That piece is arguing that at best, VWINX will fall less than other traditional funds, e.g. since it leans toward value5;. That's in contrast to funds that are designed to benefit from inflation. Which is why I felt that it doesn't make much sense to directly compare performance of these two types of funds.
5;This is not unusual for traditional 40/60 funds. Only 4 out of 120 (30%-50% allocation) funds have portfolios that are in growth style boxes (per M* screener).
The writer speaks in sweeping generalities without substantiation:

• the fact that the Fed Funds rate will stay at or near zero for at least the next few years [as of Sept 2020].
  Facts don't change, but predictions do as events change or more data is known. In June, "The central bank forecast[] it would raise interest rates twice by the end of 2023 after previously estimating there would be no interest rate hike until 2024."
  Most recently (Sept), "Just over 70 per cent of [leading academic economists surveyed by FT] believe the Fed will raise rates by at least a quarter of a percentage point in 2022, with almost 20 per cent expecting the move to come in the first six months of the year. That is far earlier than the 2023 lift-off from today’s near-zero levels that Fed officials pencilled in back in June."
  
• Higher inflation likely leads to higher interest rates and a steeper yield curve?
  Wellesley traditionally holds a longer duration portfolio than is typical for its peers. That would hurt Wellesley if you believe this generalization linking interest rates and yield curves and that it will hold the next time.
  However, when we look at the last sharp spike in interest rates (1978-1981) we see a very different picture. Rate going up across all maturities (which would hurt all high grade bonds), but with the yield curve inverting - the opposite of steepening. (Inverted yield curves often presage recessions, which in turn can be triggered by high inflation and lower spending.)
  
  (Source page)

Speaking of the late 70s and inverted yield curves, banks (notably S&Ls) took a beating, as they lent out long term money at lower rates while borrowing short term money (via deposit accounts) at higher rates. SA notes that VWINX concentrates on financials, but doesn't break it down further. (According to its latest semiannual report, about half of the fund's financial sector holdings are in banks: JPM, BAC, MS, TFC.) Personally, I have faith in Wellington Management to navigate this risk.
M* has an actual analysis of real performance data for VWINX to see how the fund responds to rising interest rates.
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1041732/stress-testing-some-vanguard-and-t-rowe-allocation-funds
What M* found was that Aug-Dec 2016, "as the price of long-dated bonds fell, Vanguard Wellesley Income lagged its average category peer by 1.2 percentage points." VWINX lost money over that period while on average its peers eeked out gains.
OTOH, "over the more recent January-October 2018 interest-rate climb ... [VWINX] modestly outpaced the average of that group by 0.5 percentage points. Even with its longer duration, the strategy’s lower exposure to weaker-performing non-U.S. equities gave it a bump.
Hmm, a lesser exposure to foreign equities. SA didn't pick up on this. Could help again if rates climb globally, but hurt if rates rise disproportionately in the US. Regardless, we're again talking about relative performance against peers, not measuring against inflation oriented funds.
I certainly wouldn't sell VWINX. Though that's different from saying that this fund is designed to weather extended bouts of inflation well.

Rising Rates Are Not Likely To Trash Your Bond Returns
Tom Madell
http://funds-newsletter.com
Portfolio Strategy, ETF investing, Fund Holdings, fund research
Summary
Bond fund/ETF investors, and even most investment professionals, believe that rising Fed-controlled interest rates will likely sink your bond funds.
In this article, I show historical data that rising Fed Fund rates are not typically associated with falling bond fund NAVs.
Since bond prices may not suffer as investors tend to think, this suggests some strategy considerations for holders of funds such as VBTLX and BND.
Federal Reserve Building in Washington DC
pabradyphoto/iStock via Getty Images
The news is full of articles these days that the Federal Reserve Board, the government entity charged with setting short-term interest rates, is close to reducing its support for the economy, and subsequently, likely to raise interest rates in the not too distant future. While such a raise in rates (or a series of ones) is not going to be immediate, it now seems many of the Fed's prominent economists are projecting an initial raise as early as mid-2022 with additional rises forecast to follow.**
https://www.google.com/amp/s/seekingalpha.com/amp/article/4458480-rising-rates-are-not-likely-to-trash-your-bond-returns
Enjoy

“ARK Investment Management LLC, said Wednesday that it will permanently close its New York headquarters at the end of the month and move to St. Petersburg, Fla., on Nov. 1. Known for its line of exchange-traded funds that invest in companies deemed disruptive and innovative in their industries, ARK said it aims to deepen ties with local entrepreneurs and technology startups by also building an innovation center.
‘ARK is not a traditional Wall Street asset management firm and we are looking forward to breaking the mold further by relocating to St. Petersburg, a city investing in technology, science, and innovation,’ Ms. Wood said in a statement.”
WSJ (subscription required)

If inflation is the OP’s worry, continue to own VWINX. Explained in detail here:
vwinx-excellent-choice-fed-bubble-begins-to-leak

I'd be inclined to pass on MARMX. If you really want to purchase it, it's available through some annuities, e.g. Mutual of America's individual retirement annuity (IRA).
More completely:

The Investment Company offers shares in the Funds to the Insurance Companies, without sales charge, for allocation to their Separate Accounts. See your variable annuity or variable life insurance prospectus ... Shares of the Funds are also offered through retirement plans. See your Summary Plan Description or consult with your plan sponsor for information on how to purchase shares of the Funds through your retirement plan

https://connect.rightprospectus.com/MutualofAmerica/TADF/62824C842/FS?site=NAV#
(click on statutory prospectus)
Here's MARMX's legacy risk/reward page. One can enter VTINX to compare the funds on these metrics.
http://performance.morningstar.com/fund/ratings-risk.action?t=MARMX
Over the past three years, VTINX has produced better returns (Average vs. Below Average) albeit with higher risk (Average vs. Below Average), leading to a three year 4 star rating (vs. 2 stars for MARMX).
VTINX has superior 3 year returns (7.53% vs. 6.27%) albeit with more volatility (6.25 vs 5.18) leading to nearly identical Sharpe and Sortino ratios.
All of which is about what one would expect when comparing a fund with a 30% target equity allocation (VTINX) to a a fund with a target 25% equity allocation (MARMX).

Its been a weird month where Energy boomed and everything else was sorta sagging.
1 MONTH RELATIVE PERFORMANCE
-6.3 % Healthcare
-5.3 Real Estate
-5.3 Utilities
- 5 Basic Materials
-4.2 Communication Services
-4.2 Technology
-3.7 Consumer Defensive
-2.5 Consumer Cyclical
-1.5 Industrials
+13.9 Energy
+ 1.6 Financial

Sold all my DOG yesterday morning with Dow down 400. Whew! Made a bit on it the past 5 weeks, but not something I’d want to cling to. Markets can remain irrational longer than most of us can remain solvent.

Note the language in the original story that the survey of economists was done by "the Initiative on Global Markets Forum (the University of Chicago Booth School of Business." These are Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford economists surveyed by a business school--not exactly bastions of radical leftwing ideology. Dalio has a particular world view, which slants towards Ayn Rand, yet even he recently acknowledged something has to be done about inequality. But his economic predictions have been wrong in the past, in fact quite recently: https://bloombergquint.com/business/for-bridgewater-a-year-of-losses-withdrawals-and-uneasy-staff And hedge fund/money managers in general have had a particular anti-Keynesian libertarian slant that has proven them wrong many times: https://theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/05/if-hedge-funders-are-so-smart-why-are-they-so-relentlessly-wrong/275700/ The thing is educated people disagree on this subject of inflation, but one thing the stats show is that the notion that there is a one-to-one correlation between the money supply and fiscal spending with inflation is a political fallacy. The causes are complex. I've posted this before but it's worth reposting: https://gmo.com/americas/research-library/part-1-inflation--tall-tales-and-true-causes/
Moreover, I would add, as you mentioned, that depending on one's perspective inflation isn't all bad, depending on the kind, size and duration of inflation. A lot of money managers dread wage inflation, and it may be the source of real broader inflation. But I think wages for average Americans have stagnated for decades on a real inflation-adjusted basis and have actually declined since the 1970s for the lowest paid workers. Some wage inflation even if it filtered into the rest of the CPI would be a good thing for many people. A higher minimum wage is absolutely in order.
But the thing I would stress is that no one really knows whether the current economic policies will bring about a period of extended high inflation, and the fearmongering from the rightwing has less to do with economic reality than concerns about having to pay workers more and their taxes potentially going up. The truest response in perhaps the most unsettling one: We just don't know. In fact, inflation from my perspective may be more influenced by Covid-inspired global supply shortages than monetary or fiscal policy.
Interestingly, from a leftwing MMT perspective you can hear some very different viewpoints from the prevailing ones in the original survey in this interview with Stephanie Kelton who wrote The Deficit Myth: https://dissentmagazine.org/online_articles/monetary-mythbusting-an-interview-with-stephanie-kelton

My apologize, but are you trying to create a catastrophe or avoid one with FSRRX?
Here are FSRRX stats (source Portfolio Visualizer):

FSRRX has had no clear advantage over a conservatively allocated fund similar to VWINX.
It's almost 32% draw down in July of 2008 took over 2 years to dig out of. It Real return (after inflation) is barely 2% over the last 15 years. I believe Fidelity offers MM Mutual funds that might achieve this.
As a hedge against bad outcomes what about PRPFX..not perfect but better at dealing with equity market catastrophes.

Suggest keeping this discussion on the other, original FSRRX thread.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/58743/fsrrx#latest
Very interested in further comments on this fund.

@ron : This isn't a bond fund 23% stock 52% bond 17-19 % (?) other. Max draw-down 14%.
Derf

@LewisBraham
Your last entry reminds me of Ray Dalio's presentation on "How the Economic Machine Works". I recall one quote form his presentation that goes something like:
"One man's debt (liability) is another man's income (asset)"
Debt creates what he describes as the long and short term debt cycles. Individuals need to service (repay) there debt (Principal & interest) to the borrower (usually the bank). An arrangement exists whereby the government injects liquidity into the system at a very low interest rate (overnight bank rate). The bank in turns loans this liquidity (money) to individuals and corporations so that they can receive and offer goods and services.
The money loaned to individuals and corporations needs to be repaid to the bank (both principal and interest). The money borrowed by the bank is only repaid to the government to the extent that it is borrowed and the banks only outlay is the overnight rate of interest. The government repo's (soaks up) any liquidity (borrowed money) that was not used by the bank to extend credit to credit worthy borrowers.
If credit worthy borrowers add value (labor, innovation, good & services, demand for financial assets) they are able to both pay back the bank and grow the economy. It all works.
When borrowers default, the systems grinds to a halt.
I'm sure you understand all of this, but too many (myself included) Ray Dalio does a great job explaining it all (see video below).
Getting back to inflation. It seems a strong economy should both inflate (have elements good inflation) and deflate (have elements good deflation) simultaneously (would be nice).
IMHO, Biden's bill should be looked at through that lens.
When is Inflation good?
how-can-inflation-be-good-economy
why-is-inflation-good
When is Deflation good?
can-deflation-be-good
Ray Dalio's Presentation:

BOT a wee bit more ITOT near the Open yesterday before the market recovered. Also added to VGWAX before yesterday's close to catch the expected uptick in foreign markets today. That may do it for me for on BTDip/Diplet activity for the time being at least.
So...
Fear is subsiding. Major averages will be back within ~1% of their 50dma's at the Open today. This of course ain't over until it the S&P for one breaks above its 50 and stays there this time.
Here's free FX T/A from this AM:
https://www.fxempire.com/forecasts/article/e-mini-sp-500-index-es-futures-technical-analysis-decision-time-for-buyers-at-4399-75-4432-75-785432
EDIT to add:
And from after the close. Big day tomorrow.
https://www.fxempire.com/forecasts/article/sp-500-price-forecast-stock-markets-get-boost-heading-into-jobs-number-785509

There is also a belief that there is no way to fairly tax people to pay down the deficit-spending without destroying America. I can think of a few ways based on who benefited the most from previous government/taxpayer-funded bailouts:

I first heard him as a child in the 1950s, and it came to help me understand thoughtless reactionary minds and their frights. Plus wannabe-droll delivery.

Paul Harvey? Boy, you are old! :)

Maybe not.
"In late August [2001], 83-year-old broadcasting legend Paul Harvey returned full-time to radio land. For three months, he'd been out of commission thanks to a lingering virus that zapped his once invincible voice box."
https://www.salon.com/2001/09/25/harvey_2/
Paul Harvey Noon News and Comment - Feb. 16, 2009 (Last one by Paul)

And now you know ... the rest of the story.

Here's one (free) T/A's (who I follow regularly) take on the S&P. It's pretty basic stuff but (FWIW) it is consistent with the T/A I pay for.
Take it or leave it. YMMV.
https://www.fxempire.com/forecasts/article/sp-500-price-forecast-stock-markets-continue-same-consolidation-784476

“Currently, the Fund’s fundamental policy regarding industry concentration requires the Fund to invest more than 25% of its assets in securities related to the real estate industry. The Board also approved a change in the Fund’s industry concentration policy such that the Fund will no longer be required to invest more than 25% of its assets in securities related to the real estate industry.”
Speaks for itself.

@stillers said:
GoldmanSachs for one I trust......

This is where you lose me. GS knows how to make money for GS, but that does not imply that they give out their best proprietary information (or important guidance) to the general public. Nor does any brokerage house.

What I said was
GoldmanSachs for one I trust uses some pretty sophisticated programs and their "guess" (if you can call it that) is for a S&P 9% gain in Q4.
Well I happen to pay the BIG bucks for a coupla newsletters (not GS) and they're saying pretty much the same thing.
Still lost?
If you know the history of the S&P's average annual path since 1950 as compared to this year's and that over 70% of semis stocks are already in Correction mode, you know that given that history and the current state of BIG tech, a 9%-10% move UP in Q4 2020 is a REAL possibility. And as I and people in much higher pay grades than me are saying, is likely.
And FWIW on the free stuff, GS is not alone in projecting a Q4 move UP:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/rate-fears-just-another-white-knuckle-moment-for-tech-stocks-says-this-analyst-whos-forecasting-rebound-of-at-least-10-11633427803?siteid=yhoof2
Excerpt:
...To closely followed tech analyst Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities, this is just a “white knuckle moment” that will soon pass. Ives says the worries around rising yields and growth stock valuations will give way to a year-end rally of at least 10% in the tech space...