The number of "funds" in 2023 looks more like share classes than actual funds.
The nine style boxes of broad based domestic equity funds add up to 6,918. ICI reports a total of 8.578 domestic equity share classes (including all domestic categories but excluding funds of funds), but only 2,880 unique domestic equity funds. In fact, in total ICI reports just 7,222 funds including equity, bond, hybrid, and money market funds.
The 2024 figure (totaling 3,454) still exceeds the ICI fund figure (YE 2023) of 2,880, but at least it's in the right ballpark.
2024 ICI Investment Company Fact Book - list of tables
ICI table of number of funds by type and year
ICI table of number of share classes by type and year
It would have been so much easier to examine M* figures with its premium fund screener. That had a "distinct funds only" filter. But alas, M* now offers only a crude tool on its "Investor" site. FWIW, that screener reports a total of 6,033 domestic "funds" in the nine style boxes. Well less than the 6,918 total of the nine boxes.
This suggests that M* is including in its "number of funds" counts some esoteric classes or types of funds that neither ICI nor M* itself (in its screeners) is counting. That in turn lends credibility to the idea that M* switched from share classes to funds in its reporting of total funds in category.
From the M* glossary (UK version):

Number of Funds in Category
The number of funds classified in the same category as this fund.

https://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/glossary/98231/number-of-funds-in-category.aspx

It seems that number of funds have gone down significantly for all 9-box categories.
2023

1,200   1,430   1,217
553      420    397
597      615    489

2024/YTD/Daily View

603   705   610
277   201   211
298   298   251

These correspond to:

IVW   IVV   IVE
IJK   IJH   IJJ
IJT   IJR   IJS

M* was going to make changes to its 9-box styles in August without much fanfare. But this is only early-July. I will check if M* jumped the gun.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/62403/m-equity-style-box-changes-august-2024#latest
Edit/Add. I couldn't find anything. But I see that total market VTI has been 71% LC, 20% MC, 8% SC in July. If someone is tracking M* style boxes, please post if this is significantly different from that in June or earlier.

So I tend to look at the Buy-Sell-Why thread often and just today focused on the Large Cap Growth category. Scrolling down to the Growth of $10K graph I saw that over a 10-yr time span the number of funds so categorized by M* dropped by nearly 66% if I'm reading or interpreting the data correctly. Is this true? Is it because of the explosion in ETF's or other?
From the FSCVX data page (from 2014 - 2024):
# of Invest. in Cat. 1,710- 1,681- 1,463- 1,363- 1,405- 1,360- 1,289- 1,237- 1,235- 1,200- 603

Results since 20220101 ("Normalization") dinky linky.
Results since 20200101 ("Covid") dinky linky.
I added the covid period because I will look at the Martin ratios for the funds.
It's down to FDSVX or PRWAX. Tip of the cap to @stillers for drawing my attention to funds I had missed.

@Stillers, the money was previously invested in tech funds, so moving to growth seems appropriate. Good point about the inflation news, OTOH, if it's good news . . .
I look at the last three years to see how the funds have behaved since the end of ZIRP. And when I run them through Portfolio Visualizer I'll start the clock at January 2022 for an even tougher challenge. I think the issues of inflation and interest rates are likely to be with us for a while.
I did have to look at five and ten year returns to insure that the funds I am testing have performed at least as well a AMAGX over those time periods. I then looked for funds with an active share over 50. That left me with FDSVX, PRWAX, and FTRNX which I am examining now.
I am at 30% bonds, 10% cash. Most of the bonds are low duration floaters. But I'll leave that for another day. That's about as high as it will get for me given what I have in IYK, FSUTX, and GLIFX.

Tough choice for us between FDSVX and FBGRX but settled on the former. PRWAX is one of the most underrated LCG funds. We would own any of them over AMAGX.
Other thoughts:
Not sure of your situation, but if this is new money, might not be the best time to plow into Growth after its epic, current bull run. FWIW, we have recently reduced overall stock exposure including Growth and may go to all Cash if things start getting ugly en route to Nov. Also, if plowing money in this week, we would at least do some before/after Thu/Fri CPI/PPI announcements. They've been market movers this year.
We always look beyond 3 years of performance and think that everyone should. If its the same manager(s), not sure why anyone wouldn't.
Baron's Growth funds can run very hot/cold. We're likely done with that family of funds because of it.
ERs are important but TR is obviously far more important (to us at least). A great, managed LCG fund will run ~.50-.80, as do the ones I listed. Coupled with a LCG index fund at ~.02 and you're at half that. FWIW, our weighted portfolio ER is .46. If ERs though are a primary driver for you, looks like AMAGX's ER of .91 is the highest of the bunch here and almost double FBGRX's .48.

FWIW: My 30/70 retirement portfolio has 4 CEFs which are 31.9% of the total PF. They run from 7 to 9% each.

Yet it is legal and acceptable for banks to carry CREs at their book values, i.e. the CREs don't have to be marked-to-market promptly. That was one of the issues that shook up the regional banks in early-2023. There are other problems too - e.g. HTM and AFS classifications of Treasurues and bonds held.
Those issues are just no longer in the news, but those problems didn't disappear.
BTW, originators of securitized debt (MBS, ABS, CLO) are now required to keep some on their books and there are also stricter clawback provisions for bad/defective debt found in the pool. These reforms came after the GFC.
Regional Bank ETF KRE https://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=KRE&p=D&yr=2&mn=0&dy=0&id=p19878069220

This looks like the variation of the housing disaster we had only 15 years ago. That was not too long ago and how the mechanics are already in rinse and repeat cycle. I guess greed never sleeps.
As a society, we admire / glorify people that commit white color crimes. The more blatant ones get elected to public offices.
(A easier fix would be to require the originators and underwriters to hold a percentage of the loans that they originate / bring to the market.)

The Week in Charts (07/08/24)
The most important charts and themes in markets, including...
00:00 Intro
00:21 Topics
01:30 Betting on a Rate Cut
06:07 The All-Time High Party Continues
12:25 Investors Getting Greedy
14:18 Apple's Highest Valuation Ever
16:37 Tesla's Incredible Comeback
18:28 A Coordinated Contraction
21:11 More Listings = More Price Drops
23:17 Cheaper Rents
Video

The Greek poet Archilochus wrote, "the fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." And, literally, that's all we know about the writings of Archilochus.
I suspect that the folks at BoA Merrill Lynch qualify as a foxes. I have attached Ms Subramanian's slideshow from the Morningstar keynote. The folks at Morningstar just shared it with me. It is a fascinating document touching, so far as I can tell, on every investing-related issue ever raised by anyone back as far as the Sumerians. For folks who revel in data and recommendations, is a trove.
Time to Get Picky

@WABAC, Fidelity has a ton of growthy OEFs and ETFs of their own. Even their own core funds can be growthy. Look forward to your pick.

An Interesting exercise. Four of the candidates ended up being "Great Owls." ILGFX bit the dust first for being quanty, and hugging the index more than the others. It also had the lowest investments by management.
That left AMAGX, BDAFX, and FUNYX. At the dinky linky is the Portfolio Visualizer backtest.
The active share for AMAGX and BDAFX is practically equal. AMAGX gets me to the highest allocation to tech. I like the allocation to industrials. It has the lowest allocation to financials, which is OK by me. It also features lower beta and standard deviation while still adding that tech. I like that for the IRA.
If Fido offered a cheaper version of the Baron Fund it might have been too good to pass up.

Is anyone else having problems with Schwab Mutual Fund Compare Screener .
I am on a MAc 10.15 - its old ... I know . I am having problems getting the compare tool to work - I am wondering if its me.. on A MAc... an older one at that !

Bogelheads.org I peeked about the site fast and found this discussion link.
This tread is named, 'Customer Service Mega Thread' and begins March 29, 2024. Scroll down the page to the blue colored area, second paragraph. This write says a lot.
I have no desire to read the thread, but some here may have an interest.
My last Vanguard connection was a 401k plan. The rollover of that plan to a Fidelity IRA was absolutely smooth. A three way phone call and presto, finished in about 20 minutes. I suspect that wouldn't happen today.

"Maybe their new motto will be 'Please buy our finds, but not from us.'"
Exactly. Vanguard is a fine mutual fund company but a lousy brokerage.

+1

My primary reasons for becoming a Vanguard customer were: 1) good low-cost actively-managed funds;
2) firm had strong reputation; 3) firm was mutually owned vs. publicly traded.
I was never fond of Vanguard's investor website even after it was redesigned.
I seldom contacted Vanguard for assistance but did experience several suboptimal interactions.
Dan Wiener (The Independent Adviser for Vanguard Investors) chronicled Vanguard's customer service
issues for years. Regardless of the new CEO, I'm not confident these long-standing issues will be
ameliorated in the near-future. Updated commission and fee schedules (effective July 1) suggest
Vanguard is prioritizing "nickel-and-diming" investors rather than improving customer service.
Consequently, my two Vanguard accounts were recently transferred to other brokerages.

Used to love Vanguard. Not no more. They are just a massive hassle to deal with.
I called them up a short while ago about opening up a new taxable account. I didn't want to open an account online, but couldn't find a form on their website. The rep told me they don't post the forms because they're trying to save me money. I explained that I'd rather do everything via USPS. I had to be sent a form via a super-secret email thing or whatever. I don't care if they shave another .0001 points off the expense ratio at this point -- I'll pay that extra .0001 in ER to get decent service.

Leaving? Possibly 11/6?

Nope. I'll probably be sleeping in on 11/6....