In this extreme hypothetical example, each $1 redemption in TSLA would create $1 in realized CG distribution liability, and the point when the fund would be broke is when it still has $5.6B + $1.3B - $6.9B/2 = $3.45B in nominal assets, but $0 in unencumbered assets. Probably, the SEC or a fund acquirer would step in well before that point.

It's hard to think of this as a mutual fund when 50% is in one stock. The other issue I could image is the potential tax liability if the fund starts experiencing redemptions and the manager has to sell appreciated stock. Given that, if one is a Tesla fan, why not just buy Tesla directly? According to the fund's June 30, 2021 semiannual report--https://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1217673/000119312521257076/d171358dncsrs.htm#cov171358_33--the fund had $5.6 billion of unrealized capital gains in its $6.9 billion portfolio. One could easily imagine the fund distributing some hefty taxable distributions if some of those unrealized gains have to be realized because of shareholders selling the fund.

This situation suggests an interesting problem which I've never researched. What happens if the realized gains in a fund exceed the assets in the fund?
To see how this could happen, suppose the fund bought TSLA at $0 (or for a penny if it makes people more comfortable). Assume that the fund's holding in the company is now worth $5.6B; the other $1.3B are in assets that have not appreciated.
Fund shareholders redeem $5.6B worth of shares. The fund, perhaps foolishly, decides to satisfy the redemptions by selling all its TSLA stock. The fund is left with $1.3B in assets and a gain of $5.6B. When December rolls around, what does the fund distribute in the way of cap gains dividends?
One possibility is for the fund to distribute $1.3B in divs, and carry forward the remaining gains. The pragmatic problem with that solution is that no one would buy shares of a fund that would immediately distribute 100% of the investment back as a cap gain. Talk about buying a dividend! I don't know the real answer to what the rule is.

Interesting how top 10 dividend ETFs by AUM ranked in Barron's this week.
#1 was dividend-growth VIG, #2 current-dividend VYM, #3 dividend blend SCHD.
VIG, VYM, SCHD, DGRO, SDY, DVY, FVD, NOBL, RDVY, HDV.

2/16/22 SCHD - inflow alert https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/schd:-etf-inflow-alert-1
"SCHD ETF (Symbol: SCHD) where we have detected an approximate $1.9 billion dollar inflow -- that's a 5.9% increase week over week in outstanding units (from 412,300,000 to 436,750,000). "
SCHD ... a SPY substitute via SeekingAlpha https://seekingalpha.com/article/4485315-schwab-schd-spy-substitute-for-etf-investors Summary: "The SCHD mirrors the SPY's performance but with a higher yield."

I'm a proponent of clean energy but oil and gas will still be needed in the near future.
You're absolutely correct that some people are/were overly optimistic regarding the
timeframe needed for the transition to clean energy.

Just a matter of political will. And a reduction of GREED.

"Waving a magic wand." You're right. But people can learn, grow, change. Most simply don't want to bother. I personally think our evolution continues, too. Will we get smart enough, before the spam fully hits the fan?

+1.
Because Waikiki is most famous, I mention it here:
https://www.hawaiibusiness.com/sea-level-rise-effects-honolulu-hawaii-waikiki-map-future-climate-change/#:~:text=Waikīkī at 4 feet of,at 5 feet of SLR.
The Ala Wai canal was originally planned with outlets at both ends to the sea. Some genius decided there should only be ONE. It is regularly dredged and cleaned. Otherwise, it would turn into a cesspool.

Franklin Income/FKIQX is misclassified as conservative-allocation/30-50% equity. When looking at its Relative-SD/Effective-Equity (65.8%; 73.6% for TSHIX), it is like moderate-allocation/50-70% equity. That can lead to unhappy experiences.
Edit/Add: Using PV for 33-month common run, the Relative-SDs/Effective-Equity are:
FKIQX 65.6%, TSHIX 73.6%, TSUMX 61.4%. So, all 3 are acting like moderate-allocation/50-70% equity.

Davep:BIVIX Risk varies between 4 and 5 at MFOP. Max DD -14.1% 202003, Recovery months +3. MFO Great Owl (GO). Capture Ratio Overall vs. S&P is Up 72%, Down 4% = Overall U/D of 17.7% 500. Beaten S&P 500 in all periods since inception in all up-and-down periods.

Just a matter of political will. And a reduction of GREED.

Perhaps using the word Just in this context is akin to waving a magic wand.
Here is a piece of the puzzle.....Within each nation and among rich and poor nations it is necessary to reach consensus related to "adequately" addressing the wants and needs of present day adult populations while simultaneously adequately setting aside resources to account for the wants and needs of the young and and the unborn. And, related to that, within each nation and among rich and poor nations it is necessary to determine who pays how much to achieve those goals (and then to successfully monitor and to adjust -- when climatic evidence dictates -- those commitments through extended time periods).......sounds like a tall order based on our checkered human history. Perhaps fumbling our way forward over an extended time frame and avoiding the worst possible outcome is likely (this coming from a person who began to advocate for substantially higher gas taxes 50 years ago as a way to reduce fossil fuel consumption and to account for the external costs associated with their use.) Here is a current article about some of what fumbling our way forward may entail over the next 30 years. (Hawaii takes a relatively mild hit in this telling.)

@stayCalm- "OT" refers to the "Off-Topic" MFO discussion section. It's the designated section for commentary which has either very limited or no direct connection to financial matters. msf's unwarranted snub notwithstanding, some of the oldest if not finest MFO posters may be found there. It's accessed via a link at the top left of each MFO page.
@msf- just kidding! :)

Let us hope no misdirected “newbies” accidentally stumble into OT on their first visit.
They’d surely wonder what the the board is about. I understand the reason for OT’s existence (I think).
Yet, it’s hard sometimes to draw a clear distinction between financial and non-financial issues. The many posts after two 737 Max disasters might be an example - as there were repercussions for the airline and aircraft industry which did impact some peoples’ investments and portfolio positioning. And who can argue that Covid-19 (stimulus checks, border closings, business closings, online shopping, near 0 short term interest rates, liquidity issues) wasn’t an economic event?

@Baseball_Fan : I take that fund is in tax advantage account. I see a rather large CG for 2021 !
One thing I did like was the (minimal) lose during Covid-19 ,early on .
Schwabie shows 3 other funds with no TF, so will take a peek at all 4.
A quick look would declare TSUMX the winner from inception to ytd.
Thanks, Derf

I saw that already. I prefer to trust (no pun intended) legal documents over marketing literature.
In any case, there's a difference between handing money over to a bank and having that money sit in an insured account. If the money is in an individual insured bank account waiting to be swept into an omnibus account, what type of bank account is it in? Is it in a savings account or a demand deposit account? Either way, where's the bank disclosure statement that must go along with that bank account?
What appears to be happening, and one must say "appears" because nothing is disclosed, is that the bank is merely holding your money for a day before moving it to an account (the Deposit Account). It's as if you went into a bank, handed the teller your cash, and before the teller did anything with it, gunmen with six-shooters a-blazin' grabbed the money out of the teller's hand.
Sure, the bank would likely still be on the hook for that cash. But the FDIC wouldn't be. It insures accounts, not banks. If a bank goes bust, the FDIC isn't going to cover its electric bill.

FDIC deposit insurance coverage depends on two things: (1) whether your chosen financial product is a deposit product; and (2) whether your bank is FDIC-insured.

https://www.fdic.gov/resources/deposit-insurance/brochures/deposits-at-a-glance/index.html

Thornburg describes TSUMX newer (3/1/19- ; AUM $70 million only ) as multi-asset fund (stocks, bonds, alternatives) that is "unconstrained" or go-anywhere. No ranges for assets are specified in the prospectus but M* puts it in conservative-allocation/30-50% equity based on its current positioning. It may be a milder version of Thornburg's world-allocation/multi-asset TIBAX (NTF/no-load at Fido and Schwab) and its newer type of CEF TBLD (term-structure; not leveraged for now). TSUMX has transaction-fees at Fido and Schwab and both have lower min for IRAs (Fido $2,500; Schwab $1,000). I am surprised that Thornburg hasn't made it available as NTF/no-load at Fido and Schwab.

Thanks @Davep.
Just adding what I learned if it is helpful to others.
It is a multi-asset, real return fund. Its current bond allocation is mostly investment grade with a big slug of US Treasuries.
https://www.thornburg.com/wp-content/uploads/home/pdfs/TH4795_C-fact-sheet-S.pdf.pdf
If one overlooks the idiosyncratic rise and fall of NAV in February 2021, it compares with and might even have a slight edge over FMSDX (depending on one's temperament).
If I was not averse at this point to adding an additional fund to my portfolio, I would seriously consider this.

msf & stayCalm : Did you happen to read crypto hack 2016 I posted in OT ?

I've stayed away from OT for quite some time. The Yahoo article says that the exchange (Gemini) was not hacked while the self directed IRA custodian acknowledged that "an incident occurred". That distinguishes it from 2016 where it was the exchange (Bitfinex) that was hacked.

It's hard to think of this as a mutual fund when 50% is in one stock. The other issue I could image is the potential tax liability if the fund starts experiencing redemptions and the manager has to sell appreciated stock. Given that, if one is a Tesla fan, why not just buy Tesla directly? According to the fund's June 30, 2021 semiannual report--https://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1217673/000119312521257076/d171358dncsrs.htm#cov171358_33--the fund had $5.6 billion of unrealized capital gains in its $6.9 billion portfolio. One could easily imagine the fund distributing some hefty taxable distributions if some of those unrealized gains have to be realized because of shareholders selling the fund.

@msf & @stayCalm : Did you happen to read crypto hack 2016 I posted in OT ?

The SEC has rules for diversified vs nondiversified funds. BPTRX is nondiversified.
In the 1940 Act, Congress defined a nondiversified fund simply as one that didn't meet the requirements to be called diversified. Just a basic partitioning of the fund universe into two parts.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/80a-5
What @sma3 might be thinking of is not a section of the 1940 Act (under which investment companies are registered), but rather 26 U.S. Code § 851 that defines regulated investment companies. That's a more expansive category that includes 1940 Act registered investment companies and also some common trusts that do not fit the definition of an investment company.
In any case, this statute requires that with respect to half (50%) of the fund's assets, the fund cannot invest more than 5% in a single security (other than government bonds). That leaves the other 50% to play with.
However, a second part of the statute prohibits the fund from investing more than 25% of its assets in a single company. That is the part that I've wondered about with funds like FAIRX. There is an exception if the increased percentage is due to market fluctuations. See Example 6 in the examples below.
Here are some examples of how this statute plays out.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/26/1.851-5

I'm a proponent of clean energy but oil and gas will still be needed in the near future.
You're absolutely correct that some people are/were overly optimistic regarding the
timeframe needed for the transition to clean energy.

Just a matter of political will. And a reduction of GREED.

an account labeled “Benjamin Choe'' began withdrawing bitcoin, ether and U.S. dollars from user accounts. One user said he lost 13 ETH, 1 BTC and thousands of dollars in a matter of minutes

Crypto may have been the bait, but the theft wasn't crypto-specific.
Self directed IRAs are already a wild west environment. They're structured to give investors nearly unlimited control over what types of investments are put into the IRA. Contrast that with a brokerage which limits you to stocks, bonds, derivatives, mutual funds, ETFs, and the like.
Also unlike brokerages, self directed IRA custodians don't have SIPC insurance to protect you against theft. The custodian, IRA Financial has "reason to believe that there are some bad actors posing as IRA Financial employees looking for crypto account-related information." Good luck recovering losses.
https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/investing/self-directed-ira