@FD100 - Have you ever mentioned “trend following” by name in any of your previous posts or recommended the best current trends to chase follow for the benefit of members who read you?
There are successful trend following funds. I have 5-6% so invested . Why anyone would put “all their eggs” in that one basket escapes me. Waiting for a Wiley Coyote moment? Trend following (managed futures) funds invest in a diverse mix of equities, bonds, currencies, commodities, metals, real estate and more. It’s doubtful that whatever you are doing is comparable to what they do.

Junkster: What is your point on EGRIX. More ancient history. As recently as this year you said on the other board it wasn’t a fund “for a conservative investor like me”.
FD: You are correct. I said the above in March 2025. Then, bonds lost and then recovered. You just forgot to say that later I posted that I bought EGRIX. When things change, I change too.
=========
Disclaimer: I owned EGRIX earlier in 2025, and now I have owned EIGMX for several months.
=========
"You are describing classic performance chasing"
FD: Absolutely, but I call it trend following. The idea is to catch the trend early, to sell everything to MM when risk is very high, and to switch for better-performing funds.

Heather Cox Richardson from Letters from an American, November 16, 2025
"In Lincoln’s day, and in the Gilded Age, and in the 1930s, Americans pushed back against those trying to establish an aristocracy in the United States. That project appears to be gaining speed as well in today’s America, where the rich and powerful are increasingly operating in cryptocurrencies and avoiding accountability, but where a majority of people would prefer to live in a world where a child does not have to sell her body to older men in order to save enough money to get braces on her teeth."
(Bolding of text added)

M* AI writeups of pillars are IMHO next to useless. For process, when done by human beings ...

Analysts look for strategies with a process distinctive enough to generate standout results in the future. More specifically, analysts seek to understand:

• The investment philosophy that underpins the strategy;
  
• The key “edge” of the process as executed by the manager;
  
• Elements that are systematic and repeatable, if any;
  
• The fit of the process with the resources backing the strategy and with the size of the asset base tied to the strategy (including all vehicles across all domiciles);
  
• Whether the process has been consistently applied, as demonstrated by the composition of the portfolio over time;
  
• The risks entailed in the process, from a portfolio-bias point of view and from an ability-to-execute point of view;
  
• The managers’ approach to risk management

https://s21.q4cdn.com/198919461/files/doc_downloads/2024/05/Morningstar-Medalist-Rating-Methodology-Effective-28-May-2024.pdf
The AI writeup above reflects none of this. Nor does any of this reasoning go into how the AI tool calculates the pillar rating.

Attempting to mechanically automate a thought process introduces tremendous complexity, so [Morningstar] opted to build a model that replicates the output of an analyst as faithfully as possible.

https://www.morningstar.com/content/dam/marketing/shared/research/methodology/813568-QuantRatingForFundsMethodolgy.pdf
IOW what you've got for the EGRIX pillar is a retrospective performance analysis, i.e. a star rating. Unlike the Wizard of Oz, there's no intelligent thought behind this curtain.

Eaton Vance Glbl Macro Abs Ret Advtg Fd [EGRIX] earns an Above Average Process Pillar rating from Morningstar.
"The leading factor in the rating is the fund's strong long-term risk-adjusted performance. This can be seen in its five-year alpha calculated relative to the category index, which suggests that the managers have shown skill in their allocation of risk. The parent firm's excellent risk-adjusted performance, as shown by its average 10-year Morningstar Rating of 3.3 stars, also influences the rating."
They go on to note 'Average' People and Parent Pillars. Overall a 5 star fund with a Morningstar Medalist Rating of Neutral. Full disclosure, I own EGRIX.

Thought a couple might be of interest to some. Pay walls stop me from seeing them directly.
10 Reads

Just updated all ratings to MFO Premium site, using Refinitiv data drop through Friday, 14 November 2025. Monthly flow tools updated through October and the daily FLOW tool updated through Friday.

EGRIX imo is much riskier than a plain vanilla bond fund due to it's strategy -- long/short, lotsa macro calls, frontier market holdings, FX risk, etc..
It has performed really well with an amazingly low SD with the falling dollar as a tailwind. But that outperformance go forward isn’t pre-ordained. I am a happy holder with a single digit position.

I don't invest based on the future, only based on what works lately.
When market conditions change, I change my funds.
In 2022, BND and many "safe" bond funds were pretty bad.
In the last 15 years, the super safe fund BND made just 2.2% annually which is a dismal performance.
I never diversified.
EGRIX did well in the last 5 years regardless of the dollar.

What is your point on EGRIX. More ancient history. As recently as this year you said on the other board it wasn’t a fund “for a conservative investor like me”.

EGRIX imo is much riskier than a plain vanilla bond fund due to it's strategy -- long/short, lotsa macro calls, frontier market holdings, FX risk, etc..
It has performed really well with an amazingly low SD with the falling dollar as a tailwind. But that outperformance go forward isn’t pre-ordained. I am a happy holder with a single digit position.

I don't invest based on the future, only based on what works lately.
When market conditions change, I change my funds.
In 2022, BND and many "safe" bond funds were pretty bad.
In the last 15 years, the super safe fund BND made just 2.2% annually which is a dismal performance.
I never diversified.
EGRIX did well in the last 5 years regardless of the dollar.

This subject came up in another thread a couple of weeks ago:

Fidelity (and Schwab and ...) provide individual investors the same opportunity to generate income. This page describes both how to set that up at Fidelity and more broadly the risks and benefits of security lending.
https://www.fidelity.com/trading/fully-paid-lending

As touched on in that thread, security lending is often used by mutual funds to boost returns. Here's a Vanguard page showing "the value of securities lending" by index funds.
https://corporate.vanguard.com/content/corporatesite/us/en/corp/articles/value-securities-lending-three-charts.html
Vanguard's lending policy for its funds is to lend those securities can charge the highest rates (see second graph) - maximizing reward/risk. Something to keep in mind when lending your own securities.
Securities lending involves multiple moving parts—the lender (you), the borrower, a lending agent sitting between the two, collateral management and more. The main risk is that the borrower defaults, and the collateral isn’t enough to make you whole."
More or less. Here's a more complete description about how Apex Clearing (the clearing house that Public Investing, a trading platform, uses) manages its fully paid lending program.

The principal risk in any securities lending transaction is counterparty default. When your shares are loaned out, Apex is technically the borrower and your counterparty. [With Vanguard, the borrower is Vanguard Brokerage.] ...
When Apex loans out your shares, it is required by law to post collateral (cash or cash equivalents) with value equal to at least 100% of the market value of the loaned securities. To reflect changes in the value of your loaned securities, Apex marks-to-market your loaned securities on a daily basis. [This means that on a daily basis, Apex, or Vanguard, must put up enough cash as collateral to cover the current security value.]

https://help.public.com/en/articles/7959466-what-is-fully-paid-securities-lending
So in the very unlikely event that Vanguard Brokerage defaults, the collateral will be sufficient to cover the value of the loaned security up to the day of default. What is at risk is just any appreciation of the security post default.
Perhaps more important is the split of income. IVA says that with Vanguard it is 50/50. According to Barron's (April 24, 2025), Fidelity is 60/40, Interactive Brokers and Schwab are 50/50, and Robinhood is 15/85.
https://www.barrons.com/articles/easy-income-securities-lending-3472fac5
If you lend out securities, you receive "cash in lieu" of dividends. Since you're not actually receiving dividends, that income doesn't meet the "qualified dividend" requirement for special tax treatment. Barron's goes on to say that investors typically close out the loan before the record date so that they receive "true" tax-favored divs.

Thank you. Good interview. Joe Davis has released a new book, Coming Into View. .
="https://corporate.vanguard.com/content/corporatesite/us/en/corp/who-we-are/pressroom/press-release-new-book-coming-into-view-how-ai-and-other-megatrends-will-shape-your-investments-052125.html">https://corporate.vanguard.com/content/corporatesite/us/en/corp/who-we-are/pressroom/press-release-new-book-coming-into-view-how-ai-and-other-megatrends-will-shape-your-investments-052125.html
https://www.amazon.com/Coming-into-View-Megatrends-Investments/dp/139435908X

If I could find a 1X inverse gold / miners or p/m fund I’d own a small hold. Unfortunately, they are all 2X and 3X. I have followed the metal since 1977 - being in and out several times. Simply do not understand the extreme run-up the past couple years. Mining funds lost 60-70% over only 2-3 years during the metal’s last significant bear market. OTHO, Bill Fleckenstein, who recommended gold early (about 5 years ago), sees it going still higher as the “retail crowd” warms up to it.
From BRAVE’s AI: “2015 was another extremely difficult year, marking the end of a prolonged bear market that began after 2011. By late 2015, the HUI gold miners index had plummeted 85% from its peak.”
Watching NLSAX, favorably mentioned this month on Charles Lynn Bolin’s “low ulcer” list, should valuations improve.

am surprised no one has referred to this meb faber podcast.
with a unique dynamic data set (which i am certain vanguard can afford), joe davis made some bold assertions :
the american economy will have a binary outcome, far outside smoothed averages :
a. tech will lead to record gdp (~40% ?)
b. there will be a major durable recession (~35% ?)
c. economy remains within expected deviation of norms (~25% ?)
ok, here comes the crazy part.
to best survive , he suggests a bond-heavy portfolio. i suspect all the demons from hell are in the details and execution.
https://www.themebfabershow.com/episodes/XFOyfF1UqKf

FD, how something 'did' is not an accurate indication of its level of risk. Similarly, recent results are reflected in every one of those 1-3-5 year results. Rolling returns would be a better metric, imo. It's a data point, certainly, but I continue to think that you have a tendency to equate 'risk' with short-term results, and I don't think the two are reliably linked.

EGRIX imo is a better bond alt than QDISX. But certainly still a lot riskier than a straight bond fund. One has to have very high faith in manager capabilities.

Where is the risk?
In the last 1-3-5 years EGRIX did better than "safe" funds such as DODIX,BND.
See chart
https://schrts.co/zdsBuVQk

OP article explains AMT taxes. Another tax avoidance tactic is explained in this additional NYT article (see below) focuses on how (Limited Partnerships) help individuals avoid taxes.
Biden and Dr Oz chose this route recently:

Before he became president, Joseph R. Biden Jr. avoided paying Medicare taxes by funneling earnings from his book and speeches through two S corporations, according to his tax returns. Dr. Mehmet Oz, who leads Medicare and Medicaid, avoided self-employment taxes on income he collected through an L.L.C. between 2021 and 2023, according to a memorandum prepared by Senate Democratic staff members who reviewed his tax returns.

....
NYT Article:
scott-bessent-irs-loophole

So are you thinking this is not well beyond that??

Backdoor Roth is only for $7K / $8k new contributions in 2025, $7.5K / $8.6K in 2026. That too requires clean T-IRA (i.e. without deductible/pretax contributions).
But to reduce future RMDs, consider QCDs from T-IRA and regular Roth Conversions from T-IRA and/or 401k/403b.
Hardly anyone uses MRD now. The standard usage now is RMD.

Ah yes, I meant regular Roth conversions. Thanks.

Except for gasoline prices which have likely been held stable by the adaption of hybrid and electric vehicles, Trump has little to brag about on the price front. Traveling and arriving late at a Michigan hotel several days ago I called about having pizza delivered. The first place quoted a lowest price of “about $40”. Another filled the order for $27 plus a generous tip. Don’t eat pizza much. But can $50 be far away?

RMDs, I'm sure you intended. Those are gonna hurt, but the $$$ can be reinvested in taxable. 2 more years to age 73. Born in '54. No escaping it. Death, taxes, winter. Well, not much winter here. Sometimes, however....

Yeah. Minimum required distributions. :D
Whatever they're called, it won't be a giant event for us.

I bought some PMFYX last month at Schwab where it is NTF.

Nice. :)
I would love to get it for that expense ratio. But I did duck the load at Fido. It's also NTF, and one could get in for $2500.