Thanks for the update/correction, @sma3.
I'm still not jealous. Or tired. Or proud. (As Arlo would say.) Retirement is entirely too nice. :)
Looking for a job was always the worst thing I could think of to have to be doing.

My old ( 30 years) retirement account at VOYA has ITCSX ( TPR Capital Appreciation Pt SVC) open and available at least to existing accounts.
I don't have a lot of money in this account, but might add to ITCSX at next market swoon.
Still law of big numbers makes his previous outperformance harder to continue

Good point - PRWCX is closed to most new investors.
The fund is closed to new accounts other than investors whose accounts meet any of the following criteria:
• Participants in an employer-sponsored retirement plan where the fund already serves as an investment option;
• Direct rollovers from an employer-sponsored retirement plan to a new T. Rowe Price IRA;
• Accounts held directly with T. Rowe Price that qualify through participation in certain T. Rowe Price programs;
• T. Rowe Price multi-asset products (such as funds-of-funds);
• Discretionary accounts managed by T. Rowe Price or one of its affiliates;
• Wrap, asset allocation, and other advisory programs, if permitted by T. Rowe Price.
T. Rowe Price submitted an SEC filing (dated 03/22/2023) for Capital Appreciation Equity ETF.
David Giroux will be the portfolio manager.
The new ETF will normally invest at least 80% of its net asset in equity securities.
PRWCX normally invests at least 50% of its total assets in stocks while the remaining assets
are generally invested in corporate/government debt and bank loans.
Consequently, this ETF will not be a clone of PRWCX.
MFO Link

March 31, '23.
Christine Benz is a longtime Morningstar personality. She's back with her bucket approach for retirement portfolio construction. It's never been a strategy I could ever hope to actually employ. And if I had the wherewithal, I find it to be just plain too complicated, anyhow. But have a listen, if you'd like:
https://wealthtrack.com/build-a-better-more-resilient-retirement-portfolio-with-morningstars-christine-benz/

Christine Benz has long recommended bucketing strategies for retirees.
She often credits Harold Evensky for developing this strategy.
Mr. Evensky's implementation utilizes 2 buckets while Ms. Benz uses 3 buckets.
Certain investors may find bucketing to be a helpful mental construct
which allows them to stay the course during market disruptions.
For those investors, bucketing can be immensely beneficial.
This strategy is unnecessary if an investor has a properly constructed portfolio
and a well-balanced temperament.
.

I don't think the buckets are really a dead horse, but she has been beating that drum for a long time.
As I remember, despite focusing on retirement, she doesn't mention RMDs and how to factor those into your bucket

March 31, '23.
Christine Benz is a longtime Morningstar personality. She's back with her bucket approach for retirement portfolio construction. It's never been a strategy I could ever hope to actually employ. And if I had the wherewithal, I find it to be just plain too complicated, anyhow. But have a listen, if you'd like:
https://wealthtrack.com/build-a-better-more-resilient-retirement-portfolio-with-morningstars-christine-benz/

I thought I knew what stable value funds in a 401k were. I used them for years, but what you show looks to me more like an annuity.
Stable value fund is available in my 401(K) plan. It is an insurance product that invest in short term treasurys but has the liquidity like money market fund.
There's a lot of subtlety in attributes of these products that results in a fair amount of confusion. In a broad sense everything people have mentioned here is a stable value fund. In practical terms, the distinctions don't matter much.

stable value funds and their close cousins, guaranteed investment contracts, together accounted for 21.3 percent of the assets in such plans in September [2006]
...
The stable value funds in 401(k) plans are generally a pool of short-term bonds or other debt-market investments protected by an insurance contract known as a wrapper.... The underlying investments are generally corporate bonds, which yield more than government bonds but are also at a greater risk for loss of principal. He said Treasury bonds were a more secure long-term choice than stable value funds, which may be subject “to the law of unintended consequences."
...
Like other stable value funds in 401(k) plans, [the Trust Advisors Stable Value Plus fund] was not a mutual fund but a collective trust.

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/08/business/mutfund/08stable.html
"Stable value" can refer to even more varied investment structures. Historically, or "traditionally", these were insurance products - guaranteed insurance contracts like TIAA Traditional issued directly by an insurance company.

TIAA Traditional is a guaranteed insurance contract and not an investment for federal securities law purposes.

https://www.tiaa.org/public/learn/retirement-planning-and-beyond/how-do-traditional-annuities-work
"Stable value" evolved into a much broader range of investment structures. The common thread is the use of insurance to provide investment value stability.

Stable value investment options may be offered by investment managers, trust companies, or insurance companies in various structures, such as separately managed accounts, commingled funds or guaranteed insurance accounts. Sometimes a stable value investment option will be managed by a plan sponsor. While stable value investment options may be managed or structured in a variety of ways, the important similarity is the use of stable value investment contracts, issued by banks, insurance companies, and other financial institutions, which convey to the investment option the ability to carry certain assets at book value.

https://www.stablevalue.org/stable-value/ (Links in original)
For a brief shining(?) moment, stable value funds were offered in retail IRAs. But SEC concerns about pricing led to their demise:

[Stable value as an] investing option has disappeared for individuals [in 2005] because of questions raised by the Securities and Exchange Commission about how to value the funds, although no formal ruling against them has been made.
...
Stable value funds have been available for many years, and remain available today-although on a much more limited basis-in some 401(k) plans and defined benefit pension plans maintained by employers. These investments come under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Labor, which has strict, but somewhat different regulations, from the SEC. The SEC's questions affect investments by individuals in IRAs ...
Scudder launched the first stable value IRA fund in 1997, offering the funds as Scudder Preservation Plus Income and Scudder Preservation Plus. Others were offered by PBGH, Gartmore Morley, Oppenheimer and other mutual fund managers.
But the SEC began raising questions about how to determine the daily valuation of funds with insurance wrappers, which managers had been pricing at book value. The wrapper agreement, which is what made the stable value fund what it was, was also the part that was raising questions at the SEC. The SEC, which initially approved the funds, will not comment on the situation other than to say that there are no stable value funds now registered with the SEC, although there are some nonregistered ones in existence, says John Nester, an SEC spokesman.

https://www.fa-mag.com/news/article-1120.html?issue=56

TIAA Traditional (Accumulation) Rates
No changes.
Restricted RC 6.25%, RA 6.00%
Flexible RCP 5.50%, SRA 5.25%, Newer IRAs 3.45%
TSP G Fund hasn't updated yet (previous monthly rate was 4.125%).
Options outside of workplace retirement plans include m-mkt funds, bank m-mkt accounts (FDIC insured), T-Bills, short-term brokered CDs.
#401k #403b #StableValue #TIAA #TSP
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/thread/142/stable-value-sv-rates-monthly?page=2&scrollTo=995

At least at Fidelity, QCD is not as seamless as a DAF. There is no online method to transfer the funds.
https://www.fidelity.com/learning-center/personal-finance/retirement/qcds-the-basics
Click on "Make a QCD". The pop-up that appears reads:
How do you want to submit your QCD?
Online          By mail using our form (PDF)

I like the 'In-Kind" strategy:
8-strategies-for-optimizing-rmds-from-iras

Note, @bee linked article above from Forbes is out of date and incorrectly states when RMD's must be started. SECURE 2.0 Act is now law. Owners of retirement accounts must start taking RMDs at age 73.

These are the key attributes that attracted me to PKSAX. It is the only equity fund that I have found that has the combination of Great owl, consistent strong long term performance (3 year -- 15.9%, 5 year -- 13.9%, 10 year -- 14.9%), what I consider to be reasonable Max drawdowns in both March 2020 of 18.3% and 2022 of 17.7%, and managers who have been in place for a long time (since 2008). It has consistently beaten both its index and its category and does so with a non-traditional approach to sector selection. It has heavy concentrations in both industrials and financials which are quite different from its index. I was able to purchase it through the Thrift Savings plan which is the government's retirement program. I wonder if it might also be available in some other 401k programs. You are right its unfortunately not available at Schwab and Fidelity. Lewis is correct in that it is fairly concentrated, but it has managed that risk to date quite well. I would be very interested if anyone has identified any funds with similar attributes. I think they are rare...

Will you receive a pension when you retire ? Of the $700 K , is any in equities ? Have you ran any simulation to project income to out going bill payments ? Any thoughts of down sizing after retirement ? How much income from SS? More questions than answers, & hopefully they will lead you as to how much to have in "safe" investments.

Don’t know about your finance situation and risk tolerance. So here it goes for your questions on CDs:
1. As of today the only CDs that yield 5% are those with shorter duration ones, 9-12 month. Creating a CD ladder is necessary in order to maintain cash flow (income) as you desired. For example, a one-year ladder consisting of 4 CDs with each maturing every 3 months would provide income every 3 months. So it boils down to how much extra income you want from your CDs. Don’t forget that the interest accrued from CDs is taxed as ordinary income with both federal and state tax applies. Treasury bills/notes are federal tax-exempt but state tax is still applied.
2. CDs are safe (FDIC insured) but they are not liquid during the investment period. Some bank CDs pay interest monthly, but they pay at lower yield. Brokered CDs at your brokerages pay higher yield, but majority of them pay at maturity, not monthly. Treasury bills (1 -12 months), on the other hand, are highly liquid and one can sell them on secondary market if necessary. Creating T bills ladders will provide periodic income just as CD ladders.
3. At current inflation rate (CPI as of Feb 2023 is at 6.2% y-o-y), you are losing future buying power each year by investing in CDs alone. Thus, other investment vehicles such as stocks, bonds, and others are required as part of the “growth” component of your retirement income.
Within this MFO discussion forum, you are getting opinions from other investors. The best answer should come from your financial planner. At least you have something to consider as a starting point. Best wishes.

"Sweep account" is essentially a marketing term that is used differently by T. Rowe Price and by Fidelity.
A "settlement account" (what Fidelity calls a "core" account) is where the cash comes from to settle all your brokerage transactions (including cash withdrawals). One can think of this as one's checking account.
T. Rowe Price brokerage lets you pick a money market fund to hold your settlement account money. It refers to this fund as a sweep account and provides this description of how the sweep mechanism works.

Price requires all new accounts to select a T. Rowe Price money market fund as a sweep option. ...On the settlement date, Price may debit my designated money market sweep fund ... for payment of securities purchased by me. I will earn dividends up to, but not including, the settlement date. My Account will be credited with the proceeds from the sale of securities, and I will begin earning dividends the next business day after the settlement date.

https://www.troweprice.com/content/dam/iinvestor/Forms/accountAgreement.pdf
In contrast, Fidelity uses "sweep" somewhat differently. For nonretirement accounts (except CMA accounts), Fidelity lets you keep your cash in SPAXX (yielding 4.28%) or FZFXX (yielding 4.22%). These operate the same way as T. Rowe Price described above, but Fidelity does not call these "sweep" accounts.
Rather, Fidelity reserves that term for settlement accounts where the money is "swept" into an FDIC-insured bank account (2.32% posted rate; the APY is 2.34%). This is an option for retirement accounts and is mandatory for CMA accounts at Fidelity.
https://www.fidelity.com/trading/faqs-about-account#faq_about2
https://www.fidelity.com/cash-management/fidelity-cash-management-account/overview
At Fidelity, you have the option of having your money FDIC-insured by using a CMA account. But you pay for that insurance in the form of reduced interest. FDIC insurance is not an option at TRP.
Features of CMA accounts Fidelity are slightly different from Fidelity's "regular" brokerage accounts. The most significant CMA advantage that I'm aware of is that Fidelity rebates all ATM fees. In a regular account you need to have a certain level of assets before Fidelity provides unlimited rebates.
FWIW, I use a "regular" Fidelity brokerage account for almost everything and have a CMA account with a few hundred bucks for ATM withdrawals only.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/890540/000139834423006578/fp0082730-1_497.htm
497 1 fp0082730-1_497.htm
THE ADVISORS’ INNER CIRCLE FUND II
(the “Trust”)
Kopernik Global All-Cap Fund
(the “Fund”)
Supplement dated March 24, 2023
to the Fund’s Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (the “SAI”), each
dated March 1, 2023
This supplement provides new and additional information beyond that contained in the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and SAI, and should be read in conjunction with the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and SAI.
Effective as of the close of business on June 1, 2023 (the “Effective Date”), the Fund will be closed to certain new investments because Kopernik Global Investors, LLC (the “Adviser”), the Fund’s investment adviser, believes that carefully managing the Fund’s capacity provides the opportunity to continue to invest in the most attractively priced companies it can find and maintain the ability to take advantage of investments across different markets, countries, industry/sectors, and across the market capitalization spectrum.
While any existing shareholder may continue to reinvest Fund dividends and distributions, other new investments in the Fund may only be made by those investors within the following categories:
•Direct shareholders of the Fund as of the Effective Date and the date of the new investment;
•Participants in qualified retirement plans that offer shares of the Fund as an investment option as of the Effective Date; and
•Trustees and officers of the Trust, employees of the Adviser, and their immediate family members.
The Fund reserves the right to modify the above criteria, suspend all sales of new shares or reject any specific purchase order for any reason.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE
KGI-SK-009-0200

Kilbride may be around 60 - not that old. He has high positions at Wellington Management (WM) - Partner, Managing Director (MD), portfolio manager. Vanguard has setup a smaller, similar and more concentrated fund for him - VADGX, AUM $318.1 million, ER 0.45%, only 28 holdings (vs 41 for VDIGX), inception 11/9/21. It's advisor-only fund and Schwab shows as NA and it isn't part of Fido NTF (so, no competition with VDIGX). It seems to me that Kilbride will be around Wellington Management handling VADGX, helping Fisher, and may be other even higher things at WM. It doesn't look like he is moving into a retirement community.

My more depressing problem is that I have to take an RMD sometime this year out of a retirement account with no gains or even breakeven recovery and almost certainly no prospects for same.

I have been scheduling automatic RMD withdrawals in December. Now I am wondering if it might be better to just take them in early January so they might have a good chance of mirroring the value at the end of the year before.
On the other hand, I imagine you can't win timing this either.

My BSV, BND, STIP, VGIT etc. are all down so much I am holding, but I sure do get bummed every time my eyes glance past them looking to see how VONG or QQQ has been.
My more depressing problem is that I have to take an RMD sometime this year out of a retirement account with no gains or even breakeven recovery and almost certainly no prospects for same.

MSF - I really appreciate the effort you put into this analysis! I'm 75, widowed, good health (so far), earning $60K (after 401-K contribution) from working part-time (which I plan to continue). Most of my income is from investments, pension, and SS. True retirement would probably drop me into the 32% federal tax bracket. Thanks for your insight!

There are too many variables and possibilities for me to write up a complete description let alone an analysis right now. Difference in tax rates post-retirement, number of years until retirement (at which point you should switch to IRA since the 401(k) then offers no more deferral of RMDs), number of anticipated years of life (not IRS tables), type of beneficiary (spouse or other), expected rate of return (and variability of returns).
Broad picture - the more your tax rates drop in retirement the better off you are in keeping the money in the 401(k), since that will avoid RMDs until they're taxed at the lower rates. That tax savings can more than compensate for the extra fees in the meantime.
If there's no change in rates, the picture changes. Each year you pay $8K in taxes using the IRA, meaning you have $8K less earning returns. Keep the $500K in the 401(k) and you have $4800 less due to fees that can earn returns. So you've got about $3.2K more with the 401(k) sitting there earning returns.
But while the $4800 loss to fees in the 401(k) is permanent, the loss of an extra $8K in taxes with the IRA is temporary. Keeping the money in the 401(k), sooner or later, you'd still withdraw the $20K, post-retirement, and pay the $8K in taxes then.
I don't have the time right now to delve more deeply into this. Gut feeling is that a sizeable post-retirement reduction in tax rates would justify keeping the money in the 401(k). Otherwise, moving the money to the IRA may come out better.