I kinda disagree with you when you say it is not a game...if this market isn't the world's largest casino, not sure what it is. The market is NOT a utility. It does not care that someone "needs" 8% a year return to fund their retirement. It's use is to raise capital to grow companies. NOT to provide anyone with a secure retirement.
Dictionary. Game. Definition. a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck
Many "play" the markets....some have more skill/resources than others....for sure it is competitive...someone is always on the other side of the trade...sure...lot of luck involved at times....

Yes, in one sense you are Spot-On @Baseball_Fan. :) A matter of perspective. When the wind’s blowing hard out to R / L / center field (as now) anyone can be a “star”. But the winds are not always so favorable.
As it may concern another member … Be very careful about dishing out investment advice to individuals. While advice comes cheap, their hard earned money did not. When push comes to shove its their money and their ass hanging out there - not yours.

"It’s about being able to stay near fully invested - even at an advanced age - and doing better than you would if parked 100% in cash (or cash-like investments)"
You are now going to the other extreme of only cash. There is a lot going on between 0% to 100% stocks. Your goal is to stay invested, my goal is different.
Let's explore several questions
1) How comfortable are you with JHQAX? The following question is the most revealing, what % are you going to invest in JHQAX for the next 20 years? I have more confidence investing in 50/50 PRWCX/VWIAX for many retirees that it meets their goals. In fact, I don't even trust PRWCX, because I don't know how long Giroux will be in charge. This is why my wife has instructions to invest in 3 funds if I'm gone, 2 indexes and VWIAX because I can trust them for decades.
2) You made a good observation, DODBX lost 33% in 2008. But why stop there, stocks+bonds lost over 15% at the bottom of 2022, and many lost over 10% by year-end. In 03/2020, many bond funds lost 10% and stocks over 30% at the bottom. Are you going to get rid of all of them?
3) You made another good point "the various approaches attempted by funds are unpredictable "
Bingo. and why I research it for many years. I talked to many people, especially investors who have enough, and most told me they don't want to ever lose more than 10% from any last top, but they still want their portfolio to make a decent return. They must give up either performance or lower risk.
So, just my opinion, good timing/trading is the only choice IF you can do it. Timing doesn't have to be all or none, you can trade 20-30-50%. BTW, I'm almost sure that Fred was probably in high % in MM for months, just like I did in 2022. When markets don't make sense, I'm out. I don't trust any funds/managers and I don't believe in relative performance, only absolute. If 50/50 PRWCX/VWIAX lost about 10-11% in 2022, it doesn't comfort me compared to -18% for SPY. I don't tolerate this decline.
Another subject we must discuss is how much you have in retirement and let's assume no pension. Smaller portfolios must be at a higher % in stocks to survive. WTF portfolio can be in 20/80 to 80/20. The biggest problem is in the middle.

I like your sense of humor Hank...but in all seriousness, I kinda disagree with you when you say it is not a game...if this market isn't the world's largest casino, not sure what it is. The market is NOT a utility. It does not care that someone "needs" 8% a year return to fund their retirement. It's use is to raise capital to grow companies. NOT to provide anyone with a secure retirement.
Dictionary. Game. Definition. a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck
Many "play" the markets....some have more skill/resources than others....for sure it is competitive...someone is always on the other side of the trade...sure...lot of luck involved at times....

These may be the first ETFs to wrap this sort of strategy, but vehicles using it have been around "forever". See, e.g. principal protected notes, market linked CDs, indexed annuities, etc.
The particular strategy you described (provide protection via Treasuries, purchase at-the-money call options) is one way of structuring investments. This ETF uses a slightly different strategy (see pp. 19 et seq. in the prospectus).
It purchases at-the-money call and put options and sells an out-of-the-money put option to raise some cash. The put option provides protection against the market declining. The call option purchased provides market exposure for a 100% participation rate. The call option sold creates a cap - if the market goes up higher than the strike price, the buyer of the call will exercise, thus limiting the fund's upside potential.
This variant is independent of interest rates. It should work in ZIRP.
As the Bloomberg piece intimates, a "buffer"ed vehicle does not get 100% protection. (See the principal protected note link above for more on buffers.) So calling this first ETF a "buffer" ETF is somewhat of a misnomer. It does suggest that subsequent ETFs will not have 100% principal protection.

Sold TAN from the IRA. It was .92%. Hasn't done much in the year I owned it. And I feel the need to start taking the ornaments off the retirement tree.
Added the proceeds to PRWCX since it is NTF at Fidelity, and the position could be bigger.
I can still play with the taxable. :)

Is this for a retirement account for your son?
If so, and if your son is able to rollover anything from a 401(k) to an IRA, then you can get access to PRWCX through TRP.

@yogibearbull
are you referring to the other TSP funds?
As they paid better than MMF I used my other retirement accounts for equites and stock funds.

I don't understand the concern for international funds in a Roth IRA, but that's ok. I did google a little on the subject and it's complicated, but I'm still not concerned after reading. Apparently Schwab isn't either. I found this in one of their articles on the subject:

Foreign taxes in retirement accounts
Unfortunately, foreign investments in retirement accounts don't qualify for either a tax credit or deduction.
Because income in a tax-deferred account—such as an individual retirement account (IRA) or 401(k)—isn't subject to U.S. tax (at least not until you begin making withdrawals), you can't deduct foreign taxes paid on investments held in the account. But don't worry—the foreign taxes reduce the income earned in that account. That is, when you eventually withdraw funds from your account, you'll be taxed on the net amount only.
If you have a Roth IRA, the situation is a bit different. Withdrawals from Roth accounts are tax-free, so you won't benefit from the foreign taxes you paid. But don't let the lack of a tax benefit deter you from holding foreign investments in your Roth account; it could still make sense to include foreign assets for diversification and potential growth.

One school of investing advice (from professionals who get interviews or write columns -- some of them, anyway) for past x years has recommended forgetting about "age in bonds" and entering retirement with a high equity allocation to help prevent running out of money much later.
I would expect quite a variety of reasons for the high equity allocation, including inertia, not wanting to sell on the way down (hope for the future), and a reluctance to part with funds that have stood the test of time in one's portfolio, in addition to all those reasons already mentioned in this thread.

One of the reasons why I consolidated all of our retirement accounts at Fidelity is its account analysis feature. I used to use M* X-Ray often to review and and analyze our various accounts. Once M* started stripping away features, I started looking for alternatives and realized Fidelity had what I needed all along. I moved all of our IRAs and former 401Ks to Fidelity and haven’t looked back. And it’s FREE for customers.

I am risk adverse by nature, but without a pension ( except SS) I knew my wife and I would have to depend on our investments for living expenses, vacations weddings etc when we retired.
Much of what I read pointed out that retiring into a multi year bear market would be a big problem, so we reduced equities after 60, and two years into retirement we are about 40%. If there is a significant pull back will increase it. After two or three years into retirement I am more comfortable knowing our basic living expenxes etc.

@sma3 - While some esteemed posters appear to disagree with you, the expert from Schwab I linked earlier would appear to agree:
As you put together your retirement portfolio, you also need to think about the role your savings will play in your overall income plan. For example, how much income do you expect from guaranteed sources like annuities, pensions, and Social Security? - "If these guaranteed income streams will generate enough income to cover the majority of your expenses, you might be able to maintain a more aggressive stance with your portfolio well into retirement … Conversely, if you'll rely on your portfolio for the majority of your income, you'll need to take a more balanced approach with your investments”
https://www.schwab.com/retirement-portfolio
Having both pension and SS, I view investments mainly as a growth asset - an enhancement to an already comfortable subsistence. If it were all I had to live on, I’d probably view them more as an income generator. Those aren’t mutually exclusive. But it does, I think, highlight two very different perspectives. The other side of the coin is that folks with pensions paid for that during their working years, whether by regular payroll deductions or by working for lower compensation than they might have received elsewhere where a pension did not exist. So it’s likely the “non-pensioners” retired with a much greater nest-egg to safeguard - provided skill-sets were similar.
-
PS - I’m actually somewhat more aggressive today than when I retired 25 years ago. Those 25 years didn’t go to waste. I read Fund Alarm and Mutual Fund Observer and learned immensely from those people. And, in retirement there’s time to read about and study the markets that you didn’t have while employed. I suppose to an extent the more advanced technology and “at demand” information flow has helped, although that one’s a 2-edged sword.

Very interesting points raised by several members. It is true that the equal weight fund does have to sell its winners down to the .2 allocation, but I understand that such rejiggering occurs only 4 times per year. Winners are pared back while stocks that have become cheaper (i.e., lost value) are on sale, so to speak. The gains from this « value proposition «  should compensate for the opportunity cost of selling gainers early.
I did not previously own an S&P 500 index fund in my actively managed portfolio, so I am not replacing or duplicating anything by dipping my toes into RSP. I do own plenty of TIEIX, the TIAA-CREF Equity Index Fund, in my retirement account. I often hear chirping in my mind from some irritating creature named FOMO. Maybe others have been visited by this PITA. On good days, I can show him/her the door.

I am risk adverse by nature, but without a pension ( except SS) I knew my wife and I would have to depend on our investments for living expenses, vacations weddings etc when we retired.
Much of what I read pointed out that retiring into a multi year bear market would be a big problem, so we reduced equities after 60, and two years into retirement we are about 40%. If there is a significant pull back will increase it.
After two or three years into retirement I am more comfortable knowing our basic living expenxes etc.

After 25 years of retirement my allocation hasn’t changed much. Early on I looked to TRRIX, a 40/60 TRP fund for guidance. Currently own the fund and it’s one of several I watch to try and keep my feet firmly on the ground.
No X-Ray. Simply broke apart my holdings to get a rough picture.
Equity 46%
Foreign / domestic bonds 20%
Convertible bonds 10%
Cash 10%
Precious metals 7%*
Foreign currencies 5%*
S&P short position -2%
Net long equity 44%
* Some of the metals exposure is direct and some through PRPFX. The currencies are all through PRPFX. I own one long-short fund, making the total short position a bit higher than stated above and the net-long equity a bit lower.
What the discussion pretty much misses is that not all equities are the same. Some are relatively low volatility, while some can be be quite explosive. Exposure to EM may count as part of your equities, but is more risky than most U.S. domestics. Guess that’s for another day.

@Roy, you are getting great inputs from many posters here on your asset allocation. Target date fund’s glide path provides a good starting point for the major asset class allocations, and I use them as a reference point, just as @Observant1 is doing. I am several years older than you are and am approaching retirement too.
Several years ago, I gradually reduced stock exposure gradually to a 50/25/25 (stock/bond/cash) allocation. This conservative allocation was helpful to navigate through the difficult year of 2022 when both stocks and bonds fell simultaneously. This year has been the quite the reversal as both stocks and bonds move up amidst of banking crisis. Now that the bulk of rate hike is behind us, I am more optimistic that bonds will have more meaningful gain this year with respect to yields (4-5%) and some capital appreciation on the bond prices. T bills, CDs and money market are yielding 5%. And that is good enough for me.

Roy, the nice thing about investing is the fact that very seldom you can find exceptional funds which defy common concepts such as low expense + index do best over a longer time.
PRWCX is one of them. In the past I used PIMIX(2010-2017), SGIIX,OAKBX,FAIRX(2000-1 to 2009).
I started reducing my portfolio in 90+% in stocks, in 2013, 5 years prior to retirement. Most of the bond portion was in PIMIX. Since 2017 (retirement=2018) I have been using about 90% bond OEFs, but I'm a unique bond OEF trader.
I think 50/50 is a good choice. I would select between the following funds:
Moderate allocation=PRWCX
More conservative=WBAIX/WBALX....CFTAX(Tactical-increase/decrease stock %)...FASMX

The largest chunk by far of our investments have been in TRAIX/PRWCX for the past ~16-17 years, so the recent move to reduce some of those holdings was a bit difficult because of the emotional attachment as well as the FOMO on future equity gains. We are now roughly 50/50 equity/fixed income---still sufficient equity exposure for growth and nice dividend income from the MM/bond side. Our equity exposure had already been down the past 1 1/2 years as some money my wife inherited had been placed in fixed income rather than TRAIX/PRWCX.
Would be interested to know at what age many of you started reducing equity exposure as you neared retirement? I am 60 very soon.

@Roy,
I'm the same age as you. I started reducing my equity exposure gradually in 2020 or so.
Last year the stock market "helped" to decrease my equity allocation a bit! :-(
Portfolio on 12-31-2019
73% Stocks
22% Bonds
5% Cash
Portfolio on 06-30-2023
66.0% Stocks
19.4% Bonds (DOXIX & TIPS)
14.4% Cash (MM funds)
I periodically review Vanguard and T. Rowe Price target-date fund portfolios for reference.
Mostly, I pay attention to the overall stock/bond split. I don't attempt to replicate these target-date funds.
For example, I don't have dedicated exposure to global/foreign bonds, convertibles, or preferred stocks.
Portfolio allocations for Vanguard Target Retirement and T. Rowe Price Retirement funds are listed below.
Please note that T. Rowe Price offers three distinct target-date fund series.
VTTVX on 05-31-2023
US Stock - 32.8%
Foreign Stock - 21.7%
US Bond - 28.9%
TIPS - 4.2%
Foreign Bond - 12.4%
TRRHX on 05-31-2023
US Stock - 39.11%
Foreign Stock - 18.44%
US Bond - 25.88%
Foreign Bond - 10.45%
Cash - 5.31%
Convertibles - 0.51%
Preferred Stock - 0.25%
Other 0.05%
VTHRX on 05-31-2023
US Stock - 38.2%
Foreign Stock - 25.3%
US Bond - 25.5%
TIPS - 0.0%
Foreign Bond - 11.0%
TRRCX on 05-31-2023
US Stock - 46.16%
Foreign Stock - 21.83%
US Bond - 18.32%
Foreign Bond - 7.97%
Cash - 4.80%
Convertibles - 0.58%
Preferred Stock - 0.30%
Other 0.04%

Would be interested to know at what age many of you started reducing equity exposure as you neared retirement? I am 60 very soon.
I had been shifting to more bonds and less equities between 2020-21. Then the spam hit the fan.
I know you love PRWCX. Me, too. In spite of myself, it has grown to 39 percent of my total right now. I try to follow the "rules of thumb," but not with much effort. Those "rules" don't apply to our house in many ways.
I'm at 50 US stocks.
8 foreign stocks
35 bonds.
...The rest is "other" or cash held by the funds. Oops, I do own a few single stocks, now.
I'm 69 later this month.
Everyone's situation is different. I'm investing primarily for my primary heirs: my son and my wife---his stepmother. He is all of 30, come October. She just turned 50. And she will go back to the Philippines when I'm gone. Much cheaper to live there. We already have a new house already built on the property where she grew up. It was necessary. The old one just fell down into decay.
One of my biggest priorities is to continue to grow the portion of the portfolio that is not tax-sheltered. Just to increase the amount that is easier for her to get at without all the blessed, lovely, amazing, beautiful, fart-brained tax rules. (I know that INHERITED IRAs are a horse of a different color.)
In the meantime, I'm not adding any stocks from foreign lands. I have seen the brokerage report to me that a chunk of the dividends "were taxed and held at the source." NHYDY. I don't want to be paying foreign governments, when my portfolio can make money HERE, and because of our specific circumstances, we've owed zero tax for many years, anyhow. I'll hold onto Norsk Hydro. It's been good to me, though the share price has lately dropped. Aluminum. They even mine their own bauxite. And green energy. And they're trying trying trying to buy a Polish recycling outfit. One of the largest aluminum concerns in the world.
Bond funds: yes. I bought junk at just the wrong time. With patience, I'm seeing it rise, now. The dividends are better than the safer stuff, so I'm riding it back up. My foray into ETFs has been less than satisfactory. I choose-----against my best interest, maybe---- to stay with TRP. Their trading platform and rules can suck spooge, I've found out. ("If you're not going to let me use the "Good Till Canceled" option, you maybe perhaps ought to LET ME KNOW!!!!!.... I.T. doink-brains.) .... With a $5k minimum to trade non-TRP funds, I'll stick with the best of TRP's mediocre bond lineup. So, when I sell my ETFs, that will go into PRSNX. What I already own bond-wise (in T-IRA) is TUHYX and PRCPX.
Break a leg! My junk is performing very well. But maybe you don't want to own junk. LOTS of places have better bond funds than TRP. I hope you find them. :)

Just one model based on age. Take with a grain of salt.
Age-based portfolio model / https://www.schwab.com/retirement-portfolio
A quick search of 5 or 6 other websites seems to pretty much find agreement with the model I linked. There are many other factors to consider of course. I linked this simply as just one example of what is out there. Personally, my 403B was 100% in global equities until about age 50 when I began sharply pulling back.

@Roy, think you are doing the right thing by reduce equity risk as you approach retirement. Five years out is not far away. Shifting more to balanced/allocation funds is another way to increase bond allocation. My high yield and bank loan funds have done well this year; YTD is about 5%. Likely these funds will have a solid year by year end. The rest of short term high quality bond funds are moving along well yielding 5%.
Watching if the market will broaden out more to smaller caps and cyclicals. If the recession strikes this year, bonds will serve as a ballast when stocks will fall.

The largest chunk by far of our investments have been in TRAIX/PRWCX for the past ~16-17 years, so the recent move to reduce some of those holdings was a bit difficult because of the emotional attachment as well as the FOMO on future equity gains. We are now roughly 50/50 equity/fixed income---still sufficient equity exposure for growth and nice dividend income from the MM/bond side. Our equity exposure had already been down the past 1 1/2 years as some money my wife inherited had been placed in fixed income rather than TRAIX/PRWCX.
Would be interested to know at what age many of you started reducing equity exposure as you neared retirement? I am 60 very soon.