here's a visual of those two 9/1 days, set against the backdrop of the nyse composite. only time will tell how etc etc.
https://ishort.ink/6s5R

Barron’s often features excerpted clips of investment advice from various forecasters. The following comes from this week’s magazine. I don’t know anything about the Aden forecast. The message provides food for thought. Will be interesting in the following months to see how correct they were. (No link / Transcribed from subscription)
Steer Clear of Bonds The Aden Forecast: Money, Metals, Markets adenforecast.com
”June 4: Interestingly, interest rates are starting to rise. The 30-year yield is leading the way. It’s above its 15-week moving average, at a three month high, and the 10-year yield is following. We’ve been showing you how oversold interest rates have been, which means they’re poised to head even higher, especially now that the rise is getting underway. This is going to coincide with an ongoing drop in bond prices, so continue to steer clear of all bonds for now.” *
Barron’s June 8, 2020 (By Mary Anne and Pamela Aden)
*There was additional short commentary on action in the U.S. Dollar index. It wasn’t directly related to the above, so I didn’t include it.

Curious as to why VFINX has reclaimed YTD loss pretty much, while DSENX still have 5% to go. Anomaly, or has something broken in DSENX?

https://www.fxstreet.com/analysis/wall-street-next-week-202006071602
Wall Street next week
ANALYSIS | Published Jun 07, 2020 16:02 (+00:00)
1. Markets cannot go higher on valid fundamentals
We believe the short squeeze (soon) over and any good news MORE THAN built into markets. We also believe this is a time to be defensive rather than FOMO. Going forward economic activity caused by the pandemic should bottom out and a real recovery will happen, but one that is slow going and uneven. We see a U US economic recovery but stock markets NOT V, L or U but W.
There is very high risk in the market now until late Summer.
IT IS TIME TO PROTECT/EXIT especially above 3150 SPX.
POST SUMMER INVESTMENTS SHOULD BE TARGETED FOR A POST COVID-19 WORLD
Couple fundamental points for next wk

(Cue the Forrest Gump impersonation:) Some here might remember the saga: we wanted to move wifey's 403b at a former employer and just convert it to a Trad IRA with VLAAX. It took them 3 months to even acknowledge that we exist (by mail) to tell us that a request had been made to the old custodian to transfer the money. THEN, we received a 2nd letter from Value Line telling us they were going to try a 2nd request to the old custodian. ("You know why it didn't go through the first time, you geniuses? Because the money isn't THERE any longer!")
Yes, after a couple of MONTHS, we went with Bruce BRUFX. Fast, quick, efficient, done.
"And that's all I have to say about THAT."
********************************************
And honestly, the one whose money is already in DODBX? She's got it on cruise control, uninterested in doing any new paperwork with a new fund family. You can lead a horse to the water, but...
Here's Sam Browne with a hot and spirited version of George and Dhani Harrison's song, "Horse To The Water."

@hank: Thanks for the reply. After reading your reply I do remember seeing some of your moves on MFO. I purchased two allocation funds mentioned here, SFAAX & VLAAX & bought VWINX at Vanguard. StaySafe, Derf

@Derf - Sorry for delayed response. I’m aware you were buying back than and either called the bottom or came darn close. I’m looking now at what you picked up. Lipper rates SFAAX quite high except expenses. I like that it has a long track record back to ‘86. VLAAX another pretty good choice, but another with high frees. VWINX is regarded as among the best in its class - but around 60% bonds. I was attempting (with limited success) to steer away from bonds back than. Don’t recall the reason. Possibly the Fed had already signaled their coming move to greater stimulus. That said, I do believe some income producing funds / assets are important to a balanced portfolio - unless of course you are very young. Sometimes it pays to act quickly. I didn’t buy after just a mere 1000-2000 Dow drop. But after 4,000 - 5,000 points down from around 29,500 it made sense to grab the net and start dipping.

people, suggest further researching
drill down into these threads as much as you can stand; Casselman is exemplary
https://twitter.com/bencasselman/status/1268936475791548416

I like to track DODBX, instead. Balanced. Stocks AND bonds. My numbers are from Morningstar. It sits today at 80th percentile among peers. But in real terms, down for 2020 now by just -3.77%. Given the recent uptrend, I'd say it will climb out and produce profit, as well as yield: currently at 2.57%. Looking at percentile rankings going back several, maybe a handful of years, there are some years where it underperformed peers, but most years are good to excellent. It is less consistently wonderful than PRWCX, but PRWCX is still CLOSED.
Back in 2010, reorienting a friend (and wife's) money, my intent was to spread the money out, to diversify. So, they own both DODBX and PRWCX, still, 10 years on. I guess you just can't have EVERYTHING. Life is like that. And, like me, they are investors, not traders. Trading just seems too much like real WORK!

OMG, the lib media is in shock, they expected at least 7 million job losses and they got +2.5 million gain. The 2.5 million came without help from NY+CA which are still shut down.
It's terrible for them but good for America.
Then came their usual, it's a lie, it's meaningless, it's only low paying jobs why cheer.
When unemployment was the lowest ever (for many categories) months ago even then they didn't cheer. It's so ridiculous.
Wait, social distancing? no more. Let's march together, burn and loot our cities, and defund the police.

@msf Thanks for the added details. The size of the "errors" for April and May appear to be similar to the size of the total monthly unemployment rates for many preceding individual months (how the world has changed!). This article was the first I noticed to point them out. It seems odd the BLS did not more prominently make reference to them at the beginning of their monthly News Releases given their magnitudes. That likely would have provided a clearer picture of the current unemployment situation. (The note referenced in the Washington Post article is located near the bottom of page 6 of the BLM's June 5 News Release.)
https://bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

I finally tried this out a week ago. A nuisance to trade on a mobile device (the only platform Fidelity supports for fractional shares). But since I had already loaded the application to deposit the infrequent paper check, it wasn't that a big deal.
No problem, very smooth operation. I used it to buy a cash substitute ETF in an IRA. That seems like an ideal use of this feature, since cash is tracked in dollars and cents.
It worked slightly differently from the way one would by an OEF. When one buys an OEF by dollar amount, one gets a certain number of shares (calculated to three places). No cash remains in the account, even if the number of shares purchased are worth a penny or two less that the size of your order.
With my ETF purchase, the number of shares was also calculated out to three decimal places. But I was left with 2¢ cash in my account.
Schwab finally followed through with its earlier announcement of fractional shares. Seeing that it doesn't handle ETFs, it doesn't handle stocks outside of the S&P 500, and it doesn't handle amounts under $5, it really is a day late and a dollar short.
https://www.schwab.com/fractional-shares-stock-slices/gift

With Rates So Low, Income Investors Need to Rethink Bonds
Incognito search for full content
https://www.google.com/search?q=With+Rates+So+Low,+Income+Investors+Need+to+Rethink+Bonds&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
https://news.knowledia.com/US/en/articles/with-rates-so-low-income-investors-need-to-rethink-bonds-acade152e87656b8b197c0d8c89d99ff244c7551
Already-beleaguered income investors are facing a tough decade. Ten years ago, investors were bemoaning a 3.8% yield on the 10-year Treasury, because a decade before that, they were yielding 6.4%. Recently, 10-year Treasuries yielded 0.88%.
“We are at a pretty bleak starting point for income investors,” says Michael Fredericks, manager of the $16 billion BlackRock Multi-Asset Income Portfolio fund (ticker: BAICX).

OMG, the lib media is in shock, they expected at least 7 million job losses and they got +2.5 million gain. The 2.5 million came without help from NY+CA which are still shut down.
It's terrible for them but good for America.
Then came their usual, it's a lie, it's meaningless, it's only low paying jobs why cheer.
When unemployment was the lowest ever (for many categories) months ago even then they didn't cheer. It's so ridiculous.
Wait, social distancing? no more. Let's march together, burn and loot our cities, and defund the police.

See my comment here.

How do we know the published job numbers are not fabricated?

It appeared there is a miscalculation from BLS, and the actual number reported is 3% higher than that of April number. Taken that in its totality, the employment picture is not so rosy as the president announced...

The special note said that if this misclassification error had not occurred, the "overall unemployment rate would have been about 3 percentage points higher than reported," meaning the unemployment rate would be about 16.3 percent for May.

https://www.greenwichtime.com/business/article/The-May-jobs-report-had-misclassification-error-15320999.php
This is the same article published in Washington Post last night by Heather Long, a long respected financial reporter. ...
Question is how can this error released pre-maturely? And this get back to TheShadow's question...

As I noted in my linked-to post, correcting for the same type errors in April makes the reduction in the unemployment rate even larger. It goes from the official 1.4% improvement to 3.4%. Though total unemployment is, of course, higher than officially reported for both months. So while the absolute number is not so rosy as the president announced, the trend surpassed the president's rosy picture.
@davidrmoran addressed Shadow's question. But then again, so did Heather Long's article:

“You can 100% discount the possibility that Trump got to the BLS. Not 98% discount, not 99.9% discount, but 100% discount,” tweeted Jason Furman, the former top economist for former president Barack Obama. “BLS has 2,400 career staff of enormous integrity and one political appointee with no scope to change this number.”

As a special added bonus, note that PK is also on record as having made the same statement. (In the words of Warner Wolf, let's go to the videotape. Check the 37 minute mark. "I'm mostly on the side of fast recovery ... IF the coronavirus is under control.")

@FD1000: "...D&C is [one of the worst managers of all time]...". Oh my goodness. Really; what does one do with that?

I meant to say below average. EXample: DODGX trail the "stupid" index SPY for performance + risk attributes. See the (proof)
Please don't come back and claim it's not fair because DODGX is more value while SPY is blend. The goal is to make money and if your fund has worse performance + SD,Sharpe,Sortino it's a knockout. You can'y hide behind "VALUE" for years. Recent performance is another proof. YTD...DODGX -7.8...SPY -0.2%

Why all the agitation over BLS misclassification errors this month, when similar ones last month were arguably worse? Something that @Rbrt pointed out.
Actually, if both April and May numbers were adjusted as suggested (to 19.7% unemployment in April and 16.3% in May) the reduction in unemployment, such as it is, would be 3.4%, far better than the official 1.4% reduction.
The flaw in the April figures was obvious; one didn't need the BLS or reporters to it. The number of people in the labor force (i.e. employed or unemployed) does not drop from 162.9M in March to 156.5M in April, unless a lot of the newly unemployed are being counted as no longer in the labor force.
Here are the BLS figures; read from them what you will:
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.a.htm
Forbes, May 10, 2020,Don’t Be Fooled By Official Unemployment Rate Of 14.7%; The Real Figure Is Even Scarier

“Interviewers were told to classify people who were employed [but] absent from work due to COVID-related reasons as temporarily unemployed. Many did this incorrectly —correcting for this error raises the unemployment rate to nearly 20%,” [Betsey Stevenson] explained. [Ms. Stevenson "was a member of the Council of Economic Advisers as well as the Chief Economist of the U.S. Department of Labor".]
To its credit, the BLS realized and called out this technical misclassification in its report ... The misclassification caused the BLS to understate the unemployment rate by roughly five percentage points, meaning the adjusted unemployment rate is really closer to 20%.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/shaharziv/2020/05/10/dont-be-fooled-by-official-unemployment-rate-of-147-the-real-figure-is-even-scarier/#3aa898c055dd

https://www.fa-mag.com/news/fidelity-throws-heft-into-hidden-asset-etf-arena-with-new-funds-56110.html
Fidelity Throws Heft Into Hidden-Asset ETF Arena With New Funds
Fidelity Investments is launching three exchange-traded funds that will partially conceal their holdings.
"These three active equity ETFs complement our existing mutual fund and ETF offerings and will meet a specific need in the marketplace,”

My apologies .
Imho I think present and past POTUS opinions and voting records are so strong /skewed and seem >50% favored one sided; the other side definitely think 'dictatorships' but in reality they only vote/do what best for their party (except for Trump maybe)...
Strong opinionated maybe corrected term...

June 6th Episode:

From the article (the gains, due to reopening still stand but that in addition to the May number being wrong the March and April unemployment rates were also underreported)
“ This problem started in March when there was a big jump in people claiming they were temporarily “absent” from work for “other reasons.” The BLS noticed this and flagged it right away. In March, the BLS said the unemployment rate likely should have been 5.4 percent, instead of the official 4.4 percent rate. In April, the BLS said the real unemployment rate was likely about 19.7 percent, not 14.7 percent.
Economists said the big takeaway is that it’s hard to collect real-time data during a pandemic and that while the unemployment rate remains high — likely more than 16 percent — it has declined a little from April.”.
I want to see what this does to number of jobs which is currently reported at around 133,000,000.