This decision really depends on the individual investor.
Actively managed funds may underperform the broader market
for several consecutive years and returns could be "lumpy."
For example, VPMAX lagged the S&P 500 and Russell 1000 indexes in 2019, 2020, and 2021.
An investor incapable of tolerating subpar short-term performance could sell at an inopportune time.
This individual would probably be better off investing in low-cost broad-based index funds.
Having said that, I really like the Primecap management team and VPMAX in particular.
A 30-year analysis (Jan. 1994 - Dec. 2023) of Vanguard PRIMECAP, Vanguard Total Stock Market Index,
and Vanguard 500 Index can be referenced using the Portfolio Visualizer link below.
Past performance is not indicative of future performance...
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&sl=BCPJliOkim1OuHmlYERP6

This was a good interview where I learned more about the Primecap's team operations and philosophy.
Thanks for posting!
I completed a Vanguard survey earlier today and the firm apparently is considering reopening
the Primecap and Capital Opportunity funds:
"Vanguard is considering reopening a fund that has been closed or limited to certain investors for the last decade. Here is information about this fund: Vanguard Capital Opportunity Fund – Capital Opportunity is an active, aggressive growth fund that invests in companies of all sizes across market cap (large, mid, & small) primarily in the US. The PRIMECAP manager expects that these companies will grow over time but may be volatile in the short-term."
I own VPMAX and VPCCX but don't own VHCAX.
Someone who owns only VHCAX reported that reopening VPMAX was mentioned in his Vanguard survey.
The following survey question really piqued my interest:
"Does the Vanguard PRIMECAP investment limit of $25,000 per year impact your investment decisions?"
Well, yes it does.
I'd exchange my entire VPCCX investment for VPMAX if Vanguard allowed it.

For those holding, UST issues, IG bonds and having those bonds within a fund, should find a nice price bump from the past 5 days; and perhaps a full week price performance, 'IF' nothing comes apart through Friday.

By December 5, 2022 investors were used to getting slapped around by the usual suspects.
After the 2023 Santa rally, no one wants to be reminded that any "plain-vanilla," bond funds were staring at three losing years in a row.
Methinks the editorial side of garden-variety M* has problems similar to the IT side.

BTW, Amy Arnott's original 12/5/22 article is still on the M* website. But it had the usual culprits and didn't seem controversial.
https://www.morningstar.com/people/amy-c-arnott?page=2
But this 1/30/24 update, that was apparently withdrawn, had a rather strange mix, with several bond funds mixed with gung-ho tech & leveraged funds.

AAII Sentiment Survey, 1/31/24
BULLISH remained the top sentiment (49.1%; high) & bearish remained the bottom sentiment (24.5%, below average); neutral remained the middle sentiment (26.4%, below average); Bull-Bear Spread was +24.6% (high; improved). Investor concerns: Elections, budget, inflation, economy, the Fed/FOMC, dollar, Russia-Ukraine (101+ weeks), Israel-Hamas (16+ weeks), geopolitical. For the Survey week (Th-Wed), stocks were mixed (growth down, cyclicals up), bonds up, oil up, gold up, dollar flat. Fed held rates but isn't in a rush to cut. #AAII #Sentiment #Markets
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1337/thread

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1058587/000116204424000122/uprightsupplement.htm
497 1 uprightsupplement.htm
Upright Assets Allocation Fund
Upright Growth Fund
Upright Growth & Income Fund
Each a series of Upright Investments Trust
Supplement dated January 31, 2024
to Prospectus Dated January 31, 2023
As of the close of business on January 31, 2024, the Upright Assets Allocation Fund, Upright Growth Fund and Upright Growth & Income Fund (the “Funds”) will close to new investments. The Funds will not take purchases from new or existing shareholders. In addition, shareholders of record on January 31, 2024, that are participating in the Automatic Investment Plan and/or the dividend reinvestment plan may not add to their existing accounts through those plans. Dividends and distributions will be paid in cash. The Funds will continue to honor redemption requests, including those made under the Automatic Withdrawal Plan. The Funds reserve the right to change this policy and reopen to new investments.
You should read this Supplement in conjunction with the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information
dated January 31, 2023. These documents are available upon request and without charge by calling Upright Investments Trust toll-free at (877) 385-5720.
You should retain this Supplement for future reference.

Found the list on another site, but no numbers. Uncertain of list order... maybe "least worst" to "most worst"?
Alerian MLP ETF (AMLP)
ProShares UltraPro VIX Short-Term Futures (UVXY)
ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ ETF (SQQQ)
PIMCO Commodity Real Return Strategy A (PCRAX)
ProShares UltraShort S&P500 (SDS)
iShares MSCI Brazil ETF (EWZ)
ProShares Short S&P500 (SH)
ProShares UltraPro Short S&P500 (SPXU)
KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB)
PIMCO StocksPLUS Short Fund A (PSSAX)
VelocityShares Daily 2x VIX Short Term ETN (TVIXF)
Direxion Daily Small Cap Bear 3X ETF (TZA)
Velocity Shares 3x LongNAtural Gas ETN (UGAZF)
ProShares UltrsShort 20+ Year Treasury (TBT)
Direxion Daily S&P 500 Bear 3X ETF (SPXS)
FWIW the list includes the 15 funds that destroyed the most value for investors over the trailing 10 years through 2021
Note: I didn't "invest" in a single one of these! I'm so proud of myself. :)

This doesn't show the tables but it preserved the M* text (and lists all 15 "wealth destroyers") as a sidebar.
https://web.archive.org/web/20240131091956/https://www.morningstar.com/funds/15-funds-that-have-destroyed-most-wealth-over-past-decade

Bummer. For anyone trying to access the article through my link, it's not connected anymore, at least for me.
There is a new link for the 15 most wealth creating funds I'll link below, but I suppose that one has a life too.
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/15-top-wealth-creators-fund-industry-2

Conclusion
The biggest players in the fund industry are often vilified as having too much power and failing to act in the best interests of their shareholders. But as the results above show, the largest funds and fund families have created significant value where it counts: by increasing dollar value for shareholders.

an unprecedented refusal
Rare, but not unprecedented. The NYTimes article at the time said only that

The decision [was] extremely unusual for Medicare, which almost always automatically pays for drugs that the F.D.A. has approved, at least for the medical conditions designated on labels.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/07/health/aduhelm-medicare-alzheimers.html
Here's a JAMA piece from last June discussing circumstances where Medicare might refuse coverage. It concludes with the observation that "Medicare’s ability to limit payment for therapies that may not meaningfully benefit patients with Medicare is a commonsense necessity for this crucial taxpayer-funded program." It also obliquely references the upcoming SC case Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo that could limit agencies' discretion in administering statutes.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2808074
https://www.scotusblog.com/2023/05/supreme-court-will-consider-major-case-on-power-of-federal-regulatory-agencies/

After the 2021 disaster (controversial FDA approval; Biogen's greed that led Medicare to an unprecedented refusal), Biogen/BIIB has a new CEO, and another Alzheimer's drug approved.
https://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=BIIB&p=D&yr=3&mn=0&dy=0&id=p24954451375

Following are heavily edited excerpts from a current opinion article in the Washington Post. This article is designated by the Post as free to non-subscribers.
Erwin R. Tiongson is a professor of the practice in Georgetown University’s Global Human Development Program.
What if I said you could read real world history on the underside of your kids’ Hot Wheels?
I remember the first time I looked at the underside of these cars, soon after I had learned to read, and realized they had been made in different countries in different years. Some were made in the United Kingdom and the United States; the newer ones were made in Japan. Decades later, as my work as an economist brought my family to the United States, my two children got toy cars nearly identical to mine — first made in China and, later, Vietnam.
I ask students in my economics classes to inspect the cars’ undersides, and together we trace the gradual movement of toy car manufacturing: from England and the United States in the 1960s to Japan in the mid-1970s, from South Korea in the mid-1980s to China in the late 1990s and Vietnam after.

The process of making die-cast toy cars is nearly unchanged since the 1960s and has been steadily passed from one country to another, marking the beginning of the transformation of entire economies. We observe how toy-export data mirrors worldwide trends in industrial sector employment over the past 60 years: the gradual rise of toy manufacturing and toy exports in developing economies, the expansion of light manufacturing in those countries, followed by the growth of more complex production and the entire industrial sector, soon dwarfing the traditional agriculture sector and lifting people out of low-paid, low-productivity work.
And then we see, almost as rapidly, the decline of the industrial sector in a now-richer economy, as production at lower prices becomes available from the next industrializing country.
This much world history reflected in a handful of toy cars!
With the covid-19 pandemic, the industrial world reeled from massive supply chain disruptions. In early 2022, Mattel — which makes Hot Wheels and Matchbox toy cars — made a move to “near-source” some production, bringing its supply chain closer to the United States and away from Asia and China: It announced an injection of $50 million to its factory in Mexico. So I expected to start seeing toy cars manufactured in Mexico.
Wrong... in two years, sometimes things change.
This past holiday season, my children and I took turns visiting the toy section of a large store just outside Washington. It was like a game: find a random car, take a picture of the box and the car’s underside, send it to our group chat. We found none from Bangladesh, Ethiopia or Mexico. They came from Malaysia, Thailand and, surprisingly, China, still. In the journey toward the inevitable transformation of economies, it seemed the world had taken a few detours.
It turns out that near-sourcing is more complicated than expected, as recently documented in the case of Mexico. Part of the difficulty involves scaling and coordination: As more businesses seek nearby production facilities, the nearby economy, with its limited human and infrastructure resources, is quickly overwhelmed. And just as critical pieces in toy manufacturing are still imported from China, inputs from China more generally are integral parts of more sophisticated global supply chains.
In addition, toy manufacturing reflects not only the promise of industrialization but also its disappointments. In late 2022, Mattel commemorated its 40th year of manufacturing in Malaysia by announcing the growth of its Hot Wheels factory there, the world’s biggest. This was a positive development, but Malaysia’s economy reached middle-income status decades ago; in the familiar pattern, it would by now have progressed to manufacturing more complex, profitable products. Instead, the country has remained in what economists have defined as the “middle-income trap” — caught between developing and rich nations.
I struggled to explain what we were seeing. Not because toy cars do not tell us something about the world but because they do. They reflect the world’s reality, including its surprises.

Here and Now broadcast a worthwhile report on Biogen and Aduhelm, the Alzheimer’s drug.
https://www.wbur.org/news/2021/12/10/biogen-aduhelm-reckoning-alzheimers-drug
It’s not surprising that the whole biotech sector is under pressure when one its guiding lights really screws up. The report talks of 1000 layoffs at Biogen and great disruption. There’s a link in the report to an in depth published article on the debacle in STAT.
The Times reported on Sunday that a large chunk of the contemplated increase in Medicare Part B premiums is due to the projected cost of this new drug, which according to many, does not work.

To quote a old time radio broadcaster, "now, the rest of the story ..." Aside from serious questions about the drug's efficacy,

One F.D.A. adviser called the approval of the drug perhaps “the worst approval decision that the F.D.A. has made that I can remember.” A congressional inquiry later found that the F.D.A.’s process for approving Aduhelm had been “rife with irregularities” and involved “lapses in protocol,” including unusually close collaboration with Biogen.

Biogen had licensed Aduhelm from Neurimmune (Swiss). With recent revenues from the drug so small that Biogen isn't even reporting them, and with Medicare paying for the drug only in clinical trials, Biogen is about to let its license lapse.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/31/business/biogen-alzheimers-aduhelm.html
To relate this to a current thread, Primecap (the management company) holds the largest percentage (11.05%) of Biogen, and Primecap (the fund, VPMCX) has 3.37% of its assets invested in Biogen. BIIB is down 13.59% in the past year (through Jan 30th), resulting in overall losses in the past 3, 5, and 10 years.

Stable-Value (SV) Rates, 2/1/24
TIAA Traditional Annuity (Accumulation) Rates
No changes
Restricted RC 6.25%, RA 6.00%
Flexible RCP 5.50%, SRA 5.25%, Newer IRAs 5.20%
TSP G Fund hasn't updated yet (previous monthly rate was 4.00%).
Edit/Add. February rate 4.125%
Options outside of workplace retirement plans include m-mkt funds, bank m-mkt accounts (FDIC insured), T-Bills, short-term brokered CDs.
#StableValue #401k #403b #TIAA #TSP
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1335/thread

Notes by YBB
Rates were maintained - fed funds 5.25-5.50%, bank reserve rate 5.4%, discount rate 5.5%. Rates have peaked, but cuts may only be later in 2024.
QT continues at -$60 billion/mo for Treasuries, -$35 billion/mo for MBS; total QT -$95 billion/mo. Cumulative QT so far is -$1.3 trillion. The pace of QT may be lowered in the near future.
Inflation is lower but is still too high vs +2% average target; inflation-expectations are lower. Monetary policy is restrictive as the fed fund rate > inflation-expectations. There was a lot of discussion on whether the Fed has enough confidence on the good progress made so far on inflation, economy and labor, but Powell won't commit to any timetables.
Economy is strong. Labor market is tight. Both are normalizing.
Housing is weak, being very rate sensitive. Lower equivalent-rents will show in the inflation data. But housing isn't Fed's direct concern; its focus is on inflation and jobs.
Fed meeting with local businesses are useful for information not yet in the data.
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1334/thread

Nothing new IMO.
Stocks are down, well, the SP500 was up 20% since Nov and it's only down about 1%(before 3 PM) from the top.
There is always a chance of a 3-5% pullback which is just how the market works, but the 24/7 media would like you to think that they know why markets are down or up...and they don't.
I pay zero attention to economic indicators and the media because they don't have a high correlation to what markets will do in the next 1-3-4-8 weeks.
Powell didn't change his tune, rates will change according to the data, and the traders try to front-run him.
So, if you are a typical investor, you should own several funds according to your goals and hardly trade.
I'm a bond trader, I never invest based on predictions, I invest based on charts and uptrends and they tell me in real-time exactly what to do.

How did Hussman not make the list? HSGFX “boasts” a - 3.8% (negative) annual return over the past 15 years, according to M*. In fairness, at least one on the list is an inverse fund. So folks should have understood what they were doing when they bought it. No doubt some traders buy and sell inverse funds trying to time the markets rather than for long term holdings.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/regional-bank-that-played-rescuer-in-2023-now-in-turmoil-163932844.html
It got too big for its britches. "Trouble in River City." Dividend suspended. And after the Flagstar AND Signature Bank acquisitions, it must meet more stringent capital reserve requirements. The bank doubled its own size in two years. "Superior planning!" .... So this explains in large part why my own Regional Bank holding has fallen like a rock in the past couple of days. BHB. I had considered throwing some money at NYCB. Glad I did not do it.
"...The stock of the Hicksville, N.Y.-based lender fell 46% Wednesday after it reported a surprise net loss of $252 million for the fourth quarter and announced a suspension of its dividend...The news sent new shockwaves through the regional banking world..."