To add to my prior post, I would suggest the first couple on my list (if you're interested in it) to look at closely for your stated purpose of diversification would be PTIAX and one of the HY munis. They will however NOT get you the global exposure you seek, but they will give you diversification.
Note that World bond and/or EM bond funds can be VERY difficult categories to do well in. I tend to get my little bit of foreign bonds via other bond bonds, NOT a dedicated World bond fund. DODLX, cousin to DODIX(?), may be one of your best options there.
https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/fund-screener/results/table/overview/averageAnnualReturnsYear3/desc/1?assetClass=TBND&category=IB,EB,XP,WH&mStarRating=4,5&ntf=&order=fundType,ntf,mStarRating

I'm confused by what is being debated here.
It seems that some may be concentrating on how to solve the BIG, LT education system issues, while others may be concentrating on the immediate, urgent need to address the issues of reopening schools due to COVID. I dunno, bit I do know my head hurts trying to determine that.
If so, I suggest that these are TWO vastly different issues and debates that, though not mutually exclusive, should be debated separately.
The first was deeply dived into in the iconic, must see, 2010 documentary, Waiting for "Superman". Despite its critics, hard to express/expose the deep rooted issues and possible solutions any better than that.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1566648/
The second is chronicled pretty nicely here:
https://www.future-ed.org/what-congressional-covid-funding-means-for-k-12-schools/
I do NOT want to get into this debate any further than to suggest reading that link and understanding that the bulk of the "money being thrown at the problem" in the next stimulus bill is primarily to combat the unique issues related to COVID, and IMO, essential to solving those issues. Solving the deep rooted education system issues is a whole 'nother story, and one that the average person who is/was NOT a teacher (or have a bio akin to mine), may not be fully aware of had they not watched the referenced documentary.

Crash asserted nonsense and I called him on it with substantiation. Then he started handwaving about a just society but calling for more flunking of kids.
Whatever.
Racqueteer, this may not be the best month to trot out the tired bootstraps argument yet again. It does remain perennially popular among some of us nonminority types, and even among some minorities too. Why can't everyone be like the Jews and the Asians and others similarly situated? What racism? What structural inequality?
As for my career, I have been a teen worker, HS teacher, university TA, and most recently sometime HS coach and sub. Also parent and grandparent. Also married to an elem-schoolteacher for a decade. I do know the gut feeling of being in a difficult classroom. It all can be very discouraging, not to say difficult to have insights about.
But I know that this is pernicious crap at the talk-radio level: 'You can't solve real, significant problems --- not at the root --- by throwing money at those problems.'

The problem, to me, with BOTH sides is the unwillingness to bend from some absolutist stance. To my way of thinking, everyone is entitled to a fair chance. That may entail more help to some individuals than others. Ultimately, however, good intentions aside, I can't MAKE someone do what is necessary to be successful. And, like the reality or not, the society in which one lives has a huge impact on the outcome. Money is almost certainly an issue, but attitude on ALL sides is as well. "Throwing money" at a problem isn't the same thing as properly funding productive strategies. If we as a society were actually serious about the issue, we'd have better pay in hard to staff districts than in affluent ones. We have just the opposite. Further, it would be more 'help' to struggling students to have classrooms which are orderly (disciplined) than not.
Having spent almost 30 years teaching mostly chemistry and physics in a heavily minority district, I know that I was drawing my classes from about half the population. Even THAT population was underperforming its potential; a situation which became WORSE over my career, Discipline issues became a greater and greater issue as time went by; since the schools didn't want to have 'bad statistics'. This despite the fact that, in a class of 1,000 students, there were probably only a dozen kids accounting for 75% of the serious instances. Instead of controlling THOSE kids, 'we' lightened up on enforcement and the problem spread.
I don't want ANY kids to fail, but the reality is that, if you set standards, SOME will not meet them. The 'solution' isn't to lower the standards so that EVERYONE 'succeeds'. If you don't end up actually KNOWING anything, how is that 'succeeding'? Anyway, by all means, make it possible TO succeed, but don't expect that you can make everyone DO it.

David, if you're not a teacher (and have never been one?), you can't begin to argue the issue with any insight.
Gotta admit, I stopped reading your post there.
Following that logic (?), do you also hold that if you've never played professional sports, you can't possibly be an insightful professional sports commentator, writer or analyst? Or is that somehow different? And if so, how?
Lemme know so that I can wash my brain of anything I ever learned from Vince Scully, Bob Costas, Tom Verducci, Paul Zimmerman...
Me, I went to school for ~20 years, have two relatives (both with PhDs) who taught for years, am married almost 45 years to a retired school teacher, live in a neighborhood overstocked with retired school teachers, and have audited the books of about 20-25 schools. But, OK, I've never been a teacher. Do I, and others with similar bios, also NOT have any insight on the issue?

Fair enough, Stillers; I made too sweeping a statement going in. I would suggest that the cases you cite involve people who either have, or have access to, direct knowledge of the field involved. I submit that opinions tend to be less valid if not supported by actual evidence and experience. If you could be bothered to go beyond that flawed introduction, I'd be interested in your thoughts.

Hello... 65% of Mama portfolio comprised of FBND. BND, fidelity2020 Fpifx, fidelitycash FCASH, and trp2020 funds TRRBX
She has many private bond corps from Ford att tmobile GM BAC
Btw most cash CD/ yields are extremely low now so unclear if these are good vehicles going forward
Kind regards

I just tried to purchase ITCSX at Schwab, and was told fund wasn't available at Schwab, so now I'm confused? Schwab does offer FLOTX which is one of the least risky Floating Rate Bond funds with $2500 minimum and transaction fee.

ITCSX is open at Schwab No load /with a fee - annual returns going back ten years within .05 -.15 basis points below PRWCX - Most likely as a result of the slightly higher ER .

Feb 5th, 2021 episode:
RYSEX is ranked #58th by US NEWS (Vanguard Funds are ranked #1,2,&3):
https://money.usnews.com/funds/search?category=small-value

David Giroux (PRWCX) suggest Floating Rate loans (Leveraged Loans or Bank Loans). TRP price manages RPIFX (see if you can get around the $1M minimum) or PRFRX ($2500).
Link to Bank Loan Mutual Funds:
https://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/rankings/bank-loan

Always jam packed with information:
could-1-400-stimulus-checks-lift-air-travel-demand

David, if you're not a teacher (and have never been one?), you can't begin to argue the issue with any insight.
Gotta admit, I stopped reading your post there.
Following that logic (?), do you also hold that if you've never played professional sports, you can't possibly be an insightful professional sports commentator, writer or analyst? Or is that somehow different? And if so, how?
Lemme know so that I can wash my brain of anything I ever learned from Vince Scully, Bob Costas, Tom Verducci, Paul Zimmerman...
Me, I went to school for ~20 years, have two relatives (both with PhDs) who taught for years, am married almost 45 years to a retired school teacher, live in a neighborhood overstocked with retired school teachers, and have audited the books of about 20-25 schools. But, OK, I've never been a teacher. Do I, and others with similar bios, also NOT have any insight on the issue?

VOYA version appears to be an annuity fund;not available for sale at the 5 brokerage platforms I reviewed.

As I’ve noted... I’m in a fair number of MS funds... They have been @stillers for me (oops I mean Stellar) for me the last couple of years. This year looks strong as well. @BenWP shared a really interesting Baron EOY report which led me to this story: https://www.barrons.com/articles/more-than-two-dozen-funds-returned-more-than-100-last-year-heres-why-thats-not-good-news-51612570231
It seems to be a quick generalization of why Morgan Stanley funds have had such terrific returns as of late. It also implies that they may just be lucky by selecting a few high flyers like Fastly and Stitch Fix and the writer opines that the long term performance is not as as consistent with MS funds. I always appreciate alternate views to mine. So I’ll continue to keep an eye on my MS funds but perhaps it wasn’t just sheer luck. Perhaps they are on a consistent long term path of identifying real winners. The performance in small caps, growth and International is something to marvel at.

@Crash, you have it right. I've never known this fund to short by any significant percentage if at all. It is also my largest fund holding.
David's info would classify this as a market neutral fund which it certainly isn't. Per Schwab, the portfolio has about 1% short in equity and other, which I'm guessing is typical of any fund. It is fairly concentrated in that it's top 10 holdings make up about 57% of assets (assets = bonds and equity), 31 % of that being in equity. But to me that is not outrageous.
I don't really know where puts and sell call options list-out as long or short holdings, but could that be some of the confusion? Or could the short holdings be leveraged bond holdings. Maybe @msf might know.

So a simpleton like me ... reads the paragraph on ‘Duration Risk” that @bee references above... and where Paul says to ‘take duration risk in your equity sleeve” ... and my take away is: be careful with long term bond funds and if you have a longer investing horizon/duration, stick with equities.
But then I realized that I’ve never heard of equity duration risk. What is it? It turns out it’s quite complicated: https://www.ipe.com/equity-duration-how-viable/17520.article
This interview is really educational and the posts by bee too.

Wasn't it FD100 who said VXX over 30 get ready, over 35 start selling, over 40 RUN !!
What about on the downside?
I love Grantham's letters and long discussions of what the rational thing to do is. But the market is not rational. If it were all we would need is one index fund.
I thought Henry Blodgett's 1998 call to buy Amazon at $240 was nuts.
I always thought I should run a mutual fund that does the exact opposite of what I do in the Market.

GMO should hide in the closet. Their predictions since 2010 are so off the mark. In 12/31/2010, they predicted that US LC would make 2.9%, the SP500 made over 14% in the next 7 years. They said that EM would be better and they trail by a huge margin.(link).
Grantham is a bear for years. It's always "news" calling for a bear market. The 24/7 media machine wants you to read these articles and how they get paid.
But hey, Gundlach predicted the 10 years treasury would be at 6% in 2021. Arnott told us that his massive research works and PAUIX had a terrible performance. Bogle told us regression to the mean must happen, and it didn't.
2010: GMO's Grantham Warns of a Stock Bubble(link) WRONG
2012: “People think the American market is very cheap. We don’t. Grantham is bullish about international stocks. (link) WRONG
2014: Grantham: Big Stock Bubble ‘Will End Badly’ in 2016 (link) WRONG
I never listen to any predictions. As a trader I only pay attention to prices, charts and trends lately and NOW. They tell me in real time what the market is doing. In the last 10 years I was invested at 99+% of my money at 97% of the time. The key for me is to invest all my money all the time and no cash, BUT, when risk is high to be in a high % of cash for days to several weeks.

Taxes. BIG problem for lots of investors, and as you've described for many MSSMX shareholders. Fortunate enough to have successfully executed a life-long investment strategy to still have 95% in tax-deferred a/c's post-Medicare age. Hold only a few munis outside the umbrella.
All that said, trusting there are far worse problems these days than paying taxes on out-sized gains.

Awesome find @MikeW. Thanks for sharing.
Helps answer the question, "After being UP ~150% in 2020, what can you possibly do for an encore?"