TGT and CLX look interesting.

Yes, CLX does look interesting. Near a 52-wk low. 4.9% dividend yield. Wide moat and M* 5-star rating always piques my interest. This may be a good entry point.

Sold 300 WBD @ $28. Not waiting to see how this plays out after 165% gain YTD.

Nvidia can now sell chips (H200) to China that are/were "National Security Threats". Clearly we do not want our mortal enemies to have them.
But wait, if the government gets its beak wet (say 25%) then poof, national security threat abated!
But wait again, by playing politics with such items, China is strongly incentivized to create their own and compete with us. Possibly to Nvidia's detriment. Tight policy, for sure.

@stay_calm
I was intrigued years ago when GMO was beating the drum about Timber with similar arguments in the Barrons' article.
I found a number of timber companies but most were also paper companies and mills. PCL and St Joe's are the smaller one's I remember. PCL got bought out and FAIRX still owns 75% of St Joes, but is more of a land play I think.
LAND is problematic because they float multiple preferred offerings loading themselves with debt to pay their rich salaries. FPI also has a lot of debt. PCVMX has a sig position so maybe worth another look.
Another reason I shied away was these two focus on fruits and almonds etc that require a LOT of water ( article in WSJ a while back) and are in fire prone California. If your farm is in oats or barley and gets torched I assume you can replant and get a crop next year but if all your almond trees burn...
The private placements may be great if you qualify and want to tie up your oney for a long time. If that is tru you are probably not reading MFO.
The smaller private placements allow you to invest as little as $10,000 but it is all in one property and I do not see how you could make an informed decision.
Maybe better off in Natural Resource fund although I haven't looked at the correlations.

From what I read, Todd & Ted were initially given slices of couple of billions to manage. I don't know how much they are managing now.
Todd indicated soon after joining BRK that he wanted to do more, so he got involved with Geico and eventually became Geico CEO.
It seems he still wasn't happy with his cards at BRK.
Ajit Jain is 74 and he has indicated he will be retiring soon. Not everyone can hang on to 95+. So, his leaving in near future won't be a surprise, but who will replace him would be (it won't be Todd).

I would guess either Joe Brandon or Kara Raiguel are the most likely candidates to replace Ajit.

I am curious about your use of the adjective “ambitious.” The dude isn’t a young guy right out of B school. What is the implication here?

LOL -

"Ambition should be made of sterner stuff."
Hope it's OK to mention the current Barron's article here re a huge exodus of top engineers & executives from Apple along with speculation Cook is nearing retirement. There's a slight connection to BRK. Buffett unloaded a lot of Apple stock, a top holding, over the past year.
Added note: BRK -2.5% as of noon time.

Regarding Apple, the move of Alan Dye to Meta and the retirement of the head of AI are actually considered net wins for the company. As one wag put it, with Alan Dye’s move to Meta, “The average IQ of both companies has increased.”

From what I read, Todd & Ted were initially given slices of couple of billions to manage. I don't know how much they are managing now.
Todd indicated soon after joining BRK that he wanted to do more, so he got involved with Geico and eventually became Geico CEO.
It seems he still wasn't happy with his cards at BRK.
Ajit Jain is 74 and he has indicated he will be retiring soon. Not everyone can hang on to 95+. So, his leaving in near future won't be a surprise, but who will replace him would be (it won't be Todd).

I am curious about your use of the adjective “ambitious.” The dude isn’t a young guy right out of B school. What is the implication here?

LOL - "Ambition should be made of sterner stuff."
Hope it's OK to mention the current Barron's article here re a huge exodus of top engineers & executives from Apple along with speculation Cook is nearing retirement. There's a slight connection to BRK. Buffett unloaded a lot of Apple stock, a top holding, over the past year.
Added note: BRK -2.5% as of noon time.

"When you got this message, had you purchased any shares recently?"
That's very likely and probably explains why the message doesn't always come up. I'll make a note to check the next time I make a sale out of a NTF fund. Those occassions have become quite infrequent for now. Thanks @msf for the insight.
FWIW - I hold just 3 NTF funds, each 15.5% of portfolio.

Fido has another quirk. Often if I begin to sell shares of a NTF fund held more than 60 days a message pops up: "If you believe you may be entitled to a fee wavier contact a representative." I did a couple times. They basically said to ignore the warning. So, if the shares have been held over 60 days I now proceed with the sale without contacting them. No trouble so far. But you'd think over 3 or 4 years they'd have corrected that error message.

Fidelity's seems to apply short term redemption fees FIFO. So even if you've recently purchased shares, a sale may not trigger the 60 day redemption fee. So long the shares you're selling could be older ones (regardless of how you identify them for tax purposes), Fidelity seems to say this is okay.
When you got this message, had you purchased any shares recently? I could see a situation where one bought 900 shares a decade ago, 100 shares last week, and now wanted to sell 100 shares. As I understand it, no fee would be due.
But, if you said you wanted to sell $1000 worth, the system would not know fer sure that you wouldn't have to sell 901 shares (including 1 "new" one) until the actual sale went through. That's because it doesn't know the closing price at the time you enter the order. So I could envision the system warning you about the possibility (however remote) of being charged a short term redemption fee.
Just guessing here.
Fidelity speaks of "holding period" without clarifying how that is calculated. I believe that this is FIFO. OTOH, Vanguard is very clear, and not so generous:

You'll also pay a $50 early redemption fee for all sales executed within 60 calendar days of the trade date of your most recent purchase of the same fund

That is, LIFO.
https://investor.vanguard.com/client-benefits/brokerage-fees-commissions

Todd Combs is ambitious and had the dual role of BRK sub-portfolio manager and CEO of Geico. I thought that he was well integrated within BRK.
Insurance head Ajit Jain may be retiring soon. So, it could be that Todd Combs wasn't seen for that role, or potential hires for that role didn't want to leave out Geico.
Interesting that Todd jumped to JPM to manage a $10 billion initiative (initially) at JPM that may grow to $1.5 trillion (easy talk). Todd has been on JPM board for several years, so he may also be considered as a potential replacement for Jamie Dimon - watch who starts leaving JPM.
I thought that Ted Weschler, who has kept low profile as a sub-portfolio manager at BRK, may be the one to leave.
After Warren Buffett announced that the incoming CEO Greg Abel will also supervise the entire BRK stock portfolio, may be Todd and Ted assessed their relationships with Greg.
Anyway, the transition at BRK has started.
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/12/08/berkshire-hathaways-todd-combs-investment-lieutenant-to-buffett-and-geico-ceo-is-leaving-for-jpmorgan.html

Is this politics as usual?
Reuters reports:

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Sunday that he would have a say whether a proposed merger between Netflix and Warner Brothers should go forward, telling reporters the market share of a combined entity could raise concerns.
"I'll be involved in that decision," Trump told reporters as he arrived at the Kennedy Center for its annual awards show.

Will it be the ballroom, the presidential library, upgrades to the Qatari jet, or the family crypto endeavors? Stay tuned.

T.D.F.-CITs Are Also Getting Into Private-equity/Credit & Cryptos
The original premise of CITs (collective investment trusts) was good - they are unlisted, loosely regulated by the banking regulator OCC (not the securities regulator SEC), & have lower ERs. CITs are available in many workplace retirement plans (401k/403b).
TDFs (target-date funds) with glide-path allocations exploded after they were allowed as default options in workplace retirement plans.
The next step was T.D.F.-CITs, supposedly the ultimate in simplicity. Now, 52% of the TDFs are T.D.F.-CITs; they overtook mutual fund TDFs (T.D.F.-OEFs) in 06/2024.
There have been several recent rules that allow new things within the T.D.F. structure - alternatives such as private-equity/credit & cryptos within CITs, & lifetime income options.
But T.D.F.-OEFs & T.D.F.-CITs are different animals. T.D.F.-CITs were supposed to be very simple funds for the general public.
Those simple aspects of T.D.F.-CITs may now be abused.
Loose CIT regulations mean that the limits & scrutiny that SEC imposes on alternatives in listed funds don't apply to T.D.F.-CITs. They may also not fully disclose the ERs of the underlying funds, so some T.D.F.-CIT ERs maybe misleading.
By claiming to offer expensive alternatives within T.D.F.-CITs, their low ERs may go out of the window. The CIT sponsors will make yeah-but (yabut) justifications for high ERs - i.e. yes, the ERs are low, but alternatives are expensive.
Keep an eye on changes your T.D.F.-CIT may be making - in its name or objectives. Know what your T.D.F.-CIT is getting into or has - you may be surprised.
WSJ https://www.wsj.com/finance/investing/do-you-really-know-whats-inside-your-401-k-c480ec9c
MSN https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/do-you-really-know-what-s-inside-your-401-k/ar-AA1RLP3d

Hi, guys.
Lynn does exceptional work, especially in trying to look at where the puck is going to be. Great analyses of portfolios that might survive a crash and lessons for 200 years of bear markets.
We also offered two Launch Alerts for MFS Active Midcap ETF (the ETF version of a solid if not spectacular MFS fund) and GMO Domestic Resilience (a niche that I'm not 100% sure is worth exploring: at base, a play on reshoring industrial production).
We also reviewed the performance of over 1000 "rookie" funds (more than one year, less than two) and nominate 10 as distinguished performers with at least decent downside protection. Rather a lot of them are the ETF clones of successful funds, which is interesting from two perspectives: 1. the migration continues and 2. there's evidence that migration works.
The publisher's letter is a bit ... thoughtful? A new version of a 2014 essay that looks at the domestication of Christmas and the reminders it offers. A reflection on Mr. Buffett's Thanksgiving letter (which contains rather a lot of "the medical news has not be excellent, but I made it to 95" hints and on heroes. And a potential explanation for why the market continues, against all logic, to rise. Short version: it's possible that the kids have sort of given up on long-term compounding and home ownership and are defaulting, in uncomfortably large numbers, to gaming the market instead of investing. There's more (and more detail) coming in the New Year's edition.
Wishing you all the best,
David and Chip

On a somewhat related note...
"MFO’s founding mission is to 'write for the benefit of intellectually curious, serious investors—
managers, advisers, and individuals—who need to go beyond marketing fluff,
beyond computer-generated recommendations and beyond Morningstar’s coverage universe.'
But one of our core precepts is '80% of all existing funds could disappear today with no loss to anyone,
except possibly the managers who have to explain it to their spouses.'”
Prof. Snowball includes a list of "rookie" funds that may be worth considering.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2025/12/the-kids-are-alright/

How to react? I dunno. A good book and the audio version is very well narrated by Sorkin himself. I see parallels in the wide public acceptance of risk taking then and today. Having grown up in the 50s, a mere decade after the Great Depression, I remember much reluctance amongst the public to take risk. Heck, I gifted my folks some $$ in the 70s or 80s I'd put in a money market fund yielding 18% and they immediately withdrew it and put it in a local bank down the street paying 4%. It was hard convincing many back then to take on more risk.
I'm bumbling through the audio late most nights. What has stood out recently is the confidence and innate charm FDR projected in stark contrast to Hoover and other duller political figures of the day.
Let's not overlook some earlier related comments in another thread.

From the old/current document, there is APE = Alpha Potential Estimate that is incorporated into the score calculations, e.g. for active funds, as follows:
(0.45 * People Score * APE) + (0.45 * Process Score * APE) + (0.10 * Parent Score * APE)
= Expected gross-of-fee alpha
Alpha is from MPT analyses (Greeks alpha, beta). So performance through APE had a direct and heavy bearing on the Medalist Ratings.
Now, this APE will be gone.
BTW, the M* article author Laura Lutton posted it on LinkedIn and I posted my abbreviated comments there. I will post here if there is any response from her or other Morningstar people (and some lurk here).
LinkedIn LINK