This is trial post here.
Pg L4: COVER STORY, “The Commodities Boom/Why It’s Time to Invest in COMMODITIES, and How to Do It”. Factors driving commodities include inflation, China and energy transitions. Bloomberg commodity index rose +27% in 2021 and more gains are ahead, especially for oil and ag-commodities. INFLATION is driven by pent-up demand and constrained supplies due to supply-chain disruptions. Greenflation is also contributing as the ESG movement has costs. CHINA is a huge consumer of commodities, and it is slowing. Its property sector is in trouble. Yet, commodities need China. ENERGY TRANSITIONS and ESG are driving the demand for several commodities. Rising energy and other prices feed into higher AG-COMMODITY prices. Plant substitutes for meats are boosting demand for several ag-commodities. WEATHER has been difficult in many areas. Most commodities are in BACKWARDATION (i.e., the prices of near-futures are higher than those for far-futures); futures-based commodity funds benefit from backwardation during their periodic future rolls. It is hard to find active commodity funds but an article in FundQ mentions 3.
Pg L7: COMMODITY indexes vary widely. The S&P GSCI commodity index has 60% in energy; the Bloomberg commodity index has 33% in energy, 33% in metals. Yet neither has lithium, copper, tin, metals essential for electrification. So, use active commodity funds such as PCRAX, CCSAX, BCSAX; indexed/passive funds are more common. Beware that commodity funds are volatile.
Pg L8: Be aware of several changes coming for 401k: More ESG options including the default options; guaranteed-income option (immediate or deferred/QLAC) at retirement included within the target-date funds (TDFs); pooled employer plan (PEP) 401k for small businesses. On the other hand, the Backdoor Roth IRA loophole will be closed. (This long piece is by @LewisBraham)
Pg L10: Amy DOMINI of Domini Impact Investments (AUM $3 billion in 5 funds) was an early ESG pioneer (Domini 400 Social Index/MSCI KLD 400 Social Index, KLD Research & Analytics that was bought by MSCI, books, etc). PERFORMANCE of ESG funds doesn’t lag general funds; in fact, they have better risk-adjusted performance. There is now appreciation that ESG is everybody’s business. There is work still to be done on ESG STANDARDIZATION and Europe is ahead on this. The SEC needs to get into this; the DOL is cleaning up the mess that it has created. Her funds use a combination of exclusions and inclusions based on ESG criteria (featured fund is DSEPX). They also use industry specific ESG standards. She notes that although Larry FINK of BlackRock/BLK makes lots of noises on ESG, BLK has a record of mostly voting with managements (Larry Fink/BLK declined comment). Her recent book, People, Planet, & Profit, November 2021.
Pg L36: In 2021/Q4 (SP500 +10.90%): Among general equity funds, the best was LC-core +9.80% and the worst was SC-growth +1.84%; NO category beat SP500. Among other equity funds, the best was real estate +14.42% and the worst was Japan -4.25%. Among fixed-income funds, LT -0.01%, world income -1.19% (not very refined in Lipper mutual fund categories listed in Barron’s).
LINK

Own it, like it. Love PRBLX but have large chunk of wife's retirement money tied up in that one. Endeavor has outperformed core over time, but with more volatility.

@wxman123 -- Bank MM funds yield around 0.4 to 0.5%. FDIC insured so 100% risk free. Are you expecting your near cash holdings to provide a higher return?

Yes, that would be the objective but doesn't always work out. Over the longer term, these "near cash" vehicles should outperform high yield FDIC insured bank accounts, but that's not generally how I use them. I mainly use them in retirement accounts where the only viable, comparable option is near zero MM funds. Over the last 3 years VNLA has earned a total return of 2.39% with very little heartburn. I don't think you could have gotten that even in the highest yielding fully liquid bank accounts.

But since I use MERFX as a cash substitute, 2%-3% per year is fine with me

The problem is for me a cash substitute fund cannot have sustained a loss greater than 2% in a year, and preferably no loss ever. Why take the risk with such meager returns? My cash subs include, SNGVX (1 off year in 31, so it gets a pass on my 2% rule); BBBMX; GILPX, VNLA (ETF) and even good old BSV (ETF). You can buy with confidence that any loss will be small and temporary. Not so clear with MERFX, which suffered a 5.67% loss in 2002 and 2.26% loss in 2008.

Not picking on anyone here, just remembering the statement that SNGVX had only one losing year out of 31. It's now 2 losing years out of 34, with nearly a 1% loss last year. Not much, but something one hopes not to see with a fund used in lieu of cash.
FWIW, BBBMX stayed in the green, gaining 0.01%.
GILPX did not, losing 0.07%. Likewise, MERFX lost 0.19%, VNLA lost 0.18% and BSV lost 0.12%.
These five funds, win or lose, came so close to zero that one might as well think of them all as having broken even. SNGVX was a different story.
Meanwhile, RPHYX kept chugging away, gaining 1.8% last year. Only 11 calendar years so far, but not a single loss.
I'm also taking a closer look at VMLTX. Only 1 losing year out of 34; that was just a loss of 0.16% in 2016. It normally maintains a higher than average duration to get higher returns. But it has shortened its duration to bring it in line with its peers, showing that it can be managed conservatively if conditions warrant.
My parents used this fund in retirement. Yes,

this is still your father's VMLTX.

It was a tough year in this space, but your numbers seem off based on my personal data and MS. BSV was down 1.09 but BBBMX was up 1.18%. For the year as a whole in 2021, my "near cash" holdings were down .04%. Not great but I can live with it. Wish there were better options but I've yet to find one's I'm comfortable with. Hard to argue about RPHYX, which I hold, but would be reluctant to put big dollars into (or most of these vehicles). While things like SNGVX had a bad year I'm OK with that (based on rising rates) rather then risking a serious loss on defaults as is a bit more likely with most of the others. It happened with ZEOIX, which recovered, but stung when it happened.

I didn't quote anything/anybody. But I think that is the general policy of through-TDFs (Fido, Vanguard, some Price, etc), but not for to-TDFs*.
Price is trying different ideas - it has 2 TDF series (older riskier, newer more conservative). In older series, it has made the income funds distinct, even sort of unlinked it from the TDF. I suppose, it may keep old names like TDF 2010, etc for a long time.
*To-TDFs become most conservative at the target retirement date and don't change any further.

Which fund family are you quoting? Do you mean merge into the Target Date Retirement Income fund? A few of these past date funds have good performance.

Through-TDFs have approx 50-50 allocation at the designated retirement date and their equity % keeps declining for about 7 yrs. At that point, they may merge into the income fund of the TDF series.

Happy New Years,
I just posted an article on Seeking Alpha regarding using the business cycle to evaluate funds. While the title is for Retirement Portfolios, the focus is on the business cycle including funds that do well or not during normalization of monetary policy. It includes a model portfolio for Vanguard and Fidelity.
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4477697-positioning-retirement-portfolios-2022
Regards,

But since I use MERFX as a cash substitute, 2%-3% per year is fine with me

The problem is for me a cash substitute fund cannot have sustained a loss greater than 2% in a year, and preferably no loss ever. Why take the risk with such meager returns? My cash subs include, SNGVX (1 off year in 31, so it gets a pass on my 2% rule); BBBMX; GILPX, VNLA (ETF) and even good old BSV (ETF). You can buy with confidence that any loss will be small and temporary. Not so clear with MERFX, which suffered a 5.67% loss in 2002 and 2.26% loss in 2008.

Not picking on anyone here, just remembering the statement that SNGVX had only one losing year out of 31. It's now 2 losing years out of 34, with nearly a 1% loss last year. Not much, but something one hopes not to see with a fund used in lieu of cash.
FWIW, BBBMX stayed in the green, gaining 0.01%.
GILPX did not, losing 0.07%. Likewise, MERFX lost 0.19%, VNLA lost 0.18% and BSV lost 0.12%.
These five funds, win or lose, came so close to zero that one might as well think of them all as having broken even. SNGVX was a different story.
Meanwhile, RPHYX kept chugging away, gaining 1.8% last year. Only 11 calendar years so far, but not a single loss.
I'm also taking a closer look at VMLTX. Only 1 losing year out of 34; that was just a loss of 0.16% in 2016. It normally maintains a higher than average duration to get higher returns. But it has shortened its duration to bring it in line with its peers, showing that it can be managed conservatively if conditions warrant.
My parents used this fund in retirement. Yes, this is still your father's VMLTX.

See my concluding sentence in the thread Seeking Suggestions for Vanguard Asset Allocation Funds: "Or even push it to a 30/70 fund (VTINX)."
This vanilla Vanguard fund of funds returned more than AOK over one day (YTD), one year (5.03% vs 4.37%), three years (9.46% vs. 9.20%), five years ( 6.78% to 6.66%), and 10 years (5.81% to 5.41%).
http://performance.morningstar.com/fund/performance-return.action?t=VTINX (compare with AOK)
Its volatility (std dev) was lower over three years (5.87% vs. 6.34%), five years (5.02% vs. 5.25%), and ten years (4.42% vs. 4.62%).
http://performance.morningstar.com/fund/ratings-risk.action?t=VTINX
The main area in which VTINX (or more generally, retirement income funds) falls short is tax efficiency. These funds are designed to generate income, and are thus not great in taxable accounts.
http://performance.morningstar.com/fund/tax-analysis.action?t=VTINX

Thanks for the contribution to this thread. I tried to retrieve/search the T Rowe Price Report Fall 2004 article referenced without luck. Behind a wall. Wish I could find it. The article would give us more clarity and specific allocation holdings. However, I did notice the column headings from the 4/2021 article 1949-2013 study is using 20% equities 50% bonds and 30% cash producing the 6.8% annual number referenced. The Nov 2014 article used column headings of 30% Short (assume to be in error?) also producing 6.8% annual return. (not the 20/80 allocations we have been discussing).
As far as what is held within the bond holdings of the 80% (or 50%)...... references are made to Fidelity Asset Manager series and RPSIX for comparisons but as you said we do not know what TRP used in the study.
Interesting subject matter.
References are also made to M* Conservative Retirement Saver Portfolio using the Lifetime Allocation Indexes. Christine Benz wrote an article providing suggested funds with allocation %'s which I plan to analyze for metrics.

fyi.. ...
since inception VASIX vs SPY runs 56% of CAGR and 29% of SD. 10/1994. Lo as 16% Equity.
since inception FASIX vs SPY runs 55% of CAGR and 31% of SD. 2/1993. Hi as 25% Equity.
since inception VBMFX/SPY vs SPY runs 60% of CAGR and 28% of SD. 2/1993.
The 60/20 may also be a good trade off depending on market valuations, business cycle and future perceptions of return (or loss). 100% equity portfolio in retirement normally not used.

@stillers, @sma3,
Couple questions for you...
@stillers...I need to read your post carefully as it resonates with me...question if you are ok answering...by chance did you move to a lower tax state when you retired? I'm in a very high tax state but also own a home in a much lower tax state...wife and I are thinking of making the move in the next year or so.
....
Best,
Baseball Fan

No, we did not relocate. We've paid zero FIT/SIT post-retirement due to the structuring of our portfolio (detailed in prior post) since we started investing in 1980. Large part of our investment strategy, thanks to my first boss and investment mentor, has always been that tired, old axiom, "It's not how much you make, it's how much you get to keep." We do however live in a state with highly favorable tax treatment for retirees.

I enjoy reading the MFO articles. Anybody have thoughts regarding the article mentioning .....a 20% equity portfolio translates into receiving 60% of the returns of an all equity portfolio with about 25% of the volatility? Just a Thinking Fast and Slow type observation....volatility (SD) is a annualized metric that would remain in this case relatively consistent over time around 25% but the 60% yearly returns vs SPY compounded over a 30 year retirement horizon would not be 60% after 30 years. A significant difference in return. IOW's the value one receives from low SD does not compound over time. Although there is value inherent.

@stillers, @sma3,
Couple questions for you...
@stillers...I need to read your post carefully as it resonates with me...question if you are ok answering...by chance did you move to a lower tax state when you retired? I'm in a very high tax state but also own a home in a much lower tax state...wife and I are thinking of making the move in the next year or so. Question for all: Has anyone else moved to lower taxes in retirement? Did it work as planned? Happy with decision?
@sma3...agreed floating rate funds scare me...usually not highest rated bonds....took a real flush in the down draft in 2020.
I too am concerned about the rattling, swift elevator down in the markets...who knows...
Another fund I am dabbling with (and have owned in the past before it stalled out) is PMEFX, Penn Mutual 1847 Income fund. Really like the mgr who used to run Berwyn Income...seems like a fund you might be able to hang onto in "rough waters". I like the fund mgr's poise and thought process in the interviews I've seen him on.
Best,
Baseball Fan

Not a lot of port moves specifically for 2022. We are nearing end of 10th year of retirement. We use 5-yr retirement portfolio strategies and are nearing the end of our 2nd 5-yr plan (June 2022). All major moves towards next 5-yr plan have been gradual/cumulative over past six months or so and will be completed by June.
Core for next five years will consist of 11 AA OEFs (and possibly 1-2 more) that can be detailed here or via PM if anyone is interested. Still reluctantly holding a smaller slug of dedicated bond OEFs (HY Munis, BL, Multi, ST HY), significantly reduced in number and aggregate $ amount from initial 5-yr plan plan. Also initiated much larger explore section during 2nd, 5-yr plan that will carryforward in next one, comprised of a coupla indivdual stocks and a coupla dedicated stock ETFs and OEFs. Former 10-yr CD ladder initiated at start of retirement continues to see final rungs fall off w/o being replaced. Maturing CD proceeds continue to be rolled to much higher risk cats, primarily explore stuff. Keeping an eye on 5-yr CD rates this year as they inch back to levels that may be acceptable replacements for some dedicated bond OEF holdings.
Will continue to make (what are effectively) tax-free IRA w/d's for personal spending wants/needs up to taxable income threshold in lieu of making Roth conversions. Continue to be ~96% under the umbrella (read, in tax-deferred a/c's) and ~4% in taxable. Haven't paid a dime in FIT/SIT since final year of employment in 2012 (state has actually been paying us $50 annually last coupla years via tax credits) and starting to look like that will all continue for at least five more years or until RMDs are um, required. Life-long tax planning strategy has been to Avoid, Defer, Minimize, and pay them on our terms when we want (read, ultimately have) to pay them.
REALLY appreciated the contributions of many of MFO regulars. Keep up the great work and contributions here and Happy New Year to all!

Our KISS of a portfolio ended the year with 80% in PRWCX/TRAIX and 20% in AKREX. So, not a bad year with low to mid 70's exposure to equities by year end.
Our average age is 56 and probably have been on the light side of equities for our age the past 15 years since PRWCX has dominated our investments, but we are okay with that. We'll keep saving, but probably have enough saved for retirement already, just need to keep growing it at a modest rate for the next handful of years. Grateful to be debt free.
Have decided equity exposure is a bit higher than preferred at this point and am in the process of reducing AKREX and moving some of the proceeds into TRAIX and PRFRX for now which is also holding some inheritance monies my wife received recently from her folk's estate. Planning for our equity exposure to be between 65-70% when done rebalancing.

It is complicated. I am not sure why there is so much focus on the "4%" rule when the IRS forces people over 75 to remove 4.07% of your retirement accounts. By 80 it is up to almost 5%.

This conflates 4% of starting amount (inflation adjusted) with 4% (or 5%) of remaining balance.
The 4% rule is supposed to enable one to spend down savings so that they are not depleted for at least 30 years. But the savings are, or may be, depleted at some point past that.
As one draws down one's savings, the 4% of the original value gradually evolves into 5%, 6% and more of the remaining balance. The RMD calculation is designed to automate this while adjusting for a gradually growing life expectancy.
That is, as one grows older without dying, one's expected lifetime expands. So year by year, one needs to plan on living longer and draw down a bit slower (as a fraction of remaining assets).

While I don’t know what moves I may make for 2022, I have done a cursory review of what happened to my portfolio last year. Global growth stunk up the joint with MGGPX the worst offender with APFDX and ARTRX taking nose dives in the last few months of the year. Global allocation, as in RPGAX, was also a drag. Our biggest domestic growth fund, BIAWX, did fine, but trailed SPYG. TIEIX, the biggest position in the retirement account, outperformed the Nasdaq while rising 23%. EM was a bad joke, represented by ARTYX, who was shown the door a while back. Foreign large growth, PWJZX, was very volatile; up 13%, it failed to return even half of the S&P 500. I have more work to do on this long holiday weekend.

just an odd fyi --- DSTL (like CAPE) is 'blocked' at ML, cannot be bought, at least in my accounts (retirement and brokerage)