I'm a little confused. Roger about VOO. But I'm looking at funds I was in in the first decade of this century, charting TWEIX, JENSX, FPACX, JABAX, and FASMX from the century's first trading day through the end of 2010.
(You could move the start or endpoint to make it an even 10y if desired and make the performance a bit worse, I believe.)
For the 11y span I specify, though, the growth ranges from up almost half (Fidelity, not so great, but sure better than SP500's nominal breakeven) to >~60% (Jensen and Janus) to way more than doubling (TWEIX, +133%) and finally to First Pacific, winning at +215%.
As always, I was inconstant, not a faithful or steady investor, as I recall, so I did not see all of these gains. But this active management was often pretty impressive for such a tough time.
Inflation over my span was ~31% total, 2.5%/yr.

Applying 5% withdrawals - With COLA and Without COLA
Lump-sum $1,000,000
Period 1/1/2000 - 6/30/23
All distributions reinvested.
Monthly withdrawals $4167/mo initial + COLA (or $50,000/yr initial + COLA); also a column for without COLA (in the PV Run With COLA, just change Inflation-Adjusted to NO).
Final Values
Portfolio, With COLA, Without COLA
50% SPY + 50% VBMFX, 226,523, 940,574
VBINX 60-40, 174,397, 935,570
VWELX 62-38, 1,554,586 2,354,730
PV Run With COLA

@Mona- I previously used the account aggregation service at Schwab, but didn't know that it was "Yodelee". I have no idea if Yodelee is any more or less secure than any other aggregator, but after a previous discussion here on MFO I got rid of all of my account aggregation. Not worth the potential problems.

@Gary1952, helpful analysis. +1

Using Backtest, if one started with $1m in 2000 using 50/50 SPY/VBMFX (BND was not in existence) and took all income, rebalanced yearly, one ended up with slightly over $1m in 2010 and a decent income stream (positive TR). It's all we have to foretell the future. A couple of mistakes trading in 10 years to make a good TR could have been serious.

AAII Sentiment Survey, 7/26/23
Bullish remained the top sentiment (44.8%; above average) & bearish remained the bottom sentiment (20.7%; low); neutral remained the middle sentiment (31.0%; average); Bull-Bear Spread was +20.7% (above average). Investor concerns: Inflation (still high); economy; the Fed (rate hiked by +25 bps); dollar; crypto regulations; market volatility (VIX, VXN, MOVE); Russia-Ukraine war (74+ weeks, 2/24/22-now); geopolitical. For the Survey week (Th-Wed), stocks were mixed (growth down, cyclicals up), bonds down, oil up, gold down, dollar up. Fed rate cuts may be in 2024. Fed staff sees only soft landing, not recession. #AAII #Sentiment #Markets
LINK

Sure, that may be true @FD1000, but you only know that after the fact. Some people are simply not comfortable holding stocks and some don't see any reason to hold bonds. Since many are not market mavens and may or may not be confused or unsure of what proportions make the most sense I contend that surviving on income is a valid option if that is what makes them the most comfortable come hell or high water. That's okay.
I hold a good chunk of PDI, thankfully above water. It's a matter of buying it at the right time under the right conditions. I use the generous monthly distributions to feed equity positions in the S&P500 and the QQQ's. Is my total return being met even though I hold that loser PDI? Not looking for an answer, to each their own as even you have acknowledged.

He did say that - inflation may be down to +2% average target only in 2025, but rate cuts may start as inflation approaches +2% (sometime in 2024, but not in 2023). So the cuts may start when inflation is between +2% to +3%, but he won't commit to a number. Moreover, he said that if the Fed waited to cut rates until +2% was achieved, then it may be too late and then inflation may go down to well below +2%.

Surviving only on income isn't a good option if your portfolio loses money or doesn't make enough, hence total return is everything. If your portfolio is big enough, you will survive anyway.
In the last 5 years, PDI paid about 50% of income in the last 5 years but was up less than 4%. So, 50% income sounds great but less than 4% is a bad performance, especially when the no-brainer SPY made 74%.

Did Powell say that the FOMC expects inflation to go down to 2% only in 2025 or am I conflating with some other 2025 mention? Sorry, I did not take notes.

There may be a mix up in times, EST, PST, etc.
Bond market closes at 2pm Eastern.
Stock market closes at 4pm Eastern.
Mutual funds price at 4pm Eastern.

Sorry it looks like I confused you with my PST. Bond market closes at 5PM Eastern.
I edited my previous post to make it read better.
If the bond mutual funds price at 4PM Eastern, price discovery can be messy, especially on a heavily traded CUSIP or on a heavy volume day. I am surprise they do not wait for the bond market closing price at 5PM EST.

YBB Notes
FED FUND rate hiked by +25 bps to 5.25-5.50%; bank reserves rate 5.4%; discount rate 5.5%. Discount Window use is up and that is being encouraged. More rate hikes are possible but at slower pace. Monetary policy is restrictive as the real fed fund rate is positive. No rate cuts in 2023, but may be in 2024 as inflation approaches +2% average target. Credit conditions have also tightened, an expected effect of Fed tightening.
QT continues for Treasuries at -$60 billion/mo, for MBS at -$35 billion/mo. QT may moderate when it's time to cut rates.
INFLATION is still too high, but headline inflation is down more than core inflation. Longer-term inflation-expectations are moderate. Pandemic and Russia-Ukraine war (economic) effects have normalized. The expiration of the safe grain-corridor deal has raised grain prices some, but that isn't a huge concern for now.
JOBS market remains strong, unemployment rate remains low despite fed rate hikes.
HOUSING, being rate sensitive, is affected as 30-yr mortgage rates are 7%. Existing homeowners don't want to move because of their low-rate mortgages, but supply of new homes is coming.
ECONOMY remains resilient and strong. Effects of monetary policy lag, but these days, there are also some anticipatory moves. The Fed staff doesn't see recession, but only a soft landing.
REGIONAL BANK situation has stabilized. The latest BANC + PACW merger is normal consolidation among the affected regional banks. But the Fed is keeping an eye on the situation.
LINK

VIX (the original one) continues to slumber at below 13.50
Must say Powell’s droning on is having same effect on me. One ETF that tries to hedge market risk based on changes in the VIX, TAIL, is off about 46% since inception in 2017. A record even John Hussman must envy. Damn poor job hedging risk as well. :)
Sitting out a rainy day. Guess the FOMC minutes / press conference had a small, but positive impact on metals. Gold is inching towards $2,000. Silver has been much more profitable this year. Not a recommendation. Just an observation.
@Yogi - Thanks for the post.

You're looking for Table II. That is in Pub 590B here:
https://www.irs.gov/publications/p590b#en_US_2022_publink100090290
Table I (which you can find by scrolling up from Table ii) is used for inherited IRAs. Table III (scroll down from Table II) is the "usual" RMD table.
Table III simplifies calculations for most IRAs by assuming that the beneficiary has the same age (life expectancy) as the owner. The IRS figures that if the two ages are within 10 years of each other, that's, well, close enough for government work.
But if the age difference is more than 10 years, it makes a significant difference in the joint life expectancy. Since your spouse is more than 10 years younger than you, your joint life expectancy is longer than it would be if your two ages were the same. So the number you divide your IRA balance by to get your RMD is higher. That's better (lower RMD).
If you were 73 now and your spouse were 62, then the IRS would figure your joint life expectancy as 27,2 (Table II). The "usual" table (Table III) would give a life expectancy of 26.5.

I appreciate your work for ALL of our sakes. What you say is clear, but I am unable to transfer and "translate" it to the particular details of my own situation. The numbers on the tables relate to other numbers on the tables, but none of it means anything since a starting point is impossible for me to find. I've sent you a Direct Message. I hope you don't mind. :)

I was assuming the OP was specifically talking about Traditional/Rollover IRAs as titled in this thread, not other types of retirement accounts such as 401/403/457 accounts. Those are two very different kind of retirement accounts, and when you set up your Schwab Accounts, I believe they are handled separately, in separate Schwab accounts. I do not believe Schwab would ever co-mingle Rollover IRAs with any remaining 401/403/457 holdings. I don't currently own any 401/403/457 accounts, so I do not have any personal experience with my Schwab brokerage holding both kinds of retirement accounts.

Nasdaq 100 ETF Holdings: Here's a look at the top holdings of the Nasdaq 100 ETF with their current weighting, their weighting on July 10 (if applicable) and year-to-date performance in 2023.
Apple Inc (AAPL): New: 11.6%, Old: 12.5%, +54.9% YTD
Microsoft Corp (MSFT): New: 9.8%, Old: 12.9%, +44.8%
Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN): New 5.1%, Old: 6.9%, +50.3%
Nvidia Corp (NVDA) New: 4.2%, Old 7.0%, +219.7%
Meta Platforms Inc (META): New: 3.5%, Old: 4.3%, +135.6%
Tesla Inc (TSLA): New: 3.3%, Old: 4.5%, +147.5%
Broadcom Inc (AVGO): New: 3.1%, Old: N/A, +64.8%
Alphabet Class A (GOOGL): New 2.8%, Old: 7.4% combined Class A/Class C, +36.4%
Alphabet Class C (GOOG): New: 2.8%, Old 7.4% combined Class A/Class C, +36.1%
PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP): New 2.2%, Old: N/A, +6.4%
After the rebalance and Monday's trading session, 23 of the components of the Nasdaq 100 ETF have a weighting of 1% or more. Several of the biggest gainers in 2023 have seen their weighting come down as shown above.
My interest in this stems from how this will affect the ETF's I hold whose top 10 holdings tend to be near duplicates of the above. Truth is that I may never know because of random day to day market action.

You're looking for Table II. That is in Pub 590B here:
https://www.irs.gov/publications/p590b#en_US_2022_publink100090290
Table I (which you can find by scrolling up from Table ii) is used for inherited IRAs. Table III (scroll down from Table II) is the "usual" RMD table.
Table III simplifies calculations for most IRAs by assuming that the beneficiary has the same age (life expectancy) as the owner. The IRS figures that if the two ages are within 10 years of each other, that's, well, close enough for government work.
But if the age difference is more than 10 years, it makes a significant difference in the joint life expectancy. Since your spouse is more than 10 years younger than you, your joint life expectancy is longer than it would be if your two ages were the same. So the number you divide your IRA balance by to get your RMD is higher. That's better (lower RMD).
If you were 73 now and your spouse were 62, then the IRS would figure your joint life expectancy as 27,2 (Table II). The "usual" table (Table III) would give a life expectancy of 26.5.

Back to the original topic…
Amy Zhang was supposed to be a star SCG and MCG manager at Brown Capital. She got hired away by Alger. However, her record there leaves a great deal to be desired. Not that her former fund BCSIX has shot the lights out since she left; its total return for the past 5 years is only 7.5%. OTOH, AGOZX has racked up a 5-year loss of 3.07% under Zhang’s tutelage. Her Alger MCs haven’t done any better.

As usual, it depends. ETFs could have higher volatility during the day based on real time event and back to "normal" when it's over while OEFs didn't experience it because the event happened between 10 to 11 AM.
Generally in time of stress, well known indexes such as SPY behave better than tiny ETFs.
Real observation: I have seen HYD(HY muni) close down 0.5% or more while the OEF was flat.