Among my funds only:
PRWCX leads.
BRUFX fell to the bottom of the pile in '23, but is positive now, in early '24, by just a fraction.
But junk bond fund TUHYX is doing even better than BRUFX.
Of course, just after I got into FALN, it fell.
Fund Managers have got my money positioned this way, in aggregate now:
Cash 7
US stocks 48
Foreign stocks 5
Bonds 37
"other" 3
(Strange: The FALN divs. are noted at the 1st of the month as per Morglestar, but brokerage TRP shows that they will be credited on the 7th of the month. Games....)
Looks like the particular problem I noted with performance numbers appearing "stuck" at a specific number for some select stocks I own has been remedied, over at Moozlestar.

@stillers
GSHIX is 17% US and 6% Novo Nordsik and 5% NVDA 2% META and 2% TSCM
May explain a lot of recent out performance

I have had NVDA since 8/22. Sold 1/3 of it in 4/23 since it was over my 3% max for individual stock. We are over that limit again. What to do? YTD +2.5%.

Mike Wilson has had opportunities in fall 2023 to adjust his views as more data became available. He struck to the inverted yield curve narrative too long. One would think there are ample resources at MS that he can lean on in order to see other more balanced views over a longer time horizon.
Recent interview with David Giruox mentioned that TRP evaluate stocks on a 5-years investment horizon, not short term. Their longer view pans out nicely in a number of TRP funds.

Certainly looks like Leuthold is preparing for a “down market”. Just looked this morning and LCORX is sitting at 13% equity exposure according to M*. That’s based on around 17% long and 4% short equity positioning. According to M* 74% of the fund’s portfolio is invested in ”fixed-income” with the remainder in cash. Its newer ETF sibling (LCR) is positioned somewhat more aggressively with 56% net long equity.
The firm has received a lot of attention in recent months, including some kind words from the Professor in last November’s Commentary. They’re apparently betting against what seems like an increasingly euphoric mainstream media and retail investment crowd.
Edit - The M* figures are not accurate. See comments from Mike & Catch below.

For completeness ...
The cash transfer completed yesterday. The first check was issued on Jan 4. The stop payment was issued on Jan 24. The money was credited back to the brokerage on Jan 25. The brokerage took seven calendar days (5 business days) after that to reissue the check on Feb 1.
Then, miraculously, that paper check made it through the mail and was received and processed by T. Rowe Price all within one day. On Feb 2, the cash received was used to invest in a T. Rowe Price fund.
Cost of delay (market rise)? $100+ That's not going to break the bank but it's more than a few bucks.
It makes one wonder about what one is told. It took a week, not a couple of days, to reissue the check. It took one day, not 10-12 business days for the money to arrive after that. Did the cash really go by paper check?

. Current ETA is another three weeks - a couple of days to stop payment, get the money back in the account, reissue check. After that, another 10-12 business days according to TRP. The outside brokerage said they could not send the money by ACH or wire or ACAT because all they could do was resend the check as originally requested.

RE: MRFOX. Great looking fund but, as noted, with no or limited TF access from major brokerages.
https://marshfieldfunds.com/fund-facts/
MFROX incepted 12/28/15.
Growth of $10K per M* since the MRFOX inception date:
MRFOX: +$25,219.77
FDSVX: +$25,219.57 (No, NOT a typo and/or you are NOT seeing double!)
FSELX: +64.645.82
We admittedly had no idea about the existence of MRFOX, but have owned the other two listed funds in the domestic, Large Cap arena since MRFOX's inception date, so not feeling too bad about sleeping on MRFOX.
FDSVX is compared as it is also a LCG fund.
FSELX is compared as it is, like MRFOX (16-24 holdings), also a concentrated fund (albeit a Semis sector fund) of 35 holdings.

The graphic is set for the 5 days ending February 2, Friday; for the best to worst % returns in select etf categories. One may then also select the one month column to align the one month return best to worst; or for the other listed time frame columns.
ADD an etf performance of your choosing, if you desire.
*** Requested ADD: For the week and YTD
--- EWW = +2.33% / +.13% (I Shares, Mexico)
MMKT note: Fidelity mmkt's yields remained steady this week, with core acct's yields at 4.98% (SPAXX) and 5.00% (FDRXX).
NOTE: Growth area remains nominally positive, although tech. related funds found some weakness this week. Most U.S. bonds had a very positive week, in spite of a large sell down on Friday.
Remain curious,
Catch

I like to compare funds against ticker NICHX (due to returns, Sortino ratio and low market correlation). MRFOX stands out on various risk and return metrics, the other two Jain funds not so much.
I am impressed by MRFOX policy around only eating your own cooking. Intend to dive deep into this and perhaps open a starter position.
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/fund-performance?s=y&sl=5iNnJGMdPHyVBS03m1WrtK

@rforno. As good an explanation of active management as I have found. Do you have an explanation of technical analysis?

"We really think that this squiggle matches what that squiggle did over there last [time period] which suggests this next squiggle coming up will act in [declared way]. And if not we'll wait until it can be compared to the previous squiggle over here but this time will be different because it's viewed at a 45-degree angle whilst humming the 'Whipsaw Song' and doing the Macarena in front of a TV playing CNBC in-between shots of gin."
Speaking as someone who's dabbled in the dark arts of TA, it's AKA: a state of voodoo brought about by hopium ingestion.. ;)

"Portfolio" as opposed to "fund" in a name is often a signal that the vehicle is designed for annuities. Nevertheless, aside from their names, they are still referred to as "funds", as in "AMT Funds".
From the SAI: "Shares of the Funds are sold to insurance company separate accounts, so that the Funds may serve as investment options under variable life insurance policies and variable annuity contracts issued by insurance companies (each, a “variable contract”). Shares of the Funds are also offered to certain qualified pension and other retirement plans (each, a “qualified plan”)."
https://www.sec.gov/ixviewer/ix.html?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/736913/000120677423000503/nb4183681_485bpos.htm
Here's the International Equity Portfolio fact sheet (Dec 2023), w/$34.8M AUM.
https://www.nb.com/handlers/documents.ashx?item_id=80aa402f-390a-4524-a1bf-e08863ea55ad&usg=AOvVaw2t510MsI7uum0NaGaTeGZq&opi=89978449
And a M* summary page from last June for the PutWrite Strategy Portfolio w/$39.69M AUM
https://www.pacificlife.com/public/portfolios_and_managers/portfolio_updates/msfs_neuberger_berman_absolute_return_multimanager.pdf
I'm sure one could find more recent data, but with both funds under $40M, does it really matter?

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/736913/000089843224000091/form497.htm
497 1 form497.htm FORM 497
Neuberger Berman Advisers Management Trust® (“AMT Funds”)
International Equity Portfolio
U.S. Equity Index PutWrite Strategy Portfolio
Supplement to the Summary Prospectuses, Prospectuses and Statement of Additional Information, each dated May 1, 2023, as amended and supplemented
As previously announced, on December 14, 2023, the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of Neuberger Berman AMT Funds (the “Trust”) approved the liquidation of each of International Equity Portfolio and U.S. Equity Index PutWrite Strategy Portfolio (the “Funds”), each a series of the Trust. Given each Fund is not currently at sufficient scale, the Board determined it was in the best interest of shareholders to close each Fund. Accordingly, the Funds will cease their investment operations, liquidate their assets and make liquidating distributions, if applicable, to shareholders of record.
The date of liquidation for the Funds is currently anticipated to occur on April 26, 2024 (the “Liquidation Date”). Shareholders of the Funds may continue to redeem their Fund shares through the Liquidation Date. As of the close of business on March 15, 2024, the Funds will not accept orders to purchase Fund shares from new investors or existing shareholders (including purchases through dividend reinvestments). In connection with the liquidations, from the date of this supplement until the Liquidation Date, each Fund may depart from its stated goals, strategies and techniques as the Fund begins to convert all portfolio securities to cash or cash equivalents in preparation for the final distribution to shareholders. This may impact each Fund’s performance and shareholders may bear increased brokerage and other transaction expenses relating to the sale of portfolio securities prior to the Liquidation Date.
Shareholders who elect to redeem their Fund shares prior to the completion of a liquidation will be redeemed in the ordinary course at a Fund’s net asset value per share. Owners of the variable annuity or insurance contracts offered by the insurance companies whose separate accounts are invested in each Fund should consult with their insurance company for information regarding the possibility of transferring their investment to other investment options prior to the Liquidation Date and the redirection of their assets that will occur on or about the Liquidation Date.
Because shares of each Fund are available as underlying investment options for variable contracts issued by insurance companies, it is anticipated that each contract owner will receive additional information from their insurance company or other financial intermediary about what options the contract owner has for its assets held in each Fund. Contract owners should refer to any documents provided by their insurance company or other financial intermediary concerning the effect of the liquidation of a Fund and any steps they may need to take as a result thereof. In addition, contract owners should understand that their insurance company may have a specific cut-off date for new investments and should contact their insurance company or other financial intermediary for more information.
Because shares of each Fund are only eligible to be held by insurance company separate accounts funding variable contracts and other qualified investors, the liquidations are not expected to be considered taxable events to contract owners. Contract owners should consult their personal tax advisor concerning their particular tax circumstances.
The date of this supplement is February 2, 2024
Please retain this supplement for future reference.
Neuberger Berman Investment Advisers LLC
1290 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10104
Shareholder Services
800.877.9700
Institutional Services
800.366.6264
www.nb.com

FCNTX Top holding META 12.52% of the AUM. META was up +20.32% today; it also started paying 0.50% dividend.
https://stockcharts.com/h-perf/ui?s=META&compare=FCNTX&id=p14446860698

There was a lot of hype today on mainstream news about the market’s “9th record close of the year”. and that the S&P is nearing 5,000. I agree with the above poster that this all seems rather discombobulated with bonds tanking the way they did.
I follow 3 “tracking funds” daily which I think combined represent a diversified conservative portfolio. I include ABRZX in the mix because it carries significant exposure to metals & commodities - something most conservative allocation funds avoid.
Anyway - after all the hype today, here’s how my 3 tracking funds ended the day. Note that all 3 finished in the red.
ABRZX (Invesco) - 0.70%
AOK (Blackrock) - 0.39%
PRSIX (T Rowe Price) - 0.05%
On average, the combined loss was - 0.38%
But ya gotta love the action so far this year. Reminds me a bit of the late 90s - a period when the stock markets began to make the network evening newscasts. Reason for all the attention - because they kept going up! (And technology in particular was unstoppable).

Up YTD 2.15%. Tech and industrial funds leading while my healthcare, energy and utilities stocks dragging results down.

@larryB, VPMAX is aggressive growth, or growth with some conviction. So, it may be frustrating at times, but if she can mix it with another LC-growth/blend, it would be fine LT.

"aggressive growth, or growth with some conviction."
I interpret that as "we feel/hope REALLYREALLYREALLY STRONGLY that this position will do well. To that end, we are lighting candles, clicking our heels, and buring incense around the Bloomberg Terminal to further show our support for these companies over the next rolling 3-5 year period."
Can someone translate that into English or did I get it right?

Even as a physician, I have a hard time figuring out biotech. I am personal friends with one of the Lecanemab investigators, but of course he could not share the news of it's effectiveness until it was publicly available in late 2022. With a press release 10/2022 BIIB popped 38%. Unless you knew someone and got inside information, it would have been hard to take advantage of it before the news hit.
Years ago, a urologist friend of mine, who was enrolling patients in the study of what became Viagra, told me it looked like it "really" worked, as the results, vs placebo, were pretty obvious! I am sure he bought a fair amount of Pfizer stock, although unless he sold it he may be underwater now.
The bottom line is it is very difficult for a professional biochemist or physician investigator to predict what will happen in any specific clinical trial, unless there is a striking and easily identifiable difference between treatment and placebo, as with Viagra. There have been multiple trials of mabs for Alzheimer's and probably billions of dollars spent until one was approved.
However, Biogen stock is selling below it's price when the research was released and a fraction of it's all time high in 2015.
Biogen is partners on Lecanemab which unlike adhelum, looks like it does have a significant effect on Alzheimer's, although it is modest and it is unclear how long it will last, and whether it will really reduce economic burden of Alzheimer's long term. (A completely rational approval process would have required evidence that it was cost effective, ie reduced long term costs of Alzheimer's, but the FDA laws do not require that, and the Alzheimer's lobby would have fought it tooth and nail; they called the conditional approval of adhelm "immoral" although it of course has been basically discontinued) Biogen has since dropped adhelum because it is minimally effective.
Biogen is furiously concocting new markets and new approaches.
https://investors.biogen.com/news-releases/news-release-details/eisai-presents-new-leqembir-lecanemab-irmb-investigational
How much of this hits the bottom line at BIIB is unclear. With new Alzheimer's tau protein blood tests available, if people with minimal forgetfulness are approved for treatment, the market may indeed be huge, but there will be a furious fight over approvals and prices etc as this has the potential to be budget breaking.
Medicare is trying to prevent store front clinics "Get you memory test here and we will fix it" by requiring registries and certifications. They may be less success with the obesity drugs and some weight loss clinics have been using them off label for years.
Probably argues for an equal weight biotech fund or just sticking to general health care funds.

The "temporarily unpublished" article has been "reviewed internally" and sanitized (-:),
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/15-funds-that-have-destroyed-most-wealth-over-past-decade

Regional bank KRE,
https://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=KRE&p=D&yr=1&mn=6&dy=0&id=p99852688028