+1. I'm still holding TRAMX. Africa/Middle East. Still underwater this year, but not by much....Yesterday was a nice bump-up, but investing is a marathon, not a sprint.

Thx for the explanations, appreciate it.
@Derf, ya it does seem wonky but...opened 5 year $90k Goldman Sachs, CD thru Schwab 1/19 @ 3.50% APY, matures 1/23, value stated a few days ago as $90,491...opened others thru Schwab during 11/19 @ 3.55%... 5 yr CDs were offering decent APYs back in late '19 etc.
Best,
Baseball Fan

So, one by one, the OLD Nuveen mutual funds are disappearing. Last time were the old Nuveen EM fund that was just liquidated, and some old Nuveen bond funds and target-risk funds that were merged into similar TIAA-CREF funds (see links below). Now, another, the Nuveen International Growth is being merged into a similar TIAA-CREF fund.
It is surprising how slow TIAA has been on doing this (after all, TIAA bought OLD Nuveen in 2014; later, to confuse the matters, it rebranded its entire fund arm as NEW Nuveen). They may have made promises to keep the old Nuveen operations going on for a while. Old Nuveen CIO Bob DOLL retired in 2021 and joined a faith-based investment firm.
Going forward, TIAA may only keep muni CEFs and OEFs from the old Nuveen and may liquidate or merge most of its mutual funds into TIAA-CREF funds. No point in running 2 middling groups of mutual funds.
At the M* TIAA forum, it was also noted recently that TIAA has plans to get rid of CREF name and operations and fold all of those into TIAA. So, all the TIAA-CREF mutual fund names may soon change to just TIAA.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/59626/nuveen-emerging-markets-equity-fund-is-to-be-liquidated/p1
https://www.nuveen.com/en-us/investments/reorganizations

“ However, compared with Morningstar Category peers historically, the strategy is less exposed.”
@Crash asked “What does this refer to?”
Poorly composed for sure. Best guess is they’re referring to the tendency of investors to “bolt” in mass and flee when a fund begins underperforming (which they alluded to in the preceding sentence). Apparently, PRNEX’s investor base is more loyal to the fund than the average for its category across industry.
Sounds like somebody with “just enough” knowledge of this fund (perhaps scanning some documents laid before them) sat at a computer and responded to a dozen or more pre-generated questions tossed at them requiring some type of numerical rating or affirmative / negative response. Liken it to those satisfaction surveys your mutual fund sends out after you’ve interacted with one of their live reps.
These questions often begin like this ….
- “On a scale of 1-10 rate the following …”
- Which of the following best describes …”
It saves an immeasurable amount of work if the one person in the organization most knowledgeable about mutual funds (or a committee) prepares all the questions and writes possible responses in advance. Why duplicate that process for every single fund? An underling can than throw the whole nearly incoherent body of the review together in minutes by sitting at a keyboard and selecting (clicking on) the “right” responses. Perhaps the best description - Computer generated with minimal human assistance.
PS - I hope no one is paying for this type of garbage.

Sadly VVPSX was one of the top funds cited in the October 3, 2021 WSJ article, "Big Hasn’t Been the Best for Fund Investors." VVPSX was second for the quarterly ranking for twelve months.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1041673/000119312522211741/d371429d497.htm
497 1 d371429d497.htm NUVEEN INVESTMENT TRUST II
NUVEEN INTERNATIONAL GROWTH FUND
SUPPLEMENT DATED AUGUST 4, 2022
TO THE PROSPECTUS AND SUMMARY PROSPECTUS DATED DECEMBER 1, 2021
Proposed Reorganization of
Nuveen International Growth Fund into
TIAA-CREF International Opportunities Fund
The Board of Trustees of Nuveen Investment Trust II (“NIT II”) and the Board of Trustees of TIAA-CREF Funds (“TC Funds”) have each approved the reorganization of Nuveen International Growth Fund (the “Target Fund”), a series of NIT II, into TIAA-CREF International Opportunities Fund (the “Acquiring Fund”), a series of TC Funds. In order for the reorganization to occur, it must be approved by the shareholders of the Target Fund.
If the Target Fund’s shareholders approve the reorganization, the Target Fund will transfer all of its assets and liabilities to the Acquiring Fund in exchange for Acquiring Fund shares of equal value. These Acquiring Fund shares will then be distributed to Target Fund shareholders and the Target Fund will be terminated. As a result of these transactions, Target Fund shareholders will become shareholders of the Acquiring Fund and will cease to be shareholders of the Target Fund. Each Target Fund shareholder will receive Acquiring Fund shares with a total value equal to the total value of that shareholder’s Target Fund shares immediately prior to the closing of the reorganization. It is expected that the reorganization will qualify as a tax-free reorganization for federal income tax purposes and that Target Fund shareholders will not recognize any gain or loss as a result of the reorganization. However, Target Fund shareholders will receive a distribution of substantially all net income and/or realized gains, if any, prior to the reorganization.
A special meeting of the Target Fund’s shareholders for the purpose of voting on the reorganization is expected to be held in early October 2022. If the required approval is obtained, it is anticipated that the reorganization will be consummated approximately 15-30 days after the special shareholder meeting. Further information regarding the proposed reorganization will be contained in proxy materials that are expected to be sent to shareholders of the Target Fund in September 2022.
The Target Fund will continue sales and redemptions of its shares as described in the prospectus until shortly before its reorganization. However, holders of shares purchased after the record date set for the Target Fund’s special meeting of shareholders will not be entitled to vote those shares at the special meeting.
PLEASE KEEP THIS WITH YOUR PROSPECTUS
AND/OR SUMMARY PROSPECTUS
FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

For the week ending on 8/3/22, Sentiment improved significantly: Bearish remained the top sentiment (38.9%; above average) & bullish remained the bottom (tie) sentiment (30.6%; below average); neutral remained the middle (tie) sentiment (30.6%; near average); Bull-Bear Spread was -8.3% (low). With all Sentiments in 30s (last times 1/5/22, 3/23/22, 6/1/22), future flip-flops in ordering are expected. There is widening belief that the worst is behind for the Sentiment and markets; mid-June may have been the worst. Investor concerns included recession/slowdown; inflation & supply-chain disruptions; the Fed/FOMC; market volatility (VIX, VXN, MOVE); Russia-Ukraine war (23+ weeks); geopolitical. For the Survey week (Thursday-Wednesday), stocks were up sharply, bonds up, oil down sharply, gold up sharply, dollar flat. #AAII #Sentiment #Markets
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/thread/141/aaii-sentiment-survey-weekly?page=7&scrollTo=731

EFCU Financial, out of Baton Rouge. 3.75% for 5 years. (Scroll down the page.) For a "jumbo," you can get 3.85%. That's a $100,000.00 minimum.
https://www.investopedia.com/best-5-year-cd-rates-4801473
https://www.efcufinancial.org/media/201852/august-2022-rate-sheet.pdf
I did not look to see about membership eligibility.

High active share was once touted as a desirable attribute for actively-managed funds.
Some people claimed that funds with high active share would outperform.
Alas, this has not occurred largely for U.S. equities over the past decade or so.
John Rekenthaler from M* provides the details here.

Exxon doesn't care who its owners are.
That's a pretty good definition of poor governance - ignoring your shareholders. Ultimately that comes with consequences.

A year ago this month [May], a small hedge fund won an unlikely victory against ExxonMobil, gaining support from a majority of the company’s shareholders to replace three of its directors, against management’s wishes. The fund, called Engine No. 1, had argued that Exxon was failing to plan for a transition away from fossil fuels, and as a result was jeopardizing its long-term business prospects.
While Engine No. 1 held only a tiny number of shares, it waged a six-month campaign and convinced large investors like BlackRock and State Street that Exxon needed fresh faces on its board of directors. Even before the vote, Exxon responded to the pressure by announcing a new low-carbon business line and more ambitious plans to reduce its own direct greenhouse gas emissions.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/17052022/charlie-penner-engine-no-1-exxonmobil/
That sounds like Exxon cared who its owners were - it opposed replacing board members and it responded to pressure by owners.
https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2021/07/23/eesg-activism-after-exxonmobil/

Making alcoholic beverages is morally wrong
Certainly some ratings penalize (or exclude) the manufacture of alcoholic beverages for moral reasons. However, M*'s Sustainalytics concerns are not moral but (surprise) sustainability:

Based on assessments from Sustainalytics ... the biggest environmental, social, or governance risk for alcohol stems from water use. ... water isn’t just an ingredient. It’s critical to production, including cleaning, cooling, and packaging. And water is even more important given its direct impact on product quality and experience, as well as the growing of ingredients like barley, corn, and other crops.

https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1092686/hate-the-sin-love-the-stock-investors-esg-exclusions-leave-opportunities
With respect to mutual funds, I do consider diversity a virtue, but some investors like lack thereof, i.e. concentration.

@Baseball_Fan : I checked average 5 year cd's issued .from January 2019. 1.4 -1.5 %
Your total sum seems somewhat suspicious for holding it that long, 3.5 years .
If you google , average cd rate 2019, you should find a chart.
I'll also admit it seems to me I bought a cd @ 3 % around 1/st qter 2018.
One other thought. Maybe that's the value going forth, if you sell, after your interest payment to you?
Have a good one, Derf

Follow the money. M* needs to show these metrics have value:

CHICAGO and AMSTERDAM, April 21, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- Morningstar, Inc. (Nasdaq: MORN), a leading provider of independent investment research, today announced it has reached an agreement to acquire Sustainalytics, a globally recognized leader in environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings and research. Morningstar currently owns an approximate 40% ownership stake in Sustainalytics, first acquired in 2017, and will purchase the remaining approximate 60% of Sustainalytics shares upon closing of the transaction.

https://newsroom.morningstar.com/newsroom/news-archive/press-release-details/2020/Morningstar-to-Acquire-Sustainalytics-and-Expand-Access-to-ESG-Research-Data-and-Analytics-for-Investors-Worldwide/default.aspx

These are features of legacy pages from two iterations ago. M* hid them many months ago, though it has only recently completely disabled them.
In its current iteration (at morningstar.com) one can still compare fund performance by using interactive graphs and selecting the desired time period. In the newest iteration (at investor.morningstar.com) you can find the interactive chart by looking for the "charting" icon down the left hand side (thanks to Yogi for finding this).
These issues have been extensively discussed in this thread:
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/59701/m-screwing-everything-up-again/p1
They are also the subject of an August commentary
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2022/08/new-coke-the-ford-edsel-cheetos-lip-balm-and-morningstar-investor/
As annoying as removal of convenience features are, so long as one has access to the data, one can at least in theory make do. (Though pragmatically it may not be worth one's time and effort.) OTOH, it is impossible to compensate for data that is completely eliminated, such as brokerage availability.

Morningstar eliminated at least 2 very nice features in its new improved iteration.
1. The ability to compare results between 2 or more funds, year by year and over various time periods.
2. The ability to see the daily performance of stocks within a mutual fund's portfolio.
I did have a link to the old pages where I could still access these features, but it recently stopped working.
These were nice features - why did they ditch them? Am I missing something?

+1.

+1. True. But I'm not going near that stuff.

Good afternoon All,
Serious question here as I feel I should but do not know the answer.
CDs.
When I buy them thru a bank, let's say for example sake, $100k, 3% APY, I see $103000 a year later in my account.
How does that work for CDs that you buy thru Schwab. When I look at the value, it makes no sense to me what the value and gain/loss is. For instance I opened a 3.55% brokered CD thru Schwab 3.5 years ago with $90k and it states the value is ~$90,492. No way that can be correct right? I called and their rep could not explain it. Does it all "true up" at the end of the CD term?
I hope this question makes sense.
Best,
Baseball Fan

I bought into the small cap fund in August of last year (it is closed to new investors, but I had an existing position in a retirement account) not realizing that the size of year-end distributions. The fund has never recovered from the 2021 distributions and the downturn in the market.