https://www.investors.com/market-trend/stock-market-today/dow-jones-futures-bitcoin-dives-below-50000-intel-snap-move-biden-capital-gains-tax-hike-plan-hits-market-rally/
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/cryptocurrency-bitcoin-ethereum-xrp-dogecoin-joe-biden-capital-tax-gain-075447840.html
The drop is due to the desire to raise the capital gains tax?
Hmmm... it has nothing to do with.... the 1.55 billion in bitcoin options that expire today?
I may wait just a little longer or by EOD to add to my tiny position.

Circling back to this... given what was said about HY bonds and inflation / recession related to the worry with FMSDX ... if you were trying to decide between adding more to FMSDX or FBALX right now... which would you prefer?

@JonGaltIII FBALX is the larger, more traditional fund. It has a MFO Risk of 4 with a 5 year maximum drawdown of -14.6 compared to MFO Risk of 3 for FMSDX with a maximum drawdown of -10.9. FBALX has 70% equity with a P/E of 36.4 compared to 52% equity with a P/E of 27.4. FBALX has twice the amount in Technology as FMSDX while FMSDX is more value oriented.
I believe that high valuations have pulled returns forward and increased risks boosting the returns of FBALX. For these reasons, I favor FMSDX going forward in the intermediate term as a conservative investor.
My next article on MFO discusses some of these reasons. Thank you for the great question.

I haven’t read everything above but I say cash is form of bonds. When I started investing in 1982 cash reserve funds were the high flyers. Of course conditions then were much different than they are now but still, cash reserves are ultra short bonds. Johnathan Clements discussed his thoughts on cash in a recent article in his Humble Dollar blog
At this point, half my bonds are termed “cash”. Another 25% are in a Stable value fund - neither true bonds or cash. Maybe I should advocate that we call all these bond like instruments “fixed income”.

I did and what I have done since I started investing and now at retirement. I'm fully invested at 99+%, only several thousands in cash at the bank. All my brokerage accounts have zero or close to zero in MM. I only go to cash since 2010-11 when I started planning my retirement, when I see very high risk, that happened about 2%. Since 2010-11 I started to change my asset allocation gradually from a very high % in stocks funds to mainly bond fund today.

@hank,
I believe you are a holder of PRPFX...a worthy all weather portfolio... that is better explained here:
https://optimizedportfolio.com/permanent-portfolio/
Using PRPFX's components as a guide (YTD):
Comparing PRPFX against its components TLT, CEF, and VTI
VTI - Rising - YTD up 6%
TLT - Falling - YTD down almost (-14%)
CEF - Falling - YTD down almost (-10%)
Cash - Flat
Look's positive short term for equities

Yes, this is Turkish crypto founder; but.....
Article, regarding the closure of this organization.
I also recalled this from 2 years ago in Canada and locked out investors. I have not performed a follow-up.

You can argue that all the bad news is factored into India and Brazil BUT each is only down by 5 to 6% YTD and compared to loss 50% March 2020. If their covid rates are skyrocketing, the impact on local economy is hard to predict. Agree DCA would be wise, but if you wait till "all clear " it will be late. I would not use money you need for anything in the next 3 years.
There is an increasing consensus that the Chinese vaccine is almost worthless with efficacy of just 50% apparently just beating WHO requirements ( why does that not surprise me?) JNJ vaccine will be much better bet for EM despite very rare Cerebral vein thrombosis issues. But it will take months to roll out

@bee - Thanks. Your link worked fine. Impressive stats and layout. In a sense, Information overload.
- Their “60” score is interesting. MaxFunds says “91”. Finny finds a low AUM a detractor (If I read it right) while MaxFunds would find that a positive.
- Appears they’ve tempered back the initial 10% in the Blackstone fund. Finny puts it at just 7.5%.
- Finny is harsh on fees. I am too. RPGAX is to a degree a defensive fund (boutique?) and those types of approaches tend to generate higher fees.
- Glad my question generated some discussion. Folks are right that DODBX exhibits more erratic performance than RPGAX. Still, IMHO, over very long time frames it’s hard to beat the advantage of a substantially lower ER.

A cute 10 minute clip. Lynch always was telegenic - hasn’t skipped a beat since leaving Magellan when it was at the crest of the wave. Is it as simple as “Buy what you know”? More appropriately what he means is : “Learn / Research / Study” before you buy. Maybe study 5-10 prospects and weed out the weakest ones before buying that “gem”. That’s hard work. If it was easy, we’d all be rich or famous like Lynch. I agree with the thought - right on the money. But I find it a lot easier (lazier) to buy mutual funds instead of stocks. Let the manager do the hard work.

Yes Hank. In another video, he stated (paraphrased), if you don't know what you're buying, buy mutual funds.

1. It is likely that COVID-19 pandemic will be brought into control with vaccination along with other mitigation practices, but it will take time and resources. Federal reserves across the globe have pledged to support this effort. As long term investors it would prudent to DCA into international funds over several months instead one lump sum, since this pandemic may take a year or longer before it stabilizes.
2. Right now countries such as New Zealand, South Korea, and Taiwan who have gotten their COVID infection under control early and are doing well economically. US is playing catch-up with rapid deployment of vaccines (FEMA) and lots of resources. Delivering 200 million vaccines within 100 days is remarkable. However, there is a sizable population who do not want the vaccines and this will prevent US to reach the herd immunity this year. It is the rapid mutation of the coronavirus that is most concerning. The worst scenario would be the new variants would greatly reduce the efficacy of COVID vaccines, and render them much less effective. So far these variants are found to be more contagious but not necessary more lethal.
3. The FANNG stocks along with those that enable remote working have advanced more than the rest of the S&P 500. The market have broadened out the economically sensitive value stocks in fall 2020. Recent interview with Leann Sonder (Schwab) posted by @Derf also discussed the recent change of stock leadership and the direction moving toward “quality” stocks.

A cute 10 minute clip. Lynch always was telegenic - hasn’t skipped a beat since leaving Magellan when it was at the crest of the wave. Is it as simple as “Buy what you know”? More appropriately what he means is : “Learn / Research / Study” before you buy. Maybe study 5-10 prospects and weed out the weakest ones before buying that “gem”. That’s hard work. If it was easy, we’d all be rich or famous like Lynch. I agree with the thought - right on the money. But I find it a lot easier (lazier) to buy mutual funds instead of stocks. Let the manager do the hard work.

Again closing in on 1.5% :)
After peaking at 1.778% March 30, the 10-year Treasury bond has steadily declined, dipping below 1.54% this evening. The rapid reversal has baffled many observers - especially in light of generally “hot” economic indicators (retail sales, commodity prices, employment numbers) and a roaring stock market.
Theories as to what, if anything, the reversal portends abound. I’ve seen suggestions some big players (like hedge funds) are bracing for a stock market sell-off later in the year, The WSJ speculates today that the rate reversal portends a strengthening European economy relative to the U.S. in coming months.
CHART

“A U.S. mutual fund that suffered nearly $500 million of losses appears to have misvalued its large derivatives portfolio, according to an analysis of the fund’s disclosures by The Wall Street Journal, academics and traders.
The Infinity Q Diversified Alpha Fund disclosed in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission valuations of investments that in at least three instances were incorrect or inconsistent with market conditions, said traders and academics. One valuation was mathematically impossible, said a former Morgan Stanley managing director who reviewed the disclosures. In one instance, the disclosures show, Infinity entered two nearly identical swaps contracts referencing the same index over the same period, yet booked a gain on one that was more than three times as large as the other—an outcome analysts said defied logic.
The SEC informed Infinity of evidence that the firm’s chief investment officer, James Velissaris, was adjusting parameters of third-party pricing models used to value its derivatives, leaving Infinity unable to accurately value its holdings, the firm has said. ... The Federal Bureau of Investigation and prosecutors at the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office are also investigating, the people familiar with the matter said ...
The mutual fund, which launched in 2014 and is a part of Infinity Q Capital Management LLC, sought to generate returns that weren’t as tied to the returns of other assets like stocks and bonds, its disclosures showed ... It appeared to pay off, particularly during the brunt of last year’s selloff. In March 2020, the mutual fund posted a return of about 7%, while the S&P 500 fell 12.4%, its worst month since 2008. That month, the fund drew its highest inflows ever, according to Morningstar Direct data.”
Excerpted / (Edited for Brevity) from The Wall Street Journal, April 21, 2021
Search Page

I haven’t read everything above but I say cash is form of bonds. When I started investing in 1982 cash reserve funds were the high flyers. Of course conditions then were much different than they are now but still, cash reserves are ultra short bonds. Johnathan Clements discussed his thoughts on cash in a recent article in his Humble Dollar blog
At this point, half my bonds are termed “cash”. Another 25% are in a Stable value fund - neither true bonds or cash. Maybe I should advocate that we call all these bond like instruments “fixed income”.

@hank: at the gym I was surprised to find the KN95 mask easier to use than a cloth or "blue" one that clings to the face and impedes breathing.

“India’s coronavirus crisis is deepening, with hospitals buckling under increasing pressure from the second wave of infections. The South Asian country reported 259,170 new cases and 1,761 deaths over a 24-hour period on Tuesday, according to government data. It is the sixth straight day that India’s daily case count exceeded 200,000 while the daily death toll — still comparatively low — is inching higher. ”
Sad any way you cut it. (Could belong in off topic.) Just trying to get my head around how Covid is playing into investment returns.
- Is it a good time to buy Asia, EM or global funds because Covid-19 has depressed those prices relative to the U.S.? Or - maybe a bad time if you think this trend will continue?
- Is the U.S. currently ahead of other countries in the Covid (infection rate) game because of (A) better governance? (B) more money and resources? or (C) a population more receptive to vaccines along with cultural differences?
- Are investors overestimating the economic rebound from Covid-19 and bidding up some prices recklessly? If so, which ones?
CNBC

Interview with Jeffery Gundlach:
Nov 2020

The Value of Investing Mistakes
Time Horizon
Concentrated Bets
Risk Management
Beta Trades are rare and requires raising funds for such situations
His outlook for the next 18 months ahead from Nov 2020:
-US Stocks are in the late stage of the momentum trade
-PRPFX looks like a good option right now... since Nov 2020 its up 14%

When Mr. Roubini (aka Dr. Doom and a fierce critic of all things crypto) wrote that piece for project syndicate, Bitcoin was $6,300 per coin. It's now around $57,000. Blockchain has the potential to disrupt banking in a similar way in which mobile phones did to the telephone pole. I just don't agree with the liberterian fantasy slant... but yes I do agree that central banks could provide alternatives that eliminate intemediaries and reduce energy ... but why didn't they? It's no coincidence that blockchain/bitcoin was launched approximately 6 weeks after the financial crisis.
All that said, I'm not very interested in the idealogy of blockchain. At present, it doesn't violate a moral code of mine. I just want to profit from investments in it. So far, so good.

We don't need Bitcoin to have a digital currency without the crazy Bitcoin mining energy costs, and libertarian ideology is an essential part of the movement:
https://ft.com/content/eeeacd7c-2e0e-11e9-ba00-0251022932c8
https://marketwatch.com/story/roubini-calls-out-the-big-blockchain-lie-2018-10-17
https://theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/05/blockchain-of-command/528543/
In fact, the elimination of a "third party intermediary" from transactions is part of the libertarian fantasy. While that third party can include greedy banks, it can also include government regulators that ensure transactions are legitimate, not in illegal goods and appropriately taxed. Bitcoin and crypto initially were means for people to trade in illicit goods--see Silk Road--and to avoid paying taxes. That is evolving now with large institutional investors and regulator interest, but still problematic.
There is also this false notion of liberation and equal access to Bitcoin instead of Central Banks--the idea that anyone can have access to mining it and trading it. But what is happening in practice is very wealthy people and institutions are cornering the market in Bitcoin. About half of all Bitcoin is controlled by a few Chinese and Russian mining pools: https://fortune.com/2021/04/20/bitcoin-mining-coal-china-environment-pollution/. So basically instead of a democratically elected central government controlling currency, Bitcoin puts control in the hands of the wealthiest private enterprises, and potentially, hostile foreign governments. It's funny, but we live in the country with the world reserve currency. To actually celebrate Bitcoin's acscent is in a way celebrating the demise of the dollar.
And meanwhile there are alternatives from central banks gearing up that don't need to be a libertarian fantasy, yet could eliminate the need for for-profit banks as intermediaries and eliminate energy waste from paper currency. From the first FT article:

One of the most important potential innovations in the broad area of digital money is potentially the opposite of cryptocurrency: central bank digital money, perhaps as a substitute for cash and possibly as something more radical than that. Analysis at the IMF and the Bank of England demonstrates that we need to be clear about what central bank digital money is to achieve, how it relates to cash or bank deposits, and whether it could be a substitute for central bank reserves, which at present can only be owned by commercial banks.
Replacing cash with digital tokens of some kind would be relatively simple. It would mainly raise questions about the degree of anonymity of such replacements. Far more potentially revolutionary and destabilising possibilities would arise if the public at large were able to switch from deposits at commercial banks to absolutely safe accounts at the central bank. This radical idea has obvious attractions since it would remove the privileged access of one class of businesses, banks, to the monetary services of the state’s bank. But it would also transform (and surely destabilise) today’s monetary system, in which the state seeks to guarantee and regulate a money supply largely created by private banks and backed by private debts. Yet the revolutionary fact is that it would now be easy for everybody to hold an account at the central bank. Technology is eliminating the historic difficulties over such access.

Disclaimer: Cryptoassets is a tiny interest of mine in terms of investing but an area I want to learn more about solely for investment / profit purposes. I'm not an official defender of BTC or crypto. In the future, I think I'll leave rebuttals to experts or others better informed than I.
You present some good points. I've been a long term skeptic and even critic of crypto... That said, before you define bitcoin and crypto as the term imaginary (btw bitcoin mining is as "real" as mining for gold) ... Imagine this:
For the first time in history there is now a system where you can send "value" from one person to another or from point A to point B without the physical exchange of an item AND without using a 3rd party intermediary. The last part being the most important and intrinsic to the story of bitcoin/blockchain. There is no administrator that can be influenced. This is an electronic payment system that goes uncensored and payments are delivered without going through a financial institution and without the need to ID people further than a hashtag. Yet all of these transactions are visible and transparent to anyone on an open ledger.
"its supply and demand of something no one really needs and it's scarcity is manufactured" - the same could be said of gold and diamonds. Intrinsic value is a faulty concept. The value of something really comes down to the demand for it.
Re: Bitcoin and Energy required to mine. Is it less energy efficient than mining for gold or printing modern currencies/fiat? The vast majority of bitcoin is currently mined in areas of the world (CN) with an extremely low electric cost. Many of these miners are converting to geothermal and the CEO of Square notes that "eventually" BTC will be powered completely by clean energy or renewables. Here's the whitepaper on it: https://assets.ctfassets.net/2d5q1td6cyxq/5mRjc9X5LTXFFihIlTt7QK/e7bcba47217b60423a01a357e036105e/BCEI_White_Paper.pdf
The last paragraph 'Bitcoin feeds...' - I don't subscribe to that as the intention or intended purpose and outcome of BTC and I'd bet those CEOS and companies dumping 100's of millions into it subscribe to a different theory as well. Best investing fortunes to all!

One of their portfolio managers is interviewed in this week’s Barron’s.
Since they like gold, I ran a comparison of their Global fund SGENX with PRPFX. At the 3 and 5 year point, PRPFX has the better performance record. At 10 years out they’re tied (8.5% annually). To a considerable extent this is comparing apples & oranges. But, considering the substantial difference in ER, I wouldn’t be encouraged to send First Eagle my money.