update:
Summary prospectus:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1141819/000089418924004723/jensenqualitygrowthetf497k.htm

Schwab is at the bottom of the performance rankings YTD, 1 year (the only robo with single digit returns, more than a point behind second worst), and 5 year (tie for worst). Over three years it did 0.2% better than the worst.
As a blind guess without checking, I suspect the cause is cash drag, especially since Vanguard has outperformed Schab recently by more than 3%, and by more than 1% over three and five years.
Schwab ranks in the middle of the pack overall. That seems to be due to broad financial planning tools and features like Intelligent Income (mentioned by Barron's) for managing a monthly income stream. Raw performance only counts for so much; with Barron's that's 25% of the total score.

As a follow-up to @rforno’s “newbie” thread, it might be interesting to reflect on what the board looked like during 2008 - right in the middle of an eventual 17-month decline in the S&P (greater losses globally and in some domestic sectors). The period is known as ”The Global Financial Crisis” and is also sometimes referred to as ”The Great Recession”. Even money market funds had become unsafe and investors began fleeing until the government exercised extraordinary authority to backstop them.
It is easy in hindsight after these rare episodes to say: “Do nothing”, “Let it ride …” , “Just don’t look. It won’t really matter 20 years from now.” These are all intelligent responses. But is that how it really was?
Anybody recall the general tenor at Fund Alarm (predecessor to MFO) back then? And what the smart, well informed, articulate posters were generally saying? Was the general feeling one of “I’m sitting tight.”… “I’m not making any moves.”, “I’m not even looking because longer term everything will be great.”
Possibly some were reading / participating on other investment forums, or possibly some recall what their friends, family members, co-workers and / or neighbors were saying and doing.

Yep. QLTY is good, GQG is better so far. Maybe?
Since QLTY's November 2023 launch, it is up 18.2%. That leads its multi-cap core Lipper peer group by 150 bps. The S&P 500 is up 17%. The GQG Partners US Select Quality is up 27%.
But GMO has dramatically outperformed GQG over the past five months (1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 month periods) while underperforming for six months and out. Curious.

It seems Fido has Venmo but not Zelle yet.
Schwab has Zelle.
My bank & credit union have Zelle. I have it active only at 1 place as a unique phone# is required. If I want to activate another Zelle, I would have to use email. There are daily/monthly limits for Zelle (mine $1K/$4K) that vary by banks & payments cannot be reversed for any reason.
https://www.fidelity.com/spend-save/mobile-payments

From BusinessWire.com:
GMO U.S. Quality ETF (QLTY) Surpasses $1 Billion in Assets Under Management

“Riding it out” works. I take it from @gman57 that he mostly sat tight without making any sales or acquisitions during the ‘07-‘09 market meltdown. However, in that case what you’re riding at the onset may be of import. Was it all in global growth? You might have been left with 35-cents on the dollar by March ‘09 - a blip on the radar screen to someone having a 40-year time horizon. Unnerving nonetheless to most of us mere mortals. Might even have had you wondering whether your 35-cents would be worth only 17 cents in another year …
I doubled down. Beginning in October ‘07 with a 60/40 mix, I gradually shifted 100% into domestic equities and then, about a year in (December 2008) I moved all that to a couple global growth funds which had fared substantially worse than domestic. Next, by a stroke of luck I converted about 40% of these badly depreciated assets into a Roth in early March ‘09 (Roth - The gift that keeps on giving). I’d just begun taking SS and the additional income covered the tax hit. The markets turned up on March 9, 2009.
Don’t know what the next step would have been. Probably would have floated a loan sometime in late ‘09 to convert the remaining IRA holdings into a Roth . Then, had the bear market continued into 2010, I’d have mortgaged the house to pour all of its equity into the most aggressive growth funds I could find (likely tech-heavy or international). Had it continued into 201l, not sure what I’d have done … (maybe start praying or simply drink more).
If you take the tack I did, it’s incumbent to back off a bit as markets rise so that you have some capital to reinvest next time things go to hell. I won’t say my way was more profitable than just riding it out. But it may have been less stressful in that you at least feel like you’re making decisions that may impact your fortunes. Stress is sometimes defined as feeling helpless to control your own fate.

It may also be possible to use a payment app with Fidelity accounts. Whether that app in turn lets you schedule transfers to a third party depends on the app. For example, according to this old (2018) moderator post, Paypal wants you to limit transfers to only Paypal customers.
For the most part, anything you can do with a Fidelity CMA account you can do with a "regular" account. When Fidelity first introduced CMA accounts, they struck me as a marketing gimmick. They still do.
There are only three differences I'm aware of (or at least that I care about):

• The CMA account offers the option (it used to be mandatory) of sweeping cash into FDIC-insured banks instead of higher yielding MMFs.
  
• The CMA account provides free ATM rebates for all customers; Fidelity doesn't rebate fees for customers of "regular" accounts unless they are at the Premium ($500K) or above level or are paying for "wealth management".
  
• The CMA accounts can't be used for IRA accounts.

it's easy to set up such payments online between your own accounts (trick is that one name must be common to both account titles)
Unless you're setting up payments from a joint account. Several years ago when I set up transfers from a joint account to my individual taxable account Fidelity required a guarantee (or maybe just consent?) from the joint owner. I don't recall whether I also had to sign.
I asked Fidelity why they required it, especially since they were allowing me to make IRA contributions from that joint account without any fuss. Fidelity said that it was getting too many complaints from joint owners when money was transferred, even though "joint" means either owner has access to the full account. So it wanted the redundant, explicit approval from the joint owner. Except for IRA contributions because "everybody does that" or words to that effect.

I didn't have much money allocated to equities in 1987 since I was young and "poor."
Having read a bit about investing, I thought the 1987 market crash might present a buying opportunity.
Despite this knowledge, I didn't actually take advantage of the situation.
During the dot-com bubble (circa 1995 - 2000), I was employed in the tech industry.
Many coworkers were discussing massive gains in Yahoo, Cisco, and the like.
It was very difficult to ignore this continuous chatter - FOMO is real!
Since markets appeared to be in a bubble, I resisted the siren song of the dot-coms.
I didn't panic during the subsequent crash but should have purchased more equities afterward.
The Global Financial Crisis (GFC) of 2007 - 2008 was very challenging for me.
There were many bankruptcies, multiple bailouts, bank runs on money market funds
(Reserve Primary Fund "broke the buck"), and rising unemployment.
Congress initially rejected the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008
($700B Troubled Asset Relief Program was a component) which led to a ~9% decline
in the S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite that day. The legislation was passed a few days later.
The seemingly endless onslaught of severe economic events caused significant anxiety.
To me, it felt like the US economy might suffer a precipitous decline analogous to the Great Depression.
Once again, I didn't panic but should have increased equity purchases after this major crash.
I hope to never experience a similar scenario again during my lifetime!

Not sure the OP would swap "trade" for "sell", but; I if so, this article seemed worth linking:
reasons-to-sell RB

Bank of America ( BAC ) CEO Brian Moynihan ... , pressed about Republican candidate Donald Trump's statement that presidents should have a say over Fed decisions, said people were free to give Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell advice and it was then his job to decide what to do.
"If you look around the world's economies and you see where central banks are independent and operate freely, they tend to fare better than the ones that don't," he said.

https://www.fidelity.com/news/article/top-news/202408111216RTRSNEWSCOMBINED_KBN39S0BW-OUSBS_1
While that's likely true, one must also consider the source. Bankers are not disinterested persons on this question. Any more authoritative sources?
For example, here is a piece written for the World Economic Forum. Though it focuses on emerging market countries and is also written by a banker (UBS AG), it provides a few specific cases in support of central bank independence.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2024/07/emerging-markets-central-bank-independence/

If central banks give in to politicized criticism or advice, it could result in short-term monetary policy decisions that may harm people’s finances and restrict entrepreneurship and job creation.

I don't trade my MF's. I hold them in a Roth and have for 10+ years. One recent addition has been PRCFX,
My taxable brokerage account is primarily dividend growth stocks, and broad market ETF's. The oldest stock was obtained in 2003 and the youngest in 2021. The ETF's are all relatively new. I hardly trade (as the term is used) but I will add to them when the market goes on sale. Technically I guess you can call that a trade but I like to think of it as stocking up on a bargain.
If pressed I guess I trade mostly the CEF's in my Roth account at the rate of one trade/mo. The CEF's are primarily income producing assets that take advantage of current market conditions. I don't buy them with the intention of selling but sometimes it's the right choice.

@Crash,
Thanks for this thread.
I caught this interview that discusses some of his book's topics:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DVZpIrRXr4o

I appreciate the link. I'm listening right now. Interesting. They are talking about stuff in the book, to start with, which is foreign to me, so I had nothing to say about it. Arbitrage and A.I.
Now they've moved on to talk about what his "Bear Traps Report" is all about....And now, McDonald was asked about the central thesis of his book.
Thanks! Getting it from the horse's own mouth! Gotta run now, but I'll come back to it.
*Sadly, his audio quality is poor. I turned on the captions. +1.

@Sven You're welcome.
I always view @Observant1 Charlie Bilello posts. I've passed his weekly observations along to other investors who are not members of this forum.

Thanks @catch22 for posting these bond data. The inverted yield curve has been more interesting in last 2 weeks.
Please see @Observant1’s posting from Charlie Bilello.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=LseO6Y4ER4M

The Buy and Sell tread is misleading and does not necessary represents the broader posters here.
We made small adjustments in our in our tax-deferred accounts between different asset classes. No big changes for sure. Changes we made this year include:
1. Shifting more to bonds as we want to reduce our portfolio risk.
2. Increasing bond duration from short to intermediate term.
3. Learning more about muni bonds as our Tbills and CDs are maturing.
4. Rebalancing to investment grade bonds (treasury and AA corporate bonds) from high yield bonds.

Thank you @rforno. I greatly value your insights (and read all of them).
I think the buy / sell thread may create the wrong impression. Like you, my long term core holdings rarely change. Most of the portfolio consists of OEFs transferred in or acquired new 5 years ago when I left TRP and opened a brokerage account at Fido. (The newest, LCORX, was acquired a year ago.) Other than occasional rebalancing those are hands-off.
I leave 30% in easier to trade vehicles. These can be CEFs, ETFs and a stock or two. It’s that latter group where I’m willing to experiment / tinker around in pursuit of some extra return. An example would be building a 5% position recently in a stock that has bounced around between $95 and $105. Has required some buying and selling over past month or two to get the average share price down.

@Crash I'm curious, with the many 1,000's of books written; and now, all of the Podcasts 'providing knowledge'? of the markets and the 'future' of investing; WHY choose this person for exposure here?
Many of us here recall, after the U.S. equity markets were in the tank during the '70's and then the 'upward pop' that began in August of 1982. Books, especially paperback books were everywhere, expressing any number of markets scenarios and 'where' to invest for whatever reasons the author(s) presented.
Being 'prescient' is a special gift and is usually not known or understood; until after the facts are presented.
Thank you.

44% of all US dollars ever created, were created in 2020 and 2021. Ya, that was the Covid era.
44% is about right, looking at M2. Such an increase is not unique. There have been other times, other situations aside from Covid, calling for monetary expansion. LBJ's "guns and butter" economy (1964 through 1968) boosted M2 by, oddly enough, 44% also.
OTOH, the subsequent contraction in M2 (5% from April 2022 to Oct 2023) appears to be unique.
Source: FRED M2 interactive graph
"The US dollar has lost 93% of its value since the year 1900."
Both of the quotes are designed to shock (or as you colorfully expressed it, to gobsmack). Not to inform or enlighten.
A 93% decline in value in 125 years is an annualized inflation rate of 2.1%, just what the US is targeting. In comparison, a pound sterling in 1900 would have the purchasing power of just 0.6 pennies (UK) in 2024. A decline of 99.4%.
https://www.officialdata.org/uk/inflation/1900?amount=1
That's what an economy in decline looks like.

This is what the US economy looks like:

Subtitle: Risks, Myths, and Investment Opportunities in a Radically Reshaped Economy.
Almost finished. The case he's making is cogent and crisply, sharply written. A quick read, though very meaty. His thesis is that smart investors, looking forward, must move from growth to value--- specifically into basic materials. Oil, gas. Gold, silver, copper, palladium, platinum.
We are in decline, economically. I have said as much for several years, myself. Some of the reason for it is that the world has emerged and grown and thrived, following WW II. We're not the 800-pound gorilla in the room which can throw its weight around the way the USA was able to do, decades ago. A big part of the decline, says McDonald, is geopolitics and overspending Inevitably, the gummint will NOT be able to literally pay down the debt, ever again. It's too massive. In order to handle it, the gummint will have to continuously roll it all over as it matures, and play interest rate games to help cover it.
McDonald has no use for economic sanctions, like the sanctions imposed on Russia and specific Russians, following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. (Crimea was previously stolen, annexed.) Russia has friends in other directions. Most are not even communist. Russia is still feeding raw materials to China so the Chinese can manufacture stuff. Gotta keep the power on. And they're not operating with any "Green Revolution" imposed upon themselves.
I was not surprised, in his treatment of that stuff in particular, that he simply ignored the ethical implications of not responding to the Putin-monster, and just letting him have his way. There is no investing conversation or essay or book which will go near anything to do with ethics. Obama, so I read, confronted Putin at a meeting of big-wigs, and told him flat-out: "We can do stuff to you." Granted, because of the multi-polar economic and political environment today, sanctions are proving to be as useful as trying to use your finger to push a string across the table.
Breathtaking quotations that gobsmacked me:
"44% of all US dollars ever created, were created in 2020 and 2021." Ya, that was the Covid era. But holy jaypers. DEVALUATION, much?????
"The US dollar has lost 93% of its value since the year 1900."
******************************************
McDonald includes summaries of some interviews he's had with some remarkably smart Shining Lights in the Investment Industry. I just finished up reading his account of a conversation with Charlie Munger. Final, distilled thoughts from that meeting actually lifted my spirits. I've made my share of mistakes in investing, but in broad terms, I could take some satisfaction, realizing I'd been doing these things by instinct, for the most part:
Charlie told him: "Trade and invest less. Sit back and wait for those top two or three opportunities that come along each year. Measure your level of conviction and allocate your capital accordingly. Above all, never trade or invest out of boredom or a desire to find something to do. Keep up your high level of passion for markets. Growing wiser is a combination of humility and diligent curiosity. Without the first, the second is useless."