I don't promote anything.

This is exactly the type of fund I love to own. Great managers, new fund, small AUM, under the radar fund. In the Multi sector bond category it has the best year to date performance + great volatility + very high yield. The fund has about 50% in MBS/securitized and about 55% in IG(investment grade) bonds, duration about 2.7.

My numbers are from TCW(

link) then Portfolio Composition.
You can see SD compared to PIMIX,JMUTX,PUCZX since inception, see PV(link)

Why are you still 'pumping' risky funds with low SD?
SD deviation does not necessarily equate to risk.
Haven't you learned from the other funds you 'pumped' like SEMMX, IOFFX, JMUTX and PUCZX because they have short term 'momentum' with low SD?
Some of these funds were down 17% in one month.
Promoting a fund which has a small AUM, risky assets and low liquidity is irresponsible.
If investors flee from small AUM funds, it will put pressure on the fund to sell illiquid assets. The fund will be selling these illiquid assets at huge discounts resulting in significant losses.
An investor only has to look at what happened to Third Avenue Focus Credit fund to see the result.
https://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/11/third-avenue-to-liquidate-junk-bond-fund-that-bet-big-on-illiquid-assets.html

Here we go again. We haven't seen you for a while.
Just because I like a fund doesn't mean you should own it. Do your own due diligence. I have used it for my own purposes successfully.
Even a fund with 1-3 billion in AUM doesn't guarantee to be liquid. In 2008 money market fund broke the buck(link)
VCIT, about 100% investment-grade fund from Vanguard, lost about 13% from peak to trough. It did recover after the Fed promised to buy bonds but you could not forecast that.
When a black swan shows up bad things happen.
There is a reason for..."Past performance is no guarantee of future results"
Now, if you have any data please post about it. Is this fund resembles SEMMX,IOFIX or Third Avenue Focus Credit fund?

This is exactly the type of fund I love to own. Great managers, new fund, small AUM, under the radar fund. In the Multi sector bond category it has the best year to date performance + great volatility + very high yield. The fund has about 50% in MBS/securitized and about 55% in IG(investment grade) bonds, duration about 2.7.

My numbers are from TCW(

link) then Portfolio Composition.
You can see SD compared to PIMIX,JMUTX,PUCZX since inception, see PV(link)

Why are you still 'pumping' risky funds with low SD?
SD deviation does not necessarily equate to risk.
Haven't you learned from the other funds you 'pumped' like SEMMX, IOFIX, JMUTX and PUCZX because they have short term 'momentum' with low SD?
Some of these funds were down 17% in one month.
Promoting a fund which has a small AUM, risky assets and low liquidity is irresponsible.
If investors flee from small AUM funds, it will put pressure on the fund to sell illiquid assets. The fund will be selling these illiquid assets at huge discounts resulting in significant losses.
An investor only has to look at what happened to Third Avenue Focus Credit fund to see the result.
https://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/11/third-avenue-to-liquidate-junk-bond-fund-that-bet-big-on-illiquid-assets.html

This is exactly the type of fund I love to own. Great managers, new fund, small AUM, under the radar fund. In the Multi sector bond category it has the best year to date performance + great volatility + very high yield. The fund has about 50% in MBS/securitized and about 55% in IG(investment grade) bonds, duration about 2.7.

My numbers are from TCW(link) then Portfolio Composition.
You can see SD compared to PIMIX,JMUTX,PUCZX since inception, see PV(link)

I was hoping THOPX would offer some safety in short term bondland. Its10% fall in March and subsequent lag these last few months have me thinking I may be the one drinking from the bowel with this fund? 70% of their holdings are bbb or lower.

Two bond funds that have held up relatively well this year are Vanguard's intermediate-term bond funds, VBILX (an index fund, expense ratio .07%) and VCORX (actively managed, expense ratio .25%). Both funds are basically 50% in government bonds and 50% in investment-grade corporates. This total-return chart shows their performance compared to THOPX and to Vanguard's junk-bond fund VWEHX. https://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?THOPX,vwehx,VCORX,VBILX

I've followed MetWest for years, and heard some of their managers speak in person. I do have faith in their integrity.
On the commercial bond side, there looked to be a good amount of junk. But even that junk didn't seem to be yielding that much (maybe 10%-15% if I was doing arithmetic correctly).
I mentioned above that I've got some pure speculation - I'm seeing a lot of derivatives and floaters. I haven't thought through their impact on yield. That goes down a rabbit hole I'd just as soon avoid, unless I want to prep for a job on Wall Street.

“Ultra Short Bonds Recently Offered Unusually High Excess Yield with Limited Credit Risk.”
Yes - But not before investors were shaken by an unprecedented drop in NAV in March /April. I have to believe many fled these funds before they rebounded. TRBUX dropped over about a month‘s time from above its benchmark NAV of $5.00 to near $4.85 - a huge loss for this cash-like holding. Since than it’s soared to well over $5.05. Federal Reserve buying of corporate bonds had to play a part in the rebound, though I still don’t fully understand what caused this turmoil at the short end of the curve in the first place. The rush to cash was about as nutty as the hoarding of toilet paper.
Just a thought based on quick look at John’s link. I’ll perhaps add more. No better or worse, I suspect, than what you’d come across elsewhere. It begs incredulity to think this short term stuff - yielding a percent or less post expenses - is suitable to grow your nest egg. Constitutes more of a holding pattern to perhaps avoid future losses.
Selected Excerpts (slightly edited / condensed)
Moving Back Into Investment Grade and High Yield: Multi-Sector Bonds
“Similar to what we saw in the ultra-short market, credit spreads widened substantially across investment grade, high yield, and securitized product sectors in February and March. That was followed by a strong, though somewhat uneven rally since late March, as not all segments of the market participated in the recovery equally. We believe this has created potential opportunities for active managers to identify attractive relative value opportunities. We would also note that high yield spreads remain nearly 200 basis points (bps) above the levels seen earlier this year, based on the ICE BofAML U.S. High Yield Index. In an environment where the 10-year U.S. Treasury bond yield has jumped by 30 bps, but remains below 1.0% (based on Bloomberg data), the credit markets may offer sources of higher income and the potential for greater total return over Treasuries.”
Historically, Convertible Bonds Have Outperformed in Market Declines
“Those looking to increase equity exposure but concerned about the potential for another pullback in the stock market may want to consider convertible securities. As we have previously noted, the asset class historically has generated compelling risk-adjusted returns over the long term. One other noteworthy feature, in our view: Convertibles historically have participated in the upside of rising equity markets, while offering some degree of downside protection during most market pullbacks.”
Innovation Equities
“One way to prepare the equity sleeve of an investment portfolio for the longer run—and further potential ups and downs of economic cycles--may be through increased exposure to innovation equities. These are stocks of those companies whose leading-edge products or services may position them for strong growth in the months and years ahead. ‘Innovation was already leading the market in terms of return, and growing size in the economy, even before we headed into this pandemic crisis,’ says Brian Foerster, Lord Abbett Investment Strategist.’Cloud technology, artificial intelligence (AI), biotech and medical devices, e-commerce, and a new area that we've classified as ‘virtual empowerment,’” were among the industries that displayed the most resiliency during the recent downturn’ he adds.”
Nothing very deep here folks. Looks like “Innovation Equities“ is the new buzz-term for what we used to call “Tech Stocks“. :)

I can't figure out how the yield is so high, 18%. ... It has about 57% in investment grade bonds, mostly mortgages and corporate credit ... Seems to good to be true, what am I missing?

You and me both.

I called TCW. They said it is because the asset base is so small. They have been able to buy a smaller number of bonds trading at a discount, therefore increasing the yield.

As it is stated, this doesn't make sense to me. (Perhaps they are talking about odd lot pricing?) For a given type of bond and a given credit rating, there's a market rate of return. The price of a given bond is determined by that market rate and its coupon rate. The lower the coupon, the higher the discount, so that YTM (and thus SEC yield) comes close to market rate. IOW, the YTM of a bond is generally independent of the size of the discount.
When looking at current yield, i.e. coupon / price rather than YTM, a discount bond will have a smaller yield. It's true that the discount will decrease the denominator. But the coupon (numerator) will also be smaller than with a bond selling at par. This latter effect dominates. So generally current yield goes down, not up, as market discount increases.
(Left as an exercise: compare current yields on two ten year bonds, one with a 2% coupon selling at par, and one with a 1% coupon.)

25% of portfolio is cash/treasuries so that's like 1-2% tops. Maybe some bond gurus on this site can figure out this mystery?

Precisely the point. It's easy enough to look at the full portfolio for this fund because it is so small. Given that the average yield is 15%, 18%, somewhere around there, we need to be able to find lots of bonds with yields well over 20% to counterbalance the cash, let alone other lower yielding bonds.
In our search for these bonds we can ignore all premium bonds paying less then, say, 15% coupon. This is because the YTW of a premium bond is even less than its coupon rate. Pretty much none of the premium bonds have coupons high enough to contribute to the high average yield.
A quick and dirty approximation for yield of discount bonds is:
[discount (as fraction of current price) ÷ years to maturity] + coupon rate
For example, we can approximate the yield of $10K of bonds with a current value of $6K, a coupon of 5%, and a maturity in 10 years as: $4K/$6K ÷ 10 years + 5% ~= 11.6%
Without going into gory detail, I'll just say that few bonds pop out as having high yields (20%+). The ones I could find (this assumes they're performing):
Corporates:
Intelsat Jackson Holdings: $13K @ 22% and $22K @ 21% (using approximation described above)
Antero Resources: $5.7K @ 40% and $3K @50%
Lots of junk yielding 10%-15%, but even those hurt, not help boost the average.
So the help from the corporates comes from $44K in total assets.
Non-agency MBS (assuming not paid off early):
Bombardier: $51K @ 26%
GSAA Trust, Series 2007-3, Class 2A1B: $13K @ 43%
So the help from non-agency MBSs comes from $64K in total assets.
All in all, about $100K of value in a $9M fund. Certainly nowhere near enough to pull the average yield up to where the fund says it is. I have a few more thoughts but they're in the way of pure, uninformed speculation. So I would rather hear from the bond mavens.

In the Multi sector bond category it has the best year to date performance + great volatility + very high yield. The fund has about 50% in MBS/securitized and about 55% in IG(investment grade) bonds, duration about 2.7.

This is the second post giving a figure of 55% - 57% in investment grade bonds.
Consider that the same managers run another TCW fund that has only 35% in IG bonds. M* rates the average credit quality of that fund as AA. If you'd prefer, SIRRX is another multisector bond fund with 57% of its portfolio in IG bonds, and M* likewise rates its average quality as AA.
OTOH, PUCZX is a multisector bond with half (50%) of its portfolio in IG bonds while its average credit quality is BB. So one can tell virtually nothing about the credit quality of a fund from the figure being given, IG bonds as a percentage of AUM.
I'm reasonably confident that M* would rate MWFEX's portfolio as BB or possibly worse. While a somewhat larger percentage of the bonds in MWFEX are IG than in PUCZX, the junk bonds are of lower quality. The effect on average credit quality, as M* explains in its methodology, is nonlinear. So a few really bad bonds can drag down the whole average.
Moving on to convexity. This is another risk of this fund, where the convexity is almost nonexistent (0.09). While there are various techniques for pushing down duration some of them also drive down convexity. This is undesirable, as it tends to mitigate the benefit of shorter duration.
Finally, when people make statements about volatility, it would be nice to see hard numbers (standard deviations) included.

https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ALeKk01srMZj2IX_eWzrfjWRskgbTPbnxw:1593454260683&source=hp&ei=tC76XvmbJ5b6-gS06oGQDg&q=Assessing+Opportunities+across+the+Risk+Spectrum+June+8,+2020&oq=Assessing+Opportunities+across+the+Risk+Spectrum+June+8,+2020&gs_lcp=ChFtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1ocBAMOgcIIxDqAhAnUNsbWNsbYL4paAFwAHgAgAGpAogBqQKSAQMyLTGYAQCgAQKgAQGwAQ8&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-hp
Assessing Opportunities across the Risk Spectrum
June 8, 2020
While recent market performance would suggest that investor optimism appears to be in full flower, there are still a great many uncertainties associated with how economies and markets will respond to pandemic-related developments in the months ahead. Long-term investors weighing their options for such an environment may be well served by employing an active manager offering a breadth of carefully constructed strategies to navigate the changed investment landscape of a post-coronavirus world.
After the March sell-off and the spring rally, where should investors focus their attention? Here, we outline four strategies that may align with different levels of risk tolerance in this uncertain environment.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/markets.businessinsider.com/amp/news/stock-market-correctly-predicted-next-president-biden-donald-trump-election-2020-6-1029351214
The stock market has correctly predicted who will win the presidency since 1984. Here's what to look for as we approach the November election.
Matthew Fox
The stock market has a solid track record of predicting who will win the US presidential election.
Since 1984, the S&P 500 has correctly predicted every single presidential election based on its price movements in the three months leading up to the election.
And since 1928, the S&P correctly predicted the next US President 87% of the time.
As we approach the November 2020 election, investors should keep an eye on the stock market to gain clues as to which candidate may win the 9election: incumbent Donald Trump, or Joe Biden
Probably wild goose chase next 4 months until nov3
Think best lock up Schumer Pelosi Trump Pence Harris Russian-Mitch Warren in covid19 ward for 3 months, whomever comes out alive is our potus nov3

The Federal Reserve spent $428 million buying debt in individual companies in the first wave of its corporate bond-buying programme, data released Sunday showed.
It bought the corporate bonds in households names such as Walmart, Coca-Cola, McDonald's, and Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway, the data showed.
The Fed spent $5.7 million on debt in Berkshire Hathaway Energy, a subsidiary of Buffett's conglomerate.
$6.8 billion worth of corporate debt ETFs were also bought by the Fed, with the central bank pouring $1.8 billion into a single ETF.

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/federal-reserve-buys-corporate-debt-berkshire-hathaway-walmart-mcdonalds-cocacola-2020-6-1029349199

Inflation is a silent killer to investor’s portfolios.
Thankfully, it’s been dormant for the last few decades, leaving nominal returns mostly intact.

The Stock Market Is Set for One of Its Best Quarters in Decades. Time to Prepare for the Worst.
https://www.barrons.com/articles/caution-should-be-byword-after-stocks-huge-quarter-51593187927?siteid=yhoof2&yptr=yahoo
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.barrons.com/amp/articles/caution-should-be-byword-after-stocks-huge-quarter-51593187927
The bigger the drop, the bigger the pop, according to one market maxim. With the stock market rebounding from its first-quarter pandemic plunge with one of its best quarters in decades, that saying seems true.
But, as another adage holds, the easy money has been made (although it sure hasn’t seemed easy). Through Thursday, the S&P 500 index had recovered 38% from its March 23 lows, while the Nasdaq Composite was up 46% and set a record this past week, and the Russell 2000 index of small-cap stocks had jumped 43%
Very volatile next few weeks, buckle down

ISTR that Michael Price had discussed starting an interval fund in the 1990's to invest in distressed companies and high yield bonds. Unfortunately, ZEOIX has morphed into an interval fund for me as I'm not willing to take a $500 loss(at least for now.)

Interval funds have been getting a lot of press recently, giving people the impression that they're something new. While I was certain that they weren't, I was having problems finding a trace of them beyond the current publicity.
I finally ran across a breadcrumb from July 5, 2000:

Loan-participation funds, for instance, are different from most mutual funds because, for the most part, they don't allow investors to redeem fund shares any time they would like. Instead, most offer only quarterly windows for redemptions.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB962673584979225345
I believe these funds gradually "opened" up and evolved into bank loan funds. For example, the article mentions Eaton Vance Prime Rate Reserves (EVPRX). This was a continuously offered fund with quarterly redemptions. Here's a 2006 prospectus describing its operation. In 2008 it became the open end fund EAFAX with the same underlying portfolio.
ISTM that the term "interval fund" is of more recent vintage. Effectively, so-called interval funds are version 2.0.

Quote from David Rosenberg's newsletter "Breakfast with Dave":
Wealth-Track_Breakfast_with_Dave_2020_06_24.pdf

1.High yield rates “should be” trading closer to 11.0% than 6.4% to compensate for default risk. And that’s for today’s default rate — we haven’t even hit the peak yet. A no-brainer assessment of how mispriced this asset class is at the moment. In fact, when you look at the 50-year history of the data, you will see that the norm is for the average coupon in the high yield market to be about 500 basis points above the prevailing default rate at any given moment of time. Today, the two levels are dead-even — and another case to be made that appropriate compensation for the inherent default risk is much closer to 11% than it is to 6%.
2.The high yield market seems to be pricing in a default rate of 3.25%, which is half today’s level. Instead of discounting a recessionary default rate, the market is pricing in a default rate we typically see three years into the economic recovery.
and,
To be sure, the stock market is way too overpriced for my liking. But the future earnings outlook is a source of debate, and the bulls have stated their case.And I get it. But high yield bonds —come on, it’s as plain as day. It’s about default risk and getting the compensation you deserve as an investor. But you see — it is the debtor, the borrower, that the Fed is most concerned about... creating this massive gap between the current artificial price and true intrinsic value will not, in the end, serve anyone very well.

@Junkster - Are you drinking from this punch bowl?

With stocks going soft this past week there has been a reading change in the barometer to a reading of 135 which reflects that the S&P 500 Index has moved from extremely overbought to overbought.
As for my positioning I am currently 10% cash, 45% income and 45% equity. I have reduced cash from my normal 20% range to 10% range because of it's low yield and raised both by income and equity area allocations from 40% to 45% each. Within equities I am overweight in good equity dividend paying funds that produce qualified dividends and on the income side I split the overweight between multi sector income and hybrid income type funds. With this, I'm now back to a cash build mode where all income generated within the portfolio will be used to restore my cash allocation. I'm estimating that by year end, should asset valuations remain close to what they are presently, my cash area will bubble somewhere around the 15% range.
Remember stocks usually go soft during the summer months and with this year being a Presidential election year I'm looking for stock market volatility to continue. Hopefully, a business friendly President will be elected which will be good for both the economy and the stock market. I remember after the last Presidential election there was a big jump in the stock market as a business friendly President was elected.
When there is a meaningful change in the barometer reading I will make post of it.
I wish all ... "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet

This is exactly the type of fund I love to own. Great managers, new fund, small AUM, under the radar fund. In the Multi sector bond category it has the best year to date performance + great volatility + very high yield. The fund has about 50% in MBS/securitized and about 55% in IG(investment grade) bonds, duration about 2.7.

The following episodes are all with David Rosenberg.
June 12th Episode:

June 19th Episode:

June 26th Episode:

From where I sit, there are things I do like even if I’m not a buyer of the Dow, S&P 500 or Nasdaq outright. I still like growth over value; I like essentials over cyclicals; I like “Big Safety”; I like the “homebody” stay-at-home stocks; I like the long end of the Treasury curve; I like Japan as a secular Abe-led turnaround story; I like secular themes tied to medical technology and cyber security investments; ESG is here to stay; and my strongest conviction is in gold and gold stocks (silver too — “ poor man’s gold”). While the Fed may be backstopping the outer limits of the corporate bond market, I wouldn’t touch it. They are so mispriced for the current and prospective default wave, it’s not even funny. If you’re that bullish, just buy stocks. If you want to invest defensively and seek yield, look at preferreds, or the solid dividend yields in selective REITs, telecom with financial depth, and utilities.

Wealth-Track_Breakfast_with_Dave_2020_06_24.pdf

The yield in June was 1.26%, so 15% annualized...its come down some, practically no volatility in June. I allocated about 10% to it last week. After seeing how much Tad and other managers own of it, I trust it more. TCW is not Bernie Madoff.

VTI/SPY performance was higher than BND in the last 10-20-30 years. Nothing new. What is going to be in the next 10-20 years? probably the same.
That was easy.
If you don't care about volatility then you should be in 100% stocks, in fact, you should take a margin, interactive brokers charge only 1.5% on $300K(link)
So, why do you need bonds? for ballast. Many retirees who accumulate a large portfolio and need a low withdrawal rate (think under 3%) could invest a large % in bonds if they like a lower volatility portfolio.