In November 2019, Chuck Akre appeared on Wealthtrack (PBS and youtube) with his co-manager Neff and talked about the coming transition. I'm hanging on. Here's a link to that 25 minute program:
https://wealthtrack.com/finding-compounding-machines-with-the-great-investor-chuck-akre-his-gen-x-co-manager-john-neff/

We agree that StockCharts is wrong. Vanguard showed 1.71% (it now shows 1.75% through 10/29), and Vanguard is the authoritative source.
If you're clicking (interactive chart) and clicking again (YTD) at M* to get YTD data, it's not surprising that M* would appear less friendly than StockCharts. All you need do is read the (correct) YTD data straight from the fund's "home" page. No extra navigation required.
I don't see any easy way to get the same data out of StockCharts. I've found no instructions on how to query YTD performance data. I can only find StockChart instructions on how to input starting/ending dates for performance data.
https://support.stockcharts.com/doku.php?id=other-tools:perfcharts#changing_the_chart_s_time_period
The instructions say that one can use a slider to change dates, or one can hold the shift key (to adjust starting date) or hold the ctl key (to adjust ending date) and simultaneously click arrow keys until a date changes to the desired value.
[Sliders make lousy numeric input widgets. "Use a slider only when the precise value won’t matter to the user."
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/gui-slider-controls/]
At least once I get everything set up, and then I mouse over the chart, I do finally see the 1.70% figure you stated.
FWIW, here's an interactive M* chart with the correct 1.71% figure.
M* chart.
Does this have anything to do with M* premium features?

For VWINX, I find M* performance, YTD at 1.71%; at Stockcharts = 1.70% at 5:40pm, Oct. 29.
NOTE: I'm using M* without an account/sign in. Never had a subscription.

M* Premium Fund Screener:
(Fund Category = Bear Market)
and (Distinct Portfolio Only = Yes)
and (Fund Name not like %ultra%)
and (Fund Name not like 2X)
and (Fund Name not like Inv)
That cuts the fund search down to a handful (5). Few enough to look at one by one.
Of course there's a more basic question of what "leveraged vehicles" you're expecting to exclude. For example, GRZZX "can invest in securities that may have a leveraging effect (such as derivatives and forward-settling securities) which may increase market exposure, magnify investment risks, and cause losses to be realized more quickly."
https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/summary/527289797
Even if you don't consider that leveraged, what about BEARX? The fact that the top ten holdings amount to -177% of assets (from the M* screener) suggests that a look at the prospectus is in order.
"Under normal market conditions, the Fund will use leverage in implementing its investment strategies, and the aggregate exposure of the Fund's short positions plus its long positions is expected to exceed the Fund's net asset value." Summary Prospectus.

One simple example - get a quick comparison/filter of bond funds that made over 2.1% in 2013 (generally a down year for bonds).
The screen tells me that the main type of bonds that that did well was junk bonds: 39 bank loan funds, 139 HY bond funds, 5 core plus, 23 multi-sector, 16 nontraditional. There were also a few funds in less "junky" categories: 2 corporate bond funds, 1 EM local currency fund, 7 short term, and one word bond (hedged) fund.
Only 11 funds above junk (above BB), only 2 of those above BBB. Mostly "deep" junk.
Reset the filter to retrieve trailing returns between 0% and 2.1% exclusive, and one starts seeing lots of muni funds.
It used to be a lot easier to get info out of the screener before M* broke the ability to build custom views (which I had used to get 15 year trailing return data, among other things). It's still possible to coax all this info out from a screen, but one needs to do it via filters.

Been a buyer since last week. More dry powder available, but wondering if the rout may be over. Planning my next purchases or ready to take profits, either way.
Last two purchases are 100 K @ $63.60 and 85 MMP @ $35.20, plus $20K of LCG OEF at COB.

it's a miracle

Nothing new. The bull market started in 03/2009 months ahead before the recovery.
Stock short term performance doesn't have high correlation to unemployment, the economy, inverted yield, valuation, PE, PE10 and even earnings(SP500 earnings were down Q4/2012 + Q1/2013 and SPY was up 12+% in Q1/2013)

AllianzGI Funds:
https://us.allianzgi.com/documents/AllianzGI-Funds-2020-Capital-Gains-Distribution-Estimates-with-NAV
Liberty Street Funds: (NEW)
https://libertystreetfunds.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Liberty-Street-2020-Year-End-Capital-Gains-Estimates.pdf
DWS Funds:
https://www.dws.com/globalassets/cio/dam-us/pdfs/resources/tax-center/forms/2020-capital-gains-distributions.pdf?v=-1258172827
Vanguard Funds:
https://advisors.vanguard.com/VGApp/iip/advisor/csa/investments/taxcenter/yearenddistributions

Morningstar shows tax cost ratio for funds on their "Price" tab (pun not intended). It's on the right hand side in the lower block of data.
See here.
The tax cost ratio is 0.03%, meaning that on average, over the past three years, you lost 0.03% of your assets to taxes each year. The category average is 0.02%. So I suppose that means the fund is "horrid", giving up an extra 1 basis point on average each year. Especially with so many HY muni funds giving up nothing to taxes.
FWIW, over five years, the average tax cost ratio is 0.03%, and PRIHX's 5 year tax cost ratio is also 0.03%.
If you have access to the M* premium screener, you can screen on HY muni funds. On the "Risk and Tax Cost" data display, you can see all the peers' 3-, 5-, and 10-year tax cost ratios.
0.03% is nothing. If you really insist on a TRP HY muni fund with a lower tax cost ratio, the screener shows that PRFHX's tax cost ratio is just 1/3 as much: 0.01% across all timeframes.
FWIW, PRTAX gives up nothing to taxes (tax cost ratio of 0.00%) vs. a category average of 0.04% over three years.

I’m using Lipper. For some strange reason, PRIHX, which Price calls “Tax Free”, receives the lowest possible score for “tax efficiency.” (1/5).
Might be that within its (tax-free) category, that’s true. So, what I’d like to do is compare it to similar funds that don’t limit their investments to just tax-free bonds.
Inputting various TRP “tax free” funds generates a wide variety of results. Their longer term (more generic) fund, PRTAX, scores highest (5/5) for tax efficiency at Lipper.

Some slightly contrarian contextual takes here, of high-level interest perhaps:
https://humbledollar.com/2020/10/follow-the-fed/

Interesting article
1)Employment: has nothing to do with stocks. Disregard.
2+5)Inflation + Plan for higher inflation.: I don't see any inflation coming soon. Still high unemployment, Covid, big tech improve processes, globalization. Disregard
3)Expect low yields. Of course, the Fed told us that
4)Favor the middle. intermediate term bonds are where you should be long term. Disregard
6)Rethink asset location: Same old narrative. Not all bonds are treasuries. Example: PTIAX,PIMIX pay about 4% annually.
6)Stay flexible. Keep your style and why disregard. If you are buy and hold investor and it worked for you changing isn't your strength. I'm a trader for about 20 years and why flexibility works for me.
7)Avoid gold. Sure. Most should avoid other stuff such as CEFs, risk parity and other exotic funds. KISS. Use only several funds, Core funds: wide indexes, explore funds: a few managed.

@msf. Been working on the house. So dodging the internet. Sorry I missed your post re DODIX.
At the time I wrote about DODIX I could swear it was BBB, and that the duration had crept up to five years. That's why I read their report, and discovered that they were buying some energy bonds. Today, all is back to normal. Duration under 5, credit rating A.
Don't know what I saw. Maybe it was primer fumes. All the regular paint is low VOC. But not the primer.
It may seem contrary to some, but I do not view bond index funds as boring.
The main reason I would sell bond funds in the near future is to realize some profit, and have some cash for the next opportunity.

VIX is one of my main criteria based on daily movements.
VIX has been elevated since early September, it finally broke above 30 and that's not a good sign.
I use other criteria relate only to my goals (low volatility and never lose more than 3% from any last top). Making 2.5 times more in 2020 than my goals and I'm fine sitting out for days.
Interest rates are inching higher since early August, they are lower for several days but I think the 10 year treasury may go higher, maybe 0.9-1%

huh?
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/svarx/portfolio
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/sfhyx/portfolio
5* with huge fees
all righty then
(have not checked mfop)

Both of these funds are run by the same team, and seem to have done great. I note that the low vol fund (SVARX) holds AlphaCentric Income and Braddock Multi-Strategy Income Instl (35% weight combined), both funds were covid disasters. My guess is that mngt swooped in after they cratered. Anyway, I was impressed enough in SVARX to take a flyer. http://thespectrumfunds.com/LowVolatility.cshtml#close SFHYX is a separate fund group with a philanthropy angle, but its run by the spectrum team. We'll see.

Out of tax considerations I also decided to take a modest 2020 distribution from the Traditional side, even though that was not required in 2020. Didn’t need the money. So it went into Price’s PRIHX - a “limited term“ HY muni fund that I think is probably a better fund than M* and the others currently rate it. ... As to the tax considerations, I’d rather write the IRS a check next April 15 than have to wait in line for a tax refund. Building up the non-IRA assets may prevent having to take an unwanted withdrawal from the Roth someday

I have an inherited Roth that requires me to take unwanted distributions. The only reason why I don't want those distributions is that after sticking the money into a taxable account all the future earnings are taxable. Aside from moving money out of a tax-sheltered account, I don't see anything unwanted about Roth distributions.
It's a different question when comparing T-IRAs and Roths. There are several reasons for keeping at least some money in a T-IRA (QCDs, lower tax bracket for heirs, leave to charity, etc.) But given a choice between adding eligible money to a Roth or leaving it in a taxable account, I'm not aware of a reason to keep it in a taxable account. So I'm not clear on your thinking here.
The muni bond fund does let you escape federal taxes (it's still substantially subject to state taxes). However that comes at a cost - muni bond yields are less than taxable bond yields (which would be tax free in a Roth).
For example (this is just the first one I picked, not necessarily the best comp), RPIHX is a taxable junk bond fund with a duration of 3.58 years and an unsubsidized SEC yield of 4.94% (subsidized is 5.08%). PRIHX is a muni junk bond fund with a duration of 4.44 years and an unsubsidized SEC yield of 1.40% (subsidized is 1.84%)
Though most multi-sector funds don't hold equity worth mentioning (5%+), about 1/8 of the nearly 100 funds do. They can get a fair amount in dividends plus a small growth kicker, but at the expense of higher volatility.
When Kathleen Gaffney left Loomis Sayles, it seemed she tried to outdo her mentor Dan Fuss at LSBDX by upping the equity to 20% in Eaton Vance Bond (EVBAX). That resulted in a fund even more volatile than LSBDX.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/23855/wealthtrack-preview-guest-kathleen-gaffney-manager-eaton-vance-bond-fund
PRIHX appears to merit a 2* rating because of its below average returns. This in turn is likely because it has one of the shortest durations of any high yield muni fund. A problem with M*'s ranking of junk bond funds is that it groups funds together regardless of duration - no short term, intermediate term, long term breakdown. There are only five muni high junk bond funds with durations under five years. Four have 2 stars; only ISHYX which has done slightly better, has a 3* rating.

+1 fd1000 I sold all my shares of CTFAX after that change. The only reason I bought it was its ability to limit stock holdings at 10% during market tops. Now it's just another 50-70% allocation fund or tactical allocation fund !

Yep, they changed it to 50% and up, see (link) second page under asset allocation.
Too bad, because 50% isn't enough protection in a stock crash

New management has done well but earlier this year they changed the fund’s asset allocation rules. Stock allocations can now never go below 50% whereas during its period of outperformance, it was allowed to hold a lower percentage of assets in stocks. Too early to tell what impact this will have on its long term performance going forward.

Ruffles, can you please provide a link to 50% equity asset allocation permanent change? I cannot locate any link on their webpage.

I think "Best" is only relevant to each individual investors portfolio criteria for what purpose/role an individual investor is attempting to fill in their portfolio. Portfolio criteria can vary widely, based on age, risk metrics, total return metrics, etc.

Yeah - That was my reaction as well. While an interesting discussion here, the topic is a little “nuts-o” when you think about it. The topic narrows it down only to “taxable” bond funds. :)
The chart is cool and gets specific. I’ll confess to generally being fog-bound with regards to bond funds anyhow. RPISX is probably listed as a bond fund, but I beg to disagree owing to its 5-25% allowable weighting in an equity fund. Also, its “bond” holdings, ranging from EM to Treasuries are so diverse as to demand a more specific moniker than simply “bond fund.”
Another consideration in the overall equation here: Some investors find value in sticking with only one or a few houses. In that case, they may be “comfy“ in settling for only “third best” or “fifth best” fund in any particular category of fund. And, as has no doubt already been mentioned, various economic forces at work at any one time can greatly lend favor to or create havoc for virtually any bond fund, regardless of name, management or style.
FWIW - I closed out long held RPSIX today. Not only has it stunk up the joint in recent years, but its diverse holdings no longer fill my perceived portfolio needs. I’d rather today hold generally short term and / or high quality bond holdings as a stabilizing influence in the portfolio rather than seeking growth or high income with such a broadly diverse “income“ fund. The small remaining amount was moved into their .25% ER index bond fund PBDIX, which I’ve held for about a year. Why bonds over cash? IMHO they would act more like a hedge against rapidly falling equity prices - if only temporarily.
Out of tax considerations I also decided to take a modest 2020 distribution from the Traditional side, even though that was not required in 2020. Didn’t need the money. So it went into Price’s PRIHX - a “limited term“ HY muni fund that I think is probably a better fund than M* and the others currently rate it. It appears almost stable enough to use as a cash alternative (not recommended however).
Part of my thinking on munis - No matter which side wins the election, municipalities and states will eventually get some federal help. (But still waiting for my official “Oracle“ license to arrive in the mail.) :) As to the tax considerations, I’d rather write the IRS a check next April 15 than have to wait in line for a tax refund. Building up the non-IRA assets may prevent having to take an unwanted withdrawal from the Roth someday (which is now near 70% of invested assets).

Roth IRA. As long as you meet the income limits , you can also contribute up to $6,000 (or $7,000 if you're turning 50 or older this year) to a Roth IRA. (If you exceed the income limits, you can still use a "backdoor " approach to contribute.) As with the Roth 401(k), all withdrawals from the Roth IRA become tax-free after you've had the account for at least 5 years and you're over age 59 ½. FROM FORBES