Palm Valley lists the following:
Inception 4/30/2019
INVESTMENT PERFORMANCE (%) as of March 31, 2024
___________________ Quarter YTD 1 Year 3 Year Inception
Palm Valley Capital Fund 1.04% 1.04% 7.38% 4.55% 7.55%
S&P SmallCap 600 Index 2.46% 2.46% 15.93% 2.29% 8.47%
Morningstar Small Cap Index 5.69% 5.69% 21.51% 2.68% 8.31%

Nibbled on a 500s starter position in PBA, a Canadian pipeline. Will add lower as appropriate.

You know what else puts this fund into perspective? The fact that it is more than 5 years old and has only attracted $273 million in assets. Maybe most people, like me, see the folly in paying a 1.26 expense ratio for a fund that routinely holds so much cash.

MikeM " @FD1000, you seem to have an incredulous dislike for this manager and his fund."
FD: There is no dislike here. I used to like PIMIX and had over 50% in it for years, but 0% since 01/2018.
FAIRX: I owned it for about 8 years during 2000-10, and left it behind since then.
I only like funds that make money. If they don't I switch I don't care how M* defines it.
Remember, if Cinnamond is a great star why he hasn't managed the same fund for decades and increased the AUM to billions? Millions of investors have been looking for an edge and all missed it?
The above is just an opinion, you can do what you like, it's your money.
I already posted the goals from https://www.palmvalleycapital.com/goal
Investing for Risk defined as losing money.
Flexible mandate allows for patience (FD: that means, if we lag, don't blame us :-)
No sector constraints
Elevated career risk
Independent; unique
Fiduciary duty uninhibited

:) @FD1000, you seem to have an incredulous dislike for this manager and his fund.
I think others in this thread have said they see this fund as a sleep-easy investment in small caps. If that is important to the investor, what's wrong with that? Why are you harping on it not beating the S&P 500?
If PVCMX was called a conservative small-cap balanced fund, would that work better? That is more accurate for what the portfolio represents (13% equity, 37% bonds, 45% cash). When thought of as a balanced fund, maybe it's a category beater. It is doing better than the heralded new TRP/Giroux conservative balanced fund PRCFX (41% equity, 53% bonds, 6% cash)
I think @WABAC said it earlier. This should not be labeled a SC fund. It has a different mandate. The manager doesn't categorize the fund. M* does -> incorrectly it appears.
FWIW, I do not own the fund. I do own PRCFX, significantly.

Saba filed today against NBH - Neuberger Berman Municipal Income. They have a big appetite. Are closed end funds obsolete in the era of ETF's. How do Blackrock or Eaton Vance option income funds compete with JEPI at 35 basis expense ratio.
Note Fidelity just started trading in option income funds - FYEE & FHEQ with low expense ratios. Trading volume is low but will grow.
We could see a large amount of closed end funds disappear.

I get ads/mail from Duke energy monthly to get insurance to cover from the house to the street. I ignore them, house is 23yrs old. I never heard of many problems. How common is it to have problems from the house to the street. Crap, I have a river birch right above my water meter but the lines (water/sewer) run pretty deep in the ground. 5-10' deep.

I added to NAD and EVT in my taxable account...adding about 5% to each. Given their FI holdings, they will likely bump up when rates eventually recede along with 4.63% and 7.49% distribution respectively. In my IRA rollover I cashed out of RPMGX. 20 years ago I jumped through hoops to maintain this fund as I changed employer plans. I sold in order to gain additional fixed income exposure, currently sitting in SNVXX. I'm waiting for a pullback and then will initiate a new position in most likely an allocation fund...FMSDX and FPURX are in the mix at present.

another review of the methodologies
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/21/opinion/inflation-data-economy.html

"Getting 5% ain't so bad". No, it's not. Going to move about 10% from Schwab SUTXX MMKT into two Treasuries- one for 2025 and one for 2026.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1014913/000110465924063686/tm2414610d1_497.htm
497 1 tm2414610d1_497.htm 497
Filed pursuant to Rule 497(e)
Registration No. 333-07305
1940 Act File No. 811-07685
FRONTIER FUNDS, INC.
Supplement to Prospectus Dated October 31, 2023
Frontier HyperiUS Global Equity Fund
Institutional Class Shares (FHYPX)
Service Class Shares (FHGSX)
The Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Frontier Funds, Inc. (the “Company”), based upon the recommendation of Frontegra Asset Management, Inc. (“Frontegra”), has determined to liquidate the Frontier HyperiUS Global Equity Fund (the “Fund”). Frontegra is the Fund’s investment adviser and Hyperion Asset Management Limited doing business as H.A.M.L. is the Fund’s subadviser. After considering a variety of factors, the Board concluded that it would be advisable and in the best interest of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund be closed and liquidated as a series of the Company, effective as of the close of business on the liquidation date, June 10, 2024.
The Board approved a Plan of Liquidation that determines the manner in which the Fund will be liquidated. Pursuant to the Plan of Liquidation and in anticipation of the Fund’s liquidation, the Fund will be closed to new purchases, additional investments and incoming exchanges, except for purchases made through an automatic investment program or the reinvestment of any distributions or a purchase exception that is approved by the officers of the Company, effective after market close on May 22, 2024. After the Fund is closed to new investments, shareholders will be permitted to exchange their shares of the Fund for shares of the other available Frontier Funds or to redeem their shares of the Fund, as provided in the Fund’s prospectus, until the liquidation date. No redemption fees will be imposed by the Fund in connection with redemptions or exchanges; however, please note that your financial intermediary may charge fees in connection with redemptions or exchanges.
Prior to the June 10, 2024, liquidation date, the Fund will no longer actively pursue its stated investment objective, and H.A.M.L. will begin to liquidate the Fund’s portfolio. The Fund’s portfolio managers will likely increase the Fund’s assets held in cash and cash equivalents in order to prepare for an orderly liquidation and to meet anticipated redemption requests. As a result, the Fund is expected to deviate from its stated investment objective, policies and strategies.
Pursuant to the Plan of Liquidation, any shareholder who has not exchanged or redeemed their shares of the Fund prior to the liquidation date of June 10, 2024, will have their shares redeemed and will receive one or more payments representing the shareholder’s proportionate interest in the net assets of the Fund as of the liquidation date, after the Fund has paid or provided for all taxes, expenses and any other liabilities, subject to any required withholdings. The automatic redemption of Fund shares on the liquidation date will generally be treated the same as any other redemption of Fund shares for tax purposes, so that shareholders (other than tax-exempt accounts) will recognize gain or loss for income tax purposes on the redemption of their Fund shares in the liquidation. In addition, the Fund and its shareholders will bear transaction costs and tax consequences associated with the disposition of the Fund’s portfolio holdings prior to the liquidation date. The Fund expects to have declared and paid a distribution or distributions, which, together with all previous such distributions, will have the effect of distributing to the Fund’s shareholders all of the Fund’s investment company taxable income and net capital gain (after reductions for any available capital loss carryforward), if any, realized in the taxable periods ending on or prior to the liquidation date. The distribution or distributions will include any additional amounts necessary to avoid federal income or excise tax. Shareholders should consult their tax adviser for further information about federal, state and local tax consequences relative to their specific situation.
This supplement should be retained with your Prospectus for future reference.
The date of this Supplement to the Prospectus is May 21, 2024.

If the press would just continue to beat the drum on "AI" and "Rate cuts", equities can easily move up another 10% this year. The market is bogging down a bit here. Just a pause?
Seems all boats have been lifted. Like Blondie sang, the tide is high.
Getting 5% ain't so bad. Reaching for >10% is more fun....as long as the party lasts. Talk of rate cuts might carry us through 2024 in nice shape.
I keep adding small amounts to PHEFX, while mainly earning ~5% from cash (CDs).

Relentlessly scouring the investible world for something. Bell Canada BCE is way-undervalued, per M* at -24% disc. HQ in Verdun-Montreal. Of course the geniuses at Schwab will not allow div. reinvestment. But the share price has dropped to the point where the yield is 8.5%. The analysis was actually thoughtful and intelligent. Limit order is in.

I'm with you Crash ... following the April swoon (which I missed) there's not much 'on sale' at the moment or that I necessarily want to pay up for. At the moment I'm debating between moving cash into an ETF paying 5% or starting to DCA into positions I want to own in the coming weeks.

No consistent relationship has been found between point-to-point TR and safe-withdrawal-rates (SWR). Dave Ramsey recently fell into this trap.
Bengen-type withdrawals should be seen as benchmarks. Not many use them as described - 4% initial withdrawal with annual COLA. PV does have the capability of withdrawals with or without COLA.
Flexible withdrawal approaches are popular. I have my own - keep withdrawal amounts fixed for 5 years & then reevaluate the portfolio & reset the withdrawals. This can lead to 5-6% withdrawals that often keep rising (at 5-yr intervals).
I have another variation of SWR, called SWRM. It's the max withdrawal rate sustainable that also returns the inflation-adjusted principal at the end. Then, the withdrawal program can be restarted. Obviously, SWRM << SWR.

If one were "back testing a portfolio to forward implement" a retirement Withdrawal Strategy using PV as @yogibullbear has outlined above, what funds would you choose?
We can't count on the same results going forward but the hope is past performance at least rhymes with future performance and we adjust as we go.
Criteria:
ER under 1%
3 Fund Portfolio
4% WD Yearly
Minimum 7% total return on a 3,5,10 and 15 yr basis
No COLA - I prefer the portfolio's yearly balance and 4% WD be the determinant of the dollar amount of the WD
Here are some funds for consideration and comment:
90% + Equity Portfolio (VFINX, FBGRX, PRMTX, FSMEX, PRNHX)
Other Choices:
- I often see these choices as being index funds that capture the market as well as sector funds that attempt to capture the outsized gains of a sector.
aggressive-allocation
70/30 or 80/20 Allocation Funds (PRWCX, TSAIX, looking for more choices )
Other Choices:
- Manager risk can be a larger dynamic with these investments. When these funds get it right they often captures more of the upside while reducing some of the downside risk.
moderately-aggressive-allocation
60/40 or 50/50 Balanced Funds (FBALX, VBINX, VWELX, FPURX, VGSTX, GAOZX, DODBX, RBAIX, RGPAX, VGWAX)
Other Balanced Funds:
- Not all balance fund are created the same. This article separate balance funds into three categories - US-centric, Global, and Diversified
balanced-funds
Other considerations:
Low Draw Down / Low Volatility Funds
- Funds that focus on Bonds, Utilities, Preferred stock might fit in this category.
12-battle-tested-low-volatility-funds
and with ETFs:
7-yield-solution-4-etf-portfolio
(JEPI, NUSI, HNDL, HIPS)
These funds should consistently produce a minimum 7% total return that I'll call The 7% Solution - where a retiree "spends down" (WD 4% yearly) while allowing the remaining 3% to grows the portfolio for future inflation adjusted 4% WDs.

Relentlessly scouring the investible world for something. Bell Canada BCE is way-undervalued, per M* at -24% disc. HQ in Verdun-Montreal. Of course the geniuses at Schwab will not allow div. reinvestment. But the share price has dropped to the point where the yield is 8.5%. The analysis was actually thoughtful and intelligent. Limit order is in.
EDIT TO ADD: And now it's been FILLED. I'm taking the tiny bit left in "Cash" and moving it to my chosen Schwab Money Market acct., at about 5% interest.

the distinction between cost method and lot selection
Exactly. Further, each - cost basis and lot selection - is a distinct legal (accounting) fiction. In reality shares owned are nothing but fungible writings in an electronic ledger. For the tax purpose of computing gain, the IRS offers two different methods of ascribing cost - average and actual. If there is no gain to be calculated for taxes (as is the case for tax-sheltered accounts), then there is no cost basis.
That doesn't preclude investors from thinking about how much money they made in buying and selling shares, regardless of whether they are taxed on cap gains. To facilitate this, brokerages often provide their own tax-sheltered "cost basis" calculations for investors to track gains in their minds. Though not on their 1040s.
To illustrate this dichotomy between tax purposes and investor perceptions, consider income averaging. Say you make $100K in a single year, but the IRS lets you average that income over five years. From your perspective, you made $100K up front; you've got $100K in your pocket. From the IRS perspective, you made $20K that year, and you'll make $20K over each of the next four years. Which is real, $100K all at once or $20K each of five years? You may say the former, since you've got $100K now, but if you're talking taxes, the $20K/year is the "real" interpretation.
Likewise, funds and brokerages have their own rules for calculating holding periods. These rules need not be consistent with each other or with tax rules.
Typically, funds (a) waive short term redemption fees on shares purchased via div reinvestment (including cap gain divs), and (b) apply the redemption fee (e.g. 2%) only to those shares sold within the short-term period as opposed to all shares sold in the transaction.
In contrast to (b), brokerages typically charge a flat short term trading fee if any of the shares sold are subject to the brokerage's short term fee. Fidelity, at least, explicitly waives fees on reinvested divs:

[Fidelity's short-term trading fee] does not apply to ... shares purchased through dividend reinvestment.

https://www.fidelity.com/bin-public/060_www_fidelity_com/documents/Brokerage_Commissions_Fee_Schedule.pdf
Finally, to illustrate the difference that ordering rules make, consider the following transactions:
Jan 4 - purchase 100 shares
Nov 25 - purchase 100 shares
Dec 28 - div reinvest - purchase 10 shares
Jan 16 (next year) - sell 110 shares
On a strict FIFO basis, 10 shares (purchased Nov 25) will have been sold within 60 days of purchase. If for the purpose of calculating a short-term redemption fee, reinvested divs are deemed to have been sold first, then the 110 shares sold will be the 10 purchased on Jan 16 and the 100 purchased on Jan 4. No fee will be assessed (assuming no fee is charged for redeeming div reinvestment shares).

There's no cost basis accounting in tax-sheltered vehicles.

You might find the following relevant:
I have a long standing mutual fund holding in my IRA but in March I had some idle cash in the account and I added to that mutual fund, which is subject to a 2% redemption fees if sold within 90 days of purchase.
The fund prospectus says, "In determining whether a redemption fee is applicable to a particular redemption, it is assumed that the redemption is first of shares acquired pursuant to the reinvestment of dividends and capital gains distributions, and next of other shares held by the shareholder for the longest period of time."
I tried to sell shares I bought a few years ago.
Schwab Rep and supervisor are adamant that cost basis method in IRA controls for purpose of applying the 2% redemption fees. They say the March purchase taints the sale because average cost basis is used in that account and thus they have to apply the 2% redemption fees. (The strange part is, their reps are not trained and their system are not designed for their own literature, which correctly says, "Assets using the Average Cost Method will default to the FIFO Lot Selection Method when disposed." We already know the brokerages thoroughly confuse the distinction between cost method and lot selection. If they actually applied the FIFO lot selection as their literature says, there is no redemption fees in my case.)
The above issue is also there at Fidelity. We discussed this in the Fidelity Community in the past year - I go there very rarely these days but anyone active there probably can pull up that discussion. My memory is not good re Fidelity's exact process but they might even just apply average cost basis method (means test the last purchased shares to see if there is a taint) in applying the fund level redemption fees, not withstanding what the customer's selection is. Posters should pay attention to what Fidelity does or read that discussion in Fidelity Community where Fidelity employees participated.
It is interesting how these brokerages' own short term redemption fees ($50) is applied on a FIFO basis but these brokerages use some other method for purposes of applying the fund's redemption fees, irrespective of what the prospectus says. I guess it is easy for them to have a simpler punitive system, rather than customize for each fund. Most customers do not select a cost (or lot) method in retirement accounts and so they are defaulted to a average method. Something to be aware of.
While it is likely differences among funds exist, I have only seen funds apply FIFO.

Withdrawal Studies with Updated PV in 2 Steps
This 2-STEP trick will work with the updated PV. This month is 05/2024 (May), so the free PV will run without issue from 5/1/2014 - 4/30/2024 (the new 10-yr limit). But the PV will also run without limit for start and end dates prior to 5/1/14 (i.e. no limitations on older data beyond the recent 10-yr window; this was found by experimentation with the updated PV). So, the current month provides the unique break point (10 years ago) for these 2 steps.
In this demo, the PV run for Bengen-type 4% withdrawal with annual COLA will be from 1/1/1985 - 4/30/2024 (the maximum possible at PV) in 2 steps.
STEP 1, PV Run 1/1/1985 - 4/30/2014 (dates beyond recent 10 years)
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&sl=3qDAqcuhRZT8zHPzoUQlPT
Initial Principal Amount $100,000, initial Monthly Withdrawal $333 (= 4,000/12 rounded).
A limitation of PV is that these inputs must be integers; to reduce the effect of rounding errors, $100,000 initial was used instead of the default $10,000. 3 funds used were VWELX, FPURX, DODBX and 1 benchmark used was VFINX.
STEP 2, PV Run 5/1/2014 - 4/30/2024 (recent 10 years), with VWELX only (asset % for FPURX and DODBX were cleared to avoid confusion). To start the 2nd PV run, use the VWELX balance and Monthly Withdrawal on 4/31/2014.
“Initial” Principal Amount $1,264,742, “initial” Monthly Withdrawal $745 (=$2,979/4 rounded; this is the payment for 4 months in 2014 divided by 4).
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&sl=6Hbd9noxhDMxTtlIuqR4ns
On 4/30/2024, Final Balance $2,530,484, Monthly payment $978 (=$3,911/4 rounded; payment for 4 months in 2024 divided by 4).
Step 2 can be repeated for FPURX (Step 3), DODBX (Step 4), VFINX (Step 5).
This is more complicated and tricky than the old single-step PV runs. One can subscribe to PV to still have that capacity.
LINK

Per CNBC:
Trump Media & Technology Group, the parent company of Donald Trump’s Truth Social network, reported a net loss of $327.6 million, with total revenue at $770,500 in its first fiscal quarter.
< - >
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/20/trump-media-djt-q1-2024-earnings.html
.. I found the key bullet points of their earnings press release pathetically amusing, too. Sounds like they're desperate for some positive talking points....
~ Completed the Business Combination with Digital World Acquisition Corp. (DJT), Successfully Debuted as Public Company, and Now Has Over 621,000 Retail Shareholders. ~
~ Commenced Trading on Nasdaq, Under Symbol DJT on March 26, 2024 ~
~ Company Has Sufficient Working Capital as a Result of a Going Public Event ~
~ Signs First Contracts for Deployment of its TV Streaming Platform ~