From CNN
”The top index of US stocks hit an all-time high in January 2022. It was downhill from there. The S&P 500 lost 19.4% over the past 12 months, notching its worst year since 2008.”
Strange? Is CNN wrong here - or are we possibly talking about intra-day high vs closing high?

HERE @hank for 2022 SPY

I think +0.25% rate rise is baked-in. Was the ending on 31 Jan before the market-closing a reaction to yesterday's stinky poopy day?

Unemployment uptrends
Inflation improved
Uncle Powell likely 0.25% tomorrow and a other 0.25%?next few months
Hard to say what will happen
Market ran harshed/ melt up anticipated futures events past 3 4 wks
Everyone of friends and their mamas/papa's cousins were shorting the past 2 3 wks and got burnt very badly... ***when the tide recedes we will know whom are swimming naked short***
Not sure who is right, mburry short master say sale, Jim Cramer say we are in bull market...

@hank, actually, the market peak was around early Nov, 2021. Downhill from there. At least by my accounts.

Thanks @MikeM. You’re correct. November 8, 2021 for the S&P. Wikipedia S&P Closing Highs
Markets did climb a bit very early in 2022 before turning south.

Different stuff peaked at different times. Crazy highflyers and EMs peaked in 02/2021, small-caps and DJ Transports in 11/2022, SP500 in 01/2022, DJIA and Nasdaq Comp also in 01/2022 but it was their 2nd peak after 11/2021 (so, sort of a double-peak), DJ Utilities peaked in 04/2022 or 09/2022.
On hindsight, it makes good sense - riskier stuff peaked first, then gradually, less risky stuff. It was like a rolling bear market but people in it didn't know that at the time.
All eyes are now on this post-10/2022 rally/bounce and the Big Guy talks tomorrow.

Happened to be watching CNBC while working out at a gym between 3:00 and 3:45. S&P was in a tight trading range during that time - running just +0.8% - 1% higher for the day. But the close had it up 1.46% at 4076.6. Yikes - some fireworks the last 15-20 minutes one might guess. Looks like most everything did well. Crude and most metals saw slight gains - but equities were the place to be. One European consumers staples stock I own bounced 2%. Don’t know if that was typical of most of the continent. As @Sven noted elsewhere, the defensive consumers staples types have been back-sliding recently while the NASDAQ and riskier parts of the market have revved-up.
Other numbers: DOW +1.09%
NASDAQ +1.67%
FOMC meeting / statement tomorrow. I don’t think today’s sort of market action makes them very happy.

TIAA Traditional Rates, February 1, 2023
Restricted RC 6.25%, RA 6.00%
Flexible RCP 5.50%, SRA 5.25%, Newer IRAs 3.45%
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/thread/142/tiaa-traditional-rates-monthly?page=2&scrollTo=916
TSP G Fund hasn't updated yet for 02/2023 (01/2023 rate was 4.00%).
https://www.tspfolio.com/tspgfundinterestrate

I have filed K-1s on TurboTax for several years. It takes extra time and occasionally some fudging ( PTP income requires two separate K-1s for each company) but it can be done without hiring an accountant.
OF course the sums involved in my case are not huge ( under $5,000) so if I screwed up the IRS probably doesn't care.
The biggest problem is some of the companies do not issue K-1s until late, even after April 15th.
If you want to invest in energy MLPs a lot easier to use one of the ETFs or Mutual funds that do so, although it will charge the management fee

Thanks msf
Not a big hurtle to clear if you are really interested. Not that it will do much good.
Most people ignore the proxy voting they get from their stock companies anyway, bu tif you look there are always a few radical proposals
Vanguard Fidelity and State Street etc and other biggies have been criticized for automatically voting with management. Even if they set up a system to allow holders of their funds to vote proxies, most people will ignore them.
Engine No 1 got three board seats on Exxon's board with a smart dedicated activist campaign among large stockholders, (they only owned $12,500,000 in stock ).
https://time.com/collection/time100-companies-2022/6159495/engine-no-1/
I think this is a far better way to approach climate change than divestment.
Their new ETF VOTE proposes to use their ownership of SP500 companies to vote in similar changes focused on "the power to create good jobs, reverse climate change, fight
gender and racial injustice, and bring greater accountability to the
economy’s largest companies."
This will probably not address @BenWP original concern that ABBV was using legal loopholes to continue making billions .
Such strategies technically, (if not morally) are certainly in the best interest of ABBV shareholders, if not the patients or taxpayers. Engine No 1 made the argument that Exxon ignoring CO2 production was a bad business decision.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/277751/000119312523019359/d114209d497.htm
497 1 d114209d497.htm 497
Janus Investment Fund
Janus Henderson International Opportunities Fund
(the “Fund”)
Supplement dated January 31, 2023
to Currently Effective Prospectuses
and Statement of Additional Information
On January 27, 2023, the Board of Trustees of the Fund approved an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization that provides for the merger of the Fund with and into Janus Henderson Overseas Fund (the “Acquiring Fund”) (the “Merger”).
The Merger is subject to certain conditions, including approval by shareholders of the Fund.
The Merger is expected to be tax-free for federal income tax purposes; therefore, Fund shareholders should not realize a tax gain or loss as a direct result of the Merger. The Merger, however, may accelerate distributions, which are taxable, as the tax year for the Fund will end on the date of the Merger. In connection with the Merger, shareholders of each class of shares of the Fund will receive shares of a corresponding class of the Acquiring Fund approximately equivalent in dollar value to the Fund shares owned immediately prior to the Merger. Investors who are Fund shareholders of record as of February 24, 2023, will receive a proxy statement/prospectus which includes important information regarding the Merger. Only Fund shareholders as of February 24, 2023, are eligible to vote on the Merger. Therefore, if you purchased shares of the Fund after February 24, 2023, and assuming shareholders of the Fund as of that date approve the Merger, any shares of the Fund you hold as of the Merger closing date will automatically be converted into shares of the Acquiring Fund.
Effective on or about February 13, 2023, the Funds will no longer accept investments by new shareholders. Until such time as the Merger is implemented, existing shareholders of the Fund may continue to purchase shares of the Fund, unless the Board of Trustees determines to limit future investments to ensure a smooth transition of shareholder accounts or for any other reason. Shareholders of the Fund may redeem their shares or exchange their shares for shares of another Janus Henderson fund for which they are eligible to purchase at any time prior to the Merger. Any applicable contingent deferred sales charges (“CDSC”) charged by the Fund will be waived for redemptions or exchanges through the date of the Merger. Exchanges by Class A shareholders into Class A Shares of another Janus Henderson fund are not subject to any applicable initial sales charge. Please check with your intermediary regarding other Janus Henderson funds and share classes offered through your intermediary.
A full description of the Acquiring Fund and the terms of the Merger will be contained in the proxy statement/prospectus that will be sent to shareholders of the Fund of record as of February 24, 2023. The Fund and the Acquiring Fund have similar investment objectives, principal investment strategies, and risks. The portfolio managers of the Acquiring Fund will continue to manage the Acquiring Fund if the Merger is approved, and the Acquiring Fund’s stated investment objective and policies will not change as a result of the Merger. Janus Henderson Investors US LLC encourages you to read the proxy statement/prospectus when it is available as it contains important information regarding the Merger.
This supplement is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy shares of the Acquiring Fund, nor is it a solicitation of any proxy. For important information about fees, expenses, and risk considerations regarding the Acquiring Fund, please refer to the Acquiring Fund’s prospectus and the proxy statement/prospectus relating to the Merger, when available, on file with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
* * *
Shareholders of record as of February 24, 2023, are expected to receive a proxy statement/prospectus, notice of special meeting of shareholders, and proxy card, containing detailed information regarding shareholder proposals with respect to these and certain other matters. The shareholder meeting is expected to be held on or about May 18, 2023. If approved, the Merger will be effective on or about June 2, 2023, or as soon as practicable thereafter.
Please retain this Supplement with your records.

CNN has some background & an update. Notable is that $2.5 billion local offering (record for India) went through as planned. Some thought that size and/or price would be reduced. Seems strange for an above-market (now) offering to be fully subscribed at the last minute. Seems both Hindenburg and Adani have rabbits in their hats.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/31/investing/india-adani-hindenburg-report-explainer-intl-hnk/index.html

ISTM the Barron’s (Roundtable) gurus made some predictions on where the S&P would end this year. Ranged from a low at / below 4,000 to around 4300 (David Giroux on the high end). Sorry - have scanned the back issues and can’t locate those predictions. Thanks for sharing your update Yogi.
To be honest I pay little attention to the S&P. (Yes - I realize one should). The Dow ISTM is a good indicator of public sentiment (if nothing else) because so many Mom & Pop investors are attuned to it. Still tends to be the headline-grabber on big up / down days. Of course, both are largely U.S. focused. Certainly there are developed markets in Europe / Japan and elsewhere as well as a wide range of undeveloped markets to be possibly included in a long term portfolio.
Added: What is helpful to me to a degree is watching the % of change + / - in a particular asset or index. Last year was a “gift-horse” in the sense the indexes peaked early in 2022. So, simply pulling up the YTD return gave you a pretty good approximation of the amount of loss from peak. Not that easy now, though there are ways to compute peak to present as well as 1, 3, 5 year gains or losses. I think I’ve alluded in the past to being a bit of a bottom-feeder. Heights in general bother me.
Actually, simply ”Googling” a stock or fund’s ticker symbol now pulls up an incredible amount of current / backward-looking data. Use it almost daily.

These days threads and info get dated quickly.
SP500 faces a strong test at 4,100. But some sentiment indicators (Deemer-BAM, Whaley, etc) and a trifecta of seasonality indicators (with near certainty, today) have triggered that may carry SP500 over 4,100 (we will see in the next few days). This may happen regardless of the tough-love message by Powell tomorrow to "fix" the fed fund futures market expectations of 25-25-5Holds-1Cut.
During the selloff in 2022, I increased my equity exposure that is now beyond my 40-60% effective-equity range. My plan is to scale that back when we are in 4,300-4,600 range. But, if 4,100 fails, I will reassess.
https://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$SPX&p=D&yr=1&mn=0&dy=0&id=p63951820077

You can always put forth a proposal for the annual meeting if you own shares directly.
While that's what many people think, that's not quite the way it works.
Companies don't want Johnny-come-latelies buying a share just before the record date just to introduce a proposal at an annual meeting. Rather, they want you to have some skin in the game before they accept your proposals for a vote. Not much skin, but skin nevertheless.
The law allows a company to require shareholders submitting proposals to have a small but substantial pecuniary interest in the company. In 2020, the SEC "adopted amendments to Exchange Act Rule 14a-8, the shareholder-proposal rule."

[It] amend[ed] Rule 14a-8(b) by:

• replacing the current ownership threshold, which requires holding at least $2,000 or 1% of a company’s securities for at least one year, with three alternative thresholds that will require a shareholder to demonstrate continuous ownership of at least:
  • $2,000 of the company’s securities for at least three years;
    
  • $15,000 of the company’s securities for at least two years; or
    
  • $25,000 of the company’s securities for at least one year.

https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2020-220
For completeness (and to split hairs even more finely), you don't necessarily have to own shares directly (i.e. be shareholder of record) in order to submit shareholder proposals.
What I think you're alluding to are the limited rights that mutual fund owners have with respect to the underlying companies in the portfolio. There, fund owners don't even hold company shares indirectly. Often indirect ownership is sufficient. The most common example likely being street name ownership.
Again looking at Rule 14a-8:

There are two types of security holders in the U.S.: registered owners and beneficial owners [footnote omitted]. Registered owners have a direct relationship with the issuer because their ownership of shares is listed on the records maintained by the issuer or its transfer agent. ...
The vast majority of investors in shares issued by U.S. companies, however, are beneficial owners, which means that they hold their securities in book-entry form through a securities intermediary, such as a broker or a bank. Beneficial owners are sometimes referred to as “street name” holders. Rule 14a-8(b)(2)(i) provides that a beneficial owner can provide proof of ownership to support his or her eligibility to submit a proposal...

https://www.sec.gov/corpfin/staff-legal-bulletin-14f-shareholder-proposals

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/923184/000119312523002397/0001193125-23-002397-index.htm
Matthews Asia Dividend Fund
Matthews China Dividend Fund

A few odd things really stand out about this announcement.
1. First, word on the street is that Yu Zhang left Matthews (probaby obvious, but some may think he is just coming off of managing his fund). If true, this is the most senior portfolio manager to leave. Not only is Asia Div one of the biggest funds at Matthews (nearly $2bn of assets), its also the 3rd biggest active managed Asia fund in the U.S. (only PRASX and MAPTX are bigger). I think Yu had been with Matthews since 2005?
2. Joyce Li, who was a co portfolio manager of Asia Dividend and China Dividend funds, also resigned on December 30, 2022. See her filing below and linkedin, confirming her departure. That's just 30 days before Yu Zhang resigned per the filing above.
Why would Matthews file these two departures as two separate filings when they happaned so close together? It's never good to file these forms when a PM departs, so it was in Matthews best interest to file them together, once.
This tells me that Matthews had NO IDEA that Yu Zhang was departing and it came as a total surprise.
Look at the filing for Joyce's departure on Dec 30, 2022. They make it VERY clear that "Yu Zhang, CFA, will continue to act as a Lead Manager of the Matthews Asia Dividend Fund". Yet he leaves less than 30 days later?
Something is up.
A shame what has happened to Matthews. They continue to bleed investment talent.
https://www.streetinsider.com/SEC+Filings/Form+497+MATTHEWS+INTERNATIONAL/21020185.html
https://www.linkedin.com/in/sjoyceli/

Here is the draft course description, fwiw:
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23584340/ap-afam-syllabus-watermark.pdf
I note that sma3 privately supplied me the same, through another source; this is from NBC.
As a teacher, parent, and grandparent, oh, and I forgot leftist, I myself find nothing to object to.
Sure, this thread can be relabeled. I did enjoy being called quasi-Marxist immediately after posting some arguably investing-pertinent economic data from Krugman.

Fund Allocations (Cumulative), 12/31/22
There was notable decrease in the allocations to stock funds, & those for bond & m-mkt funds rose; hybrid allocations held. Y-o-Y, combined AUM fell -16.16%. The changes for OEFs + ETFs were based on a total AUM of about $29.58 trillion in the previous month, so +/- 1% change was about +/- $295.8 billion. Also note that these changes were from both fund inflows/outflows & price changes.
OEFs: Stocks 51.35%, Hybrids 6.73%, Bonds 20.32%, M-Mkt 21.61%
ETFs: Stocks 80.05%, Hybrids 0.47%, Bonds 19.48%, M-Mkt N/A
OEFs & ETFs: Stocks 57.85%, Hybrids 5.31%, Bonds 20.13%, M-Mkt 16.71%
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/thread/245/fund-allocations-cumulative-monthly?page=2&scrollTo=915

What are your thoughts here. I know we have some really knowledgeable bond people here at MFO and I' like to hear everyone's opinion on the subject and if you are buying.
I've been out of specific bond funds for about a year and a half (except for RPHYX). I'm considering getting back in now with the hope the worst is over or close. What are other's thoughts? I'm specifically looking at floating rate at this point, piggybacking onto statements I've seen from David Giroux and others in Barrons. If I'm looking for an early trend, the last quarter of 2022 was steadily increasing for this sector. I'm considering using SAMBX.
I know the safer route is CD's and treasuries at 4-5%, but I'm hoping with a little added risk, high single digit returns may be obtainable.
What are the thoughts? Pros and cons?

David Sherman is very good in the tyle of ST/LD HY bonds. CBLDX and RSIIX are very good next steps after RPHIX/RPHYX, IMHO.

Too hot, too cold; or ??? GDP relatively strong, employment numbers, inflation data at the input and consumer levels, and any other gauges watched by the FED and the 'pundits' bring different perspectives and suggestions of where to invest or what the near future will bring. As I/we don't know who is buying what or for which reason(s); I will have to remain with watching and discovering price actions with bond sectors. This doesn't really provide a proper reason to want to buy bonds now; BUT I remain inclined to have a favorable view for 2023 so far. Some folks are chasing yields wherever they find them; as the FED has continued rate increases. If the yields come from bond funds, vs MMKT; AND the FED does slow the rate increases for the next several months, then the bond fund investor should benefit from a bond price increase lending to a better return on the investment. I'm not able to have a 10 year projection, as is the case with some; so our portfolio is always subject to some changes. Our investment boat tends to be slow moving; without a lot of trading, as we no longer have the time or inclination for this activity. Dollar Cost Averaging and time (compounding) remains the best investing friend for most; including bond area participation.
Tuesday, mid-day. Equity down a bit, and IG bonds acted more traditional with yields down/prices up.
Bond yields looking forward relative to layoffs, too ??? Perhaps part of an answer.
Scroll down in linked pages below for affected companies.
2022, U.S. Corp. layoffs
2023 U.S. Corp. layoffs, near dated
$U.S. value inflection point relative to both equity and bond rallies near the October 25 time frame. One would think there are other forces in play; but this may be a piece of the pie.
Relative to the below performance info for this week: Most bond returns in the list were positive this week. Several bond sectors remain with YTD returns as good as, or better than some U.S. equity sectors.
*** I was away much of the week and weekend; so not very much input.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---Several selected bond funds returns since October 25, 2022. I'll retain this date, as it is a recent inflection point when bonds began to have positive price moves. We'll need to watch if this was just a 'blip'.
NOTE: I've kept the prior dated reports in the beginning of this thread; and have added YTD to this data.
For the WEEK/YTD, NAV price changes, January 23 - January 27, 2023
***** AGAIN, this week, FZDXX, MMKT yield has remained at 4.27/8% for one month. The core Fidelity MMKT's have continued a slow creep upward to about 3.95%. The holdings of these different funds account for the variances at this time.
--- AGG = -.01% / +3.2% (I-Shares Core bond etf) widely used bond benchmark, (AAA-BBB holdings)
--- MINT = +.11% / +.78% (PIMCO Enhanced short maturity, AAA-BBB rated)
--- SHY = -.06% / +.69% (UST 1-3 yr bills)
--- IEI = -.2% / +1.96% (UST 3-7 yr notes/bonds)
--- IEF = -.15% / +3.4% (UST 7-10 yr bonds)
--- TIP = +.45% / +2.54% (UST Tips, 3-10 yrs duration, some 20+ yr duration)
--- VTIP = +.15% / +.86% (Vanguard Short-Term Infl-Prot Secs ETF)
--- STPZ = +.14% / +.92% (UST, short duration TIPs bonds, PIMCO)
--- LTPZ = +.2% / +7.55% (UST, long duration TIPs bonds, PIMCO)
--- TLT = +.48% / +7.2% (I shares 20+ Yr UST Bond
--- EDV = +1.1% / +9.8% (UST Vanguard extended duration bonds)
--- ZROZ = +1.2 / +10.1% (UST., AAA, long duration zero coupon bonds, PIMCO
--- TBT = -.9% / -13.1% (ProShares UltraShort 20+ Year Treasury (about 23 holdings)
--- TMF = +1.2% / +21% (Direxion Daily 20+ Yr Trsy Bull 3X ETF (about a 3x version of EDV etf)
--- BAGIX = +.2% / +3.23% (active managed, plain vanilla, high quality bond fund)
*** Other, for reference:
--- HYG = -.01% / +3.44% (high yield bonds, proxy ETF)
--- LQD = -.05% / +4.81% (corp. bonds, various quality)
--- FZDXX = 4.28% yield (7 day), Fidelity Premium MMKT fund
*** FZDXX yield was .11%, April,2022. The rate of rise in the yield remained flat again this week, but not decreasing.

Comments and corrections, please.
Remain curious,
Catch