@Old_Joe, we have had the fortune to invest in American funds in our 401(K). We were first a bit skeptical in the beginning With their team management approach. Over time they provided steady returns while managing the downside better than most large cap funds we had. . We are now investing with them again through their ETF offerings.

Hi folks. I encourage you reaching out directly of Mr. Snowball can arrange an MFO call. Regardless, let me take this moment to quickly respond.
Bobby: Not sure when RiverPark Short Term High Yield (RPHIX, RPHYX) commentary will some out as it is in the RiverPark hands. That said, the basic commentary will remain. As for your yield question - not 9%! I don't believe yield-to-worst or yield-to-maturity are figures readily provided as they can be very misleading since a significant portion of the the Fund rolls into cash every 30 days so a price can make a big yield impact with so little time remaining on the life of the holdings that a position(s) can impact the yield calculation. Below are some figures for June 30th (unaudited):
38% portfolio rolling off in 30 days or less
62% portfolio rolling off greater than 30 days
57% portfolio rolling off within 90 days
7.32% yield-to-worst on holdings greater than 30 days
Weighted average yield on purchases during the month was 5.88% with 2.2 month maturity.
Feel free to reach out to me directly if you need a further xplanation.
BaluBalu: Patience is a virtue. We don't like chasing the market. CMBS started to run (a little bit) post our 1Q letter. We will add as opportunity arises but price matters. Also, the opportunity should be around for some time. We expect the portfolios will continue to add,
Junkster:
Ed Shagrue is a seasoned veteran and thoughtful in the CMBS space. Although I do not own his Fund, I respect him. You should reach out to him.
I want to reiterate a comment in the 2Q commentary:
With respect to the portfolio, we remain nimble. At the end of 2Q23, we had elevated levels of “dry powder”. If high yield spreads tighten and the market rallies, we may increase our level of dry powder to take advantage of what we believe will be a correction thereafter. We had a healthy position in leveraged loans and are looking to add. At the same time, we are selectively nibbling in the CMBS market. Based on our expectation of increasing volatility, the portfolios are likely to continue experiencing above normal turnover as we adapt to reflect the changing environment.

There are only far and a few star managers, these managers do well in most markets for 1-2 decades and are flexible enough to change. The first that comes to mind is Giroux managing PRWCX.
A reasonable way is to invest in top-performing categories/funds, just as stock traders find top-performing categories and then look for stocks in that category.
From my experience after watching and researching funds for decades, most times, managers that outperformed, it's because their style fit markets in that period...or...they found a niche that worked well.
These types of markets can last for years:
2000-2010: the SP500 lost money; value, SC and international did much better(FAIRX,SGIIX)
2010-2021: US LC growth did better than most (QQQ)
PIMIX took advantage of the broken MBS of 2008 and had several years of better performance than stocks + better performance than many bond funds for more years + better SD = better Sharpe ratio.
Basically, invest in the market you have, not the market you wished you have.
BTW, the above does not mean fast trading and/or trading 100% of your portfolio.

Commercial Real Estate bond fund OEF - RCRIX/FX. YTD 6.10%. Not exactly the Armageddon the pundits have been predicting for CRE. Albeit the fund holds 0% in office buildings.
Edit: https://www.riverparkfunds.com/assets/pdfs/rpfrcf/commentary/RiverPark_Floating_Rate_CMBS_Fund_2Q23_Investor_Letter.pdf
Recent commentary on this fund. I spoke with the manager early in the year. He feels there are tremendous opportunities in CRE. He seemed a bit discouraged that his AUM were so much smaller than pre Covid as he wished to take advantage of such opportunities. I should add that River Park is by far the most stringent when it comes to short term trading of their funds. As I mentioned previously, they will send you a ban notice even before your sell order is processed. Meaning, if you have an early morning order in there to sell, they will ban you before close of day.

From the article:
"As discussed in our 1Q23 letter, capital flows favor assets with the highest risk-adjusted returns. Investors that have been large buyers of investment grade CLO debt are now able to earn significantly better yields in newly issued commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS)15 debt of comparable quality. In the AAA tranche, CMBS debt offers slightly less spread for much higher credit quality based on loan-to-value (LTV). For tranches below the AAA tranche, CMBS yields are, on average, significantly higher with better LTV"
"At the same time, we are selectively nibbling in the CMBS market. Based on our expectation of increasing volatility, the portfolios are likely to continue experiencing above normal turnover as we adapt to reflect the changing environment"
Music to my years.

@hank, the higher sum is from January to June, as I said in my post. The more time that goes by, the more the disparity grows. Start the comparison from 2021 and the disparity is now 164 bucks.
Where you start and stop your year also matters. For example, at M* you can chart the two against each other for the past year,and the difference is 57 bucks. Take a look at the chart in the new link I posted. At the end of December 2021, the discrepancy from January is 63 bucks.
The difference of .25 is not just a drag on the upside. It also sinks the fund deeper on the downside. As you can see in the link, at the end of January 2021, GLFOX is 13 bucks behind. And it will never catch up. It will fall inexorably behind.
I don't need to take IRA distributions for six years. If I back test the two funds for six years the CAGR for GLIFX is 8.63 vs, 8.35 for GLFOX. And the difference in dollars is 562 if 20K were the amount invested.

The SP500 is the most recognized index that represents stocks and over decades it has done better than most other stocks, including thousands of managed funds and professional managers that worked very hard to beat it.
Diversifying did not help much either, and I'm talking meaningfully about extra performance. There is a good reason why Bogle build the Vanguard Empire, it was based mainly on VOO or VTI for stocks. Buffet tells the same story.
The SP500 lost money in 10 years during 2000-2010, mainly because of the excessive performance of 1995-2000 when the SP500 made 250% in 5 years which is 28+% average annually (link).
Can the SP500 go sideways for years? Of course, it can. Are you going to switch to the right categories?

I’m not sure how you’re coming up with the higher sum for 1 year. Don’t read the numbers on the far right. They are for a longer time period. The chart is truly interactive. So, you can tap anywhere along the horizontal lines representing each fund and pull up the values on any date you want.
What you need to do is tap along the two colored lines about 2/3 of the way across. Dates and corresponding total investment amount will come up for each fund. The chart begins with 12/31/23. If you tap on the line where “12/31/22” pops up you will get the correct values for that date.
Initial amount: $20,000 / Start date: 12/31/21
Values on 12/31/22
GLIFX $19,741
GLFOX $19,689
Difference from 12/31/21 to 12/31/22: GLIFX +$52.00

@hank. Read all about it. As they used to say.
BTW. Check the tab for monthly returns,and you can see how it happens.

@WABC - Thanks. Just onndering if this was a misprint / typo: “ … the difference on 20K between GLIFX and GLOFX from January 2022 to June 2023 is 82 bucks … “
That might appear to be an 18 month period. Even than, the higher earnings are a bit more than I’d expect based on a difference of .25% ER. ($82 / $75)
What I did for a one year time frame was simply multiply the .25% difference in ER by the invested sum. That should, ISTM, produce a reasonably accurate difference in investor return. For longer terms the results would be less accurate because of the compounding effect.
$1,000 X 0.0025 = $2.50
$20,000 X 0.0025 = $550.00
Don’t know. I’m not very familiar with the source you are referencing. Maybe others have sharper insights on this than I.

.25 sounds like a lot. And it is with really large amounts that are left untouched out to 5 or 10 years. For lesser amounts:
$20,000 invested 1 year would earn roughly an additional … $50
$50,000 .………..1 year ……………………………………….. $125
$75,000 …………1 year………………………………..…..…. $187.50
What will the above extra return buy?
$50 - A 750 ml bottle of Johnny Walker Double-Black blended Scotch whisky - including state tax.
$125 - A nice upgrade from your $500 dollar a night room at a Manhattan hotel to a “corner view.”
$187.50 - Taxi fare from LGA to Manhattan and back - including driver tips.

Not sure what you're looking at there.
Per portfolio visualizer, the difference on 20K between GLIFX and GLOFX from January 2022 to June 2023 is 82 bucks. That .25 saves on the downside too. GLIFX lost 1.3% in 2022 vs 1.55% for GLOFX.

Similar, if not identical, to a story running on (hard to link) Bloomberg
“ less than 20 months after it began, the bear market that has engulfed the S&P 500 is a mere 260 points from being completely erased. Rather than predicting problems, chart patterns that track everything from multi-asset momentum to carriers paint a picture of booming economic activity. “
”Nearly $10 trillion has been returned to stock values ​​in the past nine months as job growth, consumer spending and corporate earnings defied the pessimists. The S&P 500 is up 27% from its October low and is now about 5% away from regaining the all-time high of 4,796.56 it reached in January 2022.”
https://smaartcompany.com/stock-markets-are-about-to-emerge-from-the-bear-market-on-a-10-trillion-rally/

21 july, 2023.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2023-07-21/bloomberg-real-yield-07-21-23

21 july, 2023.

Been there, done that ! Comes under, shit happens !

OMG same. :)
Years ago, just before the GFC, I remember suddenly being long 16 futures contracts instead of 4 b/c I never got a confirmation back and kept refreshing the screen on the ramshackle Java-based active trading platform I was using. About 15 minutes later I nearly died when I was in such a large (an unexpected) position , which I promptly liquidated completely before catching my breath....thankfully the market remained relatively flat during that period of confusion.
To my then-broker's credit, they credited me the few hundred bucks' I was down, plus the commissions, b/c I proved, and they confirmed, the problem was due to their platform. I was relieved, to say the least ... but rarely used that system again.
We live, we learn.

.25 sounds like a lot. And it is with really large amounts that are left untouched out to 5 or 10 years. For lesser amounts:
$20,000 invested 1 year would earn roughly an additional … $50
$50,000 .………..1 year ……………………………………….. $125
$75,000 …………1 year………………………………..…..…. $187.50
What will the above extra return buy?
$50 - A 750 ml bottle of Johnny Walker Double-Black blended Scotch whisky - including state tax.
$125 - A nice upgrade from your $500 dollar a night room at a Manhattan hotel to a “corner view.”
$187.50 - Taxi fare from LGA to Manhattan and back - including driver tips.

Good numbers/comparisons --- though fwiw saying, on principle, I still refuse to buy mutual funds with .25 12(b)-1 fees.

.25 sounds like a lot. And it is with really large amounts that are left untouched out to 5 or 10 years. For lesser amounts:
$20,000 invested 1 year would earn roughly an additional … $50
$50,000 .………..1 year ……………………………………….. $125
$75,000 …………1 year………………………………..…..…. $187.50
What will the above extra return buy?
$50 - A 750 ml bottle of Johnny Walker Double-Black blended Scotch whisky - including state tax.
$125 - A nice upgrade from your $500 dollar a night room at a Manhattan hotel to a “corner view.”
$187.50 - Taxi fare from LGA to Manhattan and back - including driver tips.

(https://humbledollar.com/2023/07/courage-required/)
William Bernstein | Jul 22, 2023
EVEN AFTER BEAR markets in 2020 and 2022, investors’ appetite for stocks remains as robust as ever. But what if stocks had not just a rough year or two, but a dismal stretch that lasted more than a decade? Below is an excerpt from the second edition of my book The Four Pillars of Investing, which was published earlier this month.
In August 1979, BusinessWeek ran a cover story with the headline “The Death of Equities,” and few had trouble believing it. The Dow Jones Industrial Average, which had toyed with the 1,000 level in January 1973, was now trading at 875 six-and-a-half years later. Worse, inflation was running at almost 9%. A dollar invested in the stock market in 1973 purchased just 71 cents of consumer goods, even allowing for reinvested dividends.
According to the article, “The masses long ago switched from stocks to investments having higher yields and more protection from inflation. Now the pension funds—the market’s last hope—have won permission to quit stocks and bonds for real estate, futures, gold, and even diamonds. The death of equities looks like an almost permanent condition—reversible someday, but not soon.”
Contrast today’s universal acceptance of stock investing with the sentiment described in the BusinessWeek article, when diamonds, gold and real estate were all the rage. The price of the yellow metal had risen from $35 an ounce in 1968 to more than $500 in 1979 and would peak at more than $800 the following year, equal to roughly $3,000 in today’s dollars. Still, there are similarities between the 1970s and today. Now the wise and lucky own houses in cities with desirable real estate. Back then, those who had purchased their houses for a song in the 1950s and 1960s were by 1980 sitting on real capital wealth beyond their wildest dreams. Stocks and bonds? “Paper assets,” sneered the conventional wisdom.

FUNDS. Many STAR MANAGERS who leave for other firms, or form their own firms, don’t succeed as well (JUCAX with Bill Gross was a classic disaster). The reason may be the vast analyst, research and data support systems that they relied on at their old firms. Almost 42% of these managers didn’t even last 5 years at their new firms; the startup costs at their own firms may be high. Many firms now use multi-manager team model that reduces the impact of anyone leaving. Notable exceptions/successes include GQGPX with Rajiv Jain (and Jefferey Gundlach who succeeded with DoubleLine against all odds; notably, Howard Marks underwrote most of the initial setup costs). (By @lewisbraham at MFO)
Many fund companies (BLK, IVZ, WT, Fidelity, etc) are flooding the SEC with new SPOT-CRYPTO ETFs and daring it to reject them all – while there are noises in the DC about GENSLER’s/SEC approach, and in a recent ongoing court case SEC vs XRP/Ripple, the judge wasn’t very sympathetic to the SEC arguments or its general approach to securities regulations. BlackRock’s/BLK spot-crypto approach is novel in that it will use Coinbase/COIN trading platform, but the Nasdaq/NDAQ exchange will provide assistance for detecting fraud, manipulation, etc. BlackRock has had 576 ETFs approved with only 1 rejection, so, will its spot-crypto ETFs be its 2nd rejection, or does it know something that others don’t? Anyway, several other filers have also adjusted their spot-crypto ETF filings in a way similar to BlackRock. On another front, Fidelity, Schwab, etc are developing an alternate crypto exchange that is modelled after traditional US exchanges. (One thought is that the SEC suddenly throws in the towel by saying that this crypto stuff has now sufficiently matured, or Gensler is just dumped).
An insightful Q&A:
Louis-Vincent GAVE, Gavekal Research. There are huge GEOPOLITICAL shifts going on in Europe, Asia, Middle East. It’s astounding that the peace deal between SAUDI ARABIA and IRAN has been brokered by CHINA (!) – this is like the peace between France and Germany after WWII, and possibly, a future peace between China and India. For China, an immense benefit will be a land pipeline from Saudi Arabia to Iran to ? to China. The possibility of a US/Western oil shipment embargo for China during any conflict with the US has spooked China. Then, there is this new DOLLAR DIPLOMACY that is causing gradual but steady shift away from dollar-trading and dollar-reserves into local/regional currencies. The dollar index (based on a fixed currency basket) is outdated – many already use trade-weighted dollar. The EMs ex-China are actually booming now, but the EM indexes are held back by the heavy weight from lagging China. Forget AI and Nasdaq, the markets in Argentina, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Mexico have outperformed. It still isn’t too late to participate as the EMs are under-owned and most US investors have sworn off the non-US markets. Nothing against AI, but AI will also be huge in EMs, and people would find better/cheaper alternatives to overpriced MSFT, NVDA, etc.
JAPAN is finally changing – it has inflation and rising rates and there will be a massive shift from bonds to equities. But it will be very volatile near-term (it is said that Japan is the most cyclical among the global markets). CHINA has lagged because it didn’t have huge stimuluses during the pandemic and its Covid problems are hardly over. But that is changing. Soon, the world may wake up to the day when Chinese global auto exports will exceed those by Japan. President Xi Jinping has to realize that China’s future lies in the tech sector and everything else will be secondary (economic growth, domestic consumption, etc) (with his power assured, he may flip on policy easily). Many Chinese stocks have sold off sharply, are under-owned, but have huge future potential.
LINK

Thanks @Observant1 - Sounds like we got the bases covered, Will check the AIP.
I should have added, it’s much more likely to have to sell a portion of this fund (no charge) as needs arise rather than buy back in ($49.99 fee). It’s pretty stable, so that there shouldn’t be a lot of rebalancing out/in/out. It’s part of the more stable “Let ‘em ride” segment of portfolio.