MWFSX performance continues to lag and relates to lower daily distributions.
Its performance for 1-4-12 weeks per M* Multi category is 85-97-88. Basically, it's in the bottom 15%-3%-12%.
The last several distributions are:
As of Date Ticker Dividend Rate Accumulated Dividend Rate
8/9/2020 MWFSX 0.001256647 0.012160065
8/8/2020 MWFSX 0.001256647 0.010903418
8/7/2020 MWFSX 0.001256647 0.009646771
8/6/2020 MWFSX 0.001189266 0.008390124
8/5/2020 MWFSX 0.001149859 0.007200858
8/4/2020 MWFSX 0.001163833 0.006050999
8/3/2020 MWFSX 0.001201751 0.004887166
Reminder: just several weeks ago in July the dist were 2-3 times higher.
At 0.0012 per day it's about 4.4% annually. I'm taking it off my list.

We discussed this fund last August. Its performance lagged several funds I follow by a lot. All these bond funds are mostly in securitized,

I don't know if you deem an allocation fund with slightly less than 50% stock exposure to be conservative.
If you do and are investing in a taxable account, you may want to consider VTMFX.
At least 50% of the fund's assets are allocated to munis so that investors can benefit from their tax-advantaged distributions.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/05/business/stock-market-prices-bubble.html?searchResultPosition=1
*Making Sense of Elevated Stock Market Prices
Shares are very expensive, but so are bonds. Even at current prices, the economist Robert J. Shiller says, it is reasonable to keep some wealth in stocks.
By Robert J. Shiller
March 5, 2021
The stock market is already quite expensive. That is evident when you compare current stock valuations with those from previous eras.
But it is also true that stock prices are fairly reasonable right now.
That seemingly contradictory conclusion arises when you include other important factors: interest rates and inflation, which are both extremely low.
Examined on their own, stock valuations are at giddy levels, yet they are far more attractive when viewed side by side with bonds. That’s why it is so hard to determine whether the stock market is dangerously high or a relative bargain.
Consider that the S&P 500 index of U.S. stock prices has repeatedly set records over the past year, while a measure that I helped to create, the CAPE ratio for the S&P 500, is also at high levels.
In my view, the CAPE ratio is the more important of these two measures of overpricing because it corrects for inflation and long-term corporate earnings. John Campbell, now at Harvard University, and I defined CAPE in 1988. This is a bit technical, but please bear with me: The numerator is the stock price per share corrected for consumer price inflation, while the denominator is an average over the last 10 years of corporate reported earnings per share, also corrected for inflation.*
Not sure if you will be maybe happy with your equities portion if you stay long invested (perhaps 15 20 yrs later - if you can avoid major prolong anemic returns and market crashes)

..per March 5th comment...
"As an observer of human nature, I wonder if she will come on Cramer and keep her narrative going, max out the hubris, buying the dip in her "disruptive" companies...you think so?"
March 8th. Done.
Next stop...Arkk down 50% from highs....
Full Disclosure: I have no idea what will happen, not long, not short this fund...just seems like a rerun of the bullsheet that was seen during the turn of the century...many tech investor guru's spouting their "vision"
Good Luck to All,
Baseball Fan

Yes. Warren Buffett made the move in the fourth quarter of LY. Selling Apple and buying Chevron.
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/warren-buffett-berkshire-hathaway-make-1-billion-gain-chevron-stock-2021-3-1030158860
But I’m still sold on tech too. Might provide some better entry points.

Hi Catch -
Dow + 300 or so today.
Nasdaq - 300 or so same day.
Gold sunk further to $1680
10 year Treasury touched 1.60% early today but apparently backed off to 1.57%.
Wacky.

Neither was he from what I understand. Senate aides read it to a mostly empty chamber.
Senate Chamber Empties

"that income level [to qualify for a 2021 Covid recovery rebate check] is based on their 2019 tax returns"
There's a lot of conflicting information floating around, including from news organizations, so don't be surprised if any particular description, including this one, is not quite correct.
Here's HR 1319, The American Rescue Plan of 2021. You can find the relevant text in Subtitle G, Part 1 - 2021 Rebates to Individuals, starting on p. 441.
https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr1319/BILLS-117hr1319eh.pdf
In general, initial checks ("Advance Refund and Credits", p. 447) are based on 2019 returns. But if at the time the IRS figures out how much to send you, it has your 2020 return, the initial check amount will be based on your 2020 return. ("Application to 2020 Returns Filed at Time of Initial Determination", p. 449.)
Regardless, if your 2020 return indicates you should get more (and you've filed it within three months of the tax filing deadline or Sept. 1 whichever is earlier), you'll get an additional check. ("Additional Payment", p. 449.)
But wait, there's more. This third payment, like the other two is merely an advance against a refundable tax credit. If your 2021 income qualifies you for a larger credit, you'll get the difference when you file your 2021 tax return.
To summarize:
1. Initial check based on 2019 return unless IRS has 2020 return in time to base amount on that return.
2. Second check based on 2020 return to make up the difference if your first check was based on a higher 2019 income.
3. Whatever you receive from #1 and #2 you get to keep.
4. If on your 2021 income you qualify for a larger credit, you get that as well.
Effectively, the amount of your check and/or credit is based on the lowest income in 2019, 2020, and 2021.
Ron Johnson made sure that it was all read out loud because "we should know what's in the bill." What, you mean you weren't watching C-SPAN for ten hours?

As difficult as carbon sequestration (aka: hiding it under the rug) may be, it's going to be a lot easier than transporting almost of the current energy transfer via the electric grid.
Cf: Ignoring Energy Transition Realities: Some Unanswered Questions

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/893730/000089373021000004/supplement_20210308.htm
497 1 supplement_20210308.htm
SUPPLEMENT DATED March 8, 2021
TO SUMMARY PROSPECTUS, PROSPECTUS AND
STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (“SAI”)
Integrity Energized Dividend Fund (the “Fund”)
Class A: NRGDX
Class C: NRGUX
Class I: NRIGX
Summary Prospectus, Prospectus, and SAI dated November 30, 2020
The Board of Trustees of the Integrity Energized Dividend Fund (the “Board”) has determined that it is in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund be liquidated and terminated. The Board has determined to redeem all outstanding shares of the Fund and then close the Fund on or about June 30, 2021 (the “Termination Date”).
Effective immediately, the Fund may no longer pursue its stated investment objectives, will begin liquidating its portfolio and may invest in cash equivalents such as money market funds. The Fund remains closed to additional purchases.
You may redeem or exchange your shares, including reinvested distributions, prior to the Termination Date, and you will not be subject to the Fund's contingent deferred sales charge. Additionally, if you are exchanging into a different Integrity Viking Fund you will not have to pay any initial sales charge. Any shareholders who have not redeemed or exchanged their shares of the Fund prior to the Termination Date will have their shares automatically redeemed at the net asset value per share as of that date, and proceeds will be sent to the address of record. If you have questions or need assistance, please contact your financial advisor or call the Fund's Shareholder Services Department at (800) 601-5593.
A redemption or exchange is generally considered a taxable event. You may wish to consult your tax advisor about your particular situation.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

FBALX is a GREAT fund that I've owned for as long as I can remember but it pushes the envelope of a 50%-70% AA fund. YBB has noted recently that it at times acts like an aggressive growth fund. That, and its steller mgmt team, are likely some of the causes of its outperformance in its category.

Hi @sma3

My sister who knows nothing about investing wants a conservative asset allocation fund in early retirement for an inheritance she doesn't need to live on.

I'll presume from your statement that: your sister is already in retirement and that her inheritance will be invested in a taxable account.
I noted the following a few days ago regarding a 529 account that was started in 2006 but could be applied to a taxable account, too:
>>>We set our own allocation, being 50/50 with VITPX and VBMPX. The expense ratio for the funds are .02 and .03%. VITPX holds 3,400 equities and VBMPX holds 18,000 bonds. YOW !!!
The 50/50 ratio is required to auto balance once per year. So, the ratio has never traveled to far outside of 50/50.
The 10 year total return for this blend of 2 funds is 8.705%.
I've used FBALX as a benchmark for our own investments to discover how much of a smart arse or dumb arse we may be at any given time. FBALX is high on the list of balanced funds in it's category.
FBALX has a 10 year annualized return of 10.83%. <<<
An equivalent to the above could be a simple 50/50 of SPY and AGG (or BAGIX, a plain vanilla active managed AA bond fund); OR whatever percentage mix an individual wants to choose for these two. The rough math indicates a 50/50 mix of the above to provide about a +8.45% blended total return for the past 10 years and +6.95% over the past 15 years.
My personal choice using AGG or BAGIX examples for bonds, would be the equity side into FSPHX or FSMEX for the 50/50 mix.
We individual investors find ourselves at an unfamiliar place recently, relative to the AAA bond sector. Although we have BAGIX as part of our portfolio, I/we don't know how much support/ballast will arrive during a greater than -20% equity dive, although I still feel central banks and large investment organizations would still run to AAA bonds during an equity melt.
NOTE: 50/50 of SPY (or an index) and AGG = -.4% YTD, VWINX = -.25% YTD and FBALX = +2.3% YTD.
I think your sister could have a decent risk and reward blend of no more than 3 holdings among bonds and equity to satisfy a meaningful performance portfolio.
Lastly, retirement finds too many variables for individuals/couples. If monetary needs are satisfied for the normal expenses, one's investments should still include equities, IMHO. Forty years of favorable bond returns are at a new place right now; and I surely don't know the forward road in this sector for a fully buy and hold portfolio.
Take care,
Catch

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-05/etfs-show-balance-is-shifting-in-favor-of-emerging-market-stocks
ETF Buyers Prefer Emerging Stocks Over U.S. Shares, Gold, Bonds
**Fund buying EM stocks heads for biggest inflows in two years
Earnings outlook, relative valuation back case for EM stocks
If capital flows into U.S. exchange-traded funds are any indication, investors have begun to favor emerging-market stocks over almost every other asset class -- including U.S. equities...
Another interesting idea, EM could be good vehicle to invest med long term

The OP asked for suggestions on a "conservative asset allocation fund." Lots of great suggestions here but I'm not sure many of them are what the OP is looking for. (Some are actually aggressive AA funds.) To wit, I at least don't regard any AA fund with over a 50% stock allocation as a "conservative allocation fund." YMMV.
In the 30%-50% category, other than VWIAX, I would suggest FMSDX and CFIAX. I own both of the latter and both are great LT holds that are each doing very well in the current market environment. VWIAX is historically a leader in this category but is limping through the current conditions. Former LT holder of it but have sold if off for the time being. Any of these though are LT keepers.
In the 15%-30% category, RBBAX appears to be one of the best.

@carew388 said, “Unfortunately, the best-in-class PRWCX is still closed ...”
I own some PRWCX. Great fund. But would you believe that over the past year DODBX has performed better? (+26.75% vs +22.57%). At the 5-year mark they’re close, with PRWCX slightly ahead (+13.61% vs +12.38%).
One has David Giroux. But the other has lower fees (DODBX .53% .ER vs PRWCX .70% ER).
There’s a great many good funds that would fill the needs of @sma3’s sister. Depends on a lot of factors I’m not qualified to judge. Just wanted to try and knock a bit of the luminescent cellophane off PRWCX. :)
* My numbers came from Lipper.

https://www.marketwatch.com/articles/arks-cathie-wood-disrupted-investment-management-shes-not-done-yet-51614992508
Don't know what to think of this success. But... I'm curious.

Hi Jon. Nope. But that's a good one. For example, new GOs, old GOs. Ditto with Three Alarm. Perhaps last month's MFO Rating? Will noodle.
In this month's update, I notice DODIX is back as a GO, after a short hiatus.
There is a lot of historical info, like Calendar Year ratings, back to 1960, as applicable. And, some unique evaluation period, like listed below, which may provide some insight.
Another subscriber recently asked about a metric that evaluated near-term (like 3 month trend) versus long term (like 5-10 years), which I find interesting.
Thank you though for the suggestion ... subscribers get a month free each time they offer a good suggestion or catch something amiss.
c
Some unique evalation period on MFO Premium's MultiSearch tool:
Full 1 [Vietnam] - 196812 To 197212
Full 2 [OPEC-Reagan] - 197301 To 198708
Full 3 [Black Monday-Clinton] - 198709 To 200008
Full 4 [Dotcom Bubble] - 200009 To 200710
Full 5 [GFC] - 200711 To 201912
Full 6 [CV-19] - 202001 To 202101
QE 1 - 200812 To 201003
QE 2 - 201206 To 201312
Normalization - 201601 To 201812
ZIRP - 200812 To 201512
Obama Bull - 200903 To 201612
Trump Bump - 201701 To 201912
Dec '18 Selloff - 201812 To 201812
CV-19 Bear - 202001 To 202003
QE Inf - 202004 To 202101
Irrational - 200003 To 202101

I highly doubt that any of the individuals still looking for 'decent' paying jobs, hopefully paying more than $15/hr along with some benefits are going to be worried about whether or not to buy some 'more' real estate or crypto as a result of receiving these stimulus payments. Many are still facing foreclosures or evictions, standing in food lines, going without any, much less, adequate health care and stressing about which bills they shouldn't pay this month.
I'm guessing that you still haven't got the heat back on down there in TX.

Yes, those are the funds up exactly 0.97%. As you noted, that's not helpful if one is comparing with a multi-fund portfolio.
One isn't likely to achieve that return in either the aggregate or with an individual fund these days without using junk bonds. Out of 184 distinct funds returning at least 1% this year, only a dozen are investment grade. (M* screener).
Even limiting one's focus to HY bonds, out of 175 distinct funds, only 66 (about 3/8) have returned at least 1% YTD.

Yes, need HY to get return these days. I use a barbell for my bonds, plenty of core/core-plus on one end and HY on the other and juiced with CEF's which need to be timed right of course (bought PHK off the lows last spring and GOF after it got battered in the same drawdown, worked out pretty well so far).

HI Sirs
Mama's portfolio mostly fixed incomes /private corp bonds and majority in fidelity 2015, along with BND FBND, about 20s% cash.
FSD maybe too risky for retired portfolio [as they say high risks high rewards]
prob wont get it anytime soon