I started reading the article in the OP and then decided to first check the fund out. Its near 50% financials (say, 40% if you back out BRK) is too much for me. (I already own a lot of BRK.) However, the fund did well in 2023 and 24 notwithstanding its zero allocation to Tech, HC, CD, and Utilities. So, if one is looking for the sector bias this fund offers, may be it is worth a look because the managers may be doing a good job with security selection.

I second @Old_Joe's opinion about Schwab chat. I have not used other brokerages' chat (and have not checked if they have one) but I started using Schwab chat because once I wanted to have a written record of the communication and I was pleasantly surprised the results were better via the chat. For example, I could request and get a supervisor more easily on the chat and may be because everything is in writing, the answers are more definite & less B.S. (does not mean accurate) and result oriented. Something I could not get done via three phone calls got done after one chat.
I think it is a misunderstanding to think executives are driven by a goal to increase investor wealth. Here is one ugly truth - some of the people I worked with during my 40s talked quite often about their aspiration to become board members of public companies when they retired (of course, they all wanted to become CEOs but there is a supply constraint for those jobs). For many CEOs stock of the company they used to run does not make up significant part (5%?) of their portfolio a year after they retire from the company.
I hope I am not coming across as having a gripe about anything or anyone. I think it is good to acknowledge the lay of the land and adjust our methods to stay nimble and effortless. No use complaining about the weather - learn to dress or modify behavior appropriately to minimize impact / maximize output.

From the Wall Street Journal's analysis of the economic assumptions released with the Biden budget:

Economic forecasts released Monday as part of the White House’s 2025 budget proposal assume that three-month Treasury bill rates will average 5.1% this year, the same as in 2023, before declining to 4% next year and 3.3% in 2026.
The White House sees the average 10-year Treasury note yield rising to 4.4% this year from 4.1% last year and then declining gradually to 3.7% by the end of this decade.

My recollection is that 5% is dead average for the 10 year note over the past century. Good news: I recall hearing it from Kai Ryssdal on a Marketplace podcast. Bad news: can't track it down.
Those sort of interest rates remind investors that there is an alternative to stocks, which might well occasion a shift from equities and at least the tiniest bit of discipline on the part of managers (fund and otherwise). Jon Sindreu at the Wall Street Journal published an interesting project that suggests that cash might handily beat stocks over the next 12 years and would be pretty competitive with them over the next couple years. His projection of asset class returns, based on "quarters similar to today," puts the two-year APR for stocks at 7.something percent, cash at about 7% and bonds at over 8%. The dominance of stocks would return unless you had a time horizon of five years or more ("How to Invest? More than ever, it depends on who you are?" Wall Street Journal, 3/15/2024)

I wish the White House (or anybody else) a lot of luck trying to predict where interest rates will be a year or two out.
I also recall hearing, years ago, that the long-term average for the 10 year Treasury being around 5%, but I know I didn't hear it from your source.
I have to laugh, or maybe yell, at young people today whining about 6-7% mortgage rates (which are also normalized, if memory serves). I bought my first house in 1975 and paid 8.5% which was the going rate. It went up into double-digits a few years later.
Maybe the era we're in with "high" (normalized) interest rates will encourage young people to not borrow so much, and instead try to live more within their means. I learned that valuable lesson from my father, who was a struggling young man when the Great Depression hit. Most people today cannot comprehend what those people went through.
As for cash being competitive with other asset classes, I have about 11% of my retirement portfolio in a 5.2% money market, which makes for a nice stable portion, yet still earning something -- unlike it would have a few years ago when "cash is trash."

If you like a good story, I suppose the crash and rebirth of GOODX is an interesting one for a magazine that needs subscribers.
If you're looking for a fund that is darn near 50% financial services, here's your ticket.
I just bought AMAGX for the taxable. They don't own financials. I don't seek financials for the IRA. YMMV.
@David_Snowball says:

Drama. Growth. Evolution. Ten of one, half dozen of the other!
Since our July 2023 profile, GOODX has posted top 10 (of our 300+ peers) performance in both total return and risk-adjusted return.

Have you added it to your portfolio?

We use the UTAH 529 and they recently updated their account information to provide instructions and a form to mail if one chooses to move monies from the 529 plan to a Roth IRA of the beneficiary. This is part of the Secure Act 2.0 revisions which have been discussed here previous.
This is strictly a FYI for those who may have this circumstance; and should check their 529 plan for updates to this process.
Remain curious,
Catch

The Patriot Act and Financial Institutions.
A long list of choices and information for the ACT. Perhaps there is a perceived violation that is outside of Fidelity's control.
@Crash . Please provide real information regarding under staffing at Fidelity. Thank you.

I dont think it is the employee's fault as I suspect they are rushed through training and put to work ASAP
although I have to say there are some strange things going on at Fidelity.
My wife and I moved a small (LT 10%) of her account to Schwab to make it easier to gift our kids some stock.
We got five daily phone calls from a fidelity rep wanting to know why.

Well that struck a chord. About a dozen years ago, I moved a small (LT 10%) annuity from Fidelity. And I got a call from my rep at Fidelity (back when Fidelity assigned reps), who harangued me for about 15 minutes before putting a specialist on the phone. All in all, about an hour with them telling me why the Fidelity product was so much better than where I was moving to, how they could stop the transfer before it was complete if I okay'd that.
Something else about this call. As a rule I don't use a cell phone. (I have one, pay $10/year to keep the line active, but rarely turn it on; the flip phone makes a great pocket watch.) I don't give out my number because people just leave messages that I don't hear for months.
Somehow Fidelity got that number, and rather than call me on my preferred home number, they called the cell phone. I was on a business trip to California (which is why my phone was on). So I wound up on a one hour call with Fidelity at 6:30 AM, being remarkably coherent in explaining why their particular offering didn't best meet my needs.
Reps get paid in part by AUM of their customers; this is scaled by how lucrative each dollar is - more for an annuity. They also get paid for retaining assets. So my transfer out must have hit the rep's pocketbook hard.

My experiences with Call Centers contradict that, though. Regardless of location, there is no such thing as getting a satisfactory outcome. Then they send you an email, wanting you to rate the call. And there's no way to even SAY anything. It's just a 1-5 star "rating." And how much does that communicate to anyone??? Might make someone FEEL good..... Feces.

The graphic is set for the 5 days ending March 15, Friday; for the best to worst % returns in select etf categories. One may then also select the one month column to align the one month return best to worst; or for the other listed time frame columns.
ADD an etf performance of your choosing, if you desire.
*** Requested ADD: For the week and YTD
--- EWW = +2.07% / -1.33% (I Shares, Mexico)
MMKT note: Fidelity mmkt's yields remained nominally steady this week, with core acct's yields at 4.96% (SPAXX) and 5.00% (FDRXX).
NOTE: The majority of all equity and bond sectors finished the week with negative returns.
Remain curious,
Catch

The Week in Charts (03/08/24)
The most important charts and themes in markets, including...
00:00 Intro
00:18 Topics
01:10 Here Comes the FOMO
09:20 March 2009 Low: 15-Year Anniversary
11:53 Digital and Physical Gold Rush
17:19 Spending Like Drunken Sailors
22:51 Rising Household Debt Burden
27:29 38 Consecutive Months of Jobs Growth
33:18 Labor Market Loosening
24:42 Rising Wages, Falling Inflation
Video
Blog

15 March, 2024:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2024-03-15/bloomberg-real-yield-03-15-2024

15 March. Beware the Ides of March!
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2024-03-16/wall-street-week-03-15-2024-video

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/277751/000119312524069276/d759709d497.htm
Janus Henderson Adaptive Global Allocation Fund
Janus Henderson Mid Cap Value Fund "L share class"

CreditSights I think is a good firm that occasionally comes on Real Yield.
Yes, I recognize the name. But I can't recall the names and faces of PEOPLE connected with that outfit. I'll go look for today's show, now. ...
(15th March. "Beware The Ides of March!")
EDIT to add: I'm not hearing the gloom and doom message. I can --- just as you can--- "hear between the lines:" without some sense of urgency, they would have no show to offer on-air, right? I'm seeing and hearing references to "higher for longer." Big surprise? NO. Rate-cut expectations have been pushed back--- as I thought, myself--- into maybe even 2025. Inflation will be a gigantic "bugger" to try to get it all the way down to 2%. And there have lately been lots of tech layoffs. Is the job market cracking? Retail spending is down. Are we already in a shallow, weak recession? Maybe not, according to the classic definition, but...

My recollection is that 5% is dead average for the 10 year note over the past century. Good news: I recall hearing it from Kai Ryssdal on a Marketplace podcast. Bad news: can't track it down
TheMarketplace piece was actually written by Sabri Ben-Achour, though read by Kai Ryssdal. At the 2:15 mark (or in the text) you'll find:

“You know, actually, historically speaking they’re not that high,” said David Krause, emeritus professor of finance at Marquette University. He pointed out that on average over 100 years, long-term Treasury yields were 5.2%. Close to where they are now.

https://www.marketplace.org/2023/10/23/why-are-bond-yields-so-high-right-now/
I'm still trying to harmonize the second piece mentioned in the OP (by Jon Sindreu) suggesting cash yielding 7%/year over the next two years with the first piece quoting White House economic forecasts for cash (3 mo. Treasuries) averaging 5.1% this year and 4% next year. Even if that forecast is a bit rosy (costing the Treasury less in interest), I don't see how one gets to 7%, not just in the near future (next few months) but sustained over a period of two years.
Reading the 3/14/2024 online version of the WSJ piece I don't find mention of a two year timeframe. It does say that looking at quarters similar to today, " On a one-year performance basis, stocks weren't just riskier, they also returned less on average than bonds and cash." Print version must have more, or is at least different.

Interesting. Morningstar Magazine (never heard of it before) is a quarterly with 75-80 pages with many M* articles, analyst reports and features; and lots of ads. Free to professionals, but unclear how much it costs otherwise (I couldn't find unless I go through all of the subscribing steps).
https://www.morningstar.com/products/magazine
For more info, it says to go to M* Insights, but the articles there aren't by M* Magazine issues.
https://www.morningstar.com/research/blog

From the Wall Street Journal's analysis of the economic assumptions released with the Biden budget:

Economic forecasts released Monday as part of the White House’s 2025 budget proposal assume that three-month Treasury bill rates will average 5.1% this year, the same as in 2023, before declining to 4% next year and 3.3% in 2026.
The White House sees the average 10-year Treasury note yield rising to 4.4% this year from 4.1% last year and then declining gradually to 3.7% by the end of this decade.

My recollection is that 5% is dead average for the 10 year note over the past century. Good news: I recall hearing it from Kai Ryssdal on a Marketplace podcast. Bad news: can't track it down.
Those sort of interest rates remind investors that there is an alternative to stocks, which might well occasion a shift from equities and at least the tiniest bit of discipline on the part of managers (fund and otherwise). Jon Sindreu at the Wall Street Journal published an interesting project that suggests that cash might handily beat stocks over the next 12 years and would be pretty competitive with them over the next couple years. His projection of asset class returns, based on "quarters similar to today," puts the two-year APR for stocks at 7.something percent, cash at about 7% and bonds at over 8%. The dominance of stocks would return unless you had a time horizon of five years or more ("How to Invest? More than ever, it depends on who you are?" Wall Street Journal, 3/15/2024)

We ain't all alone -
McDonald’s hit by ‘technology outage’ in UK, Ireland, Australia, Japan and China
McDonald’s restaurants in multiple countries have been hit by a “technology outage”, with restaurant, drive-through and online orders hit.
For a 90-minute period on Friday they “couldn’t serve anyone”. In Hong Kong, the McDonald’s Facebook page said self-ordering kiosks and mobile phone orders were “not functioning” and asked customers to order at the restaurant counter. A customer in Australia said it was “impossible to buy anything” via drive-through or online.
The company’s global chief information officer, Brian Rice, said the problem was due to an unspecified change to IT systems run by an outside contractor for McDonalds, blaming a “third-party provider during a configuration change”.
(The above are edited excerpts from a current report in The Guardian.)

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1413594/000110465924034878/a24-8908_1497.htm
497 1 a24-8908_1497.htm 497
abrdn Funds
(the "Trust")
abrdn Emerging Markets Sustainable Leaders Fund (the "Fund")
Supplement dated March 15, 2024 to the Fund's
Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (the "SAI"),
each dated February 29, 2024, as supplemented to date
This Supplement updates certain information contained in the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and SAI for the Fund, a series of the Trust, dated February 29, 2024.
On March 13, 2024, the Board of Trustees of the Trust approved an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization relating to the reorganization (the "Reorganization") of the Fund into the abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (the "Acquiring Fund"), a series of the Trust.
The Fund's investment adviser, abrdn Inc. ("abrdn"), proposed the Reorganization, in part, because of the Fund's decrease in asset size and increased distribution opportunities available to the Acquiring Fund. abrdn also serves as investment adviser to the Acquiring Fund.
The Reorganization does not require approval by shareholders of the Fund. A combined information statement and prospectus describing the proposed Reorganization in more detail will be mailed to shareholders of the Fund prior to the Reorganization. In the Reorganization, each shareholder of the Fund will become a shareholder of the Acquiring Fund and will receive, on a tax-free basis, shares of the Acquiring Fund with the same aggregate net asset value as their shares of the Fund. Shareholders of each class of the Fund will receive each corresponding class's shares in the Acquiring Fund. A Fund shareholder who does not wish to become a shareholder of the Acquiring Fund may redeem shares of the Fund at any time prior to the Reorganization.
It is expected that the Reorganization will be completed in the second quarter of 2024.
Please retain this Supplement for future reference.

I agree. But FLATX has lived up to it's name !!!
"flat" for the last ten years. COBYX has 50% Latin America and is doing much better