i concur. and i had not heard about teresa kong's leaving. where did she go? does anyone know? I will take a look.....
...Found this. RETIRING???? She can't be that old.....
https://citywireselector.com/news/a-rated-bond-boss-to-exit-matthews-asia/a2391349
Or is the word being used here in a non-standard way?

People often say that allocation/balanced funds are declining, dead, kaput. But they are wrong. Broadly speaking, target-date funds, robo-advisors and age-based 529s are nothing but allocation/balanced funds in some form. So, this universe is expanding. Robo-advisors alone are $1 trillion now.

Completely agree. I checked out Wealthfront the other day and opened a portfolio. I've followed them from their earliest days and was a fan of Andy Rachleff (spelling?).
I was kind of shocked with Wealthfront's suggested "portfolio solution". It was a 3 ETF portfolio that I could of built myself. Is this what Roboadvisors have come to be?

Word on the street is that Bill Hackett was asked politely to retire, or in otherwords, he was fired. Matthews has lost more than 10 portfolio managers in the last 2 years, and no, they aren't people retiring but rather the up and coming, next generation portfolio managers that got tired of poor leadership of the firm. Tiffany Hsiao, Beini Zhang, Lydia So, Raymond Deng, Rahul Gupta are just a few names. Just last month, Teresa Kong head of fixed income, also left. This exodus of talent is unprecedented and something I've never seen in my career from a small boutique.
Per their website, Matthews Asia's assets stood at $17.2 billion as of July 2022. I was in their offices in 2017/2018 and their assets were nearly $35 billion. I've heard from portfolio managers at the company that most of the drop in assets are due to outflows (clients redeeming), not markets.
It sounds like Cooper was brought in to try and turn things around. He has a tough job ahead of him. Besides massive outflows, the performance of the funds has been horrible. Their flagship, Pacific Tiger has underperformed its benchmark for nearly the last 5 years. Two of their other big funds, Innovators and Asia Growth, were heavily loaded with tech names and took huge hits with the latest correction.
https://www.matthewsasia.com/funds/mutual-funds/asia-growth/pacific-tiger-fund/?FundClassType=MIPTX
Matthews fall from grace has been sad to see. I met with their founders years ago and loved their passion for Asia and entrepreneur spirit. But that energy left the firm many years ago, and the firm has become mediocre at best. I wish Cooper luck, but its a steep mountain to climb and competitors have really stepped up their game in both Asia and EM. Matthews is not the only trick in town anymore.

+1.

That's almost 3 years, Crash- I wouldn't lock up a lot of cash for that long at 3.3%. 1 year max at that rate.

Some notes from the RPHIX/RPHYX 06-30-2022-Shareholder letter (I've added the bold):
As of June 30, 2022, the portfolio was comprised of securities with an average maturity of 4.43 months. At quarter-end, the invested portfolio had a weighted average Expected Effective Maturity of 11/10/22, and 43.10% was comprised of securities with an Expected Effective Maturity of 30 days or less.
As of June 30, 2022, the Weighted Average Market Yield to Effective Maturity was 7.17% for Effective Maturities of 31 days or more. That comprised 57% of the invested Portfolio.

yes, thank you, I've seen that article. Are the concerns still valid today?

Thank you for the comments, my appeal to both funds because although they may have different investment approaches can be used as "cash" when the funds are not invested, like right now. I am about 95% in RPHIX. Why wait when the markets break moving averages as even smart people like Meb Faber in Tactical Asset Allocation use tools to reduce the drawdowns and stomach ulcers, Ulcer Index. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=962461.
This is my personal view, in contrast to a view by the bogleheads crowd to hold the allocation no matter what. Yes, I am using various tools to gauge the risk levels and premiums. Let's just say that even if you hold equities, it is a very smart idea to add put options as well in today's environment. I don't "play" too much with options, but the tools are handy. Why sit in the 17%-20% drawdowns, especially knowing that the Fed will continue to reduce liquidity from the market?
And as @TheShadow mentioned Fed just raised the CDs and you are locking yourself for several years and risking paying early withdrawal penalties. I do have 3% CDs with Andrews. I locked right when Covid hit. It doesn't make sense to have all my money in CDs.
The appeal of HMEZX is that although it has a bit higher st deviation, the return is higher with this vs RPHIX. I use portfoliovisualiser extensively, and although, it is a backward-looking tool, it provides clues about the stability of funds and how they fared in various environments.
So, I goal is to ask if you have valid reasons to avoid HMEZX, but also looking forward to your thoughts/ideas. Thank you

Barron's article has 2 charts that cannot be linked except as screenshots. But I find that less appealing. FRED is cited as reference, so I created those 2 charts using FRED - see links at the end. The articles goes on to explain that appearances are deceptive and the Fed is allowing 3-mo settlements for its MBS purchases and is also reinvesting paydowns. And then notes the QT bump (as planned) coming in September. A short synopsis is in my Part 2, LINK:
"ECONOMY. People are confused by the Fed QT (or, -QE). Some even wonder if QT has started – yes, in June. Right now, the roll-offs are at a half-pace, the MBS at -17.5 billion/mo, the Treasuries at -30 billion/mo but those will become full strength in September (to -35 billion/mo and -60 billion/mo, respectively). So, why haven’t the Fed balances of MBS declined, although the Treasury balances have declined some? Well, the Fed allows 3-mo settlements for MBS bought to lessen any housing market disruptions, so yes, the MBS declines are surely coming. Moreover, any mortgage paydowns are being reinvested. So, the QT will become more visible after September. But remember that QT has been tried only once before and it amounts to an effective rate hike of an unknown amount, so the Fed is being cautious. Also, dollar strength had the effect of an additional rate hike of unknown amount. Remember all this going on in the background as most people are focused only on fed fund rate hikes. Also, that the QE had an effect, so will the reverse QE, or QT."
FRED - MBS https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=SxNg
FRED - Treasuries https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=SxNo

@Mav123 - I hold a 3% position in EPD in my Roth account. Opinions seem to be divided on whether that's a good idea or not but I haven't had any issues yet. I've held it for 10-12 years despite that contrary opinion. It does issue a K-1 which TurboTax handles easily.

I was interested in HMEZX, but then I was concerned by the unimpressive performance of other funds managed by the same manager (Dondero), and by general comments that can be found here: https://www.institutionalinvestor.com/article/b1l0wrph2lc0j6/Nothing-Can-Stop-This-Hedge-Fund-Soap-Opera

Another opinion : https://www.investopedia.com/best-robo-advisors-4693125

Thanks for the new info.
I remembered that Investopedia had its Robo-Advisor Ranking earlier in the year. So, I checked the stuff I saved/bookmarked, and sure, there was this from 2/28/22.
https://www.investopedia.com/investopedia-2022-best-robo-advisors-awards-5220680
What you have posted is 7/31/22 "update" with different authors but the info appears the same/similar. I will compare and see what they are trying to do now.

Some notes from the RPHIX/RPHYX 06-30-2022-Shareholder letter (I've added the bold):
As of June 30, 2022, the portfolio was comprised of securities with an average maturity of 4.43 months. At quarter-end, the invested portfolio had a weighted average Expected Effective Maturity of 11/10/22, and 43.10% was comprised of securities with an Expected Effective Maturity of 30 days or less.
As of June 30, 2022, the Weighted Average Market Yield to Effective Maturity was 7.17% for Effective Maturities of 31 days or more. That comprised 57% of the invested Portfolio.

Crash, send them email noting that your cancel order was submitted 9:15a ET or whatever it was and see what they say, and report back.
Many times over the year with both ML and Fidelity I have submitted buy / sell orders and canceled within the last minute or two, no problem, though the usual 'you are attempting a trade | cancellation close to market close and' yada yada.

Another opinion : https://www.investopedia.com/best-robo-advisors-4693125

The OP discussed HMEZX, a merger type fund, which is quite different from that of RPHIX. I selected a comparable fund, MERFX, which by coincidence, I have owned for numerous years.
You can see the returns here for MERFX since its inception:
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/MERFX/performance/
MERFX was closed to new investors as of June 1, 1996 and resumed sales in 1998.
(closed)
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/701804/0000950123-96-002625.txt
(re-opened)
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/701804/0000950123-98-008974.txt
MERFX's YTD return is (1.61%) according to Google which is better than many of my other mutual funds.
Concerning one year cd rates, the rates have only increased due to the FED increasing interest rates in the last several meetings. Before those meetings. short term CD rates were abysmal in comparison to RPHIX.

@MikeM’s been a practitioner of the robo approach for near a decade by my count. And he has consistently reported great results. I’d trust his word and judgment. One thing he might have added was that the robo approach he uses and likes excels over other approaches on a “risk adjusted” basis. Those seeking out lower risk due to age, need, circumstances wouldn’t be expected to turn out the same returns. I’d agree too that alternative funds can’t keep pace with a plain vanilla approach over long periods due mainly to the higher fees. Still, for risk averse investors a modest allocation to alts may tamp down volatility. Different strokes …
Mike said, “The average 12%, most accounts, invested in cash has been a drawback in returns,”
I don’t think I’d be violating any rule to note that James Stack currently has his investors 30%+ in cash (short term treasuries). I believe that was recently reported in Barron’s. It’s not what I choose to do. Just saying … :)
@MikeM said, “Similiar or possibly better returns than retirement or target date funds“
I have no difficulty at all believing that. I probably track 25+ funds daily that I don’t own. The two formerly successful conservative allocation retirement funds from TRP I follow have really fallen out of bed over the past year. If one cannot easily beat their recent track record on their own, they’ve got a serious problem. TRRIX (-9.51% YTD) and PRSIX (-10.21% YTD). Glad I own neither.
(In fairness, I’ll note that VWINX has held up much better than have the two TRP conservative allocation funds.)

Also, Mav123, please explain the appeal of RPHIX? The fund's total return % for 1 and 3 years is 1.70 and 1.78, respectively. Over the past 5 years its 2.21%.
On the other hand, you currently can get a 1-year FDIC insured CD at Fidelity or Vanguard that pays 3.05%. Why bother with RPHIX?

"First, Wall Street seems to have a blind spot when it comes to tightening via the Fed’s balance sheet.
Such tightening has been attempted only once before, and economists say rate increases are much easier to model than quantitative tightening. In that way, many participants assume QT won’t have much impact.
Second, the lack of discussion around QT is leading to public misunderstanding.
Some investors doubt that the Fed is following through so far on its balance-sheet tightening plan,
particularly on the MBS side."
Barron's Link

Please explain the Appeal of MERFX ? Gross ER 1.71%
1 yr -8.57 / 3 year 0.22 / 5 year 2.17 / 10 year 2.22

@hank : PS - A stock or fund that’s up 10% one day and down 10% another day is difficult to deal with.
+1
"You can't win them all" , Derf