I agree with Yogi that TIAA annuities are solid, low cost investment options. Except for TIAA Traditional, the fact that they are annuities is essentially a non-issue; what matters is the all-in cost.
Prior to SECURE 2.0, annuitized contracts (where you exchanged cash value for a promised income stream starting either "now" or "deferred" to some time in the future) were treated as separate from the remainder of your 403(b) or IRA. This is called "bifurcation".
Traditionally under bifurcation, the RMD requirement for the annuitized portion of a plan was automatically satisfied so long as payments began by age 73. QLACs were created to allow payments to begin later (up to age 85).
Here's the way Kiplinger describes it:

A DIA [deferred income annuity] can work well as an IRA, but make sure your income payments begin no later than age 72 [now 73] to comply with required minimum distribution (RMD) rules. If you want to defer income payments past that age, consider a qualified longevity annuity contract (QLAC).

https://www.kiplinger.com/retirement/annuities/604392/its-ira-season-ensure-your-assets-are-optimally-invested
This isn't changed by SECURE 2.0. What SECURE 2.0 does is allow you to disregard bifurcation. If the annuity's monthly payment exceeds the RMD of the annuity portion (I've no idea how that is calculated), then the excess can be applied towards satisfying the RMD of the remainder (non-annuitized portion) of the 403(b) or IRA.
That seems to address the "age old" question - what happens in the first year you annuitize a non-QLAC contract within a 403(b) or IRA? For a description of this question, see:
https://www.irahelp.com/slottreport/what-happens-my-rmds-if-i-annuitize-my-ira-annuity
As to whether, when one annuitizes in TIAA, the annuity contract remains within the original 403(b) plan or TIAA creates a separate plan (which would prevent applying any excess monthly payments toward the RMD of the rest of the 403(b) plan), I have no idea. TIAA does an excellent job of hiding that contract altogether. It's not listed under any 403(b) plan, and the first time I looked for it, it took me over an hour to find on the TIAA site.
FWIW, here's another M* community thread, this one specifically on Section 204 of SECURE 2.0 (the part dealing with excess monthly payments).
https://community.morningstar.com/s/question/0D53o00006PByU7CAL/section-204-excess-annuity-payment

TIAA annuities within 403b are low-cost. For example, CREF Stock VA has all-in ER of 0.23% only (AUM $112 billion). Post-retirement, money can remain as-is in TIAA Traditional (like SV; current crediting rate 6.00%) and TIAA and CREF VAs, but can also be rolled into IRAs.
CREF Stock VA https://www.tiaa.org/public/investment-performance/investment/profile?ticker=268555492
TIAA Traditional - RA https://www.tiaa.org/public/investment-performance/investment/profile?ticker=47933630
There is discussion on Secure 2.0 implications at the thread below at the M* TIAA Forum. When one annuitizes from TIAA 403b, TIAA issues a separate contract for it and it isn't clear whether the money is still part of the original 403b contract (it should be, IMO). My guess is that TIAA may modify its setup to benefit from Secure 2.0; the language is very specific on split annuitized-unannuitized $s within the same account. Beware that early discussion on this M* thread was based on some erroneous info provided by Fidelity at its website; I contacted Fidelity and was informed that the info at Fidelity website has been corrected.
https://community.morningstar.com/s/question/0D53o00006OFGTRCA5/update-on-secure-act-of-2022

From @msf quoted,

"hold an annuity in an IRA"
Teachers have had this dreadful option for years...
Variable Annuities (products) wrapped in a 403b.
Wonder if these VAs will get the same RMD treatment (relief) as QLACs?
Some teachers contribute to a mixed bag of Variable Annuities and non-VA mutual funds as part of their 403b portfolio. After retirement, the VAs get annuitized and the non-VAs often get rolled over into Traditional IRAs.
TIAA CREF Summary:
https://tiaa.org/public/pdf/Consultant_SECURE_Act_Summary_Flyer.pdf
403b QLAC:
https://businessofbenefits.com/2015/05/articles/uncategorized/the-403b-qlac/

@msf, K&LGates link is a good in that it collects various IRA related changes by Secure 2.0.
I think that QLAC, being DIA from retirement accounts, solved one RMD issue in 2014; prior to 2014 change, the DIAs from retirement accounts involved complex RMD calculations by using phantom present values and many just avoided those. All the while, DIAs from taxable (nonretirement) accounts were picking up. Now, the Secure 2.0 (aggregation of RMDs in split accounts) makes QLACs it even better in 2023.
Your last link for "Original QLAC regs" just goes back to the OP of this thread.

Link is fixed. I truncated it when I cut and pasted, and it seems that without the complete link the browser just goes back to the current page.
K&LGates is a site I've run across a few times and seems quite solid. It's not on my top three list (haven't gone there enough times). But if it shows up in a search, i would definitely glance through the page found.
I believe by "phatom present value" you're referring to the "entire interest" (value) of an annuity inside an IRA. It's not so much that QLACs solved this problem as that they were (and are) so restricted that their meger benefits (like return of premium) were already excluded from PV calculations.
The original QLAC exclusion is described here:

When a plan account or IRA holds a deferred annuity, the account balance must include the actuarial present value (APV) of certain benefits that are not reflected in the annuity’s cash value. In the case of a DIA, which may have no surrender cash value, the APV requirement effectively precluded such contracts from being offered in the qualified plan and IRA markets. ...
On February 3, 2012, Treasury and IRS released proposed amendments to the section
401(a)(9) regulations (and various related regulations) that would facilitate the purchase of DIAs providing annuity payments that commence at more advanced ages, as long as the contract meets the definition of a QLAC in the regulations. Under the proposed regulations, the value of a QLAC held under a plan or IRA (other than a Roth IRA) would be excluded from the account balance used to determine RMDs, meaning that no RMDs would be required with respect to the contract prior to annuity payments commencing thereunder.

https://www.sparkinstitute.org/content-files/summary_of_final_qlac_regulations.pdf
Effectively, the original QLAC regulations bifurcated IRAs - there would be an annuity (QLAC) portion and a "regular" portion. The QLAC value would not be included in calculating RMDs and the monthly payments from the QLAC would satisfy the RMD requirements for that portion of the IRA. The remaining "regular" potion of the IRA would be handled normally, as if the QLAC (and its value and its payments) didn't exist.
This is what SECURE 2.0 changed. If the QLAC monthly payments exceed what the annuity value require, the excess may be applied toward satisfying the RMD requirement of the "regular" portion of the IRA. Rather than simplify calculations, ISTM that SECURE 2.0 made them more complicated (though optional).
From CCH:

The SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 relaxed some RMD rules to make it easier to hold an annuity in an IRA. Effective December 29, 2022, the SECURE 2.0 Act eliminates the requirement to bifurcate the portion of the account holding the annuity for purposes of the RMD rules. As a result, the account owner can elect to aggregate distributions from the annuity portion and the rest of the account, which may result in lower minimum distributions.

https://answerconnect.cch.com/topic/2ce76cc47c6b1000ad2490b11c18c902026/required-minimum-distributions-rmd-from-iras

@msf, K&LGates link is a good in that it collects various IRA related changes by Secure 2.0.
I think that QLAC, being DIA from retirement accounts, solved one RMD issue in 2014; prior to 2014 change, the DIAs from retirement accounts involved complex RMD calculations by using phantom present values and many just avoided those. All the while, DIAs from taxable (nonretirement) accounts were picking up. Now, the Secure 2.0 (aggregation of RMDs in split accounts) makes QLACs it even better in 2023.
Your last link for "Original QLAC regs" just goes back to the OP of this thread.

The other new twist is you can convert up to $200,000 ( used to be $160,000 I think) or 25% of your IRA into a QLAC tax free, so you can lower your RMD. I have not dug into it yet, but I think you can pick an annuity date at anytime in the future, and one that would still return money to your heirs.

I feel that deferred income annuities are one of the rare positive innovations in financial services in years. But that doesn't make QLACs a great idea.
As Kitces wrote in 2015, using QLACs for the purpose of reducing RMDs, doesn't pay off. It's their value as longevity insurance, not as an RMD reduction mechanism, that makes them worthwhile.
https://www.kitces.com/blog/why-a-qlac-in-an-ira-is-a-terrible-way-to-defer-the-required-minimum-distribution-rmd-obligation/
He also suggested that the 25% limit helped people to avoid a liquidity squeeze - where they didn't have enough left in their IRA to fund retirement before their deferred annuity started monthly payments.
What SECURE 2.0 changed:
- instead of a $125K limit, adjusted for inflation (that's where the $160K figure comes from), it is reset to $200K, still adjusted for inflation;
- the 25% limit is removed
- QLAC monthly payments, once they begin, can be used to satisfy not only the RMD requirement of the annuity but also of the remaining IRA balance, potentially lowering the RMD withdrawals required of the non-annuity portion of the IRA.
https://www.klgates.com/SECURE-20-Act-Legislation-Includes-Significant-Changes-to-Individual-Retirement-Accounts-1-31-2023
What did not change:
- must start payments by age 85
- return of principal to heirs is permitted
Original QLAC regs

The other new twist is you can convert up to $200,000 ( used to be $160,000 I think) or 25% of your IRA into a QLAC tax free, so you can lower your RMD. I have not dug into it yet, but I think you can pick an annuity date at anytime in the future, and one that would still return money to your heirs.
I have searched long and hard for a simple spreadsheet that would allow different iterations of this conversion question, and take into account current and future tax rates, state tax rates, estimated inflation etc and returns.
Can't find one. Anybody else have any luck?
https://maxifiplanner.com/ comes the closest but it is an all around program designed to maximize your retirement income
My daughter finally wrote a simple spread sheet that works pretty well.
I concluded IRA conversions can save a substantial amount of taxes in the long run, but you have to be willing to pay the taxes now out of your taxable accounts.
That is the hard part. Who wants to substantially increase your tax bill this year? So we chose numbers that would not push us into the next bracket. Probably should have done more
Guess I could break down and hire a financial planner but if have never been impressed.

I believe, @Observant1, that I bought the Investor shares of the same fund that you mention.

Yes - same fund but different share class.
As Mona mentioned, SIVLX is available at Vanguard where I have an account.
It has a $25K minimum initial investment.
I believe SFVLX has a $2500 minimum initial investment.

SFVLX can be purchased with a minimum of $2,500 in a regular account and $1,000 in a retirement account directly with Seafarer. I do not see where SFVLX can be purchased through Vanguard or Schwab.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/313212/000174177323000146/c497.htm
497 1 c497.htm EEM STAT AND SUM STICKER 2.2.23
T. Rowe Price Emerging Europe Fund
Supplement to Prospectus and Summary Prospectus dated March 1, 2022, as supplemented
Effective Friday, February 17, 2023, the T. Rowe Price Emerging Europe Fund will close to all purchases. Accordingly, the summary prospectus and prospectus are updated as follows:
In the summary prospectus and section 1 of the prospectus, the disclosure under “Purchase and Sale of Fund Shares” is supplemented as follows:
Effective at the close of the New York Stock Exchange on Friday, February 17, 2023, the fund will close to all purchases from new and existing shareholders.
Section 2 of the prospectus is supplemented as follows:
CLOSED TO NEW PURCHASES
Currently, the fund is generally closed to new investors and new accounts, subject to certain exceptions. Effective at the close of the New York Stock Exchange on Friday, February 17, 2023, the fund will close to all purchases from new and existing shareholders. After February 17, 2023, even investors who already hold shares of the fund either directly with T. Rowe Price or through a retirement plan or financial intermediary may no longer purchase additional shares.
Shareholders with existing accounts may reinvest dividends and capital gains so long as they own shares of the fund in their account. In addition, the fund reserves the right, when in the judgment of T. Rowe Price it is not adverse to the fund’s interests, to permit certain types of purchases. The fund’s closure to additional purchases does not restrict existing shareholders from redeeming shares of the fund.
The date of this supplement is February 2, 2023.
F131-043 2/2/23

@sma3, I do see that IRS link, but its date is 12/8/22, prior to Secure 2.0 approval. I think that it would be adjusted (when the IRS has time) to reflect the extension of RMD to 73.
https://www.irs.gov/retirement-plans/plan-participant-employee/retirement-topics-required-minimum-distributions-rmds

The Secure Act 2.0 has been discussed here, but during the busy holiday period; so I'm placing this review.
In particular, for my emphasis, the immediate below for IRA RMD's. While you or yours may not turn 72 in 2023, you may know someone who is.....so, pass this along, as many are unlikely aware of the change for RMD's. The link below reviews Secure Act, 2.0.
*** The age at which owners of retirement accounts must start taking RMD's will increase to 73, starting January 1, 2023. The current age to begin taking RMDs is 72, so individuals will have an additional year to delay taking a mandatory withdrawal of deferred savings from their retirement accounts. Two important things to think about: If you turned 72 in 2022 or earlier, you will need to continue taking RMDs as scheduled. If you're turning 72 in 2023 and have already scheduled your withdrawal, you may want to consider updating your withdrawal plan.
Review of Secure Act 2.0 legislation passed in December, 2022. Note: One may reject 'all cookies' and still read the article.
Remain curious,
Catch

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1618627/000139834423001236/fp0082003-1_497.htm
497 1 fp0082003-1_497.htm
THE RBB FUND TRUST
Penn Capital Floating Rate Income Fund
(the “Fund”)
______________________________________________________________________________
Supplement dated January 27, 2023
to the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”) dated December 31, 2022
______________________________________________________________________________
The Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of The RBB Fund Trust (the “Trust”), based upon the recommendation of Penn Capital Management Company, LLC (the “Adviser”), approved a Plan of Liquidation and Termination for the Fund (the “Plan”). The Board concluded that it is in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund be closed and liquidated as a series of the Trust effective as of the close of business on or about February 27, 2023.
Effective as of January 30, 2023, in anticipation of the liquidation, the Fund will no longer accept purchases into the Fund. In addition, the Adviser is in the process of transitioning the Fund’s portfolio securities to cash and/or cash equivalents and the Fund will no longer be pursuing its stated investment objective.
Shareholders of the Fund may redeem their investments as described in the Fund’s Prospectus. The redemption of shares will generally be considered a taxable event.
If you hold shares of the Fund in an IRA account, you have 60 days from the date you receive your proceeds from the liquidation of the Fund (the “Proceeds”) to reinvest or “rollover” your Proceeds into another IRA and maintain their tax-deferred status. You must notify the Fund’s transfer agent by telephone at 1-844-302-PENN (7366) (toll free) prior to February 27, 2023 of your intent to rollover your IRA account to avoid withholding deductions from your Proceeds.
Pursuant to the Plan, if the Fund has not received your redemption request or other instruction prior to February 27, 2023, your shares will be automatically redeemed on February 27, 2023 at the closing net asset value per share, and you will receive your Proceeds from the Fund, subject to any required withholding. These Proceeds will generally be subject to federal and possibly state and local income taxes if the redeemed Fund shares are held in a taxable account, and the Proceeds exceed your adjusted basis in the Fund shares redeemed.
If the redeemed Fund shares are held in a qualified retirement account, such as an IRA, the redemption Proceeds may not be subject to current income taxation. You should consult with your tax advisor on the consequences of this redemption to you.
Shareholder inquiries should be directed to the Fund at 1-844-302-PENN (7366).
* * * * *
Please retain this supplement for your reference.

@LarryB
I looked at the gold funds and think for retirement accounts. pick the one with the lowest ER and decent liquidity.
In taxable accounts Gold is taxed at long term capital gains rates of 28% as a collectible ( ST is income tax rate)
However, if you use a Canadian fund like PHYS, you can fill out a form every year with your taxes and pay usual LT capital gains rate.
Otherwise buy a mutual fund like SGGDX which seems to have done betted than the index of miners like GDX. NEM is also a possibility as it has a nice dividend.
@LB
I agree Political issues always affect investments. For example, massive changes in the tax laws, an obviously political issue, made huge changes in expected investment returns.
We should be able to distinguish between political discussions with people of good faith presenting opposing but reasoned and fact based arguments or informed ( who of us really knows what is in McCarthy's head?) opinions based on their actual data or professional knowledge, and screes and ideology amplified by the internet with a hostile core.
Unfortunately there is much more of the latter than the former. Many once respected voices of facts and reason are now just the scene of shouting matches. While the NYT is not much better (looking at you 1619 project), I remember how thoughtful and insightful the WSJ used to be. The articles are still generally useful, but no where near as detailed and insightful, but the opinion pages distort and cherry pick facts to rile up the faithful.
This then pollutes everything associated with it. I am reading a pretty good book now about PGE and the California wildfires "California Burning" by K Blunt. My cousin whose house almost burned down in one of the fires refuses to read it as it is written by WSJ reporter. Everything is distorted through you own, mightily amplified political viewpoint.
There seems to be very few places for moderates and independents to have a discussion without getting yelled at.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/880859/000110465923005890/tm233916d2_497k.htm
SUPPLEMENT DATED JANUARY 23, 2023 TO THE CURRENT
SUMMARY AND STATUTORY PROSPECTUSES AND STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR:
Invesco International Core Equity Fund
(the “Fund”)
This supplement amends the Summary and Statutory Prospectuses and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”) of the above referenced Fund and is in addition to any other supplement(s), unless otherwise specified. You should read this supplement in conjunction with the Summary and Statutory Prospectuses and SAI and retain it for future reference.
On January 19, 2023, the Board of Trustees of AIM International Mutual Funds (Invesco International Mutual Funds) (the “Board”) approved a Plan of Liquidation and Dissolution (the “Plan”), which authorizes the termination, liquidation and dissolution of the Fund. In order to effect such liquidation, the Fund will close to investments by new accounts after the close of business on February 24, 2023. Existing shareholders will continue to be able to invest in the Fund until the close of business on or about April 10, 2023 when no further purchases or exchanges into the Fund will be accepted as the Fund prepares for liquidation on or about April 24, 2023 (the “Liquidation Date”) as described below. The liquidation may occur sooner if at any time before the Liquidation Date there are no shares outstanding in the Fund. The liquidation may also be delayed or occur sooner if unforeseen circumstances arise. Shareholders of the Fund may redeem their shares at any time prior to the Liquidation Date. The Fund reserves the right, in its discretion, to modify the extent to which sales of shares are limited prior to the Liquidation Date.
To prepare for the closing and liquidation of the Fund, the Fund’s portfolio managers may increase the Fund’s assets held in cash and similar instruments in order to pay for Fund expenses and meet redemption requests. As a result, the Fund may deviate from its stated investment strategies and policies and may no longer be managed to meet its investment objective. On or promptly after the Liquidation Date, the Fund will make a liquidating distribution to each remaining shareholder equal to the shareholder’s proportionate interest in the net assets of the Fund, in complete redemption and cancellation of the Fund’s shares held by the shareholder, and the Fund will be dissolved. If necessary, the Fund will declare and pay a dividend to distribute to its shareholders all of the Fund’s remaining investment company taxable income, if any, and all of the Fund’s net capital gain, if any (after reduction for any capital loss carry-forward) and any additional amounts necessary to avoid any excise tax. Alternatively, the Fund may, if eligible, treat some or all of such amounts distributed to its shareholders as being paid out as dividends as part of the liquidating distributions. The Fund’s liquidation may be a taxable event to its shareholders. Please consult your tax advisor about the potential tax consequences.
At any time prior to the Liquidation Date, shareholders may redeem their shares of the Fund pursuant to the procedures set forth in the prospectus under “Redeeming Shares,” as it may be supplemented. Contingent deferred sales charges will be waived in connection with any redemptions prior to the Liquidation Date. Shareholders who wish to avoid being liquidated out of the Fund altogether may also exchange their shares prior to the Liquidation Date for shares of another Invesco fund, subject to minimum investment account requirements and other restrictions on exchanges as described in the prospectus under “Exchanging Shares,” as it may be supplemented. Any such redemption or exchange of Fund shares for shares of another Invesco fund, as eligible, will generally be considered a taxable event for federal income tax purposes, except for exchanges in a tax-advantaged retirement plan or account. Shareholders who hold their shares in the Fund through financial intermediaries should contact their financial representatives to discuss their options with respect to the liquidation and the distribution of their redemption proceeds...

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/49905/000119312523012796/d440160d497.htm
497 1 d440160d497.htm HARTFORD MUTUAL FUNDS II INC
JANUARY 23, 2023
SUPPLEMENT TO THE FOLLOWING PROSPECTUSES:
HARTFORD SCHRODERS SECURITIZED INCOME FUND SUMMARY PROSPECTUS
DATED MARCH 1, 2022
HARTFORD SCHRODERS FUNDS PROSPECTUS
DATED MARCH 1, 2022, AS SUPPLEMENTED TO DATE
This Supplement contains new and additional information regarding Hartford Schroders Securitized Income Fund and should be read in connection with your Summary Prospectus and Statutory Prospectus.
On or about February 28, 2023 (the “Liquidation Date”), Hartford Schroders Securitized Income Fund (the “Fund”), a series of The Hartford Mutual Funds II, Inc. (the “Company”), will be liquidated (the “Liquidation”).
SUSPENSION OF SALES. The Fund is instructing its transfer agent, other service providers, and financial intermediaries to no longer accept any account applications or purchase orders from new investors effective no later than the close of business on January 31, 2023. Accordingly, the Fund will be closed to all new investors on or before that date.
Until the close of business on February 21, 2023, the Fund will remain open to retirement plans and shareholders currently invested in the Fund. After that date, the Fund will no longer accept any purchase orders and will no longer be available for automatic investments (other than dividend reinvestments). Prior to the Liquidation Date, retirement plans and shareholders currently invested in the Fund may continue to reinvest dividends and capital gain distributions in the Fund.
At any time prior to the Liquidation Date, the Fund may, in the Fund’s discretion, reject any purchase orders for any reason, including for operational reasons relating to the Liquidation of the Fund.
LIQUIDATION OF ASSETS. To prepare for the Liquidation, it is anticipated that the Fund will depart from its stated investment objective and policies as it prepares to distribute its assets to investors. It is anticipated that the Fund’s sub-adviser will increase the portion of the Fund’s assets held in cash and similar investments and reduce maturities of non-cash investments in order to prepare for orderly liquidation and to meet anticipated redemption requests. As a result, the Fund’s portfolio may consist of all or substantially all cash or cash equivalents prior to the Liquidation Date, which may adversely affect the Fund’s performance. From the date of this Supplement, the Fund may invest all or a substantial portion of its assets in cash or cash equivalents. The impending liquidation of the Fund may result in large redemptions, which could adversely affect the Fund’s expense ratios, although existing expense limitations are expected to be maintained.
In connection with the Liquidation, any shares of the Fund outstanding on the Liquidation Date will automatically be redeemed by the Fund as of the Liquidation Date (except as noted below for qualified accounts that were opened directly with the Hartford Funds). The proceeds of any such redemption will be equal to the net asset value of such shares after all charges, taxes, expenses and liabilities of the Fund have been paid or provided for. The distribution to shareholders of the Liquidation proceeds will occur on the Liquidation Date, and will be made to all shareholders of record as of the close of business on the business day preceding the Liquidation Date, other than as disclosed below. The Fund’s investment manager, Hartford Funds Management Company, LLC (“HFMC”), will bear all expenses associated with the Liquidation to the extent such expenses exceed the amount of the Fund’s normal and customary fees and operating expenses. However, the Fund and its shareholders will bear transaction costs associated with the sale of the Fund’s holdings prior to Liquidation...

FWIW, M*'s take in October 2022:
T. Rowe Price Will See Market Losses and Outflows as Long as Equity and Credit Markets Are Declining
Sector Strategist Greggory Warren
"Business Strategy and Outlook | Greggory Warren | Oct 26, 2022
In an environment where active fund managers are under assault for poor relative performance and high fees, we believe wide-moat-rated T. Rowe Price is one of the best positioned of the U.S.-based active asset managers we cover. The biggest differentiators for the firm are the size and scale of its operations, the strength of its brands, its consistent record of active fund outperformance, and reasonable fees. T. Rowe Price has historically had a stickier set of clients than its peers as well, with two thirds of its assets under management derived from retirement-based accounts."

@FD1000 - Here’s what I wrote in this same thread on 1/1/23 …
”The talking heads and market gurus I monitor mostly speak optimistically of a splendid 2023 for longer dated bonds. In particular, Rick Rieder of Blackrock appears to have trouble ‘containing’ himself during interviews on this point.”
So I and Rieder might have gotten out in front of your freaking genius prediction. Can’t tell here what date you made your call. Your reference to date currently reads: “I posted in early 11/2022”. The number “11” would indicate late in 2022 (not early). No longer share my own market views, so can’t give my take on the present investment environment. But Rick Rieder, referenced above, is a pretty sharp bond dude.
Should add:
- The issue of whether someone investing for retirement wants to allocate 100% of their long-term money into government bonds (or any other type of bond) remains an open question - and something I’m not going to comment on.
- A mere mere 2.5 weeks into a new year is a very short time to assess that year’s total performance of any asset class.

Yes. Good point. If you are retired and have no earned income, you cannot contribute to an IRA (Fidelity) So converting to a Roth is an indirect way to use ordinary cash you have on hand to increase the real value of your tax-favored holdings. Further, I always prefer to draw from the Trad-IRA for normal anticipated expenses, allowing the Roth to grow. Probably gaining no advantage in that other than preserving the tax-exempt / RMD-exempt money for major and unpredictable expense like home infrastructure.
My three conversions were all something of an “afterthought” - undertaken only after the overall market (‘07-‘09) became severely depressed or some fund / segment I owned became depressed. Having confidence these would eventually recover, I tried to make lemonade out of lemons.
Never seriously considered doing a conversion “straight-up” by using Trad-IRA funds to cover the taxes. ISTM you’re gaining little if anything doing it that way (and that seems to be the point of a lot of @msf’s math). But, perhaps in small amounts on a recurring annual basis it might make sense to some. Dunno.

You've identified a key reason why people can come out ahead by doing conversions.
I showed the arithmetic in my Jan 14 post. Basically by pre-paying taxes (via conversion), you're moving tax money from outside into your Roth. So you never again pay taxes on that money's growth. More money sheltered means more money after taxes in the end.
2010 was actually the second time the government allowed the taxes on conversions to be spread over multiple years. You were allowed to declare half of the 2010 conversion amount as part of your 2011 (not 2010) income, and the other half as part of your 2012 income.
https://www.kiplinger.com/article/retirement/t046-c001-s001-faqs-on-the-new-roth-conversion-rules.html
2010 Pub 590 (see p. 2 - What's new for 2010)
The first time the government allowed people to spread taxes on conversions over multiple years was in 1998. Then you were allowed to split the amount converted equally among four years: 1998-2001.
1998 Pub 590 (see p. 39).

Most people are familiar with the idea that if one pays T-IRA taxes from the IRA proceeds, and if tax rates don't change, then it doesn't matter whether one puts money into a T-IRA or into a Roth IRA.
For example, with a tax rate of 25%, and $1,000 to contribute, assuming the investment doubles (2x) in value:
Traditional: $1000 x 2 x 75% (for taxes) = $1,500 after tax value
Roth: 75% x $1000 (contribution after taxes) x 2 = $1,500 after tax
Likewise it doesn't matter where you keep the faster growing assets, Roth or traditional. Whatever money you keep in a T-IRA, and however you invest it, the 25% share needed to pay the taxes upon withdrawal will keep pace.
--------
"A dollar’s loss in a Roth actually hurts more than loosing a $ in a taxable Traditional IRA."
True enough as far as it goes. But one's investments drop by percentages, and a 10% drop in a T-IRA hurts the same as a 10% drop in a Roth.
Using the same example as above, except instead of doubling the value, let's say the value drops by 10%:
Traditional: $1000 x 90% (drop of 10%) x 75% (for taxes) = $675 after tax value
Roth: 75% x $1000 (contribution after taxes) x 90% = $675 after tax value
The key is to think in terms of after-tax dollars. That's hard to do when a dollar in a T-IRA looks the same as a dollar in a Roth, even though the former may be worth only 3/4 as much.
--------
Of course there are other factors to consider. If you have a large T-IRA and a fast rate of growth might kick RMDs into a higher tax bracket, then you will want to constrain T-IRA growth. Of if your heirs are nonresident aliens in a country without a tax treaty (so that they owe 30% on T-IRA proceeds), you'll want to pay taxes now, at a lower rate, to convert that money to a Roth. And so on.