Up 4.07% YTD. Outflows seem modest but continuous, leaving assets around $750 million. It looks like $900 million is the red zone for David when it comes to closing the fund.

My favorite car is whichever I'm driving currently (a 2018 Camry, bought used, as it turns out) but my favorite over the course of decades was my 1990 Honda Accord Wagon. It was my first (and only) new car, it carried everything, was efficient, reliable and dull. 300,000 miles later the body was unrecoverable from rust so I traded it in for used 1997 wagon.
Chip's favorite car is her Honda Fit, basically a chopped-off wagon with a freakish amount of storage capacity owing to rear seats that fold flat to the floor. 40" of vertical space when that happens.
Neither car is being sold in the US anymore. The Fit is sold overseas, and the Accord wagon passed away in 2015.

Hi, guys.
On my EM investments, I'd simple. I have a plan, I stick with it. My average holding time for funds is some combination of "15 years or since inception." I sold my MACSX position mostly because the stock/bond and domestic/international balance was so badly off. That was the same reason that I moved my monthly SIGIX contribution down to quarterly.
As long as Seafarer and Grandeur Peak honor their part of the bargain, I'll honor mine. I'd certainly make more money if I sold at the right time, but I've never shown that skill before and don't suppose it's snuck up on me now.
David

Thanks for your thoughts Old_Joe. Personal finance is just that. For some of us a painless 5.3% is a victory and for others it’s a disappointment.

This is kind of beating that poor old dead horse (yet again) but all of this stuff totally depends upon one's age, needs, and resources. I played the game for many years: stocks, stock funds (of many areas and types), bonds, bond funds, Mmkt funds, CDs and Treasuries, real estate rentals (both commercial and residential), even second mortgages (did very nicely on those).
Of course results varied over time, and certainly we weren't into all of those things at the same time. Some were certainly turkeys, but overall we did pretty darned well. At this point we are well out of the accumulation phase and into the preservation phase. 5% does the job very nicely, thank you.

>> ... cash should not be thought of as an equity substitute.
>> Investing is a game where success usually follows those who think using probabilities, rather than certainty.
Who thinks like this?
>> Over a five-year period, the difference between stocks and cash is more than 50%. Over 20 years, it’s more than 700%.
Jeez does this need an editor for, what's the word, sophistication. It's the 5%, not only the certainty of cash.
US inflation the last year has been under 4%.

I saw the ”$250M AUM” and at first (incorrectly) read that as the fund’s ”minimum investment amount”. I thought to myself, Hey - David’s not doing too badly. ;)

I'm always about 10-15% smid caps, with a heavy value tilt. Especially in my Roth where I have longer (God willing) to ride out any recession. Small caps rock !

Thanks all for the enlightening thoughts. Especially to @msf for the M* story. Please know the article does not represent the view of the FT. The paper publishes a wide variety of viewpoints. As someone noted, there’s a nearby column in the same issue by El-Erian with a somewhat contrary opinion. I chose to share it more because of the attention-grabbing title plus what seems like a contrarian point of view. FWIW, former head of Bridgewater, Ray Dalio was calling cash “trash” just 2-3 years ago, but has changed his tune and thinks it’s an excellent investment today at higher rates. Who is Karen Ward? First time I ever heard of her. But she works for J.P. Morgan as some sort of investment analyst. Her job description appears in the article.
Cash represents safety. At around a 5% yield it represents a return at / near the recent level of inflation (depending which gage you use or who you believe). Personally, with Social Security and a decent pension I can afford to take more risk in investing than many. So, carrying a very low cash balance doesn’t upset me much. Most of my investments might be described as “alternative” type funds of one sort or another. I try to keep them in relative balance, adding to those that have lagged lately (utilities is one example) and skimming profits from the recent better performers. To me, that represents a more stable less risky approach than owning plain vanilla equity or balanced funds. A caveat, however, is that fees are a lot higher on most of the types of (alternative) funds I invest in. I’m willing to pay that extra price in betting I can at least keep pace with cash over multi-year periods with minimal volatility (ie: pain) and possibly exceed it by a percent or two.
To each his own. I’ve never found El-Erian particularity good at calling the shots. Always sounds pessimistic to me. Since David Giroux is such a favorite here, one might wonder what his position is currently regarding the opportunities in select stocks and longer dated fixed-income securities? Wouldn’t surprise me if his fund is carrying a healthy chunk or cash, being the conservative manager he is.
Investing is always a gamble. With an overweight cash allocation one gambles that other types of investments won’t appreciate substantially during the time one is sitting in cash and that the current appealing cash returns will persist for very long. From @msf’s linked M* article: ”Investing is a game where success usually follows those who think using probabilities, rather than certainty.”
Thanks again for all the comments.

So declares Spencer Jakab, a WSJ writer, in the October 11 WSJ.
His argument is that small caps are historically undervalued relative to large caps: "the ratio of the Russell 2000 to the Russell 100 index, which has moved between a low of 58% ... to a high of around 115% ... is back down to 74%, indicating a fairly stressed level." At the same time he admits headwinds: small caps are far more exposed to interest rate changes than are large caps. Their debt is more likely floating than fixed and the average maturity on their debt is 4.4 years versus twice that for large caps.
Why consider them? Small caps have outperformed large caps, by an average of 16.51%, coming out of every one of the past 11 recessions. (SJ's wording is odd here: "in the 12 months after a recession was declared every time." The Lords of Finance generally officially declare a recession about eight months after it ends.)
In particular, small value is a good place to be. Focusing on small-value "could have the added benefit of supercharging returns during a recovery. For example, the years 2001-2004 saw $100 investing in the S&P 500 turn into about $98 which an investment in the Russell 2000 Value grew to $180."
The "almost" is the "they do well after a recession but suffer during one" part, I would guess.
My own exposure to the small cap sub-class is divided between the ultra-cautious Palm Valley Capital (micro-cap value, $250M AUM, 13% invested in stocks, up 5.3% YTD) and the ultra-charged Grandeur Peak Global Micro (micro-cap growth, soft-closed with $41M AUM, fully invested, down 2% YTD, but top 1% over five years).

I suspect the best way to crash crossover SUV sales would be disclose their shameful secret: they're actually station wagons.

Bloomberg, by the way, declared "Station wagons are back to cure SUV fatigue." (In 2017)

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1593547/000139834423019108/fp0085596-1_497.htm
497 1 fp0085596-1_497.htm
THE ADVISORS’ INNER CIRCLE FUND III
Aperture New World Opportunities Fund
Aperture Endeavour Equity Fund
Aperture Discover Equity Fund
Aperture International Equity Fund
(the “Funds”)
Supplement dated October 10, 2023 to the Funds’ Prospectus (the “Prospectus”), Summary Prospectuses (the “Summary Prospectuses”) and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”), each dated May 1, 2023, as supplemented
This supplement provides new and additional information beyond that contained in the Summary Prospectuses, Prospectus and SAI, and should be read in conjunction with the Summary Prospectuses, Prospectus and SAI.
Effective immediately, the Funds are closed to new investments by new and existing shareholders, including new investments made by existing shareholders via systematic purchases. However, automatic reinvestments of distributions will continue to be processed.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE
API-SK-002-0200

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1494928/000139834423019124/fp0085616-2_497.htm
497 1 fp0085616-2_497.htm
RiverPark Funds Trust
RiverPark Short Term High Yield Fund
Institutional Class (RPHIX)
Retail Class (RPHYX)
Supplement dated October 10, 2023 to the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information ("SAI") dated January 26, 2023.
This supplement provides new and additional information beyond that contained in the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and SAI and should be read in conjunction with the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and SAI.
IMPORTANT NOTICE ON PURCHASE OF FUND SHARES
Effective as of 9 a.m. on October 11, 2023 (the "Opening Date"), Retail and Institutional Class Shares of the RiverPark Short Term High Yield Fund (the "Fund") are open to purchase by all investors without restriction.
The Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to reject any purchase order. Sales of Retail Class Shares and Institutional Class Shares of the Fund may be restricted or reopened in the future.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.

The basic thing, in my mind, is that, at present, cash replaces traditional bonds for the purpose of 'balancing' equity risk. Eventually, you will likely see a return to said bonds for that purpose, but 5+% free of risk is a tough benchmark to exceed for 'safety' purposes. When 'bonds' start appreciating again; new analysis...

M*: Cash Is No Longer Trash, but the Opportunity Cost Might Be Greater Than You Think
https://www.morningstar.com/personal-finance/cash-is-no-longer-trash-opportunity-cost-might-be-greater-than-you-think
This M* piece is oriented toward the long term investor:

Cash is yielding more than it has in a decade—so are equities even worth the trouble? We won’t bury the lede. The answer is still yes. But it’s a fair question. Using three-month Treasuries as a cash proxy, investors can earn more than 5% on cash. This is the highest yield since 1995. ...
[It goes on to show how much a pile of cash falls behind stocks over time, and the odds of cash doing better than stocks.]
The lesson is clear: The opportunity cost of sitting in cash is huge and grows over time. ...
There are no perfect allocations or times to invest in risk assets. ...The best thing investors can do is figure out an allocation that works for them and avoid guessing what will happen based on one’s feelings.

I let the guys running my balanced fund worry about duration, and all that stuff.
Neither have I sold anything to raise cash. Looking forward to the two CD's coming off the books to do a little shopping.

An investor who bought a 10-year US Treasury bond at a yield of 4.5 per cent would see a total return of roughly 13 per cent if that yield fell 1 percentage point over 12 months. If the recession ended up being relatively nasty and the yield fell 2 percentage points, their return would exceed 20 per cent.

How will that feel for the folks that held bonds during the preceding vaporization? Will all be forgiven?

”Cash looks tempting. With interest rates for cash in the region of 5 per cent, why not avoid the volatility that comes with stocks? And with short-rates higher than longer-term interest rates, why lock up cash in a longer-term government bond?”
https://www.ft.com/content/49c1df89-7890-4643-920b-10443a05592e
By Karen Ward
Published in The Financial Times
(Offered as a contrarian point of view)

@MikeM : You waited to long before purchasing a Camry. 2005 had more than enough room . I believe it did carry 4 golfer & 4 bags, all at the same time. Recent purchase, Subaru , 3 golfer & 3 bags.

Strange that these were all UP today ^TNX, IEF; ^TYX,TLT. The underlying markets were closed, so derived prices were used. But who derived these?
https://finance.yahoo.com/quotes/^TNX,IEF,^TYX,TLT/view/v1
Edit/Add. Quotes for yields ^TNX, ^TYX are suspect. It seems that they had a small adjustment at the open, but didn't trade during the day. But IEF, TLT traded during the day. So, true 10y and 30y yields were really down.
Edit/Add2. Looks like CNBC Treasury yield quote page became live on Monday night. Click any entry and view the 5-day chart. https://www.cnbc.com/bonds/

Crap, that is a lot of money lost! Just the three top funds ETFs, they sum up to $40 billions.
I can see ARK Innovation ETF, can loss ton of money from speculative bets. Vanguard Total bond market index, BND, for example, is in just about every investor’s portfolios including target date funds and 529 plans.