I Decided to resurrect this thread with the hope of a few more thoughts and opinions now that Mr. Hwan has had a full year as sole manager and made some significant holding changes.
The SD appears to have dropped by 2+, although still a bit high, with positive Alpha that’s well above the -7.55 (per m*).
I’m considering PARWX/PFPWX for a taxable account, but not sure that’s wise. Mr. Hwan is aiming for 30% to 40% turnover which I believe should help keep the tax implications reasonable given the expected return.
Thank you for any and all replies or suggestions!

Jan 7th 2022 Episode:

I have had sig Commodities esp energy since last year's oil crash. A lot of the ETFs are too heavy in Oil to be a diversifier, so I added DBA for agriculture and GMET for "green metals" REMX for "strategic metals"
For broad based funds, I still think SPACX is a decent fund, although it paid a huge income distribution this year, presumably due to profits on futures. It is less volatile than those mentioned above with lower draw downs in 2020 ( 28 % vs over 50%)
There are lots of alternatives but look carefully at how the mange risk

My alternatives sucked. Combined 1 week return = -1.45% (neg)
4 Funds included: TMSRX, ABRZX, PRPFX, QED
My equity & balanced sleeve did better. Combined 1 week return = -.0.56% (neg)
4 Funds included : PRWCX, DODBX, RPGAX, FLJP
I’ve never viewed alternatives as “defensive”. But, over the past, they’ve held up much better than the equity & balanced funds in rough markets. I should note that two equity funds owned (the larger being GLFOX) and 2 stocks owned are not included in the above totals. Those are part of a separate “real assets” sleeve.
For comparison, here’s a few I track (1-week / Lipper)
HSGFX +3.44%
PRFDX +2.61%
PRAFX 0
HSTRX -1.43%
VFINX -1.83%
TRREX -3.32%
TRBCX - 6.19%
PRMTX -7.18%
ARKK -10.75%
Some factors that affected markets this week:
- Interest rates shot up. This hurt most bond holdings. It helped funds with outsized exposure to banks / financials. This is evident in the positive return for PRFDX - TRP’s Equity and Income fund. However, rate sensitive sectors / funds were hurt. Price’s real estate fund, TRREX, fell 3.32%.
- Minutes from last FOMC meeting were released indicating a more hawkish Fed stance / Ditto above.
- Data released showed accelerating wage growth. / Ditto above.
- Gold and p/m miners got slammed, though they’re still above their lowest levels of the past 12 months.
- Tech got whacked.
- Price’s PRAFX, their real asset fund, appears to have suffered from Schizophrenia, ending the week flat - caught between the plunge in gold and precious metals mining stocks and the whirlwind upside for many other metals. This one holds a lot of real estate, which also hurt.
One interesting tidbit ….. DFND, an intriguing looking defensive long-short fund I’ve been watching, tumbled more than 5% in the week. Now, how do you accomplish that?

MyMoneyBlog, citing Bogleheads, has a good explanation of what happened.
https://www.mymoneyblog.com/vanguard-target-retirement-funds-nav-drop-cap-gains-distribution.html
In brief, in early 2021 Vanguard enabled lots of employer plans move money from the retail TDFs to the institutional TDF, by lowering the mins from $100M to $5M. Companies responded. There was a mass movement of dollars out of the retail TDFs, creating large cap gains for those remaining.
As pointed out in the blog, had Vanguard merged the funds first, then none of these plans would have moved money around and there would have been no large gains distributed.
So the gains were not because of the merger, but in spite of the merger.

This is trial post here.
Pg L4: COVER STORY, “The Commodities Boom/Why It’s Time to Invest in COMMODITIES, and How to Do It”. Factors driving commodities include inflation, China and energy transitions. Bloomberg commodity index rose +27% in 2021 and more gains are ahead, especially for oil and ag-commodities. INFLATION is driven by pent-up demand and constrained supplies due to supply-chain disruptions. Greenflation is also contributing as the ESG movement has costs. CHINA is a huge consumer of commodities, and it is slowing. Its property sector is in trouble. Yet, commodities need China. ENERGY TRANSITIONS and ESG are driving the demand for several commodities. Rising energy and other prices feed into higher AG-COMMODITY prices. Plant substitutes for meats are boosting demand for several ag-commodities. WEATHER has been difficult in many areas. Most commodities are in BACKWARDATION (i.e., the prices of near-futures are higher than those for far-futures); futures-based commodity funds benefit from backwardation during their periodic future rolls. It is hard to find active commodity funds but an article in FundQ mentions 3.
Pg L7: COMMODITY indexes vary widely. The S&P GSCI commodity index has 60% in energy; the Bloomberg commodity index has 33% in energy, 33% in metals. Yet neither has lithium, copper, tin, metals essential for electrification. So, use active commodity funds such as PCRAX, CCSAX, BCSAX; indexed/passive funds are more common. Beware that commodity funds are volatile.
Pg L8: Be aware of several changes coming for 401k: More ESG options including the default options; guaranteed-income option (immediate or deferred/QLAC) at retirement included within the target-date funds (TDFs); pooled employer plan (PEP) 401k for small businesses. On the other hand, the Backdoor Roth IRA loophole will be closed. (This long piece is by @LewisBraham)
Pg L10: Amy DOMINI of Domini Impact Investments (AUM $3 billion in 5 funds) was an early ESG pioneer (Domini 400 Social Index/MSCI KLD 400 Social Index, KLD Research & Analytics that was bought by MSCI, books, etc). PERFORMANCE of ESG funds doesn’t lag general funds; in fact, they have better risk-adjusted performance. There is now appreciation that ESG is everybody’s business. There is work still to be done on ESG STANDARDIZATION and Europe is ahead on this. The SEC needs to get into this; the DOL is cleaning up the mess that it has created. Her funds use a combination of exclusions and inclusions based on ESG criteria (featured fund is DSEPX). They also use industry specific ESG standards. She notes that although Larry FINK of BlackRock/BLK makes lots of noises on ESG, BLK has a record of mostly voting with managements (Larry Fink/BLK declined comment). Her recent book, People, Planet, & Profit, November 2021.
Pg L36: In 2021/Q4 (SP500 +10.90%): Among general equity funds, the best was LC-core +9.80% and the worst was SC-growth +1.84%; NO category beat SP500. Among other equity funds, the best was real estate +14.42% and the worst was Japan -4.25%. Among fixed-income funds, LT -0.01%, world income -1.19% (not very refined in Lipper mutual fund categories listed in Barron’s).
LINK

ISTM that ETF’s occupy something of a “gray area” between traditional open end funds and closed end funds. Both ETFs & CEFs trade actively at prices determined by the market participants. Also, ISTM the heavy reliance of GLDB on derivatives / futures contracts must make calculating NAV precisely on a daily basis more difficult than simply “adding up the value of the underlying assets.” (my words). Since many open ended funds also use derivatives, they also face this issue.
Investopedia attempts to describe key differences between ETFs and CEFs. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052615/what-difference-between-exchange-traded-funds-etfs-and-closed-end-funds.asp
PS - Unless the forest was completely devoid of man, beast or fowl when said tree fell, there should have been sound. In any case, the sound waves are still echoing somewhere …

That 15 second delay was enough for the SEC to reject Precidian's original (2014) application for nontransparent ETFs:

The IIV is stale data. Unlike market maker proprietary algorithms, which rely on portfolio transparency and provide market makers with real-time data to effectively trade in today’s fast moving markets, IIV dissemination frequency is inadequate for purposes of making efficient markets in ETFs.27 Market makers operate at speeds calculated in fractions of a second.28 In today’s markets, 15 seconds is too long for purposes of efficient market making and could result in poor execution.29 Because an ETF is a derivative security, its current value changes every time the value of any underlying component of the ETF portfolio changes.30 Therefore, the IIV for a more frequently traded component security might not effectively take into account the full trading activity for that security, despite being available every 15 seconds.
For example, a large buy order for a component security held by the proposed ETF could temporarily spike the price of that security and, therefore, inflate the proposed ETF’s contemporaneous IIV calculation. 31 The IIV for the proposed ETF cannot adjust for such variations, whereas the NAV would.32 Therefore, relying on a stale IIV as a primary pricing signal for market making in Applicants’ proposed ETFs would not result in an effective arbitrage mechanism. 33

https://www.sec.gov/rules/ic/2014/ic-31300.pdf (footnotes omitted)

As @msf noted, intraday indicated values (IIV) may be for creation/redemption baskets. With refresh every 15 sec, how stale that data can be?
Note that Precidian ETFs and several others are the newer active nontransparent ETFs. These have different portfolio disclosure rules than those for passive/indexed ETFs (95-96%?).

The IIV (intraday indiciative NAV) is just that, indicative, not necessarily an accurate calculation of the current NAV. First, because it is usually calculated only four times a minute, so the value can be somewhat stale. More interestingly, it may not be accurate because it is calculated on something other than the precise instantaneous holdings in the portfolio.
It may be calculated based on yesterday's ending portfolio. That is, for example, the way Precidian Active Shares provide what they call a verified IIV (VIIV).

[T]he custodian on behalf of the fund will share the end of day NAV portfolio (NAVP) with an independent valuation agent. Rather than publically disclosing portfolio composition, the valuation agent will calculate and disseminate a Verified Indicative Intraday Value (VIIV) at one-second intervals the following day based on the NAVP

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1499655/000114420419018151/tv518160_40-appa.htm
More customarily, the calculation, still performed by third parties, is based on daily creation baskets. The issue here is that creation baskets often do not precisely replicate what is in the portfolio.

In certain cases (e.g., some fixed income ETFs), the creation or redemption basket might contain different combinations of securities and/or cash relative to the overall ETF portfolio

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1499655/000114420419018151/tv518160_40-appa.htm
It gives one pause to consider that an ETF might specify baskets for creating and redeeming shares (by authorized participants) that don't match. (This can be used as a mechanism for changing the holdings of an ETF.)
"The composition of the redemption basket typically mirrors that of the creation basket." But it doesn't have to.
http://www.understandetfs.org/creation_redemption.html

I’m impressed if you already have your weekend Barron’s. Mine on Kindle comes in Saturdays - usually in the late morning.
Positive stories in B do cause stocks to spike. Generally the industrial metals were hot this week. Bloomberg reported today that NGLOY - one I held for a while - was on fire today (figuratively).
Back to TMSRX - Suspect they have some precious metals miners in the mix. Seems to me a lot of hedge fund managers like to hold a bit. Might help explain its woes this week.
Chart TMSRX from Lipper

This article is a quick read. Supposing that they have a better mouse trap method/modeling to discover the "trend", perhaps there will be success of consequence. I attempt investment modeling in my brain, either from observation or technical data or valid bias towards a sector; AND this becomes an attempt to front run a given sector(s), be they equity and/or bonds.
I can imagine, that in many an investors mind, is to know when to "front run" the crowds, eh?
Just my, frozen in Michigan, two cents worth.
ETF Strategy Review "overview"
A snippet: "During expansion, when inflationary pressures are building, and during peak, when inflation is rising above trend, the ETF will typically invest in Treasury Inflation Protection Securities (TIPS) or ETFs that primarily invest in TIPS.
During contraction, when deflationary forces begin to take over, and during trough, before easing Federal Reserve policy reduces the risk of deflation, the ETF will typically hold nominal Treasuries or ETFs that primarily hold these securities."

'grave or optimistic according to temperament'
https://messaging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/template/oakv2?campaign_id=116&emc=edit_pk_20220107&instance_id=49735&nl=paul-krugman&productCode=PK&regi_id=22268089&segment_id=79008&te=1&uri=nyt://newsletter/b76b77c5-1b77-5800-a757-c72c6c8a1dca&user_id=83d45440ead1d14c2a89a1e7221337d1

There is a bullish story on RIO for the weekend Barron's.
https://www.barrons.com/articles/rio-tinto-stock-lithium-green-energy-51641507428?refsec=europe

The fund is off 1.29% YTD. If they’re having to unload assets due to heavy redemptions it would explain part of it.
But what an odd week it has been. Enough to throw any money manager’s barometer into dysfunction. Suddenly we’ve awakened to inflation. Really? So rates on the 10-year are almost back to where they topped-out last March. Back than there wasn’t the hysteria that seems to have accompanied this week’s bump-up in rates. The Fed speaks? Does anyone listen? You can’t invest based on what they say because they can change course on a dime if, in their words, “the current data suggests …”
Talk about cross-currents … Industrial metals are on a tear this week. Rio Tinto (RIO) is having the best week since I bought it several months ago. But, gold - a typical inflation hedge - has seen two of its worst days in recent memory, dropping more than $35 on 2 days this week and dragging down miners. Wheaton Precious Metals (WPM) has experienced its worst week since I bought it several months ago. Than there’s the tornado that has ripped through the ARKK-type funds - affecting other market sectors. Maybe one of those yellow highway caution signs needs to be displayed: “Caution! Short Sellers at work”
Sorry if this is too far off topic. But I think these are the type of questions to think about when buying or owning a “multi-asset” fund. Or, do we just buy whatever has the best 3 year track record?

CRSP indexes make gradual changes/transitions, unlike Russell indexes that make all changes on a single preannounced date.
When MSCI was a unit of MS decades ago, Vanguard was an early client. At that time, Vanguard was having issues with S&P on the use is SP500 name - Vanguard thought that it had a general license while S&P held that licenses were product specific. After MSCI became independent, it wanted to stiff Vanguard for more money. Not known to MSCI was that Vanguard had already been working/funding CRSP at U Chicago, and when MSCI got too big for its britches, Vanguard dumped MSCI for mostly CRSP and some FTSE indexes. I think that Vanguard is the only one using CRSP indexes - don't know if there is exclusivity in Vanguard-CRSP contract, or that others haven't warmed up to CRSP, or others cut fees.
But these industry details don't matter for personal benchmarking of VTSAX, and any total stock market index will do fine.

Of course one can make money in some bonds, but is it a good idea to put 80% of the portfolio to treasuries when the interest rates may go up? Historical data since 1980 show falling rates, from about 15% in the past to about 1% now. The situation will be different when rates rise.

I am still trying to get acquainted with MFO. I received a notification, which is not for a personal message or for activity related to any thread I have bookmarked or started. I could not figure out what this notification relates. After some confusion, I figured out that it is a public messages (see below). "To "post a public message" on someone's profile (Activity Wall), choose add comment."
Not sure why a public message feature is in MFO and how it is meant to be used - what is easy for me to understand is, if one likes to send a private message, send a private message; otherwise, post it in a thread you would like to comment.
"davidrmoran → BaluBalu
about big drops, you do know about distributions, right? (honest question)"
I have no clue what the above public message is about but since this thread has my recent activity, I am posting here.
I did not expect both M* and Stock Charts to screw up accounting of YE distribution in their total return charts. I have seen before M* screw up YE distribution accounting and so cross checked with Stock Charts and assumed the difference probably relates to a distribution. Is Davidrmoran suggesting that the 25% drop in total return by Stock Charts measure is also largely explained by year end distribution and thus Stock Charts is also wrong by a big magnitude?
P.S.: Some of the mistakes in M* charts do not ever get corrected - not sure why. I expected with the passage of time, machine mistakes get fixed but looks like evidence does not bear my expectation. I use M* for charts (usually cross check with Stock Charts) and for my personal portfolio tracking. I found a lot of mistakes in the portfolio tracking tool and accepted to live with it.

The three Redwood funds listed at Schwab all have the 49.95 tf, which since I invest $500 to a $1000 at a time wouldn't work for me.

I just added CDC as a low volatility more defensive fund option. Lynn Bolin had a really nice writeup on the fund a few months back. Steady eddy fund that held up quite well in March 2020. max DD of 15%. Nice dividend too. I am also going to sell my technology fund BGSAX and trim back on holdings in MIOPX. Both have high PE multiples and Aren't well positioned for a rising rate environment. Evaluating a few other funds for purchase.