Pended is a great CU. Anybody can join and they do it fairly. We refinanced several times over the years and found each time hundreds of dollars "mistakes" that had to be fixed because I was going to walk away hours before closing.
Penfed didn't have these mistakes.
Penfed was our last home debtor. In 2012, they offer a 5 years loan at 1.99% with zero fees. We use it to pay the previous mortgage + our kids tuition and how we finished paying our debt years earlier.

“Generally, Fidelity funds have a $0 min.”
@msf - Does that mean that if I send $10.00 (ten-dollars) to Fidelity I can open 10 accounts in the amount of $1 each in 10 different funds? If so, I’m just crazy enough to do it!

Yup. I just entered an order for $1 of FLPSX, and the system took it. I immediately cancelled the order. Have fun!
P.S. The better paying (if you can call it that) MMFs have higher mins.

Yes “better paying” is perfect. :)
How does one pay the $10 house fee? Most casinos accept credit cards. Would Fidelity take a $10 debit from one of my bank cards? Playing a gold fund (or 2 or 3 at a time) would be a lot of fun. Where else can you pocket a 15-20% gain in a few days? And, if in a Roth the winnings would be a tax-free.
Hate to be so inquisitive. But I’ve never invested outside my direct accounts at a few old-fashioned houses. To my knowledge, no one has ever characterized T. Rowe or D&C as “fun” or “exciting.”

FYI
FZROX Life +6.00% vs its proprietary index +5.96%

Not sure where you get your fake numbers @msf

See this
http://quotes.morningstar.com/chart/fund/chart.action?t=fzrox
click Maximum
Fido index is included, then add FSKAX

FYI
FZROX Life +6.00% vs its proprietary index +5.96%

Not sure where you get your fake numbers @msf

FYI
FZROX Life +6.00% vs its proprietary index +5.96%

FSKAX has outperformed FZROX over the latter's lifetime, YTD, and over the latter's lifetime excluding YTD (just in case one figured that this year skewed the lifetime numbers).
The two funds follow different indexes: FZROX follows a Fidelity proprietary index; FSKAX follows a DJ index. The main difference though seems to be that FZROX has more difficulty tracking its benchmark.
Over its lifetime (since 8/2/18), it has returned almost 70 basis points less, cumulatively, than its benchmark. Give or take, that's about a 35 basis point tracking error per year. Over the same period of time, FSKAX beat its respective benchmark by a basis point.
There's the marketing hype of 100% lower expenses (0% vs 1.5 basis points). Then there's the reality of money in one's pocket.
Done.

FWIW, and this is not advice, I'd consider it a hold or slight sell.
As I asked in a recent thread on PIMIX, have your reasons for holding it changed? It's a 2x fund, 100% stock exposure + 100% bond exposure. That's always been true, it hasn't changed. If that was an appealing concept, it should still be. That fact that the some risks recently manifested shouldn't change one's perceptions - the idea of risk is that sometimes bad things actually do happen.
If one bought it because one thought that an index-ish fund, a "smart beta" could beat market returns, then one should examine why one believes (or believed) that. Is this time really different, or is the market simply going through a different phase?
Note that I'm not the one calling the CAPE index smart beta - Doubleline is. Doubleline acknowledges that pre-2012 performance of the index is just backtesting; and that Barclays is motivated to use to that present the index in the best possible light:

Shiller Barclays CAPE® U.S. Sector Total Return Index..., a non-market cap-weighted, rules-based (aka “smart beta”) index.
...
Pre-inception index performance refers to the period prior to the index inception date (defined as the period from the “Index Base Date” (September 3, 2002) to the “Index Live Date” September 3, 2012)). This performance is hypothetical and back-tested using criteria applied retroactively. It benefits from hindsight and knowledge of factors that may have favorably affected the performance and cannot account for all financial risk that may affect the actual performance of the index. It is in Barclays’ interest to demonstrate favorable pre-inception index performance. The actual performance of the index may vary significantly from the pre-inception index performance.

From the same 2019 page as cited previously.
The reason I might consider selling the fund if I owned it is because something has fundamentally changed - interest rates. Even with the use of swaps, the leverage to get 100% bond exposure is not free. That presents a hurdle, small in a normal interest rate environment, but significant in a near ZIRP world.
Compare and contrast three large cap oriented 2x (equity + bond) funds: PXTIX, DSENX, and MWATX.
Historically, PXTIX has performed as promised, beating its benchmark, the Russell 1000 Value, by half a percent for the past five years (in a low interest environment), 2% over ten years, 3% over 15. But falling about 1% short YTD.
DSENX, excluding this year, beat CAPE by 2% in a couple of years, roughly matched CAPE in a couple, and then a -1% year followed by a +1% year. That's around a half percent a year, until this year, when it looks like it made a bad bond call. (To see the blow by blow comparisons, use this page, and then add CAPE as a fund to compare with.)
It's fair to compare CAPE with the S&P 500, since that's the universe from which it is choosing sectors. M* shows that CAPE and DSENX over their lifetimes, more or less (10/31/13 to present) to have done better than the S&P 500. Both have cumulative returns around 130% vs. 110% for the S&P 500. More recently (3 years or less), they've underperformed. Whether this is just a market phase and that their outperformance will resume is fodder for a broader discussion about smart beta.
MWATX is instructive because it doesn't use smart beta, just a 2x strategy. It significantly underperformed the S&P 500 in 2008, not catching up to the S&P 500 until the end of 2016. It took a much lighter hit this year, and is now within 1% of the index on performance since Feb 20. IMHO this shows that the leveraging works, but there's real risk and one needs to be patient. Also, it's an extremely tax-inefficient strategy.

"The deficit is growing at a rate "well in excess of the growth rate of the economy," he added. "To me, that means more of our nation's income will have to be devoted to debt service, which will retard economic growth in the long term."
The above has been true 5-10-15 years ago too as the deficit was growing under both parties and...here we are.
If you believe in that let us know when are you selling everything ;-)
As usual, I disregard all articles and forecasts and concentrate on what markets are doing now.

I would open an account at Fidelity and invest in the SP500 using FXAIX. Expense Ratio=0.015%

The DoubleLine Shiller Enhanced CAPE®, [is] an investment strategy pairing Shiller Barclays CAPE® with an active fixed income strategy (DoubleLine Short-Intermediate Duration Fixed Income, or SHINT. ...

Introducing DoubleLine Short-Intermediate Fixed Income Strategy (“SHINT”)
To construct portfolios across multiple sectors of the fixed income universe, including SHINT portfolios, DoubleLine applies a macroeconomic framework, led by portfolio managers and analysts who look across the spectrum of different asset classes. ...
SHINT is a diversified fixed income strategy that, at present [April 2019], targets duration of one to three years while pursuing a yield of 3% to 4%. That yield target appears feasible in the current market environment, allowing the investment team to take a measured approach to both interest rate and credit risks. Freedom to allocate across multiple sectors of the fixed income universe also allows the team to construct a diversified fixed income portfolio with what DoubleLine believes to be the most attractive investments on a reward-to-risk basis. The two-pronged approach of coupling top-down macroeconomic views with bottom-up security selection provides potential benefits from both risk management as well as return-seeking opportunities.
Actively managing the credit risk [non-AGG bond sectors] and interest-rate risk [IG bonds] of the portfolio is a key element to the asset allocation process. DoubleLine tilts the portfolio in the direction of one risk versus another based on the investment team’s macroeconomic forecasts and views on return and risk prospects within the sectors. ...
Sector rotation of SHINT portfolios has tended to be gradual, due to the gradual shifts in the macroeconomic landscape.

https://doubleline.com/dl/wp-content/uploads/DoubleLine-CAPEinRisingRateEnvironments-March2019.pdf
That contains a lot more, including a graph of the bond sector allocations over time.
DSENX tracked CAPE until March, when it underperformed by about 6%. The gap has held steady since then. This suggests that the bond component was fairly flat (neither helping nor hurting) through February, and also after March. But that it dipped 6% in March.
We've seen funds that have not recovered well, notably junk securitized debt. But those also fell much harder than 6%. So without peeking, I'd guess that DoubleLine had a mix of low grade securitized bonds and enough higher grade bonds to temper the dip. Taking more credit risk would also be consistent with trying to maintain that 3%+ yield while keeping a short duration.. Strangely enough, the bond fund I find with the closest match for that 2020 performance is TPINX. The portfolio is consistent with my guess: BBB credit rating, 2 year duration.
Looking at the linked doc on the Enhanced CAPE strategy, it seems that DoubleLine missed a macro call in 2019. The doc is entitled: A Potential Solution for Investors in Rising-Rate Environments.

Given indications that yields on the 10- and 30-year Treasuries put in a durable bottom in 2016, ending of the 35-year bull market in government bonds, investors have good reason to think about how to position portfolios for the next regime in fixed income. The investment team at DoubleLine is not calling for the advent of a secular bear market in fixed income. ... However, DoubleLine sees numerous fundamental factors presaging a rise in interest rates over the long run. Investors should study strategies that may not need the tailwind of declining rates to provide positive returns and perhaps have the potential to outperform in the face of rising rates.

Finally (and why I was curious about this fund), M* started classifying it as a blend fund in 2019. Not all that surprising, since CAPE rotates among sectors that are most undervalued relative to their own prior valuations, not relative to the market. So it can easily rotate into more "growthy" sectors.

Sure wish my personal finances could be finagled the way the nation's are.

Yes, wouldn't THAT be lovely???!!!
@Mark is correct, too.
@rono has written about this many times lately. "This will not end well." The dollar will lose quite a bit of value. Inflation will sooner or later run rampant. And "Brother, can you spare a dime?" will become "Brother, can you spare a sawbuck?"
I notice that the EU has reached a landmark stimulus agreement. I'm currently reading Vaclav Havel's "To The Castle And Back." In it, he mentions how the EU bureaucracy is like a hairball, a quagmire of committees upon committees upon committees. So, they have a monetary union, but no fiscal union. And Havel was thinking that someone, somewhere, ought to be THE designated leader at the top of the heap. But it did not happen that way.
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=what+is+a+sawbuck&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

Thank you all once again for joining. Very much enjoyed.
Here's link to briefing deck:
https://1drv.ms/b/s!AmF1g-5ef-jInOUzGhmW61HQ0kY9gw

Donna
As you say, your grandson will begin to learn the ropes pretty quickly (once he has skin in the game). So you're not trying to select a fund that he'll have to keep forever.
He's young and has time on his side, so he can be adventurous. QQQ or a technology oriented fund would be appropriate.
This strikes a chord with me -- this week my 15-year old grandson called wanting advice about stocks (he had inherited a little money from his other grandparents). We talked about possibilities, but he made his own decisions. Of course, as soon as something went up a dollar, he wanted to sell it! My strongest recc. was SMH (semiconductors ETF). Volatile ( he had to look up this word) but will probably beat the market in the long run. I've had FSELX, the Fidelity semiconductors (managed )Select Semiconductors fund in my IRA and in my wife's Roth IRA for years and it has been very strong (especially recently).
Are you providing his initial investment (which is perfect as long as he has actually worked and earned some money)? My grandaughter just graduated from college and started working; I told her I'd match what she wanted to put in a Roth IRA. It turned out that she'd made about $6000 working last year, so she could open a Roth for that much -- my 3K and her 3K. My real goal is to get her engaged in the investment process.
This will be fun; let us know what you grandson decides.
David

Generally, Fidelity funds have a $0 min. Likewise, Schwab offers 60 house funds (Schwab and Laudus) with no mins. In addition, Schwab offers nearly 3K outside funds at a $100 min, including 110 from T. Rowe Price. (All figures are for open, NTF funds)
Fidelity Screener
Schwab screener
If you like buying stocks or ETFs by the price instead of by the share, Fidelity lets you do this. Minimum purchase per security is $1. Other, smaller brokerages like Robinhood offer this as well, but with their payments for order flow, you'll likely get poorer execution. (There are additional concerns about these brokerages pushing trades because they make money based on the volume of trading.)
Two points: stick with name brand brokerages and funds, and focus on the investment and not on the minimums.
Of course this depends on your grandson, but for a first investment I might suggest a more traditional "growth and income" type of fund like a basic S&P 500 index fund (e.g. VOO or FXAIX) or an actively managed fund like PRBLX (through Schwab with a $100 min NTF).
On the one hand, a novice investor can get spooked by sizeable drops in value. On the other hand, as a long term investment, one leans toward equity. A hybrid fund like @P_F 's suggested VGSTX could also make sense if one wants to start off more conservatively.
An S&P 500 fund starts one off with a familiar name, adding (one hopes) a measure of comfort. Otherwise I'd suggest a total stock market index fund. The Parnassus fund is a fine long term actively managed vehicle, with a socially conscious bent as an added plus.

I might do the broader VONG instead of QQQ
RSP is another one, simply SP500 but equally weighted

Most (if not all) of the funds at T Rowe Price have a $1,000 minimum for an IRA (including Roths). Not the lowest expense ratio in town, but reasonable. You’d be setting him up with one of the most respected outfits out there.
First $1,000 POMIX - T. Rowe Price Total Market Index fund. That’s the one Jack Bogle always recommended as his top choice index. ER .30%
Next $1,000 PIEQX - T Rowe Price Developed Markets Ex-North America index fund. ER .45%
Thereafter - two-thirds of contributions to former and one-third to latter.
Sure, there’s a lot of great managed funds out there (of which I own some). But with a 50-year investment horizon, index is the way to go. Lower fees (not visible at first glance) and you avoid potential managerial changes and / or mistakes.
If you can find the $1,000 minimum somewhere else offering those indexes, than of course you can elect them. I’m pretty much T. Rowe so not aware of minimums at other houses. But I’d think the $1,000 minimum is going the way of the plasma TV. (rapidly disappearing). Also, T. Rowe is no-load. I think some of the ones with lower initial investments charge a front-end load, which you don’t want.

Hi @Donna,
Not a suggestion ... Just what I'm doing for my grandaughter. However, this concept might be of some help.
I have my 18 month old granddaughter in AMECX, CAIBX, ANCFX and SMCWX at American Funds, The min. for each fund is $250.00. I make quarterly gift contributions to her account splitting the money evenly. Her mutual fund distributions pay to AFAXX which is a money market fund to accumulate until they become invested into ABALX which is a balanced fund. In this way she will have an awarness of just how much interest, dividends and capital gain distributions play in the overall sucess of investing. I'm thinking over time ABALX will become larger that the first four starting funds by the time she becomes 21 (age of majority).
Even though this is invested conseratively it is up better than 8% over the past rolling year. At her age and with the many years she has ahead I feel a conserative steady as you go approach is the wise one over an agressive growth portfolio that will have, at times, some good volatility associated with it. This might lead one into trading over staying invested for the long term.
I became an investor as a teenager at age 12 (1960). I started investing with some money my great grandparents gifted to me. And, it was put into Franklin Income (FKINX). My father's broker told me that this fund will give you some exposure to income generation (put a little gingle in your pocket if you wish) and also give you exposure to both stocks and bonds as well. It will be a good fund for you to build a base from and help you to understand the facets of investing. My next fund that I ventured into was American Funds Income Fund of America (AMECX) during my early twenties as I was learning don't put all you eggs in one basket, by this time. Today, these two funds are my largest holdings within my portfolio now just short of fifty funds split among twelve investment sleeves. I went the conserative route in the beginning and branched out from there. Now stock market volatility is viewed, by me, as a buying opportunity. While some run and sell ... I am a buyer even at the age of 72. I bought during the past market swoon and now that stocks have recovered I have been selling into the now present market strength.
If you wish to view how the asset allocation, of my grandaughter's portfolio bubles, or any of the other suggestions that has been made, below is a link to Morningstar's Instant Xray analysis tool. It's a good tool to learn how to use.
https://www.morningstar.com/instant-x-ray
Just enter the ticker symbols and amount invested in each fund then press Xray and the Portfolio Xray analysis will appear. For my granddaughter, I felt it wise to mix some income generation funds on the income side with some value and growth stocks funds on the equity side. Sometimes, with the income generation that protfolios produce keeps folks invested. My late father had a saying ... "Income never goes out of style." Thus far, in my lifetime, he has been correct.
Your grandson can follow his portfolio through M*'s portfolio manager which is another tool I use.
My best wishes to you and your grandson in starting this endeavor. It is something that he can begin small and build upon through his lifetime. In the years to come he will remember ... this is something my grandmother got me started me on. And, give thanks that you did.
Old_Skeet
edited on 7/23/2020

It's not a fund per se, but Schwab has introduced "stock slices", where he could invest as little as $5 to purchase a partial share in companies such as Amazon, Google, Facebook, Netflix, McDonald's, Electronic Arts, Nike, Home Depot, Target and Apple. They advertise that you can buy a basket of all 10 for $50.

It opened Monday at 12, I bought in a lowball bid at $11. It's up big to 14.50 in today's aftermarket on news about its plans, plus DOD restarting funding of rare earths projects ... at first I thought it was a pump-and-dump thing by their execs, but it apparently wasn't. And there aren't many Robinhooders holding the stock, either ... yet. :)

Your speculative play has paid off -- FVAC is up to $12.40
Did you get in at the initial $10 price?
A relevant article: https://investorintel.com/sectors/technology-metals/technology-metals-intel/us-rare-earths-industry-comeback-begun-mp-materials-announces-nyse-listing-via-merger-fvac/
David

Before I start sounding like a Vanguard apologist, let me say that in my experience Vanguard's human service is inferior to that of other providers including Fidelity, Schwab, and T. Rowe Price (where I've been helped not only with fund investments but with administering an individual 401k plan).
That said, how does the Vanguard brokerage platform (VBS) compare with the T. Rowe Price brokerage platform? I haven't tried the latter for a few reasons: without being a customer I cannot find what third party funds TRP offers (NTF or otherwise); and its trading costs (which I can find) are quite high.
On the other hand, at Vanguard one can buy DODFX for $20 or less (vs. $35 at TRP), and one needs only $25K to invest in PIMIX (vs. $100K at Schwab). When it comes to some third party funds, the VBS platform does have its advantages.
I really did mean that Vanguard should push people onto their VBS platform. My sense is that their mutual fund platform support is now so weak that the risk of losing customers alienated by the platform's poor support is comparable to the risk of losing customers displeased by being moved to their VBS platform. Assuming that's correct, it makes no business sense to continue expending resources in providing inferior support for the fund platform.
My last fund platform experience is informative. It involved a cash IRA transfer from an outside account to Vanguard. I filled out a paper transfer form (required by Vanguard). I directed Vanguard to invest the cash in Prime MMF. Instead, Vanguard opened a new Federal MMF on the fund platform.
ISTM it might make this blatant error if it has become so focused on the VBS platform that it has forgotten how to process fund platform transactions. Only on the VBS platform must all cash go through the Federal MMF. It didn't make any difference that the instructions were in writing on its own form. It's time for Vanguard to give up the ghost.
That's my rational observation. Subjectively, I won't move (because the features are different) until kicked off their fund platform. IMHO Vanguard's best course of action is to do that, and leave me grumbling about the lost features. What bothered me about the note I posted is that they dismissed the lost features as "minor changes" without giving people advance notice of what these changes are.