More detail on the debate surrounding the Fed's look into releasing a CBDC.

Neha Narula, who’s leading the effort at MIT to work with the Boston Fed on a central bank digital currency, called the project “a once-in-a-century opportunity to redesign the dollar” in a way that supports innovation much like the internet did.

But.....

“The United States should not implement a [central bank digital currency] simply because we can or because others are doing so,” the American Bankers Association said in a statement to lawmakers this week. The benefits “are theoretical, difficult to measure, and may be elusive,” while the negative consequences “could be severe,” the group wrote.

Fed explores ‘once in a century’ bid to remake the U.S. dollar

June 12th Episode:

Interesting conclusion:

The decision to convert or not to convert may be influenced by external factors beyond maximizing disposable income. It would seem desirable to convert when asset prices are depressed because there is less tax paid and the state of the market is amenable to a recovery. Following the same logic, converting when asset prices are inflated would seem imprudent.

https://i-orp.com/modeldescription/Vol15Issue1.pdf#page=49
I found this tidbit as a referenced link within the Optimal Retirement Planner which @davidmoran has referenced often. I am finding lots of useful links and information embedded in this planner. If you are approaching retirement or even in retirement this seems like a worthy tool to use.
Linked here:
https://i-orp.com/Plans/index.html

I have several accounts which I treat each separately but with an eye on overall allocation. My primary accounts withover 50% of my assets is an IRA Rollover with 14 Funds focusing on low correlation, distinct style boxes, asset allocation etc. I rarely update this portfolio and have allocations to both Growth and Value in Domestic Large, Mid and Small. Also, I like to invest in Int'l Gorwth and Value where most investors pick one Int'l Fund. I also own EM and Int'l SMid, Fixed Inc Core Plus, Multi-Sector Fixed.
I have a Roth @ Vanguard with 3-4 Index Funds. My current 401k is my tactical portfolio with another 10-12 funds & ETF's.
I will consolidate over the next10-15 years as I get closer to retirement.

+1 hank. Based on the Fido chart of OPGSX, 10k invested as of 5/31/11 atrophied to $2,425 by year-end 2015! If I was going to play in this sector, I would consider GDX since I could sell without incurring transaction fees. I'm sure Rono could add quite a bit to this discussion !

I like Hank's approach a lot. I hold a fair number of alternative funds, as these types of funds work, until they don't. My expected yearly return for these funds is 2.5-3 % .My previous experiences with ACVVX QMNNX PAUAX and MFLDX, among others reinforce my wariness of these funds. In the future I may just rely on MERFX ADANX and CVSIX to simplify things.

I guess I felt obligated to caution the uninitiated about the volatility of this sector. There’s lots of different ways to play the inflation card - if you think that’s where we’re going. Bullion is tamer than the miners, and there’s lots of allocation funds with limited exposure.
Adding up the string of 5 consecutive red (loosing) years for OPGSX beginning in 2011 I get north of 120%. Ouch! Who has the stamina to ride something like that out? (And it’s “5 stars” at M* - which should make you wonder about those ratings).
OK - I did my civic duty.

I thought it was worth posting this illuminative chart uncovered doing research this morning. Might make one think twice. Personally, I’m bullish on gold. (But I know only slightly more than the lamp-post on the corner.)
As this Chart shows, you can lose a lot of money playing in this arena. Check out the “return” from 2011-2015. (And Morningstar has the audacity to give this baby a 5-Star rating!)
Disclosure: I own this fund. It is among my smallest holdings.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen it. I’ll give it a go.

The Duke
Kurt Jurgens
Peter Lawford
Rod Steiger
Eddie Albert
Robt Mitchum
Richard Burton
Paul Anka
Red Buttons
Tom Tryon
Sean Connery
Henry Fonda
Roddy McDowall
......................................And that's only what I can recall off the top of my head. It's really, really good.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056197/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0

It's well worth watching. Long, but good.
Gert Fröbe played the German milkman I mentioned. For those who don't know, he also played 'Goldfinger' in the Bond movie of the same name (but was dubbed b/c his accent was too thick for audiences)
Speaking of Bond, I think Sean Connery purposely asked to play a cut-up part to contrast with his Bond persona. For example, he comes off the Higgins Boat and does a clumsy face-plant into the water, and is a snarky 'everyman' type of grunt in his other scenes, too.

In our Roths, my wife and I both own about 12 each, all actively managed. We try not to have overlap, but still it's probably 50-60% overlap.
In our 401ks, we both own fewer since our employers both offer fewer options. In my 401k, I think I own 6, all but 2 are index. Wife 401k is about the same.

I think this "true tax rate" is ridiculous headline generating nonsense. They take the total unrealized gain of public companies stock and then claim Buffet and Bezos, etc should have paid taxes on that number. They may be "worth" that on paper but these are unrealized gains, not money in the bank.
Under this theory, we would all have to pay taxes on any unrealized gains, including the appreciation in your own real estate. If property values fall would the government give us a rebate?
Buffet's income tax rate is 24/125 or 19%. I agree this is low, but so does he. Buffet has always said that the tax system is stacked in his and other millionaires favor.
Wealth taxes have been tired and abandoned in Europe as ineffective. What we need is a simpler tax system, that makes it harder to game, and better audits and enforcement

Junk and semi-junk munis and securitized. Yup: PTIAX.
Muni: 40.35
Securitized: 47.19%
... Yet, alas: YTD up a mere 1.18 and in the 67th %ile. Love the monthlies, though. PTIAX.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen it. I’ll give it a go.

The Duke
Kurt Jurgens
Peter Lawford
Rod Steiger
Eddie Albert
Robt Mitchum
Richard Burton
Paul Anka
Red Buttons
Tom Tryon
Sean Connery
Henry Fonda
Roddy McDowall
......................................And that's only what I can recall off the top of my head. It's really, really good.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056197/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0

I am in bond funds because they offer me the best returns with the lowest risk. Their trend persistency combined with their low volatility enable me to best implement the scale up buying strategy I learned from Nicolas Darvas. My first bond trade was in junk bonds in 1991. It was January 17 one of the greatest momentum days ever in equities. That day the Dow surged some 114 points which at that time was its second best on record. As is often the case there was a lag and a few days later junk bonds went on tear and had 60 consecutive trading days without a decline. That smooth ride upward continued for the next three years until February 1994 in junk bonds as they bested the S@P over that period.
That one LUCKY trade made a lasting impression on me and the way I have traded my capital ever since. Most especially after the tech wreck in March 2000. There have been many repeat performances and exhibitions of unreal trend persistency since 2000 in various bond fund categories. Emerging market debt in the early 2000s, junk bonds 2009-12, junk munis 2014, bank loans 2016, and last but not least the securitized category since last spring - IOFIX, BDKAX, abd SEMPX. IOFIX has had something like only 8 down days since last April 2020 when many of the veteran bond traders re entered. An amazing run over a 15 month period.
Some remember me as a day trader in the stock index futures. Others as a trader in tech funds who also exploited the new fund effect as well as datelining. Yet less than 3% of my total trading profits have come from daytrading and only around 13% from tech funds, new funds, datelining. Meaning almost 85% of my nest egg has come from bond funds - my one true love in the financial arena. I have always said everyone needs a trading or investing niche and I found my niche in bond funds.

Current yield PRWCX is just 1%. I note (again) the HEAVY chunk of the portfolio in utilities. 14% vs. category avg. of just 3.5%. Traditionally, utilities operate like bonds, with the steady income stream. Surely, dividend-paying utilities are the place to be recently, with bonds offering so little, eh? Giroux has said recently that as these utilities continue to green-ify, they are becoming a GROWTH story, too.

One can be very conservative, or very liberal, and also be intelligent.
When I see elected officials like this, I'm reminded of a comment made of Nixon nominee G. Harrold Carswell at his confirmation hearing: "Even if he is mediocre, there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers, and they are entitled to a little representation, aren't they?"
http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1895379_1895421_1895542,00.html
With officials like this, mediocre would be a big step up.
I just watched an election debate tonight, and while it had it's fair share of canned remarks, it was a pleasure to listen to so many candidates who were knowledgeable, well spoken, and respectful of their opponents. It's not impossible.

@AndyJ

I could be a little wealthier now if I'd gone into that trade more heavily back then, instead of cautiously.

This "trend" may persist. Good for you for paying attention and for acting on it. Some trends are short lived...some longer in duration. To me, this is where 3 month charts are helpful. Trends tend to persist. When they break down...they tend make "lower-lows" over a 1-3-6 month time frame. Go luck with your investments.
Here's an example using VIS over the last year...short lower-lows, but the trend shows longer "higher-lows". I try to look at trends this way. The red arrows are "lower Lows' and the green arrows are "higher-lows".
45 % higher-lows over the last year.

Here’s what PRWCX manager David Geroux said recently about IG bonds as an investment:
“What I would tell you about rates today is that the risk/reward on Treasuries or IG [investment grade] is so poor, it gets a situation where if rates stay static, you make very, very low returns. If rates revert back to more normalized levels, you lose a lot of money. And if rates go down, you don't have a lot of room for rates to go down … So, it's a really negatively skewed risk-adjusted return … As a result of that, we have a very short duration in our fixed-income portfolio, probably the shortest duration we've had since I've been running this strategy. Our duration today is 1.5 years” LINK
Your attempts to immunize the thread from mention of PRWCX or manager David Geroux’s views on the question “Why do you still own Bond funds?” sounds to me a bit cocoonish. Why would your view, or my view, or that of anyone else here on the question supersede that of Mr. Geroux as both verbalized by him publicly and as practiced thru his management approach?
-
“David Geroux is a five-time nominee and two-time winner of Morningstar's Fund Manager of the Year award in the allocation category. David’s fund has also won 15 "Best Fund" awards 2 from Lipper. “
Okay hank, I am not attempting to "immunize the thread" from mentioning PRWCX. I am simply stating that PRWCX is not a Bond Fund, it is an allocation fund, in which equities are the focused investment, and bonds are more in the "ballast" category, as a complement to equities. I have been in many thread debates, in which PRWCX investors, do not think PRWCX should even be classified as an "allocation fund", but rather it should be classified as a value oriented equity fund. Giroux has a history of being a value oriented investor, who will decrease equities when he thinks they are overvalued, and use the bond component (or cash) as a way of holding assets, that can be used to buy equities when they are fairly valued. There are many investors who invest in that manner, but the question is what "bond fund" are they going to use as a ballast fund for their equities, or will they just pick their favorite allocation fund, and let that manager choose bonds as they desire. Other investors, are more focused bond fund investors, who will use selected "bond funds" for total return and ballast. When they look to "bond funds", it makes sense to look at those "bond fund" managers, who excel in performance for those bond funds, to meet bond fund objectives, that fit the roles investors using those "bond funds". What I have learned about your posts on PRWCX, is that Giroux is a great "allocation fund" manager, who believes that Investment Grade Bond oefs and treasuries are out of favor for his allocation fund, and the other types of bonds (not specifically identified for this thread) are short duration bond holdings. I choose to emphasize what great bond fund managers, (like Ivascyn, Gundlach, etc.) are doing with their investments, but other posters/lurkers will likely find value in other ways on this "bond fund" thread.

On the lighter side (in a shake your head sort of way)....perhaps this idea has SPAC potential:
Moving Heaven and Earth to Save the Planet
Of course this idea never got off the ground:
Flipping Islands For Fun and Profit

“Infinity Q Capital Management says it plans to return approximately $500 million to investors who were unable to get their money back after the investment firm halted redemptions on a then-$1.7 billion mutual fund earlier this year. It remains unclear how much investors will eventually recoup from the Infinity Q Diversified Alpha Fund. The fund currently has around $1.3 billion on hand—well below where it was last valued in February—and it will keep $750 million in reserve …
“(The) firm unexpectedly halted redemptions in February and said it couldn’t value its holdings. The move stunned market participants, some of whom viewed their investments in the fund as a hedge to their broader portfolios. Infinity held wide-ranging bets across stock, currency and derivatives markets, including over-the-counter positions … Infinity appeared to have misvalued its large derivatives portfolio. Some of the valuations it disclosed were too high and, in one instance, mathematically impossible.”
From WSJ June 9, 2021
https://www.wsj.com/articles/infinity-q-capital-management-plans-to-return-500-million-to-mutual-fund-investors-11623181417