+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.

My experiences with foreign small caps and emerging markets have not been good. I invested in Artisan’s global small cap, and it performed so poorly that they closed it after a few years. I invested in MAPIX, and it was still losing money after more than 7 years. I invested in SFGIX, one of the better EM funds, and it had returned less than 4% annually after more than 11 years. These kind of funds tend to get destroyed in down markets, and it happens quickly.
I’m through investing in foreign SC and EM now, unless some of my broader foreign funds invest in them. My advice to anyone considering these markets, is to be prepared for a long wait before making any money— unless you get lucky with your timing. I’ll be 70 in January, and I might not live long enough to see them make money. Good luck!

I second the comments posted here. It is SO difficult to find any Foreign funds that perform comparable to Domestic funds. We get our Foreign exposure through a coupla Global funds, and that's it for us. Usually hold about 10% of our stock exposure in Foreign.

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

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.

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

“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.)

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.

”SpaceX Falcon Heavy launches X-37B plane, one of the US military’s most fascinating secrets”
Dateline: Thursday, December 28, 2023 (8:16 PM)
STORY
”This launch marked the first time the space plane has hitched a ride on a SpaceX Falcon Heavy, one of the most powerful operational rockets in the world.”
(Moral: Things aren’t always what they seem.)

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

As a Super Senior, CDs are very important in our savings and planning.
They offer security and liquidity and beat the low savings offered at our local CU. We have about 20% in Mutual funds and that makes us over extended if one uses the 100-age rule.
A change if our life style, Assisted Living, may be around the corner.
To make things simple for my wife and our heirs we have investments in only 2 firms. I am shortening our CD ladders to one year with many rungs.
The stability of the bank offering the CD is more important than a few tenths of a % in the interest rate.
Our pension and SS income is well greater then our current living expenses but would be gobbled up in a cared living facility.
I miss the “Investing After Retirement” forum on the M* of the olden days.

Rossby, I am also focused on my age, and my desire to avoid unnecessay stress in protecting my retirement assets. I keep hearing these statements about how investors think they can "guarantee" that other asset classes will make much more than CDs, but I keep experiencing market changing events that are "unique" that cause unexpected changes in total return reality. I am about to turn 76, starting to experience noticeable changes in my health conditions, starting to think about potential changes in my living options, etc. I have no idea what the age of each poster is, who are making comments, but younger persons can look at this thread as just a money making accumulation decision, while they go to work each day, and enjoy a variety of employment fringe benefits. I no longer work, and I must adjust my investing decisions based on the absence of employment pensions and accommodations for age related investing decisions. Everyone has a unique set of life circumstances that must be considered what risk you are able to take.

As a Super Senior, CDs are very important in our savings and planning.
They offer security and liquidity and beat the low savings offered at our local CU. We have about 20% in Mutual funds and that makes us over extended if one uses the 100-age rule.
A change if our life style, Assisted Living, may be around the corner.
To make things simple for my wife and our heirs we have investments in only 2 firms. I am shortening our CD ladders to one year with many rungs.
The stability of the bank offering the CD is more important than a few tenths of a % in the interest rate.
Our pension and SS income is well greater then our current living expenses but would be gobbled up in a cared living facility.
I miss the “Investing After Retirement” forum on the M* of the olden days.

From what I’ve read, it’s running neck and neck with a Fidelity Blue Chip ETF for top honors this year. (ARK lost 67% in 2022.)
ARKK (73.69% YTD through Dec 27, per M*) is behind its OEF clone, ADNYX (available w/$2.5K min @ Schwab) (73.80% YTD), let alone its siblings ARKF (98.60%) and ARKW (103.09%).
If top honors are restricted to "broad based" funds (ARKK is classified MCG by M*), there's MSJAX, a global small/midcap fund, up 74.23% YTD.
If top honors are restricted to ETFs, but open to all types of funds, look into digital assets ETFs. GSOL makes ARKK look like still waters. GSOL was down 94% in 2022; it is up 988.89% YTD.
Over its lifetime, ARKK is just slightly behind FCNTX: 194% vs. 211% cumulative return. It's not a ride I would want to take, but in the long run it could get you to the same place. Though I doubt most people invest in this as a buy-and-hold security. Which was your point.

Fund Allocations (Cumulative), 11/30/23
There were noticeable shifts into stocks. The changes for OEFs + ETFs were based on a total AUM of about $30.23 trillion in the previous month, so +/- 1% change was about +/- $302.3 billion. Also note that these changes were from both fund inflows/outflows & price changes. #Funds #OEFs #ETFs #ICI
OEFs & ETFs: Stocks 58.34%, Hybrids 4.74%, Bonds 18.73%, M-Mkt 18.19%
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1297/thread

@crash and @hank, thanks for the clarification. Tactical moves does require larger % to make meaningful impact on the overall portfolio. Large move for us was to exit (most) bonds in late 2021. 50/10/40 stock/bond/cash work out okay.we will maintain a healthy % in stocks ( to combat inflation) but wait for “fat pitches” as stocks are not cheap.

Truth. But for single-stocks, I never bother with the well-known, high-flying names which get all the publicity. I call them a "pre-crowded trade." Low P/E is vital for me. I look at Analyst ratings, Technical Strength (14 days.) And I avoid equities with too many "Shorts" attached. I see the SP500 is meeting resistance today, trying to break through the all-time high closing. (Still before 10:00 a.m. here. Markets close at 11:00.)