@BaluBalu

If you are OK disclosing, what function do these funds serve within your portfolio?
Why do you own the covered call strategy on QQQ in a CEF? In your experience, what portion (in a range) of the portfolio does the manager write the calls on?

Simply put, I use both items simply as contributors to fully fund my annual spending via their distributions.
Why a CEF? I've owned QQQX for several years, and frankly, option overlays in an ETF wrapper weren't widely available at the time. There may be better options available currently, but this works for me and I'm comfortable with its longer track record and balance between distributions/asset growth.
As for portfolio coverage, Nuveen states: "During the quarter, the core
option overwrite level varied between 41% and 66% of the equity portfolio's value with an average level of 56%". Their option strategy is discussed in the attached link, which I found interesting.
https://documents.nuveen.com/Documents/Nuveen/Default.aspx?uniqueId=378e5e6a-448d-49f8-b723-f56fc1f5876c

AAII Sentiment Survey, 8/28/24
BULLISH remained the top sentiment (51.2%, high) & neutral became the bottom sentiment (21.9%, low); bearish became the middle sentiment (27.0%, below average); Bull-Bear Spread was +24.2% (high). Investor concerns: Elections, budget, inflation, economy, the Fed, dollar, Russia-Ukraine (131+ weeks), Israel-Hamas (46+ weeks), geopolitical. For the Survey week (Th-Wed), stocks mixed (growth down, cyclicals up), bonds down, oil up, gold down, dollar down. NYSE %Above 50-dMA 70.11% (overbought, barely). Stock rally is broadening & equal-weight RSP had a new high. Est PCE +2.6%, core +2.7%. #AAII #Sentiment #Markets
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1629/thread

Well, I guess that MERDX doesn't mean what I thought at first. :)

It was a Kiplinger top 25 back in the days under Rick Aster. IIRC they were based in Marin County.

and super micro being looked at sideways...any chicanery going on there?

They have a history.
They were just another vendor advertising in The Computer Weekly in the Bay Area before the internet. Always wondered why people got so excited about them lately.
At least they're blowing up in the S&P 500 and not in XMHQ.

Latest favorite of Hindenburg -- short seller.
Edit: SCMI has also reported delaying filing of 10-K. I am guessing the Hindenburg report must have spooked the auditors. In a year when Hindenburg took down the Adani and Carl Icahn empires, any auditor should get nervous.

and super micro being looked at sideways...any chicanery going on there?

They have a history.
They were just another vendor advertising in The Computer Weekly in the Bay Area before the internet. Always wondered why people got so excited about them lately.
At least they're blowing up in the S&P 500 and not in XMHQ.

Hi @Old_Joe,
I know what is going on in this forum and in this thread. I did not read FD's posts in this thread but reading the very short Mona reply gave me the hint the direction the thread is taking.
I read all your posts. I do not read more than 50% of FD's posts. I have to prioritize my time. Because I read all your and some other posters' posts, I had to leave a note to myself that the thread is off-topic to me. Does not mean it is off-topic to you guys. You guys should feel free to continue. I was not trying to lecture or offend anyone.

I could be imagining but I thought the new holdings are available to us after 60 days (30 for the fund + 30 after for the SEC) of month end. If so, that is pretty useless information. I would want the info to be made available within 15 days after the month end. Makes no sense to make it more difficult for retails clients to gain info than accredited investors through Forms 13Fs.
To manage the SEC load, and make the info available more timely for all other ETFs and OEFs investors, SEC should not have imposed the changes on transparent ETFs.
This SEC's desire for power grab always seems to override the need to advocate for retail investors.

New Rules Press Release,
https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2024-110
New Rules Fact Sheet,
https://www.sec.gov/files/ic-35308-fact-sheet.pdf
My reading is that N-PORT filing of month-end holdings will be within 30 days, but those filings will be made public after 60 days of the month-end. So, there will be 2 month lag in public reporting of month-end holdings.

FD1000,
Wow, there's lots to unpack in your commentary!
I'll just comment on two topics.
"Obamacare had a huge affect long-term."
You're correct that "Obamacare" had huge long-term effects:
1) More than 16 million Americans obtained coverage within five years' passage of Obamacare.
2) People with preexisting conditions can't he denied health insurance.
3) Prescription drug costs are more affordable for many Medicare participants.
4) More screenings and preventative services are covered with low copays or deductibles.
5) Insurance companies can no longer set lifetime limits for coverage.
"After the embarrassing exit from Afghanistan, Putin realized that Biden is a weak pres and why he invaded Ukraine."

Both Trump & Biden were eager to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan.
Trump struck a deal for withdrawal by May 1, 2021.
Biden inherited this deal but delayed the withdrawal date.
The withdrawal was problematic, to say the least,
but to blame this entirely on Biden is disingenuous.
https://www.factcheck.org/2021/08/timeline-of-u-s-withdrawal-from-afghanistan/
Edit/Add:
"On the first week of Biden's presidency, "Biden’s orders direct the secretary of the Interior Department
to halt new oil and natural gas leases on public lands and waters,
and begin a thorough review of existing permits for fossil fuel development.
Do you think the above has nothing to do why oil started to go up?
Oil is a huge resource in our economy, don't you think it increased inflation?"
Many different factors can influence oil prices.
You may want to contemplate potential causes before rushing to judgement and playing the "blame game."
https://usafacts.org/articles/what-impacts-the-price-of-oil/

I respectfully disagree.
Kinnel wrote: "purely a screen; I don’t make any additions or subtractions." He says these are "simple, strict screens." Either one can access a particular share class or one can't.
The hoops one must jump through don't render a share class inaccessible. The only exception he makes to strict adherence to his rules is that he excludes actively managed funds costing under 10 basis points if you must pay a fee to access them.
Put another way, you might have to pay a small ransom to use a platform necessary to access a share class costing 20 basis points. But that doesn't matter. All that matters are those 20 basis points, not the total cost of access.
Likewise, the fact that you might have to have a small fortune in other funds in order to invest a "mere" $50K in a share class doesn't matter. All that matters is that $50K minimum, not the total size of your portfolio.

PRWCX didn't make the cut because its cost isn't much below average. But TRAIX's is, and it is available to individual Summit Preferred Services customers at T. Rowe Price with a $50K min. ("Must be a share class accessible to individual investors with a minimum investment of no greater than $50,000.")
.

Summit Preferred requires $500,000 minimum invested overall. You can split hairs, but the cheapest way for any individual investor to access TRAIX is to hold a $500,000 minimum investment in T. Rowe Price investment accounts, which violates the purpose of the screen, certainly in spirit if not in letter.

No need to be extreme. The pres in office can have a big affect on many things.
Obamacare had a huge affect long-term. IMO, it was one of the worst legislation. I priced what healthcare would cost me and my wife prior to Medicare.
Before Obamacare it was $400 monthly with a $3K deductible.
After Obamacare it was $1200-1300 monthly with a $5-6K deductible. That was years ago. I know several people who pay now about $1000 per person and 7-9K deductible.
(link) On the first week of Biden's presidency, "Biden’s orders direct the secretary of the Interior Department to halt new oil and natural gas leases on public lands and waters, and begin a thorough review of existing permits for fossil fuel development.
Do you think the above has nothing to do why oil started to go up? Oil is a huge resource in our economy, don't you think it increased inflation?
After the embarrassing exit from Afghanistan, Putin realized that Biden is a weak pres and why he invaded Ukraine. He also did on Obama watch but not during Trump.
How much money does the US allocate to Ukraine? easy over $100 billion.
Why did 4 Arab countries sign a peace agreement with Israel during Trump, which is the first time ever, while the Middle East is on fire now?
When Harris said she wants price control, don't you think it would affect us in a big way?
So yes, several presidents are more influential than others.

@hank "Marks is big on buying at a discount and holding long term."
FD: Millions tried the above while only a small % have done, Buffett. I have read his articles for a couple years, but he never helped me with my trading which is mostly in bond funds because....read what I said above, generalities and shades of gray.
Quotes from the article:
What this means is that in good times, investors obsess about the positives, ignore the negatives, and interpret things favorably. Then, when the pendulum swings, they do the opposite, with dramatic effects.
The human brain is wired to ignore or reject incoming data that is at odds with prior beliefs, and investors are particularly good at this.
Further complicating things in terms of rational analysis is the fact that most developments in the investment world can be interpreted both positively and negatively, depending on the prevailing mood.
Rarely do investors realize that (a) there can be a limit to the run of good news or (b) an upswing can be so strong as to be excessive, rendering a downswing inevitable. (FD; SPY,QQQ have been going strong for 15 years).
In short, sometimes the things that have gone up the most should be expected to continue to go up the most, and sometimes the things that have gone up the least should be expected to go up the most.
The above is meaningless unless you mention the specifics.
At least the best nugget by Buffet and Bogle = buy the SP500 for accumulators and go sleep for decades.

Working hard and long hours in IT helps you in the long run...or...you can just be lazy and cry later why you didn't make the big bucks.
Of course, you can be lucky and do well.
I decided after about 12 years that I would never work more than 40-45 per week in IT and I did it at over 90-95%.
All my efforts went to investing...and it worked.

Currently, more people from other Mag 5 are looking to work at Nvidia than Nvidia employees looking to work at other Mag 5.

The FOMC started raising rates in 3/1/22, so here is the run from 3/1/22 from TestFol for LQD, LQDH, m-mkt VMFXX, ultra-ST ICSH. LQDH has definitely outperformed LQD, as expected due to rate-hedging. LQDH kept pace with VMFXX and ICSH until 4/30/23, but then outperformed subsequently. When the rates start to go down, LQD should shine - why hedge bond funds when rates are falling?
LINK

Looking at M* for the past several months, LQD has outperformed LQDH for each of the monthly periods. One might have expected better from LQDH in anticipation of rate cuts and their swaps, etc. The portfolio indicates 95% of the portfolio is LQD. Am I correct with this and what you see?
You noted:

M* shows LQDH returning north of 3% annually over the past 10 years. That’s about double what money market funds achieved.

MMKT's were paying only about .01% yields for many years. As of April, 2022 the Fido MMKT's were paying .11% yield. This is when the move up to the current yields began. So, comparing to 10 years backwards against a MMKT yield 'is not valid'.
6 month CHART of the two.

I don't see any direct short Treasury positions.
Basically, it holds corporate LQD & tons of rate-swaps plus supporting cash. Duration is very low. So, the overall effect is m-mkt like returns out of intermediate-term bonds overlaid with derivatives. But the current yield is well below VMFXX, so, what's the point?

I’m not sure that’s a fair comparison, With the present inverted yield curve money market funds should yield better than longer dated bonds. Were yield the only factor nobody would invest in longer dated bonds today. Any (perceived) advantage would accrue to someone who wanted to own longer term investment grade bonds for diversification and who thought the inverted curve will return to normal some day.
* Isn’t the ultra low “effective” duration (0.15 years) really just a reflection of the hedging? Duno. Just trying to learn.
Here’s a link to Blackrock / LQDH with some performance data. Seems to have outdistanced money market funds in recent years. - M* shows LQDH returning north of 3% annually over the past 10 years. That’s about double what money market funds achieved.
Appreciate the comments from @yogibearbull

@FD1000
reading comp, man, reading comp (study my hed)
2022 is 2y ago
As for:
>> Since 1980, no other president except Trump has achieved above 10% real wage growth.
cite?
Are you thinking fig 3 of this supports your assertion?
https://www.aei.org/articles/have-wages-stagnated-for-decades-in-the-us/
An answer may lie in this thicket; search for "real wage":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_policy_of_the_Donald_Trump_administration
Also delve these:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_policy_of_the_Donald_Trump_administration
https://www.dallasfed.org/research/economics/2022/0215
Will be interested in your evidence. Above 10%, huh.

First, it's 3 years, not 2 years.
Second, looks to me they started in 2019, not showing the peak of 2020. If you look at this chart(https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q)
Trump started in Q1/2017 and by Q2/2020, real wages after inflation grew up from 355 to 393. That is 10.7% real growth. Then covid hit, and since Q2/2020, it went from 393 back to 368, this is a decline of 6.4%,
2 more observations:
1) From Q4/1099 to Q1/2017 = 18 years, it grew from 335 to 355 = 5.9%
2) Since 1980, no other president except Trump has achieved above 10% real wage growth.