A recent article in The NY Times about an Iowa pig farmer converting his farm to mushroom production states that there are 4000 factory farms in Iowa. An Iowa farmer interviewed on CNN last night said it’s good for the earth to raise beef cattle. I suspect there’s a connection between the American diet and our obesity problem. I am not neutral on the issue: I think bacon is a carcinogen and avoid animal products, processed foods, and the like.

Indeed. Having eaten beef in Europe, South America, and Asia, it tastes totally different than American beef which often has been fed all sorts of crap and given all sorts of drugs to help provide 'greater yield' compared to those other regions ... such Frankenfoods definitely play a role in the obesity problems, even if they're not necessarily processed. The same with wheat, which is engineered and grown more for 'yield' and 'cost savings' than nutritional value -- the wheat of today, especially in the USA is NOT the wheat from 200 or 1000 years ago.

@WABAC: because of DNC coming up, CNN had a documentary on with lots of scenes of the Chicago 1968 convention. Most striking thing to me and my wife was how skinny, almost scrawny, the young kids looked. The same slice of the population these days is either muscular or beefy to obese. Kids in elementary school in my day (the fifties) were not fat; this is not the case today. What has happened to cause this?
A recent article in The NY Times about an Iowa pig farmer converting his farm to mushroom production states that there are 4000 factory farms in Iowa. An Iowa farmer interviewed on CNN last night said it’s good for the earth to raise beef cattle. I suspect there’s a connection between the American diet and our obesity problem. I am not neutral on the issue: I think bacon is a carcinogen and avoid animal products, processed foods, and the like.

It's interesting--to me--to ponder the enthusiasm for this tactical-allocation fund on the ink-buying side of this site versus the disdain for option-based funds.

My initial comment was simply that I agreed with LCORX shorting the QQQ. Later, I attempted to answer questions from another poster. Honestly, I have little “enthusiasm” myself for this one. In looking around to fill a portfolio need several months ago it looked like a reasonable fit. Occupies 10% of portfolio, as do all my funds. Were I to lighten up, it is the first thing I would exit. That 10% would probably move into fixed income.
I’m 78. A pension & Social Security meet most needs. But they do not cover expenses like new vehicles, travel or home infrastructure. Hence, I continue to invest, keeping very little in cash. (Old habits die hard.) I think it is important to consider age, risk tolerance and someone’s overall situation if trying to analyze their investment choices. I believe we tend to invest in what we know best from past experience. One person’s cup of tea may appear a rancid waste to another.
I didn’t check the others @Observant1 mentions, but there are records at Yahoo for LCORX that go back much farther than 2008. (You need to click “Show more” at the bottom of the initial list of dates.) LCORX lost 27.44% in 2008. Make whatever you want of that.
Yahoo Finance

@rforno, I think people like your friend are probably rare. I'll admit that observing other people's shopping carts is not a reliable survey. But, I think the food industry will keep the GLP-1 companies well supplied with customers at least until the drugs go generic.

Agree, sadly. It's part of the American culture, I think -- but that's a whole different line of discussion.

I won't be ditching IYK any time soon.

@rforno, I think people like your friend are probably rare. I'll admit that observing other people's shopping carts is not a reliable survey. But, I think the food industry will keep the GLP-1 companies well supplied with customers at least until the drugs go generic.

Agree, sadly. It's part of the American culture, I think -- but that's a whole different line of discussion.

@rforno, I think people like your friend are probably rare. I'll admit that observing other people's shopping carts is not a reliable survey. But, I think the food industry will keep the GLP-1 companies well supplied with customers at least until the drugs go generic.

@Balu
The sordid details are in Reddit link below. There are several Reddit threads covering the issue. Gist is that Fidelity uses non standard definitions for commonly accepted terms on a wire form such as "FFC". I got docked twice for $40 and have given up on dealing with wiring money from Fidelity to Schwab. I just do a ACH pull now from Schwab. Wires from Fidelity to direct bank account work fine. Things get messed up when FFC is needed.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Schwab/comments/1dw5nl9/how_to_do_a_wire_transfer_from_fidelity_to_schwab/

TCAF talks about utilities most of the time (7% sector exposure....3x the benchmark) but still holds 5 times as much technology as of June. Important viewpoint on eventual AI beneficiary being software. 100% agree. Skate to where the puck is going.

I will still play utilities more than software companies for the AI theme. After all, software needs power for the computer to run it. :)
Besides the OEFs I own hold major software companies, so I'll defer to them for exposure.

new medication will improve lives and reduce junk food consumption.

What a strange world we live in that we have to buy expensive drugs to save us from consuming

stuff that should rarely go into our shopping carts.

I remember when 'Wheat Belly' was published 15 or so years ago and how the grain/junk food industry was playing dirty pool trying to discredit the author (a cardiologist) and plant seeds of doubt. Seeing how the industry was being so proactive in their nonsense, I presumed the book was probably on to something. But the book was eye-opening .... I went low-bad-carb for a year, lost a TON of weight, and haven't looked back. Since then i've learned the food industry will do ANYTHING to keep its customers hooked, and the pharma industry will do ANYTHING to address symptoms but not 'cure' the underlying causes ... both in the name of $$$$$$, of course.
By contrast, a longtime friend is on a GLP-1. They were never a chronic junk or processed food addict, worked out regularly, and generally had a healthy lifestyle yet struggled with weight and major appetite issues for decades. She started on GLP-1s last year and (last I heard) is down 25# and says they're feeling/looking like a new person in ways "not since college." I think GLP-1s are game changers, plus I'm seeing studies about how they're showing promise for other conditions, too.....and if GLP-1s can help metabolic issues, that can have a follow-on benefit for patients who don't need as many drugs for conditons, new medical devices, replacement knees/hips, etc. So in that regard I think Giroux is spot-on in this assessment. But it's great for patients, but bad for some companies.

TCAF talks about utilities most of the time (7% sector exposure....3x the benchmark) but still holds 5 times as much technology as of June. Important viewpoint on eventual AI beneficiary being software. 100% agree. Skate to where the puck is going.

@Observant1, I suggest you read this article by Devo, and go through the process of creating a "replicating portfolio." It's a useful exercise to evaluate any fund that advertises risk reduction. If your chosen risk reducer comes out ahead of the SPY-cash split, you may be on to something.
Speaking for myself, I look at how funds behaved in the rising-rate environment of 2022. I'm gloomy on the topic of inflation and interest rates. I'm not convinced inflation has been spiked for good.

@observant1 noted. will try to put something together.

I've been a happy owner of JHQAX for many years now and think of it's expected return and volatility the same as you stated, like a moderate balanced fund. But I also bought into the T.Rowe Price hedged fund, PHEFX, when it came out and have steadily increased the holding. PHEFX has actually returned more than JHQAX with what seems to be slightly more volatility. 1 year return for JHQAX=15.2%, PHEFX=22.7%. In comparison to a well known balanced fund, PRWCX=16.9% while the S&P 500 has returned ~22% in the past 1 year. FWIW.

JPMorgan Hedged Equity (JHQAX) has been on my watchlist for a while.
This fund would assume a role similar to that of a moderate allocation fund in my portfolio.
I've compared JHQAX to three well-regarded moderate allocation funds.
It had the lowest max drawdown/volatility and the highest Sharpe/Sortino ratios.
The fund's CAGR lagged by 20 bps - 55 bps.
Portfolio Backtester
During its lifetime, JHQAX has performed well on a risk-adjusted basis.
Are there any potential material risks associated with this fund's options strategy which
have not been realized but may become evident during certain market events in the future?
What am I missing?
I've read Devesh's recent "Opting out of Options ETFs" article where he states:
"These products are complex, incur significant bid-offer costs for the ETF providers, and they are all passed on to the end buyer in one form or another. If you must own stocks and are afraid of a stock market crash, reduce your stock allocation."
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2024/08/summer-thoughts/
Perhaps @Devo could provide his professional assessment of JHQAX
including corresponding risks for its options strategy?
Edit/Add: After posting, I read again the following article written by Devesh.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2024/04/options-based-funds-a-deeper-diver/

M* classifies LCORX as a tactical allocation fund.
For the most part, a moderate allocation fund would serve the same purpose in my portfolio.
With this in mind, I compared LCORX to three well-regarded moderate allocation funds.
Since 05/01/2009 (constrained by RLBGX inception date), LCORX experienced
the lowest maximum drawdown although its CAGR lagged significantly.
All three moderate allocation funds had higher Sharpe/Sortino ratios.
Portfolio Backtester

@Balu
BOA is terrible. I still have an account there but abandoned active usage of it many moons back. I'm happy with Discover Bank. That said, I'm leaning towards switching to Schwab and Fidelity only for all banking related needs. All bill pay is currently via Fidelity and paycheck is deposited to Fidelity. I like it because I don't have to manually purchase a high yield MMF like Schwab.
I have bank accounts with Capital One(hardly used, closed), Ally(great rates, terrible customer svc), Pentagon FCU(good), Marcus(disaster), Alliant CU(hardly used, closed) and 2 local banks(1 for safe deposit box). Too much account sprawl, intend to clean up and get down to Schwab and Fidelity only.
I advised my son to not open a bank account, to just use Fidelity for brokerage and banking.

@fred495 , it's unclear if the free access to old M* Legacy Portfolio will continue.
Right now, there are distinct links for M* Legacy Portfolio and the new M* Investor.
1) M* Legacy Portfolio https://www.morningstar.com/portfolio-manager
2) M* Investor https://investor.morningstar.com/
So, #2 will go away or will just redirect to the Morningstar.com.
But what happens to #1? The M* announcement is unclear. If it goes away, or redirects to Morningstar.com, then the free access is gone. This is because to access Legacy Portfolio from within Investor/Portfolio will require subscription. So, will M* keep self-standing access to Legacy Portfolio when doing this huge integration?
BTW, former Premium users were moved to M* Investor last year for the remainder of their Premium subscription, and they had to renew to maintain access.
Users will find out on Tuesday evening that is just 2 days away. Unfortunately, I won't be able to test this as I have subscription to M* Investor and I cannot test M* in free/basic-login mode. But please report this here.

+1.

Posted for anyone in need of portfolio construction ideas. As the saying goes, “There’s more than one way to skin a cat.”
https://www.whitecoatinvestor.com/150-portfolios-better-than-yours/