Another retirement option, 2 funds listed here:
VTI & VCSH
two-vanguard-index-funds-you-need-for-retirement.html

8 Best Vanguard ETFs for Retirees
https://money.usnews.com/investing/funds/slideshows/8-best-vanguard-etfs-for-retirees
Considet simplify your retirement investing with these low-fee Vanguard exchange-traded funds.
Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI)
Vanguard Short-Term Inflation-Protected Securities ETF (VTIP)
Vanguard Total International Stock ETF (VXUS)
Vanguard FTSE Social Index Fund Admiral Shares (VFTAX)
Vanguard Total World Bond ETF (BNDW)
Vanguard Dividend Appreciation ETF (VIG)
Vanguard Real Estate ETF (VNQ)
Vanguard Tax-Exempt Bond ETF (VTEB)

TRP has been doing this in most of its asset allocation and retirement funds for a few years now. They're doing more barbelling than timing the market as they give you both long treasuries and short TIPs with mild adjustments in allocation.
PRWCX goes in-and-out, i.e. market times. I've seen them do this twice in the last 10 years, buying with good timing but selling too soon.
Price's fund, TRULX, gets a lot of its money from the allocation/retirement funds. Its AUM is not too different from when I bought it 1-1/2 years ago. I wonder if this stabilizes it from the rush inflow situation.

No one knows how long QE Infinity might endure. Biden is proposing a fiscal policy alternative to Cimmamond's MCD solution that could help to offset some of QE Infinity's destructive and destabilizing effects.

Seen in its full breadth and scope, the Biden tax plan is a progressive tour de force. Biden would fund his poverty-fighting education, housing, retirement and health-care reforms with $4.3 trillion of tax hikes on the rich.
Biden’s proposals are populist in the true sense of the term. The Tax Policy Center has found that three-quarters of his tax increases fall on the richest 1% of households. In 2021, Biden would raise this group’s taxes by $299,000.

https://marketwatch.com/story/liberals-arent-giving-joe-biden-credit-for-a-radical-tax-plan-that-goes-after-the-indolent-rich-2020-07-02

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jun/27/investors-that-stick-with-stocks-will-be-rewarded-/
Investors that stick with stocks will be rewarded illustration by The Washington Times
By Peter Morici - - Saturday, June 27, 2020:
The challenges imposed by social distancing in businesses and telecommuting leave little doubt the economy will be radically different going forward, but for ordinary investors — saving for retirement and college tuition — stocks remain the cornerstone of a sound strategy.

Please don't misunderstand me. I like the idea of reverse mortgages if obtained at reasonable cost and rates for a well defined purpose, as I wrote above. They have gotten a somewhat undeserved bad rap, and they've been improved significantly. They're likely superior for a variety of well defined purposes.
But @bee raised HECMs as a great way to hedge sequence of return risk. For that particular well defined purpose, they may not be the better product. ("Hedge" = "insurance" or "protection".)
Sequence of return risk is the risk that one's decumulation (spend down/retirement) phase may begin during a market downturn. It's not a risk of ever having a market correction. So a hedge against this risk is protection that's needed during the first few years of retirement. This has a few implications:
1. Sequence of return risk is not concerned with what happens after, say, 10 years. So it doesn't matter that a HELOC only enables you to draw against your line of credit for 10 years. Like term life, that's the period that you're "insuring".
2. Since you're only "insuring" for a relatively short period (say, 1/3 of your anticipated retirement period), the fixed (up front) costs of the line of credit weigh more heavily. They are amortized over just a few years, as contrasted with closing costs on a traditional 30 year mortgage. (They also weigh more heavily because you pay these fees even if you never need to draw upon the line of credit.)
3. The amount of protection you need is capped by your anticipated expenses over the first few years of retirement. So the fact that a reverse mortgage credit line grows doesn't matter. (The fact that it might shrink with a HELOC does matter, however.)
4. Since this "insurance" is needed at the point of retirement, one might be able to apply for the line of credit shortly before retirement, thus making it easier to qualify for a HELOC.
In a sense, the whole question of how easy it is to get a HELOC is irrelevant to the question of which one is better. If you cannot get a HELOC then there is no choice to be made.
Permit a metacomment here: I've been fastidious in citing objective third party sources: the FTC, HUD, the CFPB. Pages from provider products can be informative and accurate, but still incomplete. This is something to watch for not just in this thread, but generally.
The Reverse.Mortgage page purports to be presenting information on reverse mortgages generally. But then it quietly slides into features that apply only to HECMs, such as being federally insured. You have to flip to another page to find out that this feature costs 2% of the total line of credit up front, plus 0.5% of the outstanding balance annually.
The comparison chart says that HELOCs become due (balloon payment) after ten years. Some do. But the chart is deceptive here. The Fed writes: "Many existing HELOCs are structured such that when they reach the end of the draw period, they convert from open-ended, non-amortizing lines of credit to closed-end, amortizing loans."
What is best depends on your intended purpose (including risk tolerance) and the terms (including special features) offered.

Can’t get over the fascination with “income” in an extremely low rate environment where U.S. government AAA paper is yielding practically nothing (0.65% this morning on a 10-year bond). Let’s go out a bit on the credit spectrum and assume maybe 2% on a top tier cooperate bond. If you expect those returns to put food on your table over time - best plan to plant a garden.
Don’t get me wrong. More highly speculative bonds can be held or “played”, along with income producing equities, as part of a broader plan, but the income thrown off from those isn’t the “Steady Eddy” guaranteed stream from month-to-month most would desire or expect in an income generating vehicle. Expect dry spells along the way if going lower down on the credit ladder.
What seems clear (to me anyway) is the importance of diversifying into an assortment of asset classes, which working together can produce more or less reliable capital appreciation over time. There will be dry spells of course. Think like the major hydro-electric players do and build in some “peak demand reservoirs” you can open the spickets on during those dry times, draw down, and than turn the spickets back off and let the reserve slowly build back up to full capacity during better times. Some use cash as that reserve. But it needn’t have to be cash.
Think of portfolio construction as: low risk (relatively stable) components, moderate risk components, value-based components, and growth / speculative components. The latter two will stand you well when the flood gates are wide open and the waters sre surging. David is intending to review TMSRX in the July Commentary . Before going “hog-wild” loading up on income funds that return pennies on the dollar, take a look at that one to see where might fit in. I wouldn’t buy an old favorite TRRIX right now, but there’s a fund that originally was named “Retirement Income Fund” (despite maintaining a 40% equity allocation) - just to show you how the definition and approach to income generation may be expanded.
Added : Reverse mortgages as an income stream? I guess. But it would be hard to call one “income generating” since in essence you’re “Robbing Peter to Pay Paul“. Net-Net the lender gains and the borrower ends up with little or no home equity. To me, home equity is an asset just like a stock, bond, ounce of gold, mutual fund, etc. Don’t misunderstand me. For some people they may make sense. Just questioning how they’re apparently being viewed here.

95% of advisors we discussed our plans with several months ago [fidelity, vanguard. schwab] strongly recommended heavy stocks/MF based-stocks portfolio, unless you are near retirement.

"But, but, but, the Fed and a "V" shaped recovery could make the bad things turn invisible, just like magic."
"Investor enthusiasm is pinned to two ideas. First, are hopes for a "V" shaped recovery in the economy as championed by Morgan Stanley (MS). Second, is a belief that the Federal Reserve has as much magic monetary potion as needed to pump up stocks despite all-time over-valuations.
.... investors must be very wary of high unemployment. As the unemployed begin to fall behind on bills, they are apt to turn to cashing in their retirement plans, which in turn leads to forced selling of stocks. Economic indicators are flashing red alert danger signals. Investor Will Robinson does not seem to care."
"Morgan Stanley is leading the charge for a "V" shaped economic recovery. Multiple billionaire investors, major business owners and corporate executives say otherwise."
Choose your poison thoughtfully.

@bee: Corrected Pfau link
While I'm generally a fan ofr Dr. Pfau, ISTM he skipped over some details and created some misimpressions. The first is that he appears to use HECM and "reverse mortgage" synonymously. Rather, an HECM is but one of three types of reverse mortgages. Being the most common type, and the one backed by HUD and providing some government protections, it is the type I'd likely look at first. But different types do exist, with different benefits, costs, and risks.
https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0192-reverse-mortgages#types
"With a HECM, the home title is never turned over to the bank." Okay, but so what? One has the same risk of foreclosure regardless of who holds the title. When you buy a home, do you care whether you take out a mortgage (where you keep title), or you borrow the money using a deed of trust (where the trust gets legal title)? While foreclosure procedures differ, you're still subject to foreclosure either way.
https://www.lendingtree.com/home/mortgage/deed-of-trust-vs-mortgage/
FWIW, here's what the FTC says about title: "In a reverse mortgage, you keep the title to your home. That means you are responsible for property taxes, insurance, utilities, fuel, maintenance, and other expenses." Of course you'd expect that in any case.
https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0192-reverse-mortgages#how
"They need to have full equity in the home; there can’t be any other lien on the property." HUD begs to differ on HECMs: "You must ... Own the property outright or paid-down a considerable amount"
https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/housing/sfh/hecm/hecmabou
Dr Pfau gives four different approaches to managing sequence of return risk (I've cited this before). One is to use a cash buffer.. He describes three different ways of implementing that approach, one of which is to use a reverse mortgage line of credit. What I haven't seen him discuss (perhaps I have not looked hard enough) is why he advocates using a HECM over other types of reverse mortgages, let alone other types of credit.
ISTM that if you're looking at this for use as a cash buffer - a line of credit for a temporary loan that you might never call upon - a HELOC with lower up front costs could have lower total costs. OTOH, if you're thinking of using a reverse mortgage for something else, then you might still expand your search beyond HECMs. The FTC writes:

If you’re considering a reverse mortgage, shop around. Decide which type of reverse mortgage might be right for you. That might depend on what you want to do with the money.

https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0192-reverse-mortgages#shopping.
Dr. Pfau mentions using reverse mortgages as a SS bridge (to delay benefits). A 2017 "CFPB report found, in general, the costs and risks of taking out a reverse mortgage exceed the cumulative increase in Social Security lifetime benefits that homeowners would receive by delayed claiming."
https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-report-warns-taking-out-reverse-mortgage-loan-can-be-expensive-way-maximize-social-security-benefits/
Finally, the "gotcha" that concerns me with reverse mortgages (and I like the idea of reverse mortgages if obtained at reasonable cost and rates for a well defined purpose), is that you have to pay the money back when you move. How do you buy a new home if you have spent down your equity? It looks like there is a risk of being locked into your home for life, because you won't have enough equity left to move anywhere else.
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: What happens if I have a reverse mortgage [HECM] and I want to sell my home?
https://www.consumerfinance.gov/ask-cfpb/what-happens-if-i-have-reverse-mortgage-and-i-want-sell-my-home-en-2095/
HECM risks and disadvantages (citing CFPB): https://www.elderoptionsoftexas.com/article-reverse-mortgage-pros-and-cons.htm

@Rbrt, A reverse mortgage is on my "things to do list" for my 62 birthday (earliest age). Instead of using it as a tenure payment I plan on letting the equity glide path value grow. Establishing an HECM is great way to hedge inflation risk and sequence of return risk amoung other risks. Wade Pfau is a bit better than Tom Selleck on the subject.
use-reverse-mortgages-secure-retirement

Minimum waived for I Classes offered through Workplace Retirement plans.
Stay Safe, Derf

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevevernon/2020/06/19/learn-about-the-many-types-of-retirement-income-generators/#3e69b1e48a52
Learn About The Many Types Of Retirement Income Generators
There are many types of retirement income generators (RIGs) that each produce different amounts of retirement income. My Retirement Income Scorecard compares the amounts of retirement income that are possible for 10 different RIGs, which is one consideration for choosing a RIG or combination of RIGs to build your retirement income portfolio.
Social securities
Fixed incomes products
RMD from 401k
Annuities
Bond and bond funds

Creating Portfolios That Are ‘Not for the Faint of Heart’
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/20/business/retirement-portfolios.html
https://www.google.com/search?q=Creating+Portfolios+That+Are+‘Not+for+the+Faint+of+Heart’&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
Savers who want to build their nest eggs without relying solely on the stock market have other options. The pandemic is testing their skills.
Couple of good ideas mentioned for investing
Gold
Private real estates
reits

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1413594/000110465920074561/a20-22854_2497.htm
497 1 a20-22854_2497.htm 497
ABERDEEN FUNDS
Aberdeen Diversified Alternatives Fund
Supplement dated June 18, 2020 to the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information dated February 28, 2020, as supplemented to date
On June 17, 2020, the Board of Trustees of Aberdeen Funds (the “Trust”) approved a Plan of Liquidation for the Aberdeen Diversified Alternatives Fund (the “Fund”) pursuant to which the Fund will be liquidated (the “Liquidation”) on or about August 17, 2020 (the “Liquidation Date”). Shareholder approval of the Liquidation is not required.
Suspension of Sales. Effective after market close on June 19, 2020, shares of the Fund will no longer be available for purchase by investors with the exception of: (1) existing shareholders (including shares acquired through the reinvestment of dividends and distributions); (2) employer sponsored retirement plans; or (3) fee-based programs sponsored by financial intermediaries that have selected the Fund prior to market close on June 19, 2020. Effective after market close on July 31, 2020, the Fund will be closed to all investments except shares acquired through the reinvestment of dividends and distributions.
Liquidation of Assets. The Fund will depart from its stated investment objective and policies as it liquidates holdings in preparation for the distribution of assets to investors. During this time, the Fund may hold more cash, cash equivalents or other short-term investments than normal, which may prevent the Fund from meeting its stated investment objective. On the Liquidation Date, the Fund will liquidate and distribute pro rata to the shareholders of record as of the close of business on the Liquidation Date such shareholders’ proportionate interest in all of the remaining assets of the Fund in complete cancellation and redemption of all the outstanding shares of the Fund. See “IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR QUALIFIED ACCOUNT HOLDERS” below if you are a qualified account holder. Contingent deferred sales charges will be waived in connection with any redemptions prior to the Liquidation Date. The Fund’s investment adviser, Aberdeen Standard Investments Inc., will bear all expenses of the Liquidation to the extent such expenses are not part of the Fund’s normal and customary fees and operating expenses; however, the Fund and its shareholders will bear transaction costs and tax consequences associated with turnover of the Fund’s portfolio in anticipation of the Liquidation.
Alternatives. At any time prior to the Liquidation Date, the Fund’s shareholders may redeem all or a portion of their shares or exchange their Fund shares for shares in the corresponding class of another series of the Trust pursuant to procedures set forth in the Trust’s Prospectus. If you wish to exchange your shares of the Fund into another series of the Trust, or would like to request additional copies of the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information for the Trust, please call Aberdeen Funds Shareholder Services at 866-667-9231.
Holders through Financial Intermediaries. If you are invested in the Fund through a financial intermediary, please contact that financial intermediary if you have any questions. If you are invested in a tax qualified account, please see important additional information below.
Income Tax Matters. The liquidation of the Fund, like any redemption of Fund shares, will constitute a sale upon which a gain or loss may be recognized for state and federal income tax purposes, depending on the type of account and the adjusted cost basis of the investor’s shares. Please contact your tax advisor to discuss the tax consequences to you of the Liquidation.
IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR QUALIFIED ACCOUNT HOLDERS
Fund Direct IRA Accounts
Fund Direct IRA accounts are those created for investment in the series of the Trust for which UMB Bank N.A. acts as custodian. Unless a shareholder, or other financial intermediary on behalf of such shareholder, provides instructions otherwise, Fund shares held on the Liquidation Date in Fund Direct IRAs will be redeemed in cash and the proceeds sent directly to the beneficiary of the account, which may result in the imposition of tax penalties.
If you wish to avoid tax penalties that may be imposed if your Fund shares are liquidated, you must contact your financial intermediary or Aberdeen Funds Shareholder Services at 866-667-9231 before the close of business on August 14, 2020 in order to exchange your shares for those of another series of the Trust. If you have any questions about your individual tax situation, please contact your tax advisor or financial intermediary. If you wish to exchange your shares into another series of the Trust, or would like to request additional copies of the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information for the Trust, please call Aberdeen Funds Shareholder Services at 866-667-9231.
Non-Fund Direct Traditional IRAs, Roth IRAs, SIMPLE, SEP, or SARSEP IRA and 403(b) Custodial Accounts (“Non-Fund Direct Retirement Accounts”)
If you are invested in the Fund through a Non-Fund Direct Retirement Account and Aberdeen Funds Shareholder Services does not receive instructions from you or the account trustee or custodian prior to close of business on August 14, 2020, the Fund will send a liquidating distribution to the trustee/custodian for the benefit of your account, which the trustee/custodian will process according to its own policies and procedures.
401(k), Pension and Profit Sharing Plans and other Tax-qualified Retirement Plans (“Retirement Plans”)
If you are invested in the Fund through a Retirement Plan, and Aberdeen Funds Shareholder Services does not receive instructions from you or the Retirement Plan administrator or other plan fiduciary prior to close of business on August 14, 2020, the Fund will send a liquidating distribution to the Retirement Plan, which the Retirement Plan will process according to its own policies and procedures.
The pending liquidation of the Fund may be terminated and/or abandoned at any time before the Liquidation Date by action of the Board of Trustees of the Trust.
Please retain this Supplement for future reference.

No sales. Just buys. I wish I had bought more for my wife's IRA. Still quite a bit of "dry powder" after transferring out of a retirement plan at Prudential. She still has a nice setup at TIAA-CREF that is fully invested.
There will be more buying opportunities down the road.
When to sell? You should have some sort of plan for that in advance so that you understand what you are responding to rather than acting on reflex.

Fidelity data shows nearly one-third of their investors 65 and older sold all of their stock holdings at some point between February and May while just 18% of all investors across their platform sold out of stocks.
I had a number of discussions with investors who were contemplating selling out of stocks in March. Many we retirees who worried about how an extended downturn could impact their retirement plans.
I understand why this group is more trigger happy with their portfolio. The U.S. stock market was up 10 out of 11 years heading into 2020. This crisis was looking like it could turn into Great Depression 2.0.
We’re living in scary times.
But scary times and panic are never good reasons for selling out of your stocks.

https://awealthofcommonsense.com/2020/06/when-should-you-sell-your-stocks/

As I said several times before I don't follow any of these but my own rules which I started years ago preparing for retirement. Since 2018 I practiced stricter rules 1) 6+% average annually 2) SD under 3 3) never lose 3% from any last top 4) complete flexibility to do whatever I want/need. I exceeded these rules by a lot.
===============
Anyway, the thread is about bond funds so let's get back to it.
Last Thursday was another pivotal day for me. VIX jumped to almost 41, stocks crashed, the risk is elevated, rated are down sharply but BND wasn't up which is what you expect from a high rated bond index. VBTLX which is equal to BND but doesn't trade was up 0.08%. When rates decrease so much I expect bond fund like VBTLX to make more than 0.08%
All the above didn't make sense to me. Maybe it is just short term. I do the usual when the markets don't make sense to me I sell. It is unusual because in most cases I'm invested at 99+%. In the last 10 years, I was out of the market just 12 weeks (only in 5 weeks I was at 95+% in cash)
Last Thursday I was at about 50% cash and Friday at 95+% in cash. HY Munis which I had close to 60% of my portfolio were on a tear in the last month and even last week. It was time for me to sell.
YTD I'm way over my goals of 6%. I can take time out and can "miss" some performance.

Some people like posting narratives. I prefer hard numbers.
Start with $1,000, withdraw $40 (4% real, i.e. inflation adjusted) annually over 30 years. Do this with declining equity portfolios (e.g. 100% down to 0%) and with rising equity portfolios (e.g. 0% to 100%). Backtest against historical data, using rolling 30 year periods starting with 1900-1929, ending with 1980-2009.
Then look at the failure rates (portfolios that didn't last 30 years), and how much you'd wind up with at the end of the 30 year period.

Equity %	
(Start->End)	100->0	0->100	90->10	10->90	80->20	20->80	70->30	30->70
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Failure Rate	 8.6%   21.0%    6.2%  	17.3% 	 4.9%    11.1%   4.9%	 8.6% 
Mean 		$1,388 	$851  	$1,336	$901   	$1,283	 $954	$1,230	$1,009 
Median		  $947	$171	  $873 	$293 	  $908 	 $424 	  $951    $527

Data from Exhibit 1 in Estrada,The Retirement Glidepath: An International Perspective, The Journal of Investing (Summer 2016).

Pfau and Kitces (2014) find support for RE strategies during retirement and justify their findings with the notion of sequence of returns risk. ... [I]f large negative returns occur at the beginning of the retirement period, the portfolio is far more likely to be depleted than if the same returns occurred by the end of such period...This is a plausible argument and perhaps applies to the simulations discussed in Pfau and Kitces (2014). ... However, the support for DE [declining equity] strategies found here (at least when compared to RE [rising equity] strategies) calls into question how relevant sequence of returns risk has been empirically... In other words, however plausible in theory, sequence of returns risk does not seem to have been a key determinant of portfolio failure in this broad sample.

Big advantage for rising equity? Plausible but not borne out. Nor as noted previously do Pfau's simulations bear this out under market conditions like today's.
Way too often people go with their gut, or their fears, rather than rational analysis and cold hard numbers. That's why only about 5% of people wait until age 70 to take SS, it's part of why there's an annuity puzzle.
For those who don't want to read Estrada's complete paper, there's Larry Swedroe's page about it. He concludes:

To summarize, while Estrada presents evidence favoring the use of a DE [declining equity] glide path over a rising one, and also shows that a static 60/40 allocation is preferable to an RE [rising equity] portfolio, the most prudent strategy of all is not to “set it and forget it” with any of these options.
The most prudent approach is to adapt a strategy to actual market returns and valuations.

Call it confirmation bias, but I generally agree with Clements. At least a couple of years ago I wondered (and posted) whether low rates coupled with interest rate risk rendered the value of bonds over cash dubious. I've written favorably about Buffett's propsed allocation, 10% short term (effectively cash), 90% equities. Though I disagreed with his singleminded focus on the S&P 500. This cash/equity approach is also essentially Evensky's 1985 two bucket strategy.
Figuring on a 4% withdrawal rate, the 10% cash could buffer a bear market taking 2.5 years to recover. Clements suggests 25% cash, or around a 6 year buffer. I might split the difference and put half of that 25% in cash, half in vanilla bonds, figuring that the bonds will do better even with modestly rising interest rates, if one waits 3 years or more.
As Clements noted, the expectation value of SS is greater if one delays taking benefits. This is especially true if one is focused on one's own lifetime and not on legacies. If one has a financial need for monthly checks before age 70, one can fill the gap with a temporary life annuity.
Which brings us to annuities. Dr. Wade Pfau says much the same thing as Clements - that the lower the current interest rates, the bigger the bargain annuities are, thanks to mortality credits. "Essentially, while the cost of funding retirement with an annuity increases as interest rates decline, the cost of funding retirement in other ways increases even faster than for the annuity. Therefore, the annuity becomes a better relative deal."
Speaking of Dr. Pfau, while he and Michael Kitces suggested seven years ago that a rising glidepath might provide a slightly higher probability of success (not running out of money over 30 years), subsequent research by Dr. David M. Blanchett showed that a traditional declining glidepath would work better in an environment with low interest rates and highly valued stocks. As it was in 2015 when he wrote his paper, and as it is now.
They had an ongoing exchange about this. Here's one part:

I re-ran the analysis that Michael and I did in our initial article, but I switched to the new capital market assumptions I use which allow for increasing bond yields over time while keeping a fixed average equity premium over bonds. ... It does indeed seem that retiring at times with particularly low bond yields, which can be expected to increase over time, may not favor rising equity glidepaths during retirement. It essentially causes the retiree to lock in low bond returns and even capital losses on a bond fund as bond yields gradually increase (on average) over time.
This is not to say that rising equity glidepaths are never a good idea. ... If interest rates were at a higher initial starting point, I’m guessing that rising glidepaths would look much better in his analysis.