@hank: +1 on infrastructure, which is one of the main 'themes' in one of my long-term portfolios

The best suggestion of a specific fund I’ve received (for my needs) from this board came from @BenWP a couple + years ago. That’s GLFOX. It’s the first new fund I purchased after moving to Fido’s brokerage. Thanks Ben. It is technically an infrastructure fund. M* lists it as slightly over 50% utilities. Most of the holdings are X-USA (primarily Europe), which partially explains an ER north of 1%. The fund isn’t for everyone. And, as noted, isn’t a “utilities” fund. You can probably find better infrastructure or utility funds depending on your needs for a portfolio fit - especially how much foreign exposure you need or want.
Lazzard, itself is a giant in the global investment banking business. There’s been upheaval at the top with a new CEO in recent months. Like most of the big houses, there’s cost-cutting going on. I read somewhere there’s a soft close on institutional ownership of GLFOX, but that it is still open to individual investors. Strikes me as opposite what T. Rowe is doing by closing PRWCX but allowing those with hefty initial investments in.
Of course, Fido’s “Select Utilities” (FSUTX) with a lower .74% ER is a star performer in utilities.

The P/E on the ones I saw (traditional style, highly regulated) were way too rich.
Hawaiian Electric here is not an independent company; it's owned by American Savings Bank. That's just weird
You may have the hierarchy upside down. HE owns American Savings Bank. From BofA Global Research:

Reiterate Underperform on shares of Hawaiian Electric (HE) which is expensive relative to our view of the fundamentals and deserves to trade at a discount to utility peers due to its banking exposure. HE owns American Savings Bank (ASB),

https://rsch.baml.com/access?q=KIjGPJuiY!I
It's difficult if not impossible to find a pure play in traditional, regulated utilities. The BofA excerpt implies that the utility subsidiary is doing just fine thank you, but HE is getting dragged down by its non-utility subsidiary.
M* gets the company structure wrong or at least misleading in writing that HE is 3/4 electric utility company and 1/4 bank. That suggests that it's 3/4 regulated. It's not. Apparently what M* is calling an electric company consists of two HE subsidiaries, Hawaii Electric (a traditional, regulated utility) and Pacific Current.

Pacific Current President Scott Valentino, described the subsidiary as a “Hawaii-centric non-regulated entity that invests and develops in a broad range of infrastructure.”
...
“Everything we own today is related to electricity, but we are looking for opportunities in transportation, water, agriculture and other sectors,” Valentino said.
According to Valentino, a sustainable future for Hawaii does not just lie in one sector alone.
“We are focused on the betterment of Hawaii overall, but we are really focused on accelerating the 100 percent renewable portfolio standard, and carbon neutrality across the sectors,” he said.
...
Valentino said that Pacific Current is considered a “real growth vehicle for HEI moving forward”

https://www.bizjournals.com/pacific/news/2019/05/10/pacific-current-plans-to-invest-in-sustainability.html
That seems more along the lines that Giroux was talking about, and it's unregulated.
Side note: M*'s economic moat analysis of HE is, to quote you, "just weird". It talks about how the utility portion is a monopoly and yet describes this as a "narrow moat". Apparently to M* "moat" doesn't mean so much a competitive advantage (such as being a monopoly) as it means being able to sustain excess ROI (which regulation tamps down).
https://www.morningstar.com/investing-definitions/economic-moat

A quick look at GRID (First Trust Clean Edge®Smart Grid Infrastructure ETF) shows 17% utilities as well as many industrial and tech companies that stand to benefit from what Giroux is talking about, namely the conversion to green energy. GRID does not hold New Era, but it does hold a number of overseas utilities as part of the fund's some 47% allocation to ex-US firms. PRWCX has no more than 4% non-US, so I assume Giroux is talking about finding value in US utilities.

Brookfield is doing a lot in the green energy / conversion space. BEP, BEPH, BEPI are some to consider depending on your tax situation. Their infrastructure entity BIP/BIPC are involved in this process as well.
I think many utes will be a solid if not boring play going forward due to the EV trend and fact that folks need reliable power. I'll be interested in adding names when they're paying out 4% or more dividends. (Well, except for D, which couldn't find its way out of a paper bag when it comes to management decisionmaking.)

See Vanguard exceptions to foreign tax reporting here:
https://big-bang-investors.proboards.com/post/38655/thread
Excerpt:
Vanguard's 1099s do not include foreign taxes paid for many funds, such as VT (Vanguard Total World Stock ETF), VGWAX (Global Wellington), or VGYAX (Global Wellesley Income), which have significant foreign stock exposure (including foreign dividend-paying stock exposure). This is nuts -- these funds are 40-50% foreign.
And yet, VG does provide foreign tax information on funds like STAR and the Life Strategy and Target Retirement funds, which have a minimal amount of foreign exposure.
See here which funds VG does provide foreign tax information for:
https://www.vanguard.com/pdf/FTC_2023.pdf

@Derf "I believe IRA's are not eligible for credit or deductions for foreign taxes paid on Fed taxes. That's why I'm moving to taxable account. Correct me if I'm wrong."
You are correct. Brokerage 1099s usually show foreign taxes paid (there are some peculiar exceptions at Vanguard), so in a taxable account you can claim a credit. Not in IRAs. Hence, I always keep foreign dividend payers in taxable.
Note however that Canada is an exception. There is a US-Canada agreement in place so that Canadian assets held in US IRAs are exempt from tax withholding:
https://www.suredividend.com/canadian-taxes-us-investors/#retirementaccounts
"… the 15% withholding tax that is normally imposed by the Canada Revenue Agency is waived when Canadian securities are held within U.S. retirement accounts. This is an important component of the U.S.-Canada tax treaty ..."
See discussion here:
https://big-bang-investors.proboards.com/post/39582/thread

A quick look at GRID (First Trust Clean Edge®Smart Grid Infrastructure ETF) shows 17% utilities as well as many industrial and tech companies that stand to benefit from what Giroux is talking about, namely the conversion to green energy. GRID does not hold New Era, but it does hold a number of overseas utilities as part of the fund's some 47% allocation to ex-US firms. PRWCX has no more than 4% non-US, so I assume Giroux is talking about finding value in US utilities.

Hank is right in drawing a distinction between the years up to the mid 90s and the time since then. Though I would say that the key difference between then and now is regulation.
Utilities were heavily regulated, vertically integrated companies. Electric utility companies combined power generation with transmission and distribution. Ma Bell designed its own equipment (Bell Labs) and manufactured it (Western Electric) under the 1956 consent decree.
Under regulation, utility companies were granted monopolies and guaranteed a fair rate of return. They were cash cows, very much like bonds with steady payments.

[Through the early 1990s] most public utilities were regulated monopolies. They were guaranteed a fair rate of return, based on their capital investment and costs. ...
in the old days of regulation, a utility like Con Ed would be required to regularly submit a resource plan to a state's public service commission. The two organizations would forecast demand and decide how much money should be invested in power plants and transmission lines. Rates would be adjusted to cover costs. Under deregulation, however, nobody plays that crucial planning role.

https://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/16/opinion/the-day-the-lights-went-out-an-industry-trapped-by-a-theory.html

Point taken @FD1000. You have said that your timing method isn't for everyone. That is true. And you have said that most should be diversified. But that begs the question, why do you keep posting about your system and trumpeting the great results you have achieved if the majority will lose money with timing. Are you trying to sway them to try when most will lose. Or, are you self-promoting? I have no doubt it works for a small minority. But the majority will never get it right.
Some of your advice is cookie-cutter good. Some, I'm not so sure.

MikeM, please reread my post, I didn't mention or promoted my system.
This site is about all kind of investors. From cookie cutter to advance. From very conservative to all stocks with different goals.
What you or I think is good, others don't agree so much.
2 Easy examples:
1) If you ask Buffet what stocks you should hold, he will say you just the SP500. Ask 100 financial advisers and none will tell you it's correct. Ask posters on this site and none will say, only the SP500.
2) Tell 100 financial advisers that you hold over 40% of your equities in Apple and they will tell you, it's unacceptable. This is what Buffet holds.

I don't know. If there is a bond fund that returned 7.84 over the last 15 years, and 10% over the last three years, like FSUTX has, I'ld like to know the name of it.

Trading is for a small % who can do it with reasonable success. But, the following MAY work for retirees who have enough and don't want to lose much. They don't care about performance, they care a lot more about NOT losing money.

Point taken @FD1000. You have said that your timing method isn't for everyone. That is true. And you have said that most should be diversified. But that begs the question, why do you keep posting about your system and trumpeting the great results you have achieved if the majority will lose money with timing. Are you trying to sway them to try when most will lose. Or, are you self-promoting? I have no doubt it works for a small minority. But the majority will never get it right.
Some of your advice is cookie-cutter good. Some, I'm not so sure.

Mark +1

Some really good discussion here. A couple comments:
@FD1000,

So, just my opinion, good timing/trading is the only choice IF you can do it.

You are always self promoting this option. Fact is, 90% of every-day investors that try timing methods actually end up with less return over time. That is pretty well documented. Lots of people "think" they can do it, at least initially, but I contend there is a very small minority that actually benefit. I'd be the first to say it hasn't worked for me.
@fred495, @Observant1

...This fund (JHQAX) seems to offer appealing risk/reward characteristics and it's less expensive than many "alt" funds.

JHQAX has successfully proven its mettle over the past 9 years by "providing smoother returns by tempering downside and upside returns via a systematically implemented options strategy".

I'm definitely on the same page as you guys. I don't expect it to make the same return over 10 years as say the S&P 500, but you can say the same for most balanced, allocation or bond funds too. At my age, a smoother contributor in a portfolio with good upside/downside risk stats is valued.

Well, if you read my posts, I said the following hundred of times. Most should own a limited number of funds (mostly in indexes and low ER) based on their risk and goals and hardy trade. Trading is for a small % who can do it with reasonable success. But, the following MAY work for retirees who have enough and don't want to lose much. They don't care about performance, they care a lot more about NOT losing money.
BTW, I never said that JHQAX isn't a good idea. As always the whole portfolio matters more than one fund. Example: suppose someone has 5 funds, each at 20%, he/she can own 20% in JHQAX per their EXPLORE portion.
Basically, there are all kinds of investors, there is no one size fits all. Someone can use one of the following lazy portfolios(link), do nothing for decades and stop reading everything about investing.
This site and other investment sites, in contradiction to the Boglehead, are about thinking about other choices.

Taking the new thread for a spin . . .
My foray into T-Bills came due today in the IRA. Used the proceeds to top off PRWCX and open a position in FBALX. I already have VWINX and VWELX covering the longer side of duration. These positions are now roughly equal in size.
FBALX is the new ornament on the retirement tree. I said I would be trimming, and I will. I am looking forward to just a little bit more cooperation from GISYX at 1.04% of the portfolio. Proceeds will likely be split between IYK and PSCC.

Some really good discussion here. A couple comments:
@FD1000,

So, just my opinion, good timing/trading is the only choice IF you can do it.

You are always self promoting this option. Fact is, 90% of every-day investors that try timing methods actually end up with less return over time. That is pretty well documented. Lots of people "think" they can do it, at least initially, but I contend there is a very small minority that actually benefit. I'd be the first to say it hasn't worked for me.
@fred495, @Observant1

...This fund (JHQAX) seems to offer appealing risk/reward characteristics and it's less expensive than many "alt" funds.

JHQAX has successfully proven its mettle over the past 9 years by "providing smoother returns by tempering downside and upside returns via a systematically implemented options strategy".

I'm definitely on the same page as you guys. I don't expect it to make the same return over 10 years as say the S&P 500, but you can say the same for most balanced, allocation or bond funds too. At my age, a smoother contributor in a portfolio with good upside/downside risk stats is valued.

Charles Lynn Bolin does an excellent job explaining risk/volatility/unique funds and how to build a portfolio. If you pay attention, it's not static, his view keeps changing because markets keep changing. See below 2 good examples:
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2022/10/shining-the-light-into-black-box-funds/
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2023/03/to-sell-or-not-to-sell-remix-pqtax-gpanx-cotzx/
BTW, 2022 was one of the easiest years to time markets = sell a big % to MM. We had High inflation, high prices (gas, oil, food, housing, vehicles), terrible supply chain issues around the world, and war in Europe. The Fed screams it will raise rates by several % in the coming months. Lastly, both bond+stock funds go down slowly for weeks letting you sell.

AAII Sentiment Survey, 7/19/23
Bullish remained the top sentiment (51.4%; high) & bearish remained the bottom sentiment (21.5%; low); neutral remained the middle sentiment (27.1%; below average); Bull-Bear Spread was +29.9% (high; the highest since 4-8-21). Investor concerns: Inflation (moderating but high); economy; the Fed; dollar; crypto regulations; market volatility (VIX, VXN, MOVE); Russia-Ukraine war (73+ weeks, 2/24/22-now); geopolitical. For the Survey week (Th-Wed), stocks were up, bonds up, oil down, gold up, dollar down. This stock rally continues towards new highs. The Fed will hike rates by +25 bps on Wednesday next week. #AAII #Sentiment #Markets
LINK

"It’s about being able to stay near fully invested - even at an advanced age - and doing better than you would if parked 100% in cash (or cash-like investments)"
You are now going to the other extreme of only cash. There is a lot going on between 0% to 100% stocks. Your goal is to stay invested, my goal is different.
Let's explore several questions
1) How comfortable are you with JHQAX? The following question is the most revealing, what % are you going to invest in JHQAX for the next 20 years? I have more confidence investing in 50/50 PRWCX/VWIAX for many retirees that it meets their goals. In fact, I don't even trust PRWCX, because I don't know how long Giroux will be in charge. This is why my wife has instructions to invest in 3 funds if I'm gone, 2 indexes and VWIAX because I can trust them for decades.
2) You made a good observation, DODBX lost 33% in 2008. But why stop there, stocks+bonds lost over 15% at the bottom of 2022, and many lost over 10% by year-end. In 03/2020, many bond funds lost 10% and stocks over 30% at the bottom. Are you going to get rid of all of them?
3) You made another good point "the various approaches attempted by funds are unpredictable "
Bingo. and why I research it for many years. I talked to many people, especially investors who have enough, and most told me they don't want to ever lose more than 10% from any last top, but they still want their portfolio to make a decent return. They must give up either performance or lower risk.
So, just my opinion, good timing/trading is the only choice IF you can do it. Timing doesn't have to be all or none, you can trade 20-30-50%. BTW, I'm almost sure that Fred was probably in high % in MM for months, just like I did in 2022. When markets don't make sense, I'm out. I don't trust any funds/managers and I don't believe in relative performance, only absolute. If 50/50 PRWCX/VWIAX lost about 10-11% in 2022, it doesn't comfort me compared to -18% for SPY. I don't tolerate this decline.
Another subject we must discuss is how much you have in retirement and let's assume no pension. Smaller portfolios must be at a higher % in stocks to survive. WTF portfolio can be in 20/80 to 80/20. The biggest problem is in the middle.

Not to digress, active JHQAX had very low distributions but decent portfolio turnover (44% as of 6/30/22 per M*). Distributions shown in M* from 2019 onwards show no year end distributions - I think partly because there were no meaningful redemptions /withdrawals prior to 2022. Some of the otherwise distributable monies are absorbed by the ER (reasonable) and hedging costs, resulting in low distributions per year. There were meaningful redemptions in 2022 but no cap gain distributions, showing the fund kept an eye on tax efficiency.
Having said that I would be cautious against holding this in a taxable account. 2022 distributions of JHDAX is illustrative of the potential for cap gain distributions.

If there was a “sure” way to make even a penny profit on a trade with 0 risk of loss, people would scale in. (So there isn’t.)
Closest to this I’ve ever achieved was an apparently defective slot machine years ago while visiting a casino with relatives. It actually was consistently paying out a quarter for every 15 or 20 cents cents put in. Played maybe 30 minutes and probably walked away with $3-$4 gain. I’d have stayed longer, but the rest of the group couldn’t see the merit of this exercise and so we moved on.
However, the schemes outlined by Old Joe and msf certainly sound like hedging taken to the extreme.