Brokerages do not seem to designate Rolledover Roths as such. All the brokerages I know just have Roth IRA but no Rollover Roth IRA and Roth 401(k) funds are rolled over to a Roth IRA account. Why is there this distinction between Traditional vs Roth at brokerage level? Do rolledover Roth 401(k) funds not receive the same protection as rolledover 401(k) funds?

Why no rollover Roth IRAs? Likely because of the sequence of changes in the law.

Sometimes called a “rollover IRA,” a conduit IRA holds only retirement plan rollover assets. These Traditional IRAs were established to temporarily hold retirement plan rollover assets, such as savings in a 401(k) or profit sharing plan. By segregating the assets, the individual can later move the savings back to another retirement plan and retain certain tax benefits. If the individual makes other types of IRA contributions, such as regular IRA contributions, the IRA loses its conduit status.

https://www.cuinsight.com/value-conduit-ira.html
This is supported by old Pub 590s. See, e.g. the 2000 version, p. 17.
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/p590--2000.pdf
So originally there was a need for "pure" (untainted) conduit IRAs, and brokerages tagged IRAs as such. The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA) did away with this need. It allows employer plans to accept transfers from IRAs regardless of whether the assets originated in other employer plans.
Here's the current IRS chart of permitted transfers: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/rollover_chart.pdf
EGTRRA also created Roth 401(k)s; before this they did not exist. (They didn't come into existence until even later, in 2006.) So by the time Roth 401(k)s were created, there was no longer a need for conduit IRAs. Thus no need for brokerages to tag Roth IRAs as rollovers.
As to unlimited BAPCPA bankruptcy protection, that is something that applies to assets that originate in employer plans. There's no distinction between between Roth assets and traditional assets. This may be inferred from the absence of "Roth" in the text of BAPCPA.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-109publ8/html/PLAW-109publ8.htm

As we're looking at protection given to rollovers by the BAPCPA, we're talking about bankruptcy proceedings. Some retirement assets (employer plans, money rolled into IRAs, another $1.36+M in IRAs) are protected, but this money becomes fair game if it's withdrawn before the case is decided/settled.

It is generally a bad idea to withdraw from a 401(k) or other retirement account or try to “cash-out” the account for any purpose since the money becomes income and is no longer exempt in your bankruptcy.

https://kretzerfirm.com/what-happens-to-your-401k-or-ira-in-bankruptcy/
So you're free to manage (reallocate) your protected assets while the case is ongoing. But if you withdraw money, it becomes just as subject to being frozen as money that was never protected.
---
Any IRA money that a debtor claims in good faith to be rollover money is considered exempt (protected). It's up to the bankruptcy trustee to prove otherwise.
One gets this protection, best practices or not. Nevertheless, following best practices (and having the statements to prove it) would likely dissuade a trustee from objecting to the exemption, depending on the amount of money involved.

The Court Must Construe Exemptions Liberally In Favor Of the Debtor, And The Trustee Bears The Burden Of Proof Here.
... Properly exempted property is not available to pay the claims of the debtor's creditors. The Court must construe the claim of exemption in the Recipient IRA liberally in favor of the Debtor. [citations omitted.] And the Trustee, as the party objecting to a claim of exemption, bears the burden of proving that the Debtor improperly claims this exemption. [citations omitted.]

https://www.casb.uscourts.gov/sites/casb/files/documents/opinions/09_15148.pdf
While I think this is still correct, take it with a grain of salt. It's from a decision not for publication, and at least one part of the decision was subsequently overturned by a unanimous Supreme Court: As of 2014 inherited IRAs do not get the same protection because they are not regarded as retirement accounts. But they did in this earlier 2010 case.

Thanks, Yogi. I wasn't sure if that was still the case these days. So, if retirement funds are covered (401Ks/IRAs), that just leaves Taxable funds (savings or brokerage accounts), assuming I were to setup a Land Trust.
For RE, I would not receive much coverage from the low Homestead Act exemption in my State.
Unless there are better ideas?
If I went to 5 different lawyers with this, I wonder if I would get 5 different answers.

Disregarding state law protections, IRAs of every ilk including conduit IRAs have less protection than employer plans.
Employer plans are usually covered under an anti-alienation rule that prohibits them from turning moneys over to creditors or pretty much anyone else other than the owner. Period.
https://www.erieri.com/glossary/term/alienation-of-benefits
ERISA: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/29/1056#d_1
Qualified (401(a)) plans: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/401#a_13
In contrast, the unlimited protection for employer plan assets rolled over into IRAs comes from the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA). This only protects debtors during bankruptcy. (The name of the statute is the giveaway.)
A debtor's choice appears to be to declare personal bankruptcy or rely on state statutes to protect IRA assets from creditors.
The unlimited BAPCPA protection applies to assets coming from employer retirement plans. So long as a debtor can show that IRA assets originated in an employer plan, those identified assets have unlimited protection. Certainly segregating them into a separate rollover IRA makes this source identification ("tracing") task easier. But it is not necessary, and commingling is not a mistake. Keeping inadequate records is.
Having an IRA labeled "rollover" doesn't prove that all the assets in it came from rollovers. I've owned "rollover" IRAs with commingled assets. I also have impeccable records :-)

To make sure that an individual receives the full $1 million exemption [currently adjusted to $1,362,800] on owner-established traditional and Roth IRAs and the unlimited exemption on IRA rollovers from tax-qualified retirement plans, it is good practice to establish separate IRA rollover and contributory IRA accounts. This will make it easier to track the separate pools of assets.

https://www.thetaxadviser.com/issues/2014/jan/naegele-jan2014.html

More re @derf’s query about % of transactions that go bad. Bear in mind that not all “transactions” are equal. I can’t remember an exchange between funds @ TRP ever failing to go through. Pretty routine stuff. Here’s where it became frustrating for me ……
1) Switching from paper statements to online statements as my internet capability improved did not result in fewer paper statements as intended. The opposite happened and they began mailing monthly statements that I did not welcome - often replete with account numbers and balances. So I called them. First they said I had to remove checkwriting capability from my money market account if I wanted these frequent mailings halted. I did so at some inconvenience to me. But the flood of paper did not stop. If anything it increased. Calls to try to resolve this often had me on hold for anywhere from 30 minutes to 2 hours. Still, the monthly (occasionally weekly) paper statements continued to arrive. And every “agent” I talked to seemed to have a different “take” on what the problem was.
(2) For years TRP had agreed to stop taking Michigan withholding from distributions provided I filed the appropriate Michigan tax form ahead of time. And every January 1 I completed a new form and sent it (certified mail) along with a brief typed letter to Price. But when I took a 2021 distribution mid-year, they did not honor that opt-out form. To be more specific, they did honor the opt-out provision on part of the distribution (from one bond fund) but they pulled the state tax from the other part (from a second bond fund). When I followed up with a call to try to ask why they essentially “blew me off” saying something like “sometimes we do and sometimes we don’t” (honor the opt-out request). Interestingly, Fido let’s you opt out of state withholding when you submit the transaction - a feature missing at TRP.
(3) While 90+% of the transfer to Fido was in-kind, there were 3 short term bond funds having small balances I elected to liquidate. Rather than combine these into a single check, Price mailed Fido 3 separate checks. Fido credited those to my account and allowed me to trade with them, which I did. But 3 days later Fido had the checks returned to them from their bank as “unpaid.” The next thing I knew my investments were being force sold by Fido and I was being hit with a slew of related fees. I was suspended from being able to trade with unsettled funds for 3 months. My record still bears a “Free Riding” violation which the SEC considers fraudulent behavior and a serious breech of law.
(4) Daily for over a week I was in phone contact with TRP, experiencing those 30 minute to 2 hour wait times on virtually every call trying to resolve this. Their phone personnel seemed poorly informed and ill prepared to deal with the issue. Repeatedly I was told “we’ll call you” which rarely really happened. They did eventually apologize for the matter and send out 3 new checks to Fido. What a horrendous experience - considering that TRP had long held the bulk of my retirement assets and had been trusted by me for decades to do things right.
So, @Derf and others …. it’s not so much the % of things that go wrong as the type of issue involved and how well equipped they are to resolve a problem once one occurs.

@mark, no, it is a total stock market INDEX but with humongous min for retirement plans. So, when they leave (with millions), it causes realized CGs.
I will edit my previous post by inserting "Index" in the names.

I have joined carew338 in abandoning Vanguard for anything other than their funds that are unique are Admiral class or that I have a large capital gain in.

Why not transfer the non-Vanguard holdings in kind to another brokerage?
It's cheaper to trade TF funds at Fidelity: $5/purchase using automated investing, $0 to sell vs. $20 to buy or sell at Vanguard.
Here's Investopedia's comparison of Vanguard and Fidelity. While clearly recognizing the superiority of Fidelity's platform, FWIW they consider Vanguard's platform adequate for its target (buy-and-hold and retirement) investors.
https://www.investopedia.com/vanguard-vs-fidelity-4587961
On the other end of the spectrum, looking at option trading, Fidelity and Schwab pay for order flow. Vanguard does not. Schwab receives payment for order flow on equity orders as well.
There are features that one loses by moving to Vanguard's brokerage platform. On the fund platform, one can (or could, last I checked) convert an exact dollar amount from a traditional IRA to a Roth. On the brokerage platform, one specifies the in-kind conversion by number of shares.
Checkwriting is affected. From the brokerage agreement:

immediately upon the transfer of Your Vanguard Funds into Your [Brokerage] Account You agree to cease using the checkwriting drafts (CWRs) issued on Your Vanguard Funds and to destroy any unused checks.

https://www.vanguard.com/pdf/vbsaac_042016.pdf
Power of attorney may not transfer over to the brokerage platform. In that case, one would have to set up power of attorney again, including paper forms and signature guarantees. This only affects a relatively small number of Vanguard customers. But I happen to be among them, and would not have known had I not asked. This alone is sufficient to dissuade me from converting.

Most Medicare Part B participants pay a premium that covers 25% of the actual cost of the coverage. (The government picks up the rest, using general tax revenue.) In 2021, that 25% comes to $148.50/mo, or $1782/year.
If one's MAGI¹ (AGI from line 7 of form 1040 plus tax-exempt interest from line 2a) is above $88K (single or married filing separately) or $176K (married filing jointly), then one's share of the actual Part B cost increases.
If one's MAGI is just over this threshold, then instead of paying 25% of the cost of Part B, one will pay 35%. That's a 40% increase (35%/25% = 1.4x). So in 2021, the first level of IRMAA comes to 40% x $148.50 = $59.40/mo, or $712.80/year.
https://www.medicare.gov/your-medicare-costs/part-b-costs
There are also higher brackets, where one pays 50% of the actual part B cost (IRMAA = 100% of Part B premium), 65% of Part B cost (IRMAA = 160% of premium), 80% of part B cost (IRMAA = 220% of premium), or 85% of part B cost (240% of premium). No matter what one's income level, the government is still picking up some of the tab.
https://secure.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/lnx/0601101031
In 2022, the first threshold is at $91K ($182 married filing jointly), and IRMAA is $68/mo. All the thresholds for 2021 and 2022 along with the total (part B premium plus IRMAA) amounts are on the Medicare.gov site given above.
¹MAGI is calculated using the last income tax return filed. For 2022 IRMAA, that is the income tax form for 2020, filed as recently as just two months ago, including extensions. Your Jan 2022 IRMAA can't be based on 2021 income since you haven't reported it yet.

The info on brackets I have are ( MFJ vs Single)
zero IRMAA under $176,000 $88,000
$59 /mo/person $176,000 to $222,000 $88,000 to $111,000
$148.50/mo/person $222,000 to $276,000 $111,000 to $138,000
There is a great $4 book ( Amazon) with all the data you need
James McGlynn Retirement Planning Tips for Baby Boomers

I feel that longevity insurance is one of the few useful products that the financial industry has created in the past several years. That said, if it's not a product that you are interested in independent of tax considerations, then buying a QLAC is a poor way to reduce RMDs.
Kitces, Why A QLAC In An IRA Is A Terrible Way To Defer The Required Minimum Distribution (RMD) Obligation
https://www.kitces.com/blog/why-a-qlac-in-an-ira-is-a-terrible-way-to-defer-the-required-minimum-distribution-rmd-obligation/
Getting back to timing of conversions ... Though recharacterizations (undo's) of conversions are no longer allowed, there are a couple of other tactics that provide some or much of the same effect.
One is to use a recharacterization that is still permitted. A contribution as opposed to a conversion can still be recharacterized. So if you contributed $6000 to a Roth IRA in 2021 but in doing your taxes you discover that you'd have been better off taking the deduction, you can recharacterize the $6K as a contribution to a traditional IRA. (You can also do the opposite: contribute to a T-IRA and then recharacterize it to a Roth.)
https://www.irs.gov/retirement-plans/retirement-plans-faqs-regarding-iras#Recharacterization of IRA Contributions
Another it to take advantage of the 60 day rollover rule (sometimes limited to one per year). One could withdraw money from a T-IRA near the end of the year, and then early the next year when the tax situation is clearer (and within 60 days of the withdrawal) either put the money back into the T-IRA (60 day rollover), put the money into a Roth (indirect rollover conversion), or split the money between a T-IRA and a Roth.
If any money goes back into a T-IRA, you can't do this again for another 365 calendar days. The restriction is according to days, not fiscal years.

@ Hank
Does it matters what you convert, if you can always buy or sell anything in either account tax free?
Once you have the capital in a Roth, I agree it should be probably devoted to more risky, long term investments.
Converting before you are on Medicare and after are two different calculations.
It is important to remember that the IRMAA surcharges go from zero dollars ( B Medicare Premium $1776 /year in 2021) to $700 for ONE DOLLAR of income ( AGI before the standard deduction) above $176,000 for a couple and $111,000 single. A couple would therefore pay $1400 extra.
IRMAA is based on two years before 1040, so 2022 will look at 2020 AGI. Once you file 2021 taxes in 2022 you can ask for redo, if your 2021 income is lower. It takes a month or so, so you will end up paying more for a few months.
One strategy I am considering is to do a large conversion, all in one year, before I take SS at 70. Then the impact of the conversion on the IRMAA will be limited to one year.
Other things to consider. IRS lets you put up to $135,000 in a QLAC which will reduce you RMD proportionally.
Lawrence Kotlikoff from BU has a great article in Barrons
https://www.barrons.com/articles/most-retirement-planning-is-wrong-laurence-kotlikoff-51631207476
He also runs a web site with a neat financial planning program for $100, Maxifi. It may be overkill for a lot of folks, but it will allow you to run all sorts of projections and scenarios about Roth conversions pretty easily

The question can be split into two parts:
1. Best time during a given year
2. Best year
1. In theory, the best time within a year to convert is when your T-IRA portfolio is at its nadir. Which is great if you can see into the future.
Pragmatically, waiting until there's a market correction (10% dip or more) can leave you converting at a higher value than converting now. If the market rises 15% while you're waiting and then drops 10% (to 103.5% of your starting value), what's the point? Or if you're planning on converting a bit each year, you can easily wind up stuck at the end of the year with a higher market still waiting for that correction.
If you're trying to keep MAGI under a certain "cliff" threshold (e.g. for ACA subsidies or to avoid IRMAA) then you should likely be conservative and top off your conversion near year end once you have a better handle on MAGI YTD. If your concern is about edging into another tax bracket, it's not a big deal if you wind up a few dollars over or under, so don't wait until year end for that reason.
2. If you're converting and paying taxes with non-IRA money, sooner can be better than later even if your expected tax rates in the future will be a little higher. That's because you're effectively adding money to your IRA by prepaying your taxes. (A dollar in a Roth is worth more than a dollar in a T-IRA.)
OTOH, many states give tax breaks for retirement income (including Roth conversions) once one reaches a certain age. So it can be advantageous to wait until then. You might convert between the time you reach that age and the time you retire and actually start drawing money from your T-IRA and/or pension (and possibly using up that tax break).
Several states give some sort of help on Medicare Part D prescriptions, where your income needs to be low enough to qualify. Doing Roth conversions earlier (even at somewhat higher tax rates) may help qualify for these or other income-related programs.
The largest such program is EPIC in NYS. Its income cutoff is decidedly middle class: $75K single, $100K married.
The rule of thumb short answer is the sooner the better (both within year and across years); just don't do too much in a single year and keep various income thresholds in mind. And if you're thinking of making charitable contributions, keep some money in the T-IRA so you have it available for QCDs.

Gentlemen, I really appreciate for your inputs. Last spring was a great opportunity to do a large conversion. Unfortunately many of us did not plan for it. Now we are evaluating which how much and which funds to convert per year. Great reminder that the tax table is for the adjusted gross income.
To reduce tax in retirement, we did few small changes. We switched our 401(K) to Roth 401(K) several years ago. Still we have rollover and traditional IRAs to consider for higher future tax and RMD. Higher retirement income incurs additional cost on Medicare premium and taxation on most of the social security benefit.

I find it very helpful to play around with tax estimates (using a tax calculator) in December. In some cases, it is the last chance to make contributions (such as employee retirement plans) that might impact your tax return. Also some investors employ tax harvesting strategies to capture losses. There are many more considerations. I linked a few articles I found. You may have some to share.
Here's a easy to use tax calculator for TY2021:
https://efile.com/tax-service/tax-calculator/2021-tax-calculator/

Articles on last minute tax related financial decisions:
14-last-minute-moves-that-can-boost-your-tax-refund
2021-last-minute-year-end-tax-deductions
/december-2021-tax-moves
dont-miss-out-on-these-last-minute-tax-savings-tips-for-2021

497 1 d245107d497.htm UNDISCOVERED MANAGERS FUNDS
JPMORGAN TRUST I
J.P. Morgan Income Funds
JPMorgan Inflation Managed Bond Fund
JPMORGAN TRUST II
J.P. Morgan International Equity Funds
JPMorgan International Research Enhanced Equity Fund
J.P. Morgan U.S. Equity Funds
JPMorgan Market Expansion Enhanced Index Fund
UNDISCOVERED MANAGERS FUNDS
JPMorgan Realty Income Fund
(Class R2, Class R5 and Class R6 Shares)
Supplement dated December 1, 2021
to the Current Prospectuses, as supplemented
As previously supplemented on August 11, 2021, at meetings held on August 9, 2021, the Boards of Trustees agreed to consider in early 2022 the conversion of the following four mutual funds to newly created exchange-traded funds (the “ETFs”) (each, a “Conversion”):
•JPMorgan Inflation Managed Bond Fund
•JPMorgan International Research Enhanced Equity Fund
•JPMorgan Market Expansion Enhanced Index Fund
•JPMorgan Realty Income Fund
Each new ETF will be managed in a substantially similar manner as the current mutual funds. If approved by the Boards of Trustees, it is anticipated that the Conversions would occur in 2022.
By converting these strategies to ETFs, J.P. Morgan Investment Management Inc. (“JPMIM”), the investment adviser for the mutual funds, believes shareholders in these mutual funds could benefit from reduced costs, including lower transfer agency costs for certain classes and no Rule 12b-1 or service fees. JPMIM is communicating the proposed plans prior to formal board approval, in order to provide shareholders with ample notice of the planned Conversions and allow them time to engage with JPMIM on the implications of the proposed transactions, including the need to have a brokerage account prior to the Conversion.
Each Conversion would consist of (1) the transfer of all or substantially all of the mutual fund’s assets, subject to its liabilities, to the corresponding shell ETF for shares of the ETF; and (2) the distribution of the ETF shares to the mutual fund shareholders in complete liquidation of the mutual fund. It is anticipated that if approved by the Boards of Trustees, each Conversion will not require shareholder approval.
When the Conversions are considered, each Board of Trustees, including the Trustees not deemed to be “interested persons” of the mutual funds pursuant to Section 2(a)(19) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, will need to determine whether it is in the best interests of the target mutual fund and that the Conversion would not dilute the interests of the mutual fund’s shareholders.
The new ETFs have not commenced investment operations, and it is anticipated that each will not have shareholders prior to the Conversion. If the Conversions are approved by the Boards of Trustees, existing shareholders of each mutual fund will receive prior to the Conversion a combined information statement/prospectus describing in detail both the Conversion and the surviving ETF, and summarizing the Board’s considerations in approving the Conversion.
It is anticipated that each Conversion will qualify as a tax-free reorganization for federal income tax purposes and that shareholders will not recognize any gain or loss in connection with the Conversion, except to the extent that they receive cash in connection with the liquidation of any fractional shares received in the Conversion.
In connection with the proposed Conversions discussed herein, an information statement/prospectus that will be included in a registration statement on Form N-14 will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). After the registration statement is filed with the SEC, it may be amended or withdrawn and the information statement/prospectus will not be distributed to shareholders unless and until the registration statement is declared effective by the SEC. Investors are urged to read the materials and any other relevant documents when they become available because they will contain important information about the Conversions. After they are filed, free copies of the materials will be available on the SEC’s web site at www.sec.gov. These materials also will be available at www.jpmorganfunds.com and a paper copy can be obtained at no charge by calling 1-800-480-4111 .
This communication is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer of any securities for sale. No offer of securities will be made except pursuant to a prospectus meeting the requirements of Section 10 of the Securities Act of 1933.
INVESTORS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT WITH THE
PROSPECTUSES FOR FUTURE REFERENCE
J.P. MORGAN TRUST I
JPMorgan Income Funds
JPMorgan Inflation Managed Bond Fund
J.P. MORGAN TRUST II
JPMorgan International Funds
JPMorgan International Research Enhanced Equity Fund
JPMorgan U.S. Equity Funds
JPMorgan Market Expansion Enhanced Index Fund
UNDISCOVERED MANAGERS FUNDS
JPMorgan Realty Income Fund
(each, a “Fund” and together, the “Funds”)
(Class R2, Class R5 and Class R6 Shares)
Supplement dated December 1, 2021
to the current Prospectuses, as supplemented
As previously supplemented on November 23, 2021, as announced on August 11, 2021, the Boards of Trustees have agreed to consider in early 2022 the conversion of the Funds to newly created exchange-traded funds (the “ETFs”) (each, a “Conversion”). If the Conversions are approved, each new ETF will be managed in a substantially similar manner as the current Fund. In connection with the Conversions, the Board of Trustees considered and approved certain actions described below. Each of the actions will be implemented on January 18, 2022 (the “Effective Date”) only if the Boards of Trustees approve the Conversions.
On the Effective Date, the following will be added as a new section for each of the Funds except the JPMorgan International Research Enhanced Equity Fund under the heading “Investing with J.P. Morgan Funds — LIMITED OFFERING — Funds Subject to a Limited Offering — Limited Offering of Class A and Class C Shares”
Class A and C Shares (each, a “Limited Class”) are publicly offered only on a limited basis and investors are not eligible to purchase a Limited Class except as described below. Except as otherwise described below, shareholders permitted to continue to purchase shares of a Limited Class include existing shareholders of record and, if the shareholder of record is an omnibus account, beneficial owners in that account as of the effective date of the limited offering.
• Existing shareholders of each Limited Class may continue to purchase additional shares of the Limited Class in their existing Fund accounts either through J.P. Morgan Funds Services or a Financial Intermediary and may continue to reinvest dividends or capital gains distributions from shares owned in the Fund.
•Group Retirement Plans (as defined in the glossary) (and their successor, related and affiliated plans), which have a Limited Class available may continue to open accounts for new participants and can purchase additional shares in existing participant accounts.
For JPMorgan International Research Enhanced Equity Fund, the following will replace the current disclosure under “Investing with J.P. Morgan Funds — LIMITED OFFERING — Limited Offering of Certain Share Classes” on the Effective Date:
Class A Shares of the JPMorgan International Research Enhanced Equity Fund (the “Limited Class”) are publicly offered only on a limited basis and investors are not eligible to purchase the Limited Class except as described below. Except as otherwise described below, shareholders permitted to continue to purchase shares of the Limited Class include existing shareholders of record and, if the shareholder of record is an omnibus account, beneficial owners in that account as of the effective date of the limited offering...

I could just repeat what I said in a nearby thread on BAMBX (LINK).

Tips on linking:
One can link to a specific post by copying the link from the date on that post; your post is:
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/143272/#Comment_143272
When quoting material, a link to the source can provide additional context. The M* definition may have come from Morningstar, Morningstar Category for Funds Definitions (May 6, 2021), p. 34.
As to what it means to be an alternative strategy fund, M* changed this about a half year ago. At that time, it removed long-short funds from the alternative strategy group, because these funds are largely influenced by the equity market. But M* kept market neutral funds (a special case of long-short, where long = short) as alternative funds. The reasoning being that these funds have diversified away the equity nature of their risk.
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1036165/introducing-the-new-alternative-morningstar-categories
That seems to be M*'s current take on alternative funds. That regardless of what they hold they diversify away the intrinsic nature of their holdings. So, if a fund uses multiple alternative strategies, it is now called a multistrategy fund. But if a fund uses multiple strategies that are not alternative strategies, it is not. Well, it's still a multistrategy fund, but it's not a multistrategy category fund.
Are we confused yet? I certainly am, and following the maxim to never invest in something one doesn't understand, I tend to avoid alternative strategy funds, whether singular or multiple. YMMV.
Fidelity has a slew of target retirement funds with lower volatility, higher Sharpe ratios, and better YTD, 1, and 3 year returns, including FFFAX (actively managed), FIKFX (index funds), FHBZX (both actively and passively managed funds), FIRMX, and FIRNX. Along somewhat the same lines is Vanguard's VASIX.
These funds correlate somewhat more closely than TMSRX to the stock and bond markets, but if you're primarily looking for bond alternatives (better than cash and not too volatile) they seem to be good, less complicated candidates.
Portfolio Visualizer correlation matrix
A cursory look at the quarterly performance breakdown suggests that TMSRX may do better in periods of high market volatility, but that doesn't seem to help improve its long term volatility or its longer term performance.
http://performance.morningstar.com/fund/performance-return.action?t=TMSRX

Agree with Crash...AFDVX is a good research idea! I currently own ASVIX and it's outperforming this year and has exceptional #'s over the past 3 years as well.
Curious how others diversify their small cap choices...I prefer starting with Style and have Growth, Blend and Value in both of our (Rollover) retirement accounts.
AFDVX could be a replacement option for ASVIX...slightly cheaper, slightly more value focused (P/E), Sector allocations are better fit (somethimes I get hungup on this)
IRA -
BCSIX
MSCFX
BRSVX
IRA (Wife) -
OSTGX
DSCPX
ASVIX

A good article on the challenges of managing money in retirement.
better-get-a-spending-strategy

The problem with spend down rules is that they assume that the objective of spending in retirement is simply not running out of money. Actually, the objective is… well, spending—and having some predictability around one’s income. Not running out of money is the constraint, not the objective.

In retirement, given the streakiness, hot and cold characteristics of small caps and small-cap funds, is it worth holding them at all? If preservation and reduced volatility is the goal in retirement, small-caps would never be the main component of a portfolio. But anyhow, with all of this in mind, my own dedicated small-cap fund is down to just 2% of total. In a fund that's closed, so I'm reluctant to cash-out of it completely.... What think ye all? PRDSX. (And whatever others, too...)

@WABAC, you are enjoying life and that is most important after retirement. The ability to start at 62 takes planning ahead. Many of my friends took their at their full retirement age; few took them at 62 due to health reason. My family longevity history goes quite long and my health is doing ok with all that outdoor activities. So I am not sure which path to takes.

msf said: Schwab is projecting average real returns over the next decade of around 4.5% in the stock market and negative bond returns.

Would you please provide a link to Schwab? Thanks