $2,000, so exposure isn't unlimited.

I am learning (first year of Medicare) that there are payment phases with Part D.
The Premium - (in my case, it is embedded in my Medicare Advantage Premium)
The Deductible - (Full out of pocket Cost of the RX up to a specific $...in my case $200)
The Co-payment - (A percentage of the RX cost based on the tier of the drug up to a $ Amount... in my case, $2000).
I assume my deductible and my copay are additive ($200 +$1800 = $2000). At that point the cost of meds are fully coverage by my plan...whoopie!
For 2025:
All must pay for:
Medicare Part B - which looks like it will be about $185/M (plus IRMAA adjustments)
Next select between:
- A Supplemental Plan (Some may include benefits for hearing, eye care... maybe even dental?) or
- Medicare Advantage Plan (Hearing, Eye care , Dental or Part D may be included)
Select a Part D Plan (Costs = Premium + as much as $2K of deductibles and co-pays)
Some Non - required Coverage I plan on having:
- Dental (My local Dentist offers an in house care plan) - $280 - Covers basic Care - 2 cleanings, x-rays, exams
- Hearing (Hearing Tests and Hearing aid allowances) - I found that Costco or Easter Seals in our area offered affordable services
- Eyecare (Eye Tests and Eye glass allowances) - I found that Costco offered affordable services
Snapshot of maximum Health care costs for 2025:

Part B= ($185*12) = $2,220
Medicare Advantage = $1200 (Includes Part D Premium) + Max $2000 Medical Deductible + Part D Potential out of Pocket Max cost of $2000
Dental Plan - $280 (50% discount of other procedures)
All of the above costs are close to $7700
In years where I have mostly Wellness visits I would have costs close to $3700
Most of this is HSA eligible for reimbursement so I will have decisions to make on how I manage that account going forward.
Lots to continue to learn and do.

The good news is that starting in 2025, drug costs will be capped at $2,000, so exposure isn't unlimited.
Good to know! Great information. My Part D is a Wellcare Plan. Going to a ZERO premium in 2025. I use the plan for most of my oodles of 'scripts. The expensive ones, I order from North of the border. It does not count toward deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums, but that Plan is designed to drive you into poverty before coverage kicks-in, in the old 80/20 standard sense. They play word games. ... So, I call Winnipeg. The drugstore might be in Mauritius. And it gets sent to me via the Danish Mail? I dunno how they make that work, but I still come out ahead.

Zero or low costs for all our meds too (Optum, Costco, CVS)
Drug plans often get little attention when comparing MAPD plans. For most people there's little difference - generics, preferred or otherwise, are either "free" or dirt cheap on most plans. But when it comes to brand name drugs, the difference between plans can be huge.
Over the past few years, drug plans, both Part D and MAPD, have been moving from copay (flat amount per item) to coinsurance (percentage cost). Brand name drugs with four (or more) digit costs are becoming way more expensive.
Consider Prolia, a brand name drug used by many for osteoporosis. (I know a few people using it.) Plans typically list it as a tier 4 (brand name, non-preferred) drug. The manufacturer gives its list price (wholesale acquisition price) as $1,786.12. It is injected twice yearly.
Tufts Preferred Access PPO charges 50% for tier 4 drugs. That would come to $1,786 yearly. (Medicare.gov says $1,62x).
BC/BS Blue SaverRx charges 49% copay for tier 4 drugs. That comes out about the same as Tufts. (Medicare.gov says $1,59x.)
Or you could get a BC/BS PPO plan that charges just $285/dose ($570/year), but it comes with an $87/mo premium. The all in cost is about the same, at $1,614.
One point here is that what looks like an obvious candidate can instantly become dubious depending on one's individual situation.
Another point is that drugs can shift the whole landscape, even tilting it toward MA plans.
Medicare.gov shows no Part D policy charging under $1,900 in Boston when one includes Prolia. But it reports that Mass General Brigham PPO's all in cost, including Prolia, is "just" $600/year. That's a $1,300 difference.
One might be willing to pay the cost of a Medigap plan for the peace of mind that comes with Original Medicare. Many people are. But adding yet another $1,300 on top of that due to Part D costs could give one pause. The good news is that starting in 2025, drug costs will be capped at $2,000, so exposure isn't unlimited.

Blog - https://bilello.blog/2024/the-week-in-charts-10-14-24
Item 4 discusses the cumulative increase in major CPI categories over the past 4 years and shows Medical care at 8% and Auto insurance at 60%. Why are we measuring Medical care, rather than Medical insurance? My medical insurance probably went up 60%. I already know my next year medical premium increase is 15%. CPI probably has measurement problem.
Item 8. US HY Credit spreads at 2.89% is the lowest since 2007. SPY dividend yield at 1.27%(tied with Q4 2021) is the lowest since 1999. Nothing to see here?

what age groups purchase what?
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/10/business/social-security-benefits-increase-2025.html