Continuing to add minimum amounts to current positions in OSTIX and RSIVX. Waiting to see tomorrow’s 1-y and 2-y treasury auction on Wednesday. Hesitant to step foot in the secondary market for 2 and 3-y treasuries, though I’d like to lock-in these rates. Missed what appears to have been the peak last month.

@FD1000: thanks for your comment about Liberty Mutual. I had been a long-time Amica customer, but left them when I found they were completely inflexible on the premium. LM offered a decent deal to grads of my university, so I switched. After 15 years, I’m still satisfied but 2023 sticker shock lingers. Time to call a customer rep to see if they have some flexibility.

Be sure to ask for 'Bee-bu.' :)

@FD1000: thanks for your comment about Liberty Mutual. I had been a long-time Amica customer, but left them when I found they were completely inflexible on the premium. LM offered a decent deal to grads of my university, so I switched. After 15 years, I’m still satisfied but 2023 sticker shock lingers. Time to call a customer rep to see if they have some flexibility.

David's point is spot-on. To this day I can't understand how people will buy $110 candy bars or $1200 sweaters or a $300 white t-shirt. Heck ... I have a $100 credit to Saks every year from Amex (2x$50) but I pretty much just use it for some (small) tin of dessert goodies to send my partner b/c otherwise all I could probably purchase with it from them is a single pair of socks or a basic keychain. Insanity!
I guess if you have f-you levels of money and/or are a money-hoarder, you evolve into that bubble and being out-of-touch is the unfortunate norm.

@David_Snowball
You know, we read and hear comments similar to yours almost every day. But I had not yet read or heard words strung together anywhere near as well as you just did. Thank you!
If I may add..
My family was as close as you can come to being dirt poor. I started collecting bottles for 2/5-cent refunds as soon as I could walk (some say crawl) and elevated to top caddy at the local, private country club until I got my first real job flipping burgers at 16.
Wednesday was ladies day at the club. I was one of the few brave souls to regularly show to tote their bags, circa late-60's-early 70's, when women had not yet (to be kind) elevated their games to bearable. They were far more interested then in golf serving as a weekly fashion show of sorts, with expert outfit color-coordination being far more important than a stinking par or bogey.
Off #1 tee we go, both drives of the owners of my two bags out there well over 75 yards on the otherwise easy opening Par 4. We get to the balls, they ask me, "What should I hit from here?" I (in my mind) deadpan, "Lady, just keep hitting that one 'til i tell you when to stop."
Then, after upwards of 5 grueling hours of upper echelon chit-chat, and an uncountable number of lost balls, strokes and cigarettes, one of them stiffs me for the standard $1 tip, instead tossing me four bits. I head to the highway to hitch-hike home with my measly $7, while they toss back a few in the club bar before jumping in their Cadillacs and Jags.
So, long-winded I know, but in answer to your question, NO!
I learned at a very young age that they "honestly and truly ha(ve) no f'ing clue what life outside the compound is like."
That said, if the woman who stiffed me on any given Wednesday ever had cause to check the inventory of new balls in her golf bag, she might question if she could have lost that many balls on her own! Caddies play golf, too, you know! Or do you?

Our local success story, Zingerman’s, is said to be offering the “Rolls Royce” of turkeys at $250 for a bird 7-11 pounds. A larger one is, natch, even dearer. I read no further in the news article because it seemed pointless to exacerbate my stunned outrage. As previously noted, who the F are the customers for such baubles?

I do wonder, a propos Mark's point, about the effects of the chasm that now separates America's corporate elite from ... you know, lesser beings. In 2021, post-pandemic, the median CEO salary topped $20 million, up nearly 2000% since '78 and about 254X the average worker's salary.
One commentator this week observed that these aren't people for whom "first class tickets" and "luxury resorts" are meaningful terms; they're "private jets" and "secret islands."
When Wharton business school students were surveyed about how much money the average American makes, something like a third of them offered six-figure answers. (Ummm ... its just north of $50k.)
I read "The Cheapskates's Guide to Holiday Presents" in the WSJ on Friday. The first was a $150 sweater and the second was $110 for 10 chocolate bars; admittedly a lot less than the $1200 men's sweater and thousand dollar shirts a week earlier, but in what world ...?
Long ago the elder President Bush (1992) was decried as out-of-touch for he had no idea of what things like milk or bread cost, and being gobsmacked by a laser scanner at a checkout. But I really wonder, sometimes, if our difficulties might not be exacerbated by the fact that the elite - the 700+ billionaires among us - honestly and truly has no f'ing clue what life outside the compound is like?

I'm a bit wary when 'enhanced', 'strategic', or 'dynamic' are included in a fund's name
Marketing aside, what do you really think about the funds?

Are enhanced index funds genuinely enhanced?
Link

Rather than (or in addition to) reading a summary, why not read the whole piece (18 pages): https://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~mgruber/pdfs/efm21.pdf
Stern (NYU) and Tobin (St. Johns)
I've just skimmed each, Swedroe's summary and the original paper.
Swedroe writes:

The pre-expense advantage of enhanced index funds all but disappeared post-expense because of their higher expense ratios. This was true whether using the low-cost share class available to institutional investors or the low-cost share class available to individual investors.

IOW, categorically, enhanced index funds do no worse and perhaps a slight bit better than vanilla index funds. The better wording, from the paper itself, is that

The difference [between performance of] both index funds and enhanced index funds is not statistically different from zero. All we can conclude is that enhanced index funds do no worse than index funds after expenses.

So there's no reason to dismiss enhanced index funds as a whole.
An important point made in the paper is that gross of expenses (i.e. before expenses are deducted), enhanced index funds outperform vanilla index funds. It's just that their higher costs eat up nearly all (except for a statistically insignificant amount) of that excess return. Further, while expenses are a predictor of relative outperformance by vanilla index funds (cheaper funds should do better than more expensive ones), they say that expenses cannot predict which enhanced index funds will do better than average.
Let's take that at face value. That any enhanced index fund, net of expenses (i.e. after subtracting off its costs) is as likely as any other to over- or under-perform the average.
Now instead of looking at the universe of enhanced index funds, each with a different "enhancement" method, consider just one enhanced index fund. The size of its outperformance before subtracting fees roughly matches the higher amount of fees it charges. Doesn't matter which enhanced index fund since the authors can make no predictions based on fees.
Suppose now that we had two enhanced index funds, identical in every way (same manager, same portfolios, same quality of execution, etc.) except that one charged lower fees than the other. Their gross performance (before considering fees) would have to be identical by assumption. Their net performance, after subtracting fees, would be different, and predictable.
This does not contradict the paper, because the paper looked at different funds with different portfolios. Those with higher funds performed better, just enough to compensate for their higher fees. That's not the case with the two hypothetical funds because they're identical except for fees.
That seems to be the situation here. Fidelity is taking OEF enhanced index funds, reducing their fees by around 20 basis points, and selling them through ETF channels. Like lower cost vanilla index funds, the ETFs' lower costs makes them attractive, if nothing but sales channel and ERs are changed. That's the $64,000 question - will the ETFs be identical to the former OEF funds?

I'm a bit wary when 'enhanced', 'strategic', or 'dynamic' are included in a fund's name.

:)

I'm a bit wary when 'enhanced', 'strategic', or 'dynamic' are included in a fund's name.

+1 x 1000! :)

@Sven, see Q&A. Fido has all kinds of ETFs - nontransparent, semitransparent, transparent; also, passive, Active.
Q8: Will these ETFs be “non-transparent” or “semi-transparent”?
A: The ETFs will be fully transparent and disclose holdings on a daily basis.
Q9: Does Fidelity have any other transparent active equity ETFs?
A: Yes, Fidelity launched disruptive ETFs in June 2023 that are transparent active equity
ETFs: Fidelity® Disruptive Automation ETF (FBOT), Fidelity® Disruptive
Communications ETF (FDCF), Fidelity® Disruptive Finance ETF (FDFF), Fidelity®
Disruptive Medicine ETF (FMED), Fidelity® Disruptive Technology ETF (FDTX), and
Fidelity® Disruptors ETF (FDIF). Fidelity also offers 12 actively managed fully
transparent fixed income ETFs, as well as a number of passively managed fully
transparent ETFs that utilize third-party and proprietary indexes.
Q10: What other ETFs does Fidelity offer?
A: As part of its overall ETF offering, the 64 Fidelity ETFs this month will include twentyone actively managed equity ETFs, twelve fixed income ETFs, thirteen equity factor
ETFs, six passive thematic ETFs, eleven passive equity sector ETFs, and Fidelity ONEQ.
As a leading provider of ETFs, Fidelity’s platform offers individual investors and
advisors access to more than 2,500 ETFs, available for online purchase commission-free,
with more than $930 billion in ETF client assets as of October 31, 2023. As part of
Fidelity's commitment to financial education, the company offers educational resources
to help investors review ETF investing ideas, decide which types of ETFs may fit their
investing needs, or browse ETFs with Fidelity’s screener:
https://www.fidelity.com/etfs/investing-in-etfs.

They are quantitatively "enhanced" index funds, though Fidelity dropped the "index" part of the name for the ETF versions.
Fidelity converted its International Enhanced Index Fund FIENX, its Large Cap Core Enhanced Index Fund FLCEX, its Large Cap Growth Enhanced Fund FLGEX, its Large Cap Value Enhanced Fund FLVEX and its Mid Cap Enhanced Index Fund FMEIX into ETFs.
From these funds' prospectus:

Generally using computer-aided, quantitative analysis of historical valuation, growth, profitability, and other factors to select a broadly diversified group of stocks that may have the potential to provide a higher total return than that of [the respective index]

The addition of these six active equity ETFs can serve as core building blocks for investors to meet this need.’ ...

The “active” strategy and daily reporting make these funds different from other index fund ETFs. From Mark’s link above, these are new addition to Fidelity’s existing actively managed ETFs. In term of fees, they are a tad higher than index ETF in the range of 18-28 bps.

I've always felt that insurance is almost impossible to evaluate because cost is the easiest, but only one of the important variables. How does one evaluate an insurance company's track record of responsiveness to customer problems or of handling claims?
What's the point of paying less in premiums only to get screwed if you have a claim?
You may not always get what you paid for, but you never get what you didn't pay for.
OK, maybe that's a shade too cynical- I've surely had situations where someone was extremely generous in accommodating me well beyond what was actually called for. But sure as hell not insurance companies.

You speak truth.
But here's one: On the way to my doctor, I found I was leaking brake fluid. Just managed to stop in the lot without hitting a tree along the shrub-line. Called the useless1-800 number. ...Hello, I need a tow just as far as the next gas station. Gotta buy some brake fluid. I'm leaking fluid. ....Yes, we cover 62 things related to roadside assistance, but not that.
I called my AGENT, who lives and works an hour from where I was. "I'll bring it to you." And he did. Don't like his Fake Noise politics, but he saved my bacon, that day.

Here is the Fidelity webpage for the ETFs you have identified:
https://www.fidelity.com/etfs/find-an-etf?selectTab=4&imm_pid=700000001009773&immid=100826_SEA&imm_eid=ep35276482655&utm_source=GOOGLE&utm_medium=paid_search&utm_account_id=700000001009773&utm_campaign=MUT&utm_content=58700004245025695&utm_term=fidelity+sector+etf&utm_campaign_id=100826&utm_id=71700000038831601&gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQiApOyqBhDlARIsAGfnyMrrbWQ4X3k711ZwQmSPfRszC7RweSFM7NLv4KqFTpkTGYe69AIcrJQaAnhVEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds
Excerpt from Citywire's 11/13/23 article:
,,,The ETFs will retain the objectives and management of their mutual fund counterparts. However, their expense ratios have been reduced to about half -- FELC, FELG, and FELV will cost 0.18%, FMDE 0.23%, and FESM and FENI 0.28%. They will continue to be managed by Anna Lester, Max Kaufmann and Shashi Naik.
‘We continue to see demand for active ETFs as investors seek the potential for outperformance with the benefits of an ETF wrapper,’ said Greg Friedman, Fidelity’s head of ETF management and strategy. ‘The addition of these six active equity ETFs can serve as core building blocks for investors to meet this need.’ ...

With apologies to the Shadow if this has already been posted:
Q1: I understand that Fidelity is launching six new enhanced ETFs. What can you tell me?
A: That’s correct, Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Core ETF (FELC), Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG), Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Value ETF (FELV), Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap ETF (FMDE), Fidelity Enhanced Small Cap ETF (FESM), and Fidelity Enhanced International ETF (FENI) will be available commission-free for individual investors and financial advisors through Fidelity’s online brokerage platforms on November 20, 2023.
The new enhanced ETFs, which were initially launched as mutual funds in 2007, are the culmination of Fidelity’s June 2023 announcement regarding the plan to convert the fund suite into ETFs.
Fidelity Statement

Withdrawals w/Fractional End-Balance Goals (Infl-Adj)
Method
1. Use #PortfolioVisualizer for #SWR (% of orig portfolio bal that can be withdrawn at yearends w/infl adj w/o running out of money ($amounts); CFI = Final Bal (infl-adj)/Initial Bal.
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1261/thread
2. #SWRM is % of original portfolio bal that can be withdrawn at yearends w/ infl adj, but at the end, $leftover is fraction f (=< 1) of infl-adj orig principal ($amounts).
SWRM = SWR*(CFI - f)/CFI
SWRMs for 01/2000 - 12/2022
FUND CFI f = 0 f = 0.25 f = 0.50 f = 0.75 f = 1
VWELX 2.9844 7.25% 6.64% 6.035% 5.43% 4.82%
FBALX 2.8961 6.83% 6.24% 5.65% 5.06% 4.47%
ABALX 2.9187 7.40% 6.77% 6.13% 5.50% 4.865%
VFINX 2.2346 4.34% 3.85% 3.37% 2.88% 2.40%

Back to the subject of the Thread.
QLTY trading volume continues to be odd. Everyday since its launch, the volume is higher than the previous day but the AUM remains the same $3.1M (as of today's market open). Today's volume is large enough that almost 100% of the # of outstanding shares would change hands in just today. So much retail (and FA) interest (fascination) with this ETF but not enough institutional interest to get the AUM move above the meager launch AUM!

“CEFs are tradable securities just like ETFs and stocks. They have the current market values but no liquidation dates. They are subject to M&A by activists. Just look at GIM that will turn soon into SABA “
Appreciate all this. But ETFs trade at the value of their underlying assets. No? So do mutual funds (in theory anyways). But CEF’s can trade at discounts of 10, 20% or more below book value and sometimes trade well above what their assets are really worth
Maybe a better way to phrase my question: If you buy, sell or own perpetual (non term limited) CEF’s) on what valuation metric do you base your decision if the “share price” is substantially different from the “NAV”?
ISTM - One part I’ve overlooked is earnings stream. I suspect that’s really important to the perpetual CEFs.

Not suggesting we are in a stock market mania, but in a mania market, expect MOAT to underperform. When MOAT changed its methodology in 2016, they made a small fix to it traditionally disregarding the Momentum factor but not a large enough fix.
MOAT methodology is agnostic to Quality factor as well. (It is possible, in M* eyes, moat subsumes quality.) So, If one looks at M*'s factor profile for MOAT, Momentum and Quality factors currently rank the lowest of all the factors.
Also, I would not invest in MOAT unless one is interested in Value because valuation (though can be subjective / assumptions) drives its strategy. If one looks at the M* style map, this can be seen easily.
Currently, its size factor is on the border of large and mid cap. Also, it is somewhat equal weighted (vs cap weighted). Mid cap and equal weighted portfolios have not done well lately vs SPY. Even after the 2016 methodology changes, the fund can swing greatly in factors (except the Value factor) from one rebalance date to the next, and if one is inclined to be in-charge of active management of their portfolio (or the portion allocated to MOAT), MOAT is not for you, as it can throw you off your game.
With MOAT, expect to get idiosyncratic experience relative to SPY.
Next rebalance is after the third Friday in December. So, its portfolio is fixed until then - just in case, one is hoping and praying that it will behave differently tomorrow.
Hopefully, that is enough discussion about MOAT and the thread can get back to QLTY.