Mona, look up TDF retirement & their 2020 TDF. You could use one or the other or split the two. I believe the 2015 TDF is close to rolling into the Retirement fund. You will get tips also. I haven't checked Life Strategy allocation. The 34% cash maybe a problem to find a bench marking fund. If you combine cash & bonds as one , you could luck out & find one.
FWIW, Derf

From above post :
"A number of posters have referenced possibly investing 100% in their chosen benchmark fund. Not a bad idea. "
Had I done this , put 50 or 100 % in a TDF at Vanguard, I would have blown my fuse do to the LARGE cap gains that were issued for this tax year !
This subject was discuss about 2 months ago.
Enjoy your Sunday, Derf

This change requires a different way of thinking about the impact of energy price spikes.

The big picture: In the past, when oil prices spiked, the impact on the U.S. economy was straightforward: It made America poorer, as more of our income went overseas to pay for imported energy.
Now, after the shale gas revolution of the last 15 years, the impact is more subtle. Higher fuel prices disadvantage consumers and energy-intensive industries, yes. But there is a counteracting surge in incomes for domestic energy producers and their workers.
Higher oil prices no longer depress overall measures of prosperity like GDP and national income, but rather shift it around toward certain regions. Texas and North Dakota win; Massachusetts and North Carolina lose.

Link:
energy independent

Benchmarks should be simple & stable/static. TDFs are too complicated as general benchmarks. Then, there are wide variations among the same-dated TDFs.
This is why I like previously mentioned Fido Asset Manager & Vanguard LifeStrategy series for general benchmarking.
But I understand that posters may choose any benchmark for their personal benchmarking purposes. In fact, PV even allows customized personal benchmarks.

Yep - I’ve never liked, used, or benchmarked to a TDF. (TRRIX and PRSIX aren’t TD / don’t use glide paths).
What’s always troubled me about TDFs is the glide path could end up being “out of sync” with valuations at any particular time. So you might end up with 80% in equities at a time of extremely high valuations and than 20-25 years later have only 30% in equities after they’ve become relatively cheap by historical standards. Not a prediction. Just saying …

It's impossible to keep track of all these series without a scorecard, and even then, I'm not sure.
Until 2013, T. Rowe Price offered an aggressive, but stable (unchanged glidepath) product, unlike its leading competitors, Vanguard and Fidelity.
2011 Ibbotoson Paper, Bait and Switch: Glide Path Instability

“In 2008 and 2009, there was increased interest in adjusting our glide path more conservatively,” said Jerome Clark, portfolio manager of T. Rowe Price’s retirement funds. “We avoid making glide path changes based upon short-term market environments, which is consistent with the message we communicate to our investors to stay the course when markets swing to extremes.”

https://www.investmentnews.com/target-date-glide-paths-are-unstable-at-some-major-plan-providers-37617
By 2013, T. Rowe Price and Vanguard had well outperformed Fidelity over the preceding five years because of their more aggressive glide paths. Consequently, Fidelity again changed its glidepath, bringing it in line with its competitors. It seems like a stretch to say that T. Rowe Price at the same time introduced a less aggressive line of funds because of loud complaints received years ago as it began multi-year run of superior results.

Still, it is notable that as of Aug. 22, [2013] T. Rowe Price launched new funds that recognize that some investors are more risk averse as a complement its core T. Rowe Price Retirement Funds, which had $88.1 billion in assets as of March 31.

https://riabiz.com/a/2013/9/27/after-a-lot-of-flak-fidelity-investments-does-a-study-and-pledges-to-change-how-it-manages-its-170-billion-of-target-date-funds
Meanwhile, Fidelity was not only tinkering with its initial Freedom series, but creating a slew of variants: Freedom Index (same idea, but w/index funds), Managed Payout Funds and Simplicity RMD Funds (originally Income Replacement Funds launched in 2008, with dates every two years). That change came about around 2017.
You can find those four series on Fidelity's Asset Allocation funds page (click on Asset Allocation tab).
https://www.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/fidelity-funds/overview
What Fidelity isn't showing you there is that it has a fifth(!) series of funds. Fidelity Freedom Blend funds, which is a "blend" of active and passive management. See, e.g. FHARX. These date from 2018.
As Yogi noted, in 2020, T. Rowe Price decided change the glide paths of both of its series to make them more aggressive. Rather than make a quick change, it changed the allocations over a period of two years, which should be complete in the middle of this year.
In 2021, T. Rowe Price launched a series of blend funds (that appear to make more extensive use of index funds to reduce cost). These follow the same new ("enhanced") glide path that the Retirement Series are migrating to. But since the Retirement Blend series is new, it doesn't need to transition to the new glide path, it starts with that immediately. The two series, Retirement and Retirement Blend, should be tracking the same path within a few months.

• The Retirement Blend Fund series is designed for investors who prefer a single, simplified, professionally managed solution for retirement investing and who want an approach that marries the benefits of active and passive investment styles, including placing a greater emphasis on managing overall cost.
• The Retirement Blend strategy has been in place at T. Rowe Price since 2018 but it was previously available only in the collective investment trust format. This mutual fund series extends the firm's Retirement Blend approach to a wider range of investors for whom a mutual fund is the preferred or most appropriate vehicle.
• The Retirement Blend Funds use the enhanced glide path and the same diversification and tactical asset allocation as T. Rowe Price's existing Retirement series of target date portfolios.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/t-rowe-price-adds-retirement-blend-funds-to-target-date-lineup-301343055.html
I respectfully disagree that T. Rowe Price has made this confusing to the max. IMHO that "honor" goes to Fidelity, with its ever changing glidepaths, its greater multiplicity of series, its "hidden" series of blend funds, and its changing of series names and objectives. And lest I forget, a slew of share classes, including K and K6, and Fidelity Advisor variants with their alphabet soup: A, C, M, I, Z, and Z6.

A number of posters have referenced possibly investing 100% in their chosen benchmark fund. Not a bad idea. That’s what prompted me to switch from TRRIX to PRSIX in early 2021 and than stake out a modest portfolio position in PRSIX. It’s a very good fund, and I anticipated ramping up the commitment in coming years with an eventual 100% stake in that one fund.
What changed my thinking? Here’s a few considerations:
- For one, I’d had some favorite long held funds at several different houses I didn’t want to part with.
- A second thought was the suspicion that some of PRSIX’s solid past performance was owing to the decades long bond bull market we’ve experienced and that if that trend reversed the fund would cease to post such fine returns.
- Third, 100% in PRSIX wouldn’t provide the level of exposure to commodities and precious metals I deemed important.
- Fourth, there was a reluctance to put all the eggs in the same basket.
- Lastly, while PRSIX’s 5% investment in a Blackstone hedge fund had appeal initially, after moving from TRP to Fidelity many alternative ways to hedge had become available.
Like most here, I suppose, I occassionally compare my portfolio’s performance to a wide array of funds. Benchmarking to one (or in my case 3) funds is fine - but not an end-all in itself.

I hadn't looked at the performance tabs on Yahoo. That's a really nice feature.
Now, if Yahoo would only report accurately. FGMNX had three losing calendar years: the two you mentioned and also 2021. Yahoo show 2021's return as N/A, though it knows better. Yahoo gives December 31 adjusted closing figures as 11.58 (2021) and 11.68 (2020) for a loss of 0.85%, matching Fidelity's official figure.
https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/performance-and-risk/31617K105?type=sq-NavBar
FWIW, according to the Yahoo performance tab, the fund's worst calendar quarters were in 1987: 2Q (-2.48%) and 3Q (-3.40%). The worst three month drawdown, irrespective of month boundaries, was around 6½%, from the close on July 17, 1987 to the close on Oct 16 (a Friday) or Oct 19 (a Monday) 1987. Nearly double the calendar quarter max loss.
I got this by downloading the daily adjusted close figures from Yahoo and playing with Excel to approximate quarterly returns day by day.

PIGLX generated lower 5 Yr., 10 Yr., and 15 Yr. returns than PGBIX.
The fund was also more volatile and experienced larger drawdowns.
Investors were not rewarded for taking on currency risk.
Total net assets for the PIGLX strategy were $195 MM as of 01/31/2022
while total net assets for the PGBIX strategy were $903 MM.

Investors need to be mindful regarding M*'s fund category classifications.
Some funds don't fit neatly into one of the available fund categories.
Here are some quick examples that I recall:
NEWFX - classified as diversified EM fund; averages 1/3 assets in developed markets
World Stock - all large-cap funds (value, blend, growth) were lumped together until 05/01/2021

@Jim0445, now it works fine. Original and comparisons in Interactive-Charts now have reinvestments. Both mutual funds and ETFs also have reinvestments. The 1st version had the flaw that it did reinvestments for mutual funds but not for ETFs, but now that is fixed. What I still don't like is that these Interactive-Charts cannot be linked via direct website URLs but one must use screenshot, image-host, MFO Insert-Image icon (I did a post on steps for posting images https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/59179/posting-images#latest).
SP500 ETF and OEF Max-view, Image URL at host https://i.ibb.co/D8FC7gG/Screenshot-2022-02-19-17-50-29.png

Jeremy Grantham was on Barron's roundtable today and his take on the market was extra bleak.
He believes we're in a "super bubble" about to burst and something that has only occurred 3x in the last 100 or so years.
-S&P 500 to fall 50% to 2500 in his opinion.
-"Today, well over 40% of the Nasdaq is down 50% from their highs" - suppose he's referring to the death cross.
His Recommendations?
- Have cash for next few years
- Avoid US stocks except high quality
-Blue chips are the way to go, but avoid US
-Go International, they are normally overpriced
-EM like Japan, Growth
-Oh and avoid US stocks
Those are his "thoughts" on the market.

I don't have a clear preference for any specific growth funds with less downside risk than category peers.
AKREX (Class I: AKRIX) seems like a good choice but its expense ratio of 1.3% gives me pause.
CSIEX (Class I: CEYIX) has performed well since the current management team started on 06/16/2015.

Thanks @MikeM. Great question. You & I go way back on this one.
WOW - Lots of changes for me the past few years.
- My original benchmark (for 15-20 years) was TRRIX (40/60) - although I deviated away to “buy down” on equities during the ‘07-‘09 meltdown.
- Beginning in 2021 I switched my benchmark to PRSIX (also 40/60) and for the first time decided to include a small weighting (7%) of the benchmark inside the portfolio. Switching was bad timing. PRSIX, which for years has outperformed TRRIX, lagged badly during 2021.
- In late 2021 I sold PRSIX and moved to PSMM for a benchmark, also buying a small slice. The advantages were lower cost and ease of trading in and out. It’s 40/60 with the ability to alter its allocation as managers see fit. Yikes - the bond exposure seemed to really jerk this one around, so I quickly exited.
- Early this year I developed a tri-fund tracker (benchmark) I like so far. This tracker follows three equally weighted funds: AOK (30/70), PRSIX (40/60) and ABRZX. The only one I own is ABRZX to the tune of 7+%. (I’m sure there are superior funds.) It’s a quirky fund you need to follow to appreciate. But, using derivatives it provides a moderate “hedged” exposure to commodities, stocks, and bonds.
How am I holding up? I’m pleased to be ahead of the benchmark YTD. Below is the performance of those benchmark components this year. Age and circumstance dictate a rather conservative approach - and I’ve never maintained a separate cash stash.
AOK -4.52%
PRSIX -4.45%
ABRZX -3.10%
YTD benchmark average: -4.02%
Yesterday, the tracker dropped 0.12% (equally weighted in dollar terms). / My portfolio was right in-line with that (although some days it varies a bit).One reason is I’ve been maintaining a speculative position in TAIL (an inverse fund) to the tune of 6-7%.
There’s an old cliche about “if you don’t have a road map you’ll never realize by how far you’ve missed your mark.”
@MikeM - I admire your work with benchmarks. Generally you’ve chosen wisely. One thing I’d toss out is I’ve noticed TRP doing some things in their allocation funds over the past year (assuming you benchmark to them) that indicate hedging on their part. One is overweighting their Dynamic Global Income fund (RPIEX) which appears to short bonds to some extent and also ISTM they’ve beefed up exposure to floating rate bonds. Also, TMSRX is showing up in some. For RPSIX it comprises 4% of holdings.
In my own case, I’m “playing with fire” having built up a near 10% spec position to hedge what I still perceive as expensive equity markets. Mostly TAIL but also GLDB which holds longer-dated corporates and gold. They haven’t made $$ yet - but they have buffered some of the bigger downdrafts in the markets. “Staying power” is worth something.
FWIW

Two good fund series for benchmarking are:
Vanguard LifeStrategy (equity 20%, 40%, 60%,80%) funds of index funds.
Fidelity Asset Manager (equity 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, 85%) funds of Fidelity Central (internal; not listed) funds.
https://www.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/fidelity-fund-portfolios/asset-manager-funds

@MikeM,
Wealthtrack guest this week discusses TRP Retirement Funds:
Linked Here

Thought I'd share and ask how others are holding up to their own benchmarks. Sometimes you have to step back from the headlines and financial talking-heads and see how things are going personally.
In a market that is so volatile and seems heading lower, it's hard for me to get a perspective for my portfolio losses unless I compare to some benchmarks. So I did that this morning. Overall, I have 2 tax deferred accounts that make up my total, total being ~46% equity. A little more than 1/2 my total is in a Schwab robo, Intelligent Portfolio. No fuss, no muss. Nothing I can screw up. It self balances to the goal of 45% equities (at 43% now). The other account is what I self-manage, sitting at about 49% equities, very little in bonds and a lot of the "other" category which I guess is the term for alternative investments, commodities and gold.
I'm comfortable using the TRP retirement funds for benchmarks. The closest benchmark for me is their 2010 retirement fund, TBLQX, 45% equities. I also like to compare to SPY and VTI (Vanguards total stock market etf) to get some perspective of, if the market falls big-time, what would I expect my savings to drop, percentage wise. Below is my comparisons:
YTD
Schwab robo -3.4%
Self managed -4.4
Total -3.9
Bechmarks:
TBLQX -4.6
SPY -9.3
VTI -9.9
So in perspective, I guess I'm holding up ok versus these benchmarks. If I make no adjustments and the market has a big drop I can guestimate my loss being "only" about 40% of that drop. Good to know.
FWIW, some other TRP retirement funds YTD:
TRRIX 38% stock = -4.1%
TBLPX 41% stock = -4.3
TBLQX 45% stock = -4.6
TBLSX 48% stock = -4.7
TSBAX 52% stock = -5.0
TBLVX 60% stock = -5.5

USAA sold its brokerage business to Schwab

I was to recieve nothing as a USAA member for the transfer of my assets to Schwab so I took my assets to TD Ameritrade and received a transfer bonus of $1500.
Funny, now that TD and Schwab are merging...if I end up staying with Schwab I at least am $1500 better off than I would have been with the USAA/Schwab deal.
Anyone aware of transfer bonus offers that are worth considering?
investing/best-brokerage-account-bonuses/

The $5 charge is for incremental (additional) purchases via automatic investment. An initial investment in a TF fund costs either $49.95 (for most TF funds) or $75 (for Schwab, Vanguard, and D&C funds).
But there's a way around that, by purchasing an initial position elsewhere and transferring in kind. (Don't cringe - I know we've both had recent problems transferring assets.)
Generally, funds purchased directly from a fund family can be transferred with no cost to a brokerage. Or one can use a brokerage that charges a low transaction fee and does free transfers such as Merrill Edge ($19.95 to buy, $0 for partial transfer; just leave a little cash in the account) or Vanguard ($20 to buy, $0 to transfer).
I mention these brokerages because I have experience transferring assets in kind (ACAT) between them and Fidelity in both directions at no cost. (Merrill has been problematic in handling fractional shares even of mutual funds, though they may have improved their system since the last time I transferred assets.)
Here's a page with a table of brokerages and their ACAT transfer fees.
https://topratedfirms.com/brokers/fees/brokerage-account-transfer-fees.aspx
Take it with a grain of salt, and always check with the brokerage directly. For example, the table says that Robinhood does not charge for partial transfers. Robinhood says "There is a $75 fee for partial and full ACATS out of Robinhood."
https://robinhood.com/us/en/support/articles/transfer-stocks-out-of-your-robinhood-account/

14th in the ranking? USAA? Really?
USAA out sources...

Victory Capital supports USAA members with USAA Mutual Funds

https://investor.vcm.com/member
USAA sells out...
Also, USAA brokerage accounts were sold to Schwab for a handsome profit.
($1.8 Billion)
charles-schwab-to-buy-usaa-assets-in-1point8-billion-deal
So, my feeling... they should be much lower in the ranking.

“Fidelity's charge of $5 to buy, $0 to sell seems pretty cheap.”
However, I just ran a test at Fido by hypothetically buying 2 different D&C funds (DODIX, DODFX) with 2 different imputed amounts ($2500 & &5,000). In all 4 cases the cost to buy would have been $75.00 each.