https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/924727/000110465923103126/tm2326678d1_497.htm
FPA U.S. Core Equity Fund
(Ticker: FPPFX)
A series of FPA Funds Trust (the “Trust”)
Supplement dated September 22, 2023 to the
Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”),
each dated June 30, 2023, as amended July 28, 2023.
The Board of Trustees of the Trust has approved a Plan of Liquidation for the FPA U.S. Core Equity Fund (the “Fund”). The Plan of Liquidation authorizes the termination, liquidation and dissolution of the Fund. In order to perform such liquidation, effective September 29, 2023 the Fund is closed to all new investment.
The Fund will be liquidated on or about October 31, 2023 (the “Liquidation Date”), and shareholders may redeem their shares until the Liquidation Date. On or promptly after the Liquidation Date, the Fund will make a liquidating distribution to its remaining shareholders equal to each shareholder’s proportionate interest in the net assets of the Fund, in complete redemption and cancellation of the Fund’s shares held by the shareholder, and the Fund will be dissolved. Any liquidation proceeds paid to a shareholder should generally be treated as received in exchange for shares and will therefore generally give rise to a capital gain or loss depending on the shareholder’s tax basis. Shareholders (including but not limited to shareholders holding shares through tax-deferred accounts) should contact their tax advisers to discuss the income tax consequences of the liquidation. Under certain circumstances, liquidation proceeds may be subject to withholding taxes.
In anticipation of the liquidation of the Fund, First Pacific Advisors, LP, the Fund’s advisor, may manage the Fund in a manner intended to facilitate its orderly liquidation, such as by raising cash or making investments in other highly liquid assets. As a result, during this time, all or a portion of the Fund may not be invested in a manner consistent with its stated investment strategies, which may prevent the Fund from achieving its investment objective.
Please contact the Fund at (800) 982-4372, except from Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands, where you may call collect (310) 473-0225, if you have any questions or need assistance.
Please file this Supplement with your records.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/836906/000168386323006311/f36210d1.htm
From Vanguard:
https://corporate.vanguard.com/content/corporatesite/us/en/corp/who-we-are/pressroom/press-release-vanguard-to-expand-active-fixed-income-lineup-with-launch-of-two-active-bond-etfs-092223.html

@Sven - they're "probably" designed "properly" :-)
Robo (and to a lesser extent hybrid) advisors are designed for simpler situations - asset allocation, growing (or spending down) portfolios, tax loss harvesting, maybe targeting specific goals (amounts/dates when needed). 1% is too high a fee for these "basic plus" services.
The standard assumption is that younger people or people with modest portfolios don't need more sophisticated services (extensive tax planning, estate planning, trusts, etc). It's not a bad assumption but there are many exceptions: wealthy people without heirs just spending down retirement money don't need many services; young working class families dealing with health issues may.

My parent’s generation pays over 1% management fees on top of costly investment vehicles. Robo advisors when designed probably do serve their customers at a reasonable cost.

Many years ago, Fidelity was my 401(k) plan administrator. A planning tool, the Financial Engines was made available in their Net Benefit portal. Here is more information on it.

https://www.edelmanfinancialengines.com/about-us/

The users have the ability to input a number of variables into the model and it generates the probability of outcomes. That model works well with index funds but not so much with active managed funds. Nevertheless, I came to appreciate asset allocation as the most direct factor on long term return. @lynnbolin 2021 also mentioned Financial Engines in a recent post.
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/166992/#Comment_166992
It appears that both Fidelity and Vanguard use some version of the Financial Engines that can accommodates active funds just as index funds. Our Fidelity planning report provides a full picture of our finance before we engage with Vanguard PAS. You are correct that Vanguard cannot legally advise on external funds. Their plan only advises those $ that you direct them to manage. This is a new experience for us working with advisors but being prepared really help to guide the planning discussion accordingly. Unlike Vanguard customer lines that customers complain about, the advisor phone numbers and Secure Messaging are excellent. Again, thank you for sharing.

Well, well, well.
After these 6 names appear here in this article, I suppose you can kiss the opportunity goodbye. People will be lunging at these stocks. High interest rates negatively affecting banks and insurance? Not so, so it says here:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/fed-anticipates-higher-rates-longer-121000821.html
I suppose this sort of piece is what we'd call click-bait. But they ARE making something of a case for the assertion.
WTFC
NECB
OBT
RGA
PRI
RZB

@msf said, Dynamic Cash Flow Tax Plan- Roth IRA Conversion (the sample spreadsheet)

Thank you. That is very insightful to see it on a spreadsheet. These are the next set of questions I was planning to ask Vanguard.
@Observant1, if you are a Fidelity customer, they have a very detail planning tool where you can include all your investment and it generates several outcomes based on future inflation rates and market returns. That is more useful for the customers to see a more complete picture. Higher than average inflation will erode future buying power. Same effect will result from below average market returns.

As a follow-up to their robo-advisor evaluation, M* conducted additional research.
Two hypothetical investor profiles were created.
Only seven of the 20 robo-advisors allow investors to complete risk assessments without registering.
Their sample recommendations varied widely.
Four robo-advisors recommended identical portfolios for both investor profiles.
This was surprising since the investors' time horizons differed by 18 years.
Conclusion
"Robo-advisors have one key purpose: to simplify and automate the investment process.
However, our research underscores the fact that the resulting portfolios often vary.
The upshot is that while robo-investing delivers on its promise to automate the investment process,
investors should still do their own research and make sure they’re comfortable with the recommended
portfolio before signing up with a specific provider."
Not All Robo-Advisors Are Created Equal

@Observant1, thank you for sharing. Great post from all.

@msf
Yep that is the same spreadsheet I saw. How did you get a copy?
I got a bunch of Morningstar reports on their portfolios and am going over them. Will report back as soon as I have finished.
So far for the 65% Equity income oriented portfolio I see that it lost 9% 10/21-9/22.
More later

Selling 1/3 of my bank loan OEF position on the close. Ugly day for credit including for a change the floating rate ETFs. If I am wrong will buy back. If this is the beginning of a correction will sell more. Unlike in the past cash is no longer trash.
Edit. Make that 40%.

@Observant1 - point noted. Though treating the investments as cash seems to conflict with building goal forecasts by scaling the managed portion of your portfolio to your total portfolio size. The former would lead to a lower projected return over the long term. So I'm not quite sure what it is Vanguard is trying to say here. Either way, the M* statement seems to be off.
@Hank - You wrote: "Those recommended age specific equity allocations are fascinating." Fore each age range, there's a different allocation. There's your glidepath. Give yourself credit on the concept, if not the wording.

I don't expect much that is good will happen in the Market until we are into 2025.
*"Mark Baum" in The Big Short.

So there's a chance the biotech ETF I bought at the end of 2021 might come back to life . . . some day? ROFL.
Looks like the CD in my IRA will come in handy when it pays off in October.
Plenty of cash in the taxable to shop with, if I wasn't frolicking in the spondulicks the MM is throwing off.

[snip]
As @Sven noted, Vanguard PAS can incorporate outside investments in its planning. It is one of several robo/hybrid advisors that do this (including the top five in M*'s ranking). See thread on Robo Advisor Evaluation.
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/61501/robo-advisor-evaluation
From the M* report: "Having access to this [external asset] information can help robo-advisor programs provide more accurate advice on savings, asset allocations, and progress toward investment goals."

The dollar values for outside investments were incorporated into the portfolio
but these investments were treated as cash in the current asset mix*.
Consequently, unnecessary and counter-productive trades (with tax consequences)
were suggested to align my Vanguard accounts with the targeted asset allocation.
My understanding is that Vanguard PAS can not provide advice for outside accounts.
I'm certain there are legal reasons for this stance.
I'm ok with not getting advice for outside accounts but believe it would be much better
if these investments¹ were factored into the current asset mix in the beginning.
When we forecast goals that include accounts outside the portfolio (including
Vanguard accounts): They’re based solely on the account balance information
and contribution rates provided to us. For accounts held outside the portfolio,
we’ll assume the asset allocation is the same as our recommended allocation.
Thus, the hypothetical projections and your results will vary. You might consider
adjusting the asset mix of accounts outside the portfolio to our recommended
mix. This recommendation assumes the objectives of those accounts are the
same as your portfolio accounts.
* Edit: Outside investments were assumed to be allocated according to the plan (60/40 in this case)
when goals were forecast. However, outside investments were entirely ignored in the current asset mix.
This would result in unnecessary and senseless trading to align my portfolio with the target asset allocation.
¹ A list of all outside investments was provided.

I just got off the call with this guy [at Wealth Enhancement Group]. I was generally impressed. ( While he was not calling form his yacht, he was calling from second home in Maine!) They have a model which will calculate Roth Conversions and expected taxes with breakeven points ( Example says 2040!). Assumes 5% return in taxable and 7% in Roth

Is this the example you were shown?
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ed7df046f291c4a9e5546fc/t/63ffc63f2a2d1c36743d9803/1677706815803/Sample+Roth+Conversions+DCFI+-+2023_with+notes+-+JH.pdf

They will do financial plan free of any fees, but of course want to manage your money. The fee is fairly reasonable at 1% for first 1,000,000 up to 0.7% over 5,000,000, so in line with most firms that do portfolio management only, and a bit higher than many mutual funds.

That is certainly in line with the industry:

From: https://www.advisoryhq.com/articles/financial-advisor-fees-wealth-managers-planners-and-fee-only-advisors/
Comparison of types of services and typical fees:
https://smartasset.com/financial-advisor/financial-advisor-cost
Fees do depend on what you get. I was just looking at someone's Separately Managed Account (SMA) portfolio with a couple of hundred large cap stocks (with little S&P 500 overlap). Real portfolio, outperformed the S&P 500 net of fees since owned (about 2.5 years), fees closer to 1/2% than to 1% (well under $1M in assets). Would perform tax harvesting except it is in an IRA. Don't know about other services included.

I agree the Vanguard info is pretty comprehensive, but to me it is predictably Vanguard, ie 60/40, 20% International, tax loss harvesting. Not sure that is worth their fees which I think are 0.3% correct ?

As @hank observed, Vanguard builds a glidepath. I noted in the Robo advisor thread that per M* this is unusual for low cost (i.e. robo) advisors. Also note that that 20% international is out of 60% stock, i.e. 1/3 of equity is foreign. Vanguard, being enthusiastic about matching market attributes, observes that 40% of the equity market is abroad.
Vanguard Digital Advisor costs 20 basis points all in, or 15 basis points excluding underlying fund expenses. One adds another 15 basis points (30 basis points excluding underlying expenses) in order to get human attention and financial planning. More services, higher fees.
https://investor.vanguard.com/advice/compare-investment-advice#comparison-chart

Those suggested allocations for VG PAS in 60s & 70s (60-40), early-80s (55-45), late-80s & beyond (50-50) are much higher than those for target-date funds (TDFs), including Vanguard TDFs. Of course, the questionnaire for PAS determined the specifics.
Most TDFs have 50-50 in 60s (retirement age) and then flatten out to 20-80/40-60 over several years. TDFs also have issues. But I am just noticing the huge discrepancy between the VG PAS recommendations and TDFs.

Vanguard has defined five risk levels for asset allocation schedules:
very conservative, conservative, moderate, aggressive, very aggressive.
The asset allocation schedule suggested in my plan is considered aggressive.
For some context, two 2025 target-date fund portfolios (08/31/2023) are listed below.
VTTVX
U.S. Stock: 32.60%
Intl. Stock: 22.00%
U.S. Bond: 28.30%
Intl. Bond: 12.40%
Short-Term TIPS: 4.70%
TRRHX
U.S. Stock: 38.39%
Intl. Stock: 17.58%
U.S. Bond: 26.18%
Intl. Bond: 9.75%
Cash: 4.80%
Other: 2.66%
Convertibles: 0.42%
Preferred Stock: 0.22%
The glide path in my plan differs from target-date fund glide paths.
Equity allocation is 60% until age 80, 55% from ages 80 - 85, and 50% from ages 85 - 100.
I was surprised by the relatively high equity allocation beyond age 80.
Perhaps a more conventional glide path exists for conservative or moderate asset allocation schedules?

@sma3 stated:
For this you get the plan, quarterly reviews, tax planning etc. Their "value dividend growth " portfolio has returned 12% net of fees since 2007, pays 3% and lost only 7% in 2022. They also have a growth portfolio, and buy individual bonds for income. They have on site CFA, CFPs, tax lawyers estate planners etc.
In the "value dividend growth" portfolio 12% net of fees since 2007 figure above provided by the Wealth Enhancement Group, do they compare this portfolio to what index? Is their portfolio earning 13% since 2007 for a little more than 15+ years (ie, 12% net of fee + 1% advisor fee)? I'm curious as it appears they are earning equal to S&P 500 index returns or possible better with lower risk profile.

Those recommended age specific equity allocations are fascinating. Sound about right for disciplined really long-term oriented investors. A lot of us (self included) may have a hard time “shutting our eyes” and letting those long-term investments play out. To some extent, that may be a characteristic of those who frequent investment forums or follow markets closely (eyes always wide open).
Not sure if covered above, but fairly certain those recommendations are aside from a hefty stash of cash / short term investments for emergencies or to ride out an equity bear market. Pretty much goes without saying …
Thanks to @Observant1 and others who have contributed to this thread.

Having a more complete portfolio picture helped in our planning. Remember, the initial plan is merely a proposal. The clients need to review it thoroughly and make adjustments (asset allocation (risk tolerance), investment vehicles, and % active vs. % passive). We have VG to manage part of several IRA accounts for us with the objective of capital appreciation (the third bucket). We manage the other half for generating income (first and second buckets).
As @lynnbolin21 said earlier there is an element of "leap of faith" when using financial advisor. This is new to us so we take it slow. Our ultimate goal is to have a human advisor to help manage our retirement funds if and when I can no longer able to manage it.
On Vanguard site, there is other links on the bottom that have many useful information on financial planning and templates for their advisors.
https://advisors.vanguard.com/advisors-home
I found particularly informative is under the "Advisor's Alpha®" tab where it goes into Advisor's Alpha® overview, Investors' view on advice, and Behavioral coaching. On the Wealth Management tab, it goes into useful tools for Health Care Cost Estimator, Intergenerational wealth, and Roth Conversion Calculator.
I believe sharing these information is helpful for everyone's planning in the future.