The company's news release:
https://www.radiusrecycling.com/company/investors/news-release-details/22391

+1.

Oh, well .....
https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/moodys-downgrades-10-us-banks-warns-possible-cuts-others-2023-08-08/

Using Schwab as my source of CD rate data it seems as though a plateau may have been reached. Since July 10 rates have been essentially flat. I don’t think that these rates will last well into 2024. Now may be the time to lock in for longer.

My "guess"--I am expecting shorter term CD rates to rise a little more as we move through the rest of August. I am not expecting any major changes for the remainder of 2023. I am expecting 2024 to be flat to slightly lower for both shorter and longer term periods. I still think there is a chance for one more small rate hike this year, but we are moving into election season, and I just don't see the Feds doing anything signficant during the election period

Using Schwab as my source of CD rate data it seems as though a plateau may have been reached. Since July 10 rates have been essentially flat. I don’t think that these rates will last well into 2024. Now may be the time to lock in for longer.

Try CRV and then Accord will feel like a sports car. Now we have CRV and RDX. We have been a Honda/Acura family for many years.

+1 on Acura. After a decade of German engineering, I just bought my second MDX last month, actually ... luxury Honda engineering with fantastic AWD capabilities. And massaging seats, too. :)

Important point:
investors who trade directly with T. Rowe Price can open new accounts in the funds.
Don't look for these funds to be open via brokerages.

+1 @msf
I held PRHYX many years. When they announced the fund’s (second) closing over a decade ago, I sold 100%, believing they knew something I didn’t. I really thought it would reopen within a year or two after it had suffered a loss. Oops - it kept going strong, and they never did reopen it until now. At this stage of my life. I’ve got enough ”irons in the fire”. Somebody else can buy it now.
Smart move by TRP. Obviously they’re trying to retain existing or draw in new direct investors.
And nice catch by @msf to notice the limitation!

Just purchased a 6 figure CD for my IRA, paying 5.2%, over an 18 month term--my first CD with a Maturity Date in 2025. I have 3 more CDs maturing in 2023, and 9 CDs maturing in 2024. When these remaining CDs mature, I will seriously consider buying replacement CDs, if they are paying 5+%. If CD rates start tanking before my remaining CDs mature, I will have to carefully evaluate my options at that point in time. "Making a lot more money in bonds than CDs" is not very important to me, as long as CDs pay a rate I consider attractive. Low risk and low stress are very important to me in retirement, but I do prefer at least a 4% to 6% TR, to replace RMD distributions, and I will look for the lowest risk investment options to meet that objective.

So my question is: why would you prefer to own bond funds to a longer term CD when rates are falling?

You changed what we are talking about. We were discussing shorter-term CD that matures in 3-6-12 months. I already posted that 3-5 years CD makes more sense because rates will fall in months to come, and the 3-5 years CDs will pay more months after that. Why would you sell these longer-term CDs? Usually, CD holders hold to the end + they pay a penalty if they sell early.
MM and Mutual funds give me a lot more flexibility. Investors who bought CD months ago are paid less than MM today. But again, the difference is peanuts in performance.
When rates start going down, my longer term funds will make more money in weeks-months.
Basically for me, when CD pays close to MM, I would never go with CD because CD has more constraints.
If rates are stabilized my bond funds will definitely make more money. Sure, bond funds are riskier, but I can make a lot more too. When markets turn around, you can make several % in funds within weeks. I call it the big money.
Example: look at a chart of 10 years treasury (https://schrts.co/YZrChyJi)
Now look at ORNAX(https://schrts.co/RarenBFS). See how nicely ORNAX made on 11/2022, 01/2023, 03/2023.
But, if someone just wants to make 5%, then CDs are OK, but inflation is still high. I want to make 3% above inflation. It's all correlated. Inflation is lower, CD pays lower.
CDs can't compensate you enough after inflation and why 3-5 years CDS may be a better choice if inflation goes to 3%.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/754915/000174177323002524/c497k.htm
497K 1 c497k.htm
T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund
T. Rowe Price Institutional High Yield Fund
Supplement to Prospectuses and Summary Prospectuses dated October 1, 2022
T. Rowe Price International Discovery Fund
Supplement to Prospectus and Summary Prospectus dated March 1, 2023
Effective September 1, 2023, the funds will resume accepting new accounts and purchases from most investors who invest directly with T. Rowe Price.
Accordingly, effective September 1, 2023, the first sentence under “Purchase and Sale of Fund Shares” in each summary prospectus and section 1 of each prospectus is deleted in its entirety. In addition, the section entitled “Closed to New Investors” in Section 2 of the prospectus is deleted in its entirety.
The date of this supplement is August 7, 2023.
G49-041 8/7/23
Recent email I received:
T. Rowe Price Log in to your account T. Rowe Price
Fund Name Ticker CUSIP
T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund — Investor Class PRHYX 741481105
T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund — I Class PRHIX 741481303
T. Rowe Price International Discovery Fund — Investor Class PRIDX 77956H302
T. Rowe Price International Discovery Fund — I Class TIDDX 77956H377
Dear Client,
We’re writing to inform you that effective September 1, 2023, the purchase restrictions on the T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund and the T. Rowe Price International Discovery Fund will be removed. As a result of this change, investors who trade directly with T. Rowe Price can open new accounts in the funds.
The fund(s) had previously been restricted for all investors over concerns that significant cash flows could make it difficult to identify securities that fit our investment process. In addition to this, market conditions have changed, and following a thorough review of net inflows and other factors related to the strategy, we believe that we can accommodate controlled asset growth over time.
Thank you for investing with T. Rowe Price. If you have any questions about these changes, please contact us.
For more information, please download a prospectus for the T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund and T. Rowe Price International Discovery Fund.
All funds are subject to market risk including possible loss of principal.
This communication does not undertake to give investment advice in a fiduciary capacity. T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc., and/or its affiliates receive revenue from T. Rowe Price investment products and services.
This email may be considered advertising under federal law.

@wabac,
You raised good points. A portfolio can have several goals. Performance is always important. But, I also think that risk-adjusted performance is more important, at least for me, and that can be measured by the Sharpe ratio.
The following are several simple measurements I set for myself
1) My stock portion must beat the easiest most common index VOO/VTI. If I don't beat it, my stock portion must have a better risk-adjusted performance.
2) My bond portion should beat good bond funds, starting with BND and DODIX.
3) If I have 50/50, must beat W+W (Wellington, Wellesley)
4) For a conservative portfolio, must beat Wellesley.
The above is just a start, a minimum. I also know about great funds over the years, such as PRWCX and PIMIX.
I'm very critical of my own portfolio. It's all data-driven. No excuses are allowed. It doesn't matter if you use 3 or 10-15 funds, or how you do it.
Suppose I want to set up an easy buy and hold portfolio for a retiree, see below 2 real-life examples.
1) In order to make my wife's investment decisions easier, I set up a written plan for her to invest in only 3 funds. I only trust 2 choices indexes + Vanguard funds managed by Wellington. Wellington Management is the oldest, it's conservative, team style, and not one dominant manager, with a very cheap expense ratio. Since our money isn't with Vanguard, we would have to own the more expensive funds(not Admiral), but it's still cheap.
For a younger age, until age 70-75 and still having a taxable account...45% VWINX...25% VWAHX(HY Muni)...30% VSMGX. Because of HY Muni bonds which are hybrid, this portfolio is more like 40/60
Older than 70-75 or taxable account is gone: 40% VWINX(40/60)...30% VWEHX(HY Corp)...30% VSMGX(60/40). Because of HY Corp bonds which are hybrid, this portfolio is more like 45/55.
2) An older relative retired around 2002 and told me he saw several financial advisors and they want to charge him 1% and he really doesn't trust any of them. Markets are volatile and he wants a stable LT simple portfolio and all his money is at Vanguard. Based on the amount of money he had, he needed about 3.5% yearly withdrawal and wants a conservative portfolio. I told him he can be in just 35-40% stocks and the rest bond and to invest in just 2 funds VWIAX+VCCGX. If he needs more money, just sell shares from both funds at equal amount of money. Just keep several thousands in the bank, use your SS and distributions from these 2 funds and if you require more just sell shares from both at 70/30 (VWIAX+VCCGX).
In the first 10-15 years, this guy called me every 2-3 years and thanked me how I saved him so much money and how it works well.
Below are the results(link)including 3.5% annual withdrawal, and they show that KISS investing and spending worked very well. This portfolio was able to support the 3.5% and grow at 6% (including the 3.5% withdrawal).

Not too long ago we were all talking in a thread about "the market" going sideways for a decade, or more.
Now we're being told that we should all invest in the 500, like Buffet "advises" his wife to do when he dies. Which sort of misses the point that she is likely to inherit a crap-ton of Berkshire shares, and heaven knows what else. Who is going to tell her to sell all that so she can plunk it all down on the 500?
Well. I don't have those resources. Sometimes the goal of investing is not to "beat the market" but to preserve capital that can be put to work to sustain a certain level of comfort in retirement.
As the man said after he fell from the roof:

@FD1000 So what? Just because investors can do this, that or the other thing doesn't mean they will. No matter how hard you try to convince them, they will do what they feel most comfortable with no matter what evidence you provide to the contrary.
Want proof? Look at the current leading presidential candidate for the Republican Party.

It's just an opinion, as much as yours. We are just anonymous posters. Anyone should do what is good for them and when they do it they should use due diligence.
What Trump has to do anything with our discussion? Why bring politics into an investment site when our country is divided?

Diversification doesn't guarantee better performance or better risk/SD or better risk-adjusted performance. Being in 10 funds isn't necessarily better than 2 funds. I could be wrong but I can't find any research that proves that more funds are a better choice, no matter the age and goals.
Having 10 accounts isn't an excuse to own more funds than 5 accounts, because I use the same funds in different accounts.
There are many ways to Rome. I have learned and changed over the years. I never believed in a static style no matter what.
I also learned and love the exceptions to many rules and used some of these funds over the years. These funds are unique and scarce. 2 easy ones have been PRWCX+PIMIX. Many don't comfortable investing a big % in one fund, I'm not one of them.
But, many investors can benefit by using a simple portfolio with just several funds and hardly doing anything and avoiding common mistakes. Here are several examples: https://www.marketwatch.com/lazyportfolio%20

I’ve heard it said, and agree, that diversification is a risk management strategy— not a way to achieve high performance. Face it, nobody really knows which markets or sectors will perform better or worse in the future. By diversifying, you are covering more bases. So, you’ll avoid being over exposed in poor performing area while capturing the better performing ones.
Almost certainly, you can achieve better performance by focusing on only a few areas — if you are skilled or lucky enough to pick the right ones. Not many investors are successful at this approach, which is why most investment advisers will tell people to diversify, diversify, diversify. Another key to this approach is to buy and hold your investments long term. If you are forever chasing winners and selling losers, you stand a good chance of hurting your overall performance. Of course, some investors are better at picking winners and selling losers, and others have a penchant for picking losers and selling winners.
Buffet’s advice about the S&P is sound, but certainly looks better after the past 15 years. However, there have been periods (eg, 2000-2010) when the S&P did not perform well and you would have greatly improved your overall performance by owning other asset classes, such as foreign stocks, small caps, REITs, etc. For that reason, I prefer total market index funds.

@dtconroe: thanks for your very clearly expounded review of your situation and how your current portfolio evolved from something quite different from what you are holding/managing today. I had forgotten what you reported doing to your portfolio last year. I think you did exceedingly well to preserve your capital; wouldst that I had done the same instead of screwing around with the likes of REMIX. You could have a second career as a market timer!!
You are absolutely right to point out that individual circumstances vary so much that what one member may be doing can have little relevance to what another does. I can leave my TIAA portfolio for passive accumulation, the result of generous employer and my belated contributions over a 42-year career. Our Roths and joint brokerage accounts, OTOH, I can afford to manage as actively as I choose to, even at the age of 81. Our Honda Accord hybrid gets better mileage than what I get out of my hands-on approach to investing, if you don't mind a mixed metaphor. The Accord rarely offers thrilling acceleration while my occasional pedal-to-the-metal aggressive buys might produce squat. The Accord, however always provides a smooth ride.

@FD - Personal offense? None. But thanks. I appreciate the sentiment.
From your latest linked article - Why Average Investors Earn Below-Average Market Returns :
“Investor behavior is illogical and often based on emotion. That does not lead to wise long-term investing decisions.”
Yes. That’s pretty widely known and has been discussed here before. But it says nothing regarding your earlier (unsupported) assertion, “I have seen a lot more investors who lag the market when they own more funds, I mean over 5-7 funds.”
In addition to the obvious disconnect between what you asserted earlier and what your linked article says, let’s recognize a few relevant facts.
- “Average investors” includes all those with workplace defined contribution plans. That’s a lot of people who may have little or no investment interest or experience. And it includes all ages, from young adults buying their first home to folks with 50+ years investing experience. Lately, too, it has come to include the thrill-seeking “meme” crowd with little regard for fundamentals. All these and more fall within the realm of ”average investor”.
- “Average investors” don’t frequent investment forums like this one. Can’t speak for wherever else you’ve been, but this community represents a select slice of the investing public. Participants possess above average intelligence, are well read and highly motivated. Some have professional backgrounds in finance or financial journalism.
- To your initial assertion about number of funds … . I will contend that 8-10 high quality funds along the lines of PRWCX or JHQAX should perform as well on average as 1 or 2 equally high quality ones. The number of funds alone does not determine whether one “beats the index.” The overall quality of those holdings may.
- Indexes carry no cash reserve as funds do. So they have a built-in advantage actively managed portfolios do not possess.. “Tit-for-tat” active will underperform an index.
- Not all investors want to track or match the S&P’s performance. Some of us are pleased we didn’t lose 18% last year. We’ll sacrifice some future return if it means avoiding such dramatic 1-year losses.
- Your criticism of owning more than 5-7 funds misses the point that many investors manage several portfolios. I have a Roth, Traditional IRA, and Taxable account. Each is viewed in a different time-frame and tax perspective. Some have long-term portfolios, mid-range ones and short term investments for more immediate needs. Some manage for a spouse. Some have limited-option workplace plans - plus other outside investments.
Thanks for the linked article. But, since it contained nothing I didn’t already know, I checked the “not helpful” box at the end.

I am probably the worse investor at MFO. My ignorance/incompetence is, or should be, notorious. Yet I am among the "perfect". My before RMD is more than sufficient so RMD (before tax) amount gets reinvested. I have no debt. So far, at age 74, I am independent with a little help from the delivery guys who I compensate handsomely. So, yes, right now, I am perfect. But, maybe, not by anyone else's definition.

IMO there is no 'perfect' investing strategy or style. Everyone has their own tolerances, pain points, goals, and desires. I for one don't care if I keep pace with the SPX or 'only' make 9% per year while not worrying and still sleeping well at night. If I lose less than the SPX in a down period, I'll still sleep well even if I'm in the red for a bit. By contrast, some people (mainly institutions needing bragging rights and TV-trading retail traders) feel like failures if they don't track or beat the market and lie awake with each 2% down-wiggle in the index. Each to our own.
(I've said the same thing, or variants of this for years in active trading forums/chats ... there is no 'Holy Grail' technical indicator that's always perfect, just like there's no one investing strategy/tactic that works 100% of the time w/o losses.)
It's also why I don't like index funds. You track 'the market' but many times, like now, the 'market' returns are really only from the top 5-10 names. So if I was looking, I'd just own them and avoid the drag.

analysis
buying / buyer weakness
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1687834445259194368.html

I know Mr. Snowball is travelling overseas on vacation, but will there be an August Commentary?