Thanks @Observant1. I got my paper this morning but haven't dug in yet. I'll check it out tomorrow.

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.

@Derf - To be clear, sometime this spring I announced a decision to no longer name stocks or funds I own. I’ve generally held to that principle, except on rare occasion to acknowledge ownership of a fund should it come under discussion in a thread I’m participating in. Since the earlier (January ‘23) references you alluded to concerning to DKNG proceeded that decision, it was reasonable of you to ask about it.
Sometime this summer (I could look up the date) I stopped making small speculative bets on funds or stocks and consolidated everything into the 10/10 approach mentioned earlier in this thread. (Perhaps age had something to do with this.) So the days of speculating on DKNG or anything near as exciting are over. All the stocks I currently own might be termed “consumers staples” or “equity conglomerates” - about as non-exciting as you can get. And I’ve never identified them - nor will I.

@hank " Hell - I now believe this type of predatory practice should be outlawed." I agree 100%. Unfortunately this baiting was going on before DK started doing it.

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.

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 !

@MikeM,
Barron's published The Best Income Investments for 2024 yesterday.
REITs are mentioned in the article.
FWIW, Piper Sandler analyst Alexander Goldfarb believes the sector's outlook is good.
He likes Simon Property, Brixmor Property Group, Kite Realty Group Trust,
EastGroup Properties and Terreno Realty.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/savingandinvesting/the-best-income-investments-for-2024/ar-AA1mdhxj

+1 @MikeM / I think there are advantages to investing with companies that are privately held (fully or in significant measure). Same may hold true in doing research. Dunno.
With public companies the investment horizon may be shorter, management feeling compelled to keep the stock price high and attract new investors. And there’s the danger of “activists” trying to gain a large hold and seeking to monetize some of the assets by stripping away services / service quality. I suppose in a large company the size of TROW that second threat (activists) is small.

I just looked at the American Funds Portfolio Series Annual report (10/23, just out) and notice they've included CGDV in one of their portfolios. Not sure if that helped support that ETF's price strength over the past year or not, but it's just an interesting factoid -- I don't recall seeing that there before.
(disclosure: I am in their Moderate G&I portfolio through a SMA)

That’s where I’ve landed after years of “over analyzing” / “over allocating”. Run a 10-part portfolio @10% each. Various cash holdings constitute 10%. Another part consists of 3 individual stocks. The other 8 are single funds (OEMF, CEF, ETF).
Recently pitched a 10% weighted aggressive bond fund & replaced it with an investment grade short term fund. Had I @rforno’s money, a move like that might have sent “ripples” through the markets!

As mentioned, M* is a publicly traded company with the priority to make money for their investors. I believe the stock has returned in the +30% range YTD. PE ratio is in the 170's, overvalued maybe, but it does indicate investors like what M* is doing. I'm guessing the changes being made may irritate some here, but at the same time be rewarding to shareholders.
Companies change, especially in the quest to reward investors. I guess we can complain about M* eliminating the free stuff or them changing the things we have gotten used to, but they are following their obligation to shareholders, apparently. Isn't it time to except the changes and move on?

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).

I have been trading a big % since 2000 of at least 20% until retirement.
Since retirement in 2018 and only 2-3 funds (they are not at equal %), every trade is at least 30%, and most are at 40-50%. Changes under 10% have minimal effect, and under 5% are meaningless.

PREVIEW & REVIEW (consolidated). 2023 was a bad year for BIOTECH, but there were several M&A deals. The equal weight XBI outperformed the market-cap weight IBB. Pause in rate hikes, and prospects for rate cuts, helps companies that rely on debt. 2024 should be a better year for biotech.
Best INCOME investments for 2024. Bonds came through in 2023 beating their recent bear market. Who knew that Treasuries could move like this. Bond yields are higher and more normal. Cash remains appealing too. Dividend stocks lagged other stocks, but offer both current-dividends and dividend-growth. In the list below, fund types OEFs, ETFs and CEFs are mixed.
US Dividend Stocks – VYM, SCHD, NOBL
Foreign Dividend Stocks – IDV, SCHY, IEMG
Energy Pipelines – AMLP, KYN, SMLPX
Utilities – XLU, UTG, NEE
Telecoms – T, TMUS, VZ
Convertibles – CWB, ICVT
Real Estate – VNQ, RQI
MBS – MBB, VMBS, DLTNX
HY – HYG, TUHYX, JQC
Preferreds – PFF, JPC, FPEI
Munis – VWITX, NEA, MUB
Treasuries – SHY, TLT, TIP
FUNDS. Many investors like to buy TREASURIES at Auctions at Treasury Direct (TD; a site that isn’t very user-friendly). One has to own these to maturity at TD, or move them out of TD to brokerages for trading. But Treasuries can also be bought at major brokerages at Auctions or in the secondary market (with bid-ask spreads) with no/little commissions. Treasury funds can be used by those who don’t want to deal with individual Treasury purchases. (By @LewisBraham at MFO)
EXTRA, FUNDS. 2023 had several good bond ETF launches. A total of 500 ETFs were launched and 370 were active ETFs; there are now 1,353 active ETFs with $500 billion AUM. Many active ETFs have lower ERs than their OEF cousins. Mentioned are active multisector BINC, value TCAF, ETF of ETFs DFAW. The fee wars continued with indexed SCYB, BEMB, etc. The worst ETF offerings were AIYY, BITX, etc.
RETIREMENT. SECURE 2.0 has allowed several changes for 401k/403b, but plans have been slow to adopt OPTIONAL changes – employer contribution matching for student loan payments, emergency funds within 401k/403b (PLESAs), etc. This may be because the employers are focusing now on several MANDATORY changes for catchup provisions, auto-enrollments, RMDs, etc. (Also, because 401k/403b regulations have become very complicated)
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/thread/546/barron-january-1-2024-2
https://www.barrons.com/magazine?mod=BOL_TOPNAV

The Week in Charts (12/27/23)
Put these charts on your wall. Topics:
0:00 Intro
00:23 Overbought! Oversold!
01:08 Credit Card Rates & Mortgage Rates
01:55 Fed Policy & Stock Market Returns
03:30 Mortgage Rates & Home Prices
04:20 The Stock Market Is Not the Economy
05:20 Bear Market Bottoms
06:39 Volatility is Mean-Reverting at Extremes
07:36 Markets Don't Follow a Normal Distribution
09:35 Bank Failures and Financial Crises
10:33 Increasing Concentration
11:59 What Happened Last Year = What Will Happen Next Year?
12:47 Cars Are Not Appreciating Assets
13:43 Past Performance = Future Results?
14:54 Just Buy What You Know?
15:54 Shorting Stocks Based on Valuation
17:07 Irrational Investors
18:38 Streaks
19:41 Profits Matter ... Eventually
20:41 The Workers Came Back
21:42 Bonds Have Risk
23:23 Buying a Stock Based on a Meme
24:34 Supply/Demand Imbalances
25:20 Makes Changes to Your Portfolio Based on Headlines
26:26 Rising National Debt
28:06 Big Returns, Big Drawdowns
28:59 Central Planning vs. Capitalism
29:53 Wall Street Predictions
31:10 Why You Need to Invest
32:21 There Is No Impossible in Markets
Video
Blog

Your pie charts seem to confirm my view that high foreign investments have hurt its returns. TRPBX’s foreign holdings are much higher than FBALX. I don’t shun foreign investments, but will prefer to use dedicated foreign funds from now on, particularly since TRP’s foreign funds are so weak. After I sold TRPBX in my Roth IRA, I reinvested in FBALX plus my other TRP stock funds (TRMCX, TRVLX and PRDMX). Also put some of money in Fidelity’s FIVFX, which has outperformed TRP foreign funds. I’m planning to do a Roth conversion with part of the ARTKX shares in my regular IRA, and will put the remaining funds in that. I’m not comfortable holding 20% of the total assets of my Roth IRA in foreign stocks plus another 10-15% in foreign bonds, particularly given the higher risk and lower returns of foreign markets for many years.

I also tend to hold funds for quite some time, because funds have their own cycles and often when one fund underperforms another for some time, the pattern subsequently reverses.
Looking at the calendar year percentile rankings, one could say that it's not so much that TRPBX got worse as that it tended to be okay but not great. Or as rforno put it, "kind of 'meh'".
The fund had two bad years, 2021 and 2022 (and FBALX had an even worse record in 2022). These weigh heavily on its three year performance and five year performance. Those two years aside, its yearly performances were typically top third, just.
Even going back to your first decade with these funds (2003-2012), TRPBX barely outpaced FBALX, 8.23% to 8.21%.
I suspect that the fraction of equity that's invested abroad hasn't shifted much in decades. A fund may be permitted to make major allocation changes without ever taking advantage of that freedom. Not worth going back past 2017, though, because earlier annual reports don't seem to contain that information.
Sept 2023 (M*): 32% foreign (19.01%/59.60%)
May 2022 (annual report): 36% foreign (21%/59%)

May 2021 (annual report): 34% foreign (20%/59%)

May 2020 (annual report): 34% foreign (21%/62%)

May 2019 (annual report): 35% foreign (20%/57%)

May 2018 (annual report): 36% foreign (21%/58%)

The 2017 annual report notes that T. Rowe Price made several changes to what were then called the Personal Strategy Funds.

On October 1, 2016, we introduced three new underlying investment strategies to the Personal Strategy Funds. ... The changes include a new allocation to alternatives through a hedge fund-of-funds, as well as initiating an investment in the T. Rowe Price Dynamic Global Bond Fund and an equity index option strategy.

2023 went out with a whimper rather than a bang, but it was a better year than most expected. I was most surprised by the rally in bond funds over the past couple months. Also surprised by the performance of foreign funds, which still trailed the S&P but did well on an absolute basis. FCNTX was my best performing fund, returning nearly 40%, which was much better than expected but not surprising that it led my other funds.
The overall value of my portfolio is still below its peak in 2021, but not far behind. My taxable account grew a lot in 2023, from investment returns as well as interest from CDs, Treasuries, money markets and short term bond funds. I also started drawing Social Security payments in 2023 and our overall income exceeded our expenses by quite a lot.

@msf
You are correct that TRPBX slightly outperformed FBALX by about 1.1% in 2022.
However, over the following time periods, FBALX outperformed TRPBX annualized by this much:
1 year, 6.7%
3 years, 4.1%
5 years, 4.2%
10 years, 2.2%
Put another way, $10,000 invested in FBALX ten years ago would be worth $23,262, compared to $17,743 with TRPBX. Since I had considerably more money invested in both funds over the past 10 years, the value of my FBALX holdings have increased by tens of thousands of dollars more than TRPBX — particularly since I’ve owned both funds for more than 20 years (until selling TRPBX earlier this year.)
Anyway, it’s my fault for sticking with TRP allocation funds for so long. They have underperformed
for a while, but I’m a patient buy-and-hold investor and kept expecting things to change. They did, but unfortunately for the worse.