There is a new M* value factor article - Best Ways to Reach for Value, Whenever it Shines
Scrolling down to the Factor Profile graphics for VTV / DFLVX / VLUE, Style seems just plain wrong, as all are depicted as being paragons of Growth.
Just for comparison, I looked up Factor Profile on the Portfolio tabs for HACAX / FDGRX / WGROX, and my goodness, they appear to be flat-out value funds.
Have I been investing backwards all this time?
Quality of editing, lack of innovative ideas, cutting back of mutual fund recommendations and evaluations, truncating of data on funds and this repetitive harping about "buckets".
The only thing I find of value anymore is the portfolio analysis. As far as I can tell this is still the only place I know of on the web where you can see what a exposures a portfolio has, although Portfolio Visualizer is getting close
The former shows the fund as nearly pure growth as does the fund's style chart, while the fund page factor analysis reports the fund to be nearly pure value. Of course the reporting dates are different (Oct 2019 vs. Dec 2019), but with a 17% turnover, it's not likely that the fund converted suddenly from a growth fund to a value fund.
It appears that either no one looks at M*'s factor analysis (so no one has reported an error), meaning the factor analysis is not something readers care about, or as @sma3 suggests, M* has been informed and just doesn't care. Either way, M* is not meeting the needs of its retail subscribers.
M* is confused by M* at times, too.