Barron's has also raised concerns, https://www.barrons.com/articles/social-security-checks-doge-cuts-musk-0862aa39?mod=past_editions
My summary for those who cannot access Barron's article (LINK):
"RETIREMENT. DOGE is now going after the SSA. The charges of massive fraud have been discredited by accounting for dependent and survivor benefits that are tracked under the original Social Security recipient who may have passed away. The SSA expenses are only about 1% of the benefits the SSA pays out (It would be lower on the so-called SSA assets that are really Treasury IOUs; moreover, all of the Medicare application processing is also through the SSA, while states process the Medicaid applications). The SSA Inspector General found that between 2015-2022, only 1% of the SSA payments were improper. Those who have gone through the process of getting SSA benefits realize how difficult it’s to cheat the system.
There are problems with the SSA, but those don’t include fraud. There is a mismatch of the FICA revenues and benefits paid out that the Congress must address within 10 years. Take Administration’s promise to protect Social Security with a grain of salt – just look at how its promises to protect Medicare and Medicaid went in its recent budget. If your SSA check suddenly stops, DOGE probably ate it. So, keep an eye on your SSA direct deposits, signup or login to My Social Security and print your work earnings history and information on benefits. Fraudsters are already exploiting the situation by sending fake emails or making fraudulent calls – beware that the SSA doesn’t do that unless it has sent you a formal notification via the USPS."

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/01/doge-actions-may-cause-social-security-benefit-interruption-ex-agency-head.html
Not a cheerful development, even for those already receiving social security benefits

@Crash
Have you tried the MSN link WABAC posted above?
Works for me...
Edit/Add:
"Shown above are the rankings for 2024 and 5 years (all #1 to #5, then only selected families).
There are also tables for 10 years and for each category - 5 best and 5 worst."
The MSN article shows the top 5 families for 2024 but does't include data for 5 years, 10 years, or categories.

Yes, I was able to read at MSN. Thank you. Understanding the metric by which they did the rankings would be key, eh? Rearranging one's portfolio based on that article = shooting yourself in the foot. If you own any of those funds, it will make you feel good...

These are annual fund family rankings that Barron's has published for years. These are based on asset-weighted fund family performances over multiple timeframes - but the story lead is always with annual rankings.
So, one wouldn't expect, say, a bond house like Pimco, to do well in them (Doesn't mean one should sell Pimco. In fact, I own several Pimco funds that are best in class). Fidelity is well rounded now (it used to be growth heavy years ago) and does well (I have Fido 403b). But what's wrong with Vanguard (home for my IRAs)? There are lot of negative stories about Franklin Templeton and its poor showing could be expected. But look at how well Nuveen/TIAA has managed its fund business - that isn't even its main business (I have TIAA 403b).
Changes in ranking are also of interest.
Ratings are controversial - whether for fund families, funds, colleges, restaurants, many consumer products (credit cards, insurance, bank accounts). But ratings sell and many websites exist just for ratings. Barron's has its own suite of ratings.
Use rating info to ask questions, and that's what posters here have done. This story will be in Part 2 of my weekend digests that are posted elsewhere.
MFOP has its own fund family rankings with different criteria for eligibility - 5+ funds of any type. These are also performance based, but weightings used are unclear. As both Barron's and MFOP use Lipper's database, it may be interesting to compare those ratings. Within MFOP, there are also many types of rankings, so there isn't any single MFOP ranking. May be @Charles can comment. https://www.member.mfopremium.com/definitions/
"The Fund Family Rating represents quintile ranking of percentage of funds in family that have beaten their peers since inception (or back to 1960), based on absolute return, oldest share class only. A rating of 5 represents "Top" family, while 1 represents "Bottom." Ratings apply to families with at least 5 funds (up from 3 as of June 2023), age 1 calendar month or more. Since January 2022, families are also rated for the past 1, 3, and 5-year performance periods (ala Fund Alarm) to better assess near-term performance of more established families."

"Morningstar's Manager Research analysts assign Parent ratings to more than 100 of the 150 largest firms
in the US. Only 10 of them earn our greatest conviction and are awarded a High Parent rating."
"Analysts consider a variety of factors in their Parent assessments, including a firm's ability to attract, develop, and retain investment talent; approach to succession planning; risk management; product development;
and fee philosophy, among other things."
Firms With High Parent Pillar Ratings
Vanguard
Capital Group
T. Rowe
Dimensional
MFS
Dodge & Cox
Baird
Primecap
Fiduciary Mgmt.
Jensen
https://www.morningstar.com/lp/fund-family-150
Note: Email address must be provided to download Morningstar Fund Family Digest PDF.

Barrons’ ranking is not much different from the Morningstar’s.
Thanks to @Charles and company. One can get more useful data from MFO Premium on OEFs and ETFs over 1, 3, 5, and 10 years periods.

”I believe it's unwise to select the "Best Fund Families" focusing on one-year performance.
Consider also that the largest fund(s) may have produced excellent returns (luck?)
while the vast majority of funds in the firm's stable may have greatly underperformed.
This article is an interesting read but Barron's rankings provide little value”.
Agree with @Observant1
I haven’t yet read the Barron’s piece. Enjoy these for sure. But I think it’s an impossible task. There are so many different ingredients that go into managing funds - not the least of which is downside protection. I’d give more credience to 5 or 10 year rankings. Even then, take with a grain of salt.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/22370/000119312525042403/d652018d497.htm
497 1 d652018d497.htm JOHN HANCOCK INVESTMENT TRUST
 
Prospectus Supplement
John Hancock Investment Trust
John Hancock ESG International Equity Fund
Supplement dated March 1, 2025 to the current Prospectus, as may be supplemented (the Prospectus)
At its meeting held on December 10-12, 2024, the Board of Trustees (the Board) of John Hancock Investment Trust, of which John Hancock ESG International Equity Fund (ESG International Equity) is a series, voted to recommend that the shareholders of ESG International Equity approve a reorganization, that is expected to be tax-free, of ESG International Equity into John Hancock Global Environmental Opportunities Fund (Global Environmental Opportunities, and together with ESG International Equity, the funds), also a series of John Hancock Investment Trust, as described below (the Reorganization). Shareholders of record as of February 5, 2025, are entitled to vote on the Reorganization.
Under the terms of the Reorganization, subject to shareholder approval at a shareholder meeting scheduled to be held on or about April 3, 2025, ESG International Equity would transfer all of its assets to Global Environmental Opportunities in exchange for corresponding shares of Global Environmental Opportunities. Global Environmental Opportunities would assume substantially all of ESG International Equity’s liabilities. The corresponding shares of Global Environmental Opportunities would then be distributed to ESG International Equity’s shareholders, and ESG International Equity would be terminated. If approved by ESG International Equity’s shareholders, the Reorganization is expected to occur as of the close of business on or about April 25, 2025 (the Closing Date). Further information regarding the proposed Reorganization is contained in a proxy statement and prospectus, which became available February 14, 2025.
ESG International Equity will remain open to purchases and redemptions from existing shareholders until the Closing Date. ESG International Equity no longer accepts orders from new investors to purchase shares of ESG International Equity. However, discretionary fee-based advisory programs, certain retirement accounts and/or model portfolios that include ESG International Equity as an investment option as of the close of business January 13, 2025, may continue to make ESG International Equity shares available to new and existing accounts.
Prior to the Reorganization, any dividends paid will be paid in accordance with the current dividend option of an account; accounts in which the dividend reinvestment option has been chosen will receive any dividends in the form of additional shares of ESG International Equity.
To satisfy an Internal Revenue Service requirement, ESG International Equity hereby designates the maximum amount of the net long-term gains earned, if any, as a capital gain dividend, with respect to ESG International Equity’s final taxable year. Please refer to Form 1099-DIV for tax reporting purposes.
The foregoing is not an offer to sell, nor a solicitation of an offer to buy, any shares in connection with the Reorganization, nor is it a solicitation of any proxy. For important information regarding ESG International Equity or Global Environmental Opportunities, or to receive a free copy of the proxy statement/prospectus relating to the proposed merger, once it is available, please call the funds’ toll-free telephone number: 800-225-5291 (Class A) or 888-972-8696 (Class I and Class R6). The proxy statement/prospectus contains important information about fund objectives, strategies, fees, expenses, risks, and the Board’s considerations in approving the Reorganization. The proxy statement/prospectus also will be available for free on the SEC’s website (www.sec.gov). Please read the proxy statement/prospectus carefully before making any decision to invest in any shares in connection with the Reorganization or when considering whether to vote for the Reorganization.
You should read this supplement in conjunction with the Prospectus and retain it for your future reference.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/802716/000168386325001616/f40816d1.htm
497 1 f40816d1.htm VP FUND LIQUIDATIONS LEGACY FUNDS AND RS FUND
Victory Portfolios
Victory Special Value Fund
Class A, Class C, Class I, and Class R
Supplement dated February 28, 2025
to the Prospectus and Summary Prospectus dated November 1, 2024
On February 25, 2025, the Board of Trustees of Victory Portfolios II (“Trust”), upon the recommendation of Victory Capital Management Inc., the Trust’s investment adviser, approved a Plan of Liquidation (“Plan”) for the Victory Special Value Fund (the “Fund”). It is anticipated that the Fund will liquidate on or about April 29, 2025. On the liquidation date, the Fund will redeem all its outstanding shares at the net asset value of such shares.
In anticipation of the liquidation, at the start of business on March 3, 2025, the Fund will be closed to new investors and shareholder accounts. Through end of business on April 23, 2025, the Fund will continue to accept additional investments (including through the reinvestment of dividends and capital gains) from existing shareholders. In order to provide for an orderly liquidation and satisfy redemptions in anticipation of the liquidation, the Fund may deviate from its investment objective and strategies as the liquidation date approaches. It is anticipated that the Fund’s portfolio will be positioned into cash on or some time prior to the liquidation date.
The Fund may pay more than one liquidating distribution in more than one installment. Distribution of liquidation proceeds to Fund shareholders may result in a taxable event for shareholders, depending on their individual circumstances. Shareholders should consult their own tax advisors about any tax liability resulting from the receipt of liquidation proceeds.
If you wish to obtain more information, please call the Victory Funds at 800-539-3863.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR YOUR FUTURE REFERENCE.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/889284/000139834425004334/fp0092518-1_497.htm
497 1 fp0092518-1_497.htm
Filed pursuant to 497(e)
File Nos. 033-49098 and 811-06719
STERLING CAPITAL FUNDS
SUPPLEMENT DATED FEBRUARY 28, 2025
TO EACH OF THE CLASS A, CLASS C, INSTITUTIONAL SHARES, AND CLASS R6 SUMMARY PROSPECTUS, THE CLASS A AND CLASS C SHARES PROSPECTUS, THE INSTITUTIONAL AND CLASS R6 SHARES PROSPECTUS, AND THE STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, each DATED FEBRUARY 1, 2025, as supplemented
This Supplement provides the following amended and supplemental information and supersedes any information to the contrary in each of the Class A, Class C, Institutional Shares, and Class R6 Summary Prospectus, the Class A and Class C Shares Prospectus, the Institutional and Class R6 Shares Prospectus (collectively, the “Prospectuses”), and the Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”) each dated February 1, 2025, with respect to Sterling Capital Mid Value Fund:
Sterling Capital Mid Value Fund
The Board of Trustees of Sterling Capital Funds has approved a proposal by Sterling Capital Management LLC (“Sterling Capital”), the investment adviser to Sterling Capital Mid Value Fund (the “Acquired Fund” or the “Fund”), to effect the merger of the Acquired Fund into the Sterling Capital Mid Cap Relative Value Fund (“Acquiring Fund”) (the “Merger”) on or about May 12, 2025 (the “Merger Date”).
The Merger is expected to be a tax-free reorganization for federal income tax purposes. On the Merger Date, any investment in a share class of the Acquired Fund will, in effect, be exchanged for an investment in a corresponding share class with an equal aggregate net asset value in the Acquiring Fund. Therefore, as a result of the Merger, shareholders of the Acquired Fund will become shareholders of the Acquiring Fund. Acquired Fund shareholders will not pay any sales charges, purchase premiums, or redemption fees as a result of the Merger. Prior to the consummation of the Merger, the Acquired Fund expects to reposition certain of its portfolio holdings and expects that it will dispose of approximately 89% of its investments and invest the proceeds of such dispositions in securities currently held by the Acquiring Fund, or in other securities, cash and/or cash equivalents. Accordingly, the Acquired Fund may no longer be implementing its investment strategy in the time period leading up to the Merger. The Acquired Fund will incur transaction costs in connection with this repositioning, and the repositioning is expected to result in the recognition of net capital gains and the distribution of net capital gains to Acquired Fund shareholders. These distributions would be taxable to shareholders. You can find information about the Acquiring Fund and its investment policies and risks, including a prospectus, summary prospectus and Statement of Additional Information, online at sterlingcapital.com/investments/mutual-funds/. You can also get this information at no cost by emailing a request to [email protected], by calling 1-800-228-1872 or by asking your financial representative.
Acquired Fund shareholders will receive shares of the Acquiring Fund’s corresponding share class as part of the Merger. The Acquired Fund and the Acquiring Fund pay the same annual management fee rate. Each class of shares of the Acquiring Fund currently bears Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses that are lower than the Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses of the corresponding class of shares of the Acquired Fund. Each Fund’s Class C Shares are subject to a Contingent Deferred Sales Charge (CDSC) of 1.00% on such shares if they are redeemed within one year of purchase. Each Fund’s Class A Shares purchased in the amount of $1 million or more for which a front-end sales load was not charged at the time of purchase also are subject to a CDSC of 1.00% if such shares are redeemed within two years after purchase. Class A Shares and Class C Shares received as a result of the Merger will continue to be subject to the CDSC schedule of the shares of the Acquired Fund you originally purchased.
Shareholder approval of the Merger is not required. At any time before the close of the Merger, you may redeem your shares as described in the Prospectuses. Such redemptions may be taxable transactions.
In addition, effective immediately Andrew T. DiZio is appointed as co-portfolio manager of the Mid Value Fund, joining William C. Smith and Lee D. Houser as co-portfolio managers of the Fund. Effective April 1, 2025, Messrs. Smith and Houser will no longer serve as co-portfolio managers of the Fund, and Mr. DiZio will be the sole portfolio manager of the Fund.
Mr. DiZio is an Executive Director of Sterling Capital and Portfolio Manager and currently serves as portfolio manager of the Mid Cap Relative Value Fund (the Acquiring Fund), and information regarding Mr. DiZio can be found in the prospectuses and statement of additional information relating to the Mid Cap Relative Value Fund.
SHAREHOLDERS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT
WITH THE PROSPECTUSES AND STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.
-1-
STAT-SUP-MVSUPP22025

@Crash
Have you tried the MSN link WABAC posted above?
Works for me...
Edit/Add:
"Shown above are the rankings for 2024 and 5 years (all #1 to #5, then only selected families).
There are also tables for 10 years and for each category - 5 best and 5 worst."
The MSN article shows the top 5 families for 2024 but does't include data for 5 years, 10 years, or categories.

Barron's Best Fund Families, 2024
https://www.barrons.com/articles/best-fund-families-nvidia-market-810af9e6?refsec=mutual-funds&mod=topics_mutual-funds
Top Families for 2024: #1-Lord Abbett, #2-Sit, #3-Fidelity, #4-PGIM, #5-Nuveen/TIAA, #7-Capital Group/American Funds, #8-JPM, #10-MS, #12-DFA, #14-T Rowe Price, #20-Invesco, #23-BlackRock, #30-Pimco, #31-BNY Mellon, #36-Franklin Templeton, #37-Vanguard,...to #50.
Top Families for 5 Years: #1-SIT, #2-Fidelity, #3-DFA, #4-Pimco, #5-Thrivent, #7-Nuveen/TIAA, #9-Capital Group/American Funds, #12-JPM, #21-BNY Mellon, #24-MS, #26-T Rowe Price, #29-BlackRock, #30-Vanguard, #36-Invesco,...to #50.
In 2024, most active equity funds lagged major indexes. Those without much exposure to Magnificent 7 also lagged. But there are a few strong performers beyond the Magnificent 7. Securitized debt did the best among fixed-income, but bonds did fine too. Most investors had decent returns (and if they lagged major indexes, so what?).
Eligible fund families required at least 3 active equity OEFs/ETFs (including smart-beta), 1 global equity fund, 1 allocation/hybrid fund, 2 bond funds and 1 national muni fund. Scores in each of these categories were combined using category asset weights to determine the overall rankings. Shown above are the rankings for 2024 and 5 years (all #1 to #5, then only selected families). There are also tables for 10 years and for each category - 5 best and 5 worst.

Following are excerpts from a current NPR report:

The Social Security Administration (SSA) announced Thursday that it "will soon implement agency-wide organizational restructuring that will include significant workforce reductions."
The planned cuts, which are in line with an executive order from President Trump to broadly slash the federal workforce, are raising concerns about staffing at the agency that disburses retirement savings, as well as disability and survivor benefits, to tens of millions of Americans.
Advocates say long wait times for services have plagued the agency for years, and its staffing of some 60,000 employees is already at about a 50-year low. Ahead of the looming broader cuts, at least five of eight regional commissioners have recently resigned, according to a senior SSA official who was not authorized to speak to the press.
Morale at the agency is extremely low, the source said, as staff are crying in meetings and managers are trying to reassure their employees during a time of great uncertainty.
"The public is going to suffer terribly as a result of this," the source wrote to NPR. "Local field offices will close, hold times will increase, and people will be sicker, hungry, or die when checks don't arrive or a disability hearing is delayed just one month too late."
Trump has said that Social Security "won't be touched" as he continues to make sweeping cuts to the federal government.
Until now, the SSA has been largely spared from efforts, mainly overseen by billionaire Elon Musk, to slash the size of the federal government. That includes a federal hiring freeze and more recent dismissals of large numbers of mostly newer workers. But in the last week or so, the agency has faced much of the same chaos and disruption that has been experienced by other federal departments. Changes at the agency are also leading to worries among employees and cybersecurity experts about the protection of sensitive records.
The agency's prior acting commissioner, Michelle King, was recently replaced after clashing with associates of Musk's Department of Government Efficiency who sought access to sensitive personal data held by the agency. King has been replaced by Leland Dudek, who was being investigated internally before being promoted, according to the SSA official.
The protection of sensitive data is one of the top concerns for SSA employees: "SSA is incredibly risk averse. And for good reason," the SSA official said. "The data we house is intimate and comprehensive. Every U.S. man, woman and child (living and dead), has a Social Security Number and records of their work, income, tax, disability and civil relationships. And now DOGE has access to all of it."
The SSA's servers are vast, complex and archaic, processing billions of data points a day, often using programming languages that few people are familiar with, the source continued. Those systems are already under constant attack by digital adversaries from around the world, creating a constant challenge for those tasked with protecting the systems.
There are no indications that the engineers working with DOGE have gone through required training to protect federal records, the source said, nor specific agency-level training to work in each department's unique systems. Lawmakers have already begun to raise the alarm about cybersecurity concerns of DOGE's access to federal systems, while legal cases about DOGE's access are ongoing.
Max Richtman, president & CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, told NPR that the process to get disability benefits, in particular, is "so cumbersome and difficult to navigate" and insufficiently staffed that in the last couple of years, "about 10,000 claimants who appealed for their benefits die waiting for their claim to be resolved."

Next Tuesday, March 4th is when tariffs will start with Canada and Mexico (25%) and China. There has been talk about EU in next too.. Will investor sentiment improve?

I would not overreact to these numbers. The still very high percentage (a record high at last check) of retail investor wealth held in stocks is much more telling. I’m willing to give some credence to the theory among some that the passive index based equity flows, largely into retirement accounts, is fueling the passive bid and keeping the most expensive market segments aloft. I can’t prove that, but I am exercising more than an ounce of caution.
Unrelated perhaps - But just as retail investor interest in gold was ramping up the metal has lost a bit of steam - off more than $100 from its record high of a week ago near $2900. $3,000. That’s chump change as gold goes at this point. I suspect gold will run a lot higher. But not willing to take a chance on it. Have a very small hold in GGN which has (somewhat surprisingly) lost a bit over the short time since buying. If my eyes are not deceiving me, oil has fallen below $70 today which, along with gold, helps explain the hit to GGN.
The 10 year chart at M* doesn’t reflect the disastrous runs gold and gold & p/c mining funds endured in the past. Pulling up 15-20 year charts for gold & mining funds would be very enlightening. Look before you jump.

Stable-Value (SV) Rates, 3/1/25
TIAA Traditional Annuity (Accumulation) Rates
No changes; early release; new declaration yr starts
Restricted RC 5.50%, RA 5.25%
Flexible RCP 4.75%, SRA 4.50%, IRA-101110+ 4.75%
TSP G Fund 4.250% (previous 4.625%). (Edited 3/3/25)
Options outside of workplace retirement plans include m-mkt funds, bank m-mkt accounts (FDIC insured), T-Bills, short-term brokered CDs.
#StableValue #401k #403b #TIAA #TSP
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1892/thread

Tthe complaint hinged partly on CapOne advertising the old account as having one of the highest interest rates. Otherwise, it might have no more obligation to its customers to notify them of a better in-house account than it would have to notify them of a superior account at a competitor.

The type of savings account at the center of the Capital One lawsuit was advertised to customers as having one of the “highest” interest rates in the nation, according to the CFPB.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/02/27/cfpb-drops-capital-one-lawsuit-other-cases-launched-under-biden/
Banks know that checking/savings account money is sticky.

I believe the total to be 37.2 +8 = 45.2% state non taxable ? Agree or not ?

Disagree. I believe (but haven't checked lately) that it is percentage of income, not assets that matters. In any case, Schwab, like all fund sponsors, provides taxpayers exact figures. For SNVXX, 33.30% of the income is state tax exempt. Except for Calif., Conn., and N.Y. where none of the income is exempt.
https://www.schwabassetmanagement.com/resource/2024-supplementary-tax-information

Not that it matters, but this "bug" was not well reported.
The way many of the reports came out (COBOL, ancient people supposedly getting benefits) made it sound like a Y2K problem. A lot of business programs, often written in COBOL, represented years as two digits (e.g. 1945 would be represented as 45). So the system would get confused with anyone over age 100. For example, is someone born in '01' 24 years old or 124 years old?
Yogi may have had this in the back of his mind, since he suggested that SS stops paying for people over 100 years old. Actually, the SSA system stops paying benefits at age 115. So it isn't a Y2K issue, or even a COBOL issue per se.
1875 may have been programmed in as the default year of birth for unknown years, but it is not something designed into the COBOL language. Unlike, say, Jan 1, 1970 00:00:00 is designed into the C language as the "epoch tine".
The takeaway from this nonsense is that the DOGE "whiz kids" didn't care about what SSA's programs really do, and also that tech reporters seem hardly more enlightened. My mother was a COBOL programmer (one of multiple careers) and would likely have been laughing at all of this.

https://mcusercontent.com/6632e94d6daa1bdbf46f55a23/files/129212a4-3626-1293-d324-00a2e6e459bf/PR4Q24_Eng_Full_Report.01.pdf
Dunno who else might be interested. A bright corner of my portfolio. (Surprise! Despite the Orange Flatulence's saber-rattling about the Canal.)