How the index SCHD tracks works:
https://indexologyblog.com/2023/01/20/the-dow-jones-dividend-100-indices-part-1-a-focus-on-dividend-sustainability-and-quality/
And this provides further useful analysis of the index as it stands today:
https://indexologyblog.com/2023/01/24/the-dow-jones-dividend-100-indices-part-2-strong-fundamentals-and-the-benefits-of-diversification/

@Davidrmoran. +1. Having first invested in SCHD in 2012, it has ultimately become my entire equity position. I have been retired since 2019 and have a conservative asset allocation. I question the appropriateness of a single holding all the time but it works for me. And it leaves me lots of time to play with the other 70% of the portfolio.

Over the long term they do slightly better than FXAIX
Do they do any better, or are you just looking relative to a particular moment in time (i.e. now)? Comparing their three year rolling cumulative returns by calendar years (e.g. Jan 2019-Dec 2021), the figures (from M* charts) are:

     2020-2022  '19-'21	'18-'20	'17-'19	'16-'18	'15-'17	'14-'16	'13-'15	'12-'14	'11-'13
FXAIX	24.75%	100.32%	 48.80%	 53.10%	 30.38%	 38.28%	 29.02%	 52.54%	 74.51%	 56.77% 
SCHD	44.56%	 90.14%	 38.51%	 45.45%	 32.84%	 40.22%	 29.53%	 48.09%	 65.32%	 56.42%
CDC	38.27%	 78.90%	 27.03%	 30.48%	 31.78%	 38.76%	   -	   -	   -	   -

Over its lifetime (July 1, 2014 through Feb 10, 2023), CDC has done slightly worse than FXAIX, returning a cumulative 138.04% vs FXAIX's 143.78%.
More importantly, all the cumulative figures ending Dec 31, 2022 are significantly skewed by FXAIX's sizeable underperformance in 2022 relative to the other funds: -18.13% vs -3.23% (SCHD) or -7.76% (CDC). (FXAIX has done better so far this year.)
I'm not knocking any of these funds, and I can certainly see the point in suggesting dividend oriented funds to someone who has been focused on cash returns. It's just that there's a tendency for people to look at "what have you done for me lately" even when trying not to - sometimes it's baked into the numbers.

For true buy & hold types, the argument for SCHD over SP500 is clear: SCHD has nontrivially outperformed 10/5/3/1y. (A flip occurred 4mos ago.) For those who fancy themselves slightly more conservative or at least 'non-volatilist', a second argument for SCHD is clear. For preservation Lipper gives SCHD 5* and FXAIX/IVV 4*. MFOP gives Great Owl status to both (interestingly, FXAIX/IVV is on the honor roll too, and not SCHD) but shows SCHD's UI to be ~50%-75% of SP500, depending on time period.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1217286/000119312523034416/d445231d497.htm
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/763852/000119312523034417/0001193125-23-034417-index.htm
Affected funds:
JPMorgan High Yield Municipal Fund
JPMorgan Sustainable Municipal Income Fund
JPMorgan Equity Focus Fund
JPMorgan Limited Duration Bond Fund

Update 2/12/23. New links for TIAA/CREF VA Charts
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/932/thread
CREF VAs have classes R1 [highest ERs], R2, R3 [lowest ERs] since 4/1/15. Old single-class VAs had ERs similar to the new R2 class. TIAA has also populated the old/non-existing histories of newer classes with those for the older single-classes. TIAA T-REA remains a single class VA.
Links for CREF VAs, R3 classes and T-REA.
CREF Bond Market R3 QCBMIX
CREF Equity Index R3 QCEQIX
CREF Global Equity R3 QCGLIX
CREF Growth R3 QCGRIX
CREF ILB R3 QCILIX
CREF Social Choice R3 QCSCIX
CREF Stock R3 QCSTIX
TIAA Real Estate Account (T-REA) QREARX
The Q-symbols for CREF VA classes differ only in the 5th place: R1 has R, R2 has P, R3 has I. So, the charts for R1 and R2 classes can be created from the corresponding R3 class charts by simply adjusting the Q-symbols in the URL. See the following example for the CREF Stock.
QCSTRX https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/QCSTRX/chart
QCSTPX https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/QCSTPX/chart
QCSTIX https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/QCSTIX/chart
I have tested these links in M* LOGOFF mode too, so they should work for everybody.

I guess I could try switching to physical NYT and Washington Post but the amount of paper we would have to take to the landfill weekly is overwhelming

It's not like the old days, when a Sunday paper could clock in at 12 pounds. These days it seems that I can fold the entire Sunday NYTimes.
https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/heaviest-ever-newspaper
With the rapid rise in print edition costs (about 25% cumulative over the past two years), I've trimmed back to just the (ever lighter) Sunday paper. It is delivered in two parts (Saturday for fill sections, Sunday for news), so I still get to touch a paper for the whole weekend.

2013 -48.83%
2014 -15.39%
2015 -23.14%

There's a typo. It should be -47.83%.

Your cynicism is not unjustified, though the process of introducing streamlined reports was a bit more neutral than that.
From the SEC proposal:

We request comment on the proposed scope of disclosure for the annual report, including the following: ...
4. A fund may have multiple share classes with differing fee structures. Should these multi-class funds be permitted to reflect only one or a subset of classes, rather than all share classes in a shareholder report so long as a fund produces a shareholder report that relates to each share class? Would such an approach reduce the complexity of the disclosure and provide more-tailored information that is specific to a shareholder’s investment in the fund? Or, conversely, would such a requirement not benefit shareholders? For example, could it reduce shareholders’ ability to compare classes of a fund? Should there be limits on the number or types of classes that a single annual report may cover to reduce potential complexity or length? For example, should we prohibit an annual report transmitted to retail shareholders from including disclosure related to a fund’s institutional class? Are there potential complexities or burdens associated with such an approach? Please explain.

https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2020/33-10814.pdf
The comments received by the SEC can be found here:
https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-09-20/s70920.htm
Few comments addressed the streamlined reports, as the bulk of the proposal deals with changes to the "full" reports. One comment worth noting is from Barbara Roper (at the time, the director of investor protection for the Consumer Federation of America).

Seeing [multiple share class] information could, for example, cause the investor to question why they are invested in shares that carry higher costs or suffer poorer performance relative to other available share classes.
...
We are therefore at least preliminarily opposed to the idea ...of permitting funds to reflect only a subset of share classes in a shareholder report. Despite our initial skepticism, we believe this approach is worth testing to see whether it results in a better investor experience. If testing demonstrates that limiting the number of share classes reported on in a single report offers benefits that outweigh the potential downsides, the Commission should proceed accordingly. However, ...

https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-09-20/s70920-8204376-227513.pdf
All I can find in Capital Research and Management's comments regarding the streamlined reports is that it is generally supportive of adopting them:

We support the Commission proposing a rule that creates a new streamlined shareholder report with key information and provides funds with an alternative way to keep shareholders informed instead of delivering annual prospectus updates to existing shareholders. We believe this approach furthers the Commission’s goal to address the concern that shareholder report and prospectus disclosures may appear redundant or inconsistent to shareholders, as well as the belief that prospectus disclosures in particular may often be less relevant to the informational needs of a shareholder who is simply monitoring his or her fund investments. However...

https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-09-20/s70920-8204356-227509.pdf

We're about 6 days late, unfortunately. My apologies!
We've converted all of our programs to shared functions, which will ultimately enable faster updates, while helping to ensure accurate calculations. It will even enable expansion of tools.
But, first time out has been slow because of all the conversation and checking.
Tomorrow, should post update using 10 February data drop. The one that just went live used the 3 February drop. Except for Month To Date (MTD) metrics, should be close.
If you see anything amiss or just want to chat, please drop me a line.

They forgot "No K-1"

... and "Enhanced Premium"

”if you are hedged”
Therein lies the problem. How much to hedge and what instruments to use. @BaseballFan had good luck using HSGFX last year I believe. Some use (inverse funds) SPDN or DOG to hedge. I believe investment grade bonds AAA rated @ 10 years or further out might be a useful hedge. The problem with most hedges is they will lose you money during good times. (I haven’t forgotten cash either, which I’m sure some consider a hedge.)
Some articles I’ve read recently have mentioned CCOR as a good hedge against stock market downside. But I remain undecided on that. It does not have a long enough track record IMHO.

@Sven
This is a chart of the 10 yr yield for the past year. Place/hover the mouse pointer anywhere on the line to display the date and yield for that date. The percent to the right side is the percentage change in the yield from the chart beginning date.

Interesting question...I do remember BLNDX falling ~ 5% in a day I believe it was autumn of 21'. Kept thinking, nah, it's too early for a distribution etc...it was real...it stung.
ISTM it all depends on how much you have in that investment and how much/if you are hedged..
I'd ask what is the largest drawndown in a week...most flushes seem to take place over 3 days...some Friday night are tougher than others if you get the whammo down in your portfolio and have all weekend to fester on it...
I also remember reading something online where some "limit" what they are willing to risk in the market based on what they earn in 12 or 6 months or 3 months etc...my personal limit is 3 months but likely cause I am so risk adverse?
Good Luck and Good Health to all,
Baseball Fan

@hank, Many thanks to your info on what Fed and the market control. I too notice the 10 year treasury yield has moved up from the low 1.3% (1/5/23) to 3.74% (2/10/23), and that is sizable change in short time. High quality IG bond funds I am invested are yielding 4.0% that is encouraging from that of last year.

For the w/e Feb. 3, LQD was +5.2%, HYG was +4.25% and AGG was +3.17%, YTD. This past week found these 3 cut in half for YTD performance. A serious 'hair cut'.

@catch22, profit taking - interesting only for a small gain. Bond market this year is quite volatile even in high quality bonds including treasuries and IG bonds. I left the bond sector since fall 2021 and bought back some % this year with the yields being more attractive at about 4%. Still trying to better understand the bond volatility and opportunities to make some gain this year.

Hi @Sven
Strictly my own opinion, but as the 10 year Treasury still remains a benchmark for many forms of consumer loans, it's yield forms a benchmark for other bond yields, too. Although the yield curve that has been and is in place for some time now, fully perverts the normal historic range of yield spreads with 'somewhat normal economic conditions'; of which is not clear at this time, eh? The economy is in a 'coin toss' right now, at least for the big money and traders. I do my best to understand where the money wants to travel within bonds, not unlike equities.
As with the list of bond NAV's, there are many different sectors for various needs; not unlike the 11 sectors of the SP-500, and they find there own path for a variety of reasons.
For this past week, I think we find a pure profit taking event with some bonds.
For the w/e Feb. 3, LQD was +5.2%, HYG was +4.25% and AGG was +3.17%, YTD. This past week found these 3 cut in half for YTD performance. A serious 'hair cut'.
Hopefully, others will offer a viewpoint.
I've placed a link below about the large issuance of bonds early this year that may help define some of this week's sell down.
Record global bond issuance to start 2023.

Question: is there a correlation between 10 year treasury yield to the rest of bond market? This past week there is a pullback on IG bonds.

That’s for @catch22 to answer.
But since I mentioned the 10-year Treasury …. Mortgage rates set by banks often key-off of that rate. If I recall from refinancing, the rates are adjusted every Monday in line with how the 10-year has performed. . The 10-year represents the highest quality debt for over what I would characterize as an “intermediate” term. Very high quality corporate bonds of like duration would also react to moves in the 10-year. Their return should, however, be a bit higher.
But there’s a lot of other debt that’s little affected by what the 10-year Treasury does - like junk bonds which react more to economic conditions. And, of course, very short term investment grade debt (out to perhaps 2 or 3 years) reacts closely to the Federal Reserve mandated overnight lending rate. In a normal healthy economy, very long dated AAA bonds (20-30 years out) should earn more than what the 10-year yields. However, (without checking) it’s likely they do not currently because of the inverted yield curve.
@Sven - IG bonds fell last week in line with an uptick in yields. The uptick in 10 year treasury rates was part of that overall move. There’s a widespread misconception, I think, that the Fed is responsible for longer term rates. In reality, its influence is primarily at the very short end of the curve. The markets determine the appropriate rate out at 10-years and beyond. And that may diverge from what the Fed wants to happen.

@catch, really appreciate your reporting on bond performance.
Question: is there a correlation between 10 year treasury yield to the rest of bond market? This past week there is a pullback on IG bonds.

@hank I corrected the typo.....to 'too'. A lazy finger or brain while typing. And yes, one of the 'check off' boxes on the cards.
I'm content to take the 4.47% 7 day yield with FZDXX OR one may have 4.14% with SPAXX or 4.18% with FDRXX MMKT's. We already hold 27% of our portfolio in IG bonds and don't plan to add more right now; unless some major event causes a 'new' look into the IG/Treasury area.

Over the long term they do slightly better than FXAIX
Do they do any better, or are you just looking relative to a particular moment in time (i.e. now)? Comparing their three year rolling cumulative returns by calendar years (e.g. Jan 2019-Dec 2021), the figures (from M* charts) are:

     2020-2022  '19-'21	'18-'20	'17-'19	'16-'18	'15-'17	'14-'16	'13-'15	'12-'14	'11-'13
FXAIX	24.75%	100.32%	 48.80%	 53.10%	 30.38%	 38.28%	 29.02%	 52.54%	 74.51%	 56.77% 
SCHD	44.56%	 90.14%	 38.51%	 45.45%	 32.84%	 40.22%	 29.53%	 48.09%	 65.32%	 56.42%
CDC	38.27%	 78.90%	 27.03%	 30.48%	 31.78%	 38.76%	   -	   -	   -	   -

Over its lifetime (July 1, 2014 through Feb 10, 2023), CDC has done slightly worse than FXAIX, returning a cumulative 138.04% vs FXAIX's 143.78%.
More importantly, all the cumulative figures ending Dec 31, 2022 are significantly skewed by FXAIX's sizeable underperformance in 2022 relative to the other funds: -18.13% vs -3.23% (SCHD) or -7.76% (CDC). (FXAIX has done better so far this year.)
I'm not knocking any of these funds, and I can certainly see the point in suggesting dividend oriented funds to someone who has been focused on cash returns. It's just that there's a tendency for people to look at "what have you done for me lately" even when trying not to - sometimes it's baked into the numbers.
For a set and forget fund that covers all bases ("foreign, global, world and U.S", and fixed income) one might consider VGWIX / VGYAX. Not an index fund, but still a low cost fund. Its 35/65 stock/bond mix may also suit someone moving from a cash portfolio. Funds with more traditional blends include VGWLX / VGWAX and CIBFX (though jumbo). A drawback of these funds (notably the Vanguard ones) is a dearth of EM investment. You may consider that a plus (arguably a more conservative approach).

I always received in the 'comments' section.................'talks to much' or similar …
What an anachronism! You’re really dating yourself with that expression. In addition, your teacher wasn’t a very good speller. :) But, yes I remember the “talks too much” check-box on report cards when I was very young - and no doubt qualified.
- Bonds? My dull mind sees 3.74% on the 10-year and reacts favorably.
- Watching Bloomberg’s WSW from Friday, the lady from Invesco referred to the present as: ”The golden age of fixed-income.” Take that with a large grain of salt.