Follow M* intrigues at:
For those with M* access, https://community.morningstar.com/s/question/0D53o00006ce0GGCAY/m-updates-2023
For those without M* access, https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/thread/460/updates-2023

In my quick search with M* Investor Screener yesterday, I missed some usual hybrid favorites because:
1. M* has (again) changed allocation/balanced categories to descriptors: Conservative, Moderate-Conservative, Moderate, Moderate-Aggressive, Aggressive. IMO, it's good as I never liked the %based names (like Allocation/Balanced 30-50%, etc).
BTW, a new M* Category document that is typically published in April but is overdue (in the past, M* has just slipped in the new document but still with the April date).
2. Another recent M* change has separate ratings for classes, so the M* Investor Screener now shows zillions of AF classes that overwhelm the list. There is no way to suppress that (the old Screener had "Distinct Classes Only" option and that showed either the oldest class or that with the lowest ER). IMO, M* can leave the default as-is but add "Distinct Classes Only" option.
3. Some old favorites are Bronze or Neutral now. That can be explained by the terrible 2022 for hybrids that affected them differently (growth-oriented hybrids suffered more). But I doubt that many holders would swap out of them because of that. I noticed that but limited my mentions to Analysts Ratings of Gold/Silver only. For example, JABAX, a hybrid choice in my Schwab DAF is now Neutral, but if it remains that way, Schwab will likely kick it out and replace with something else.
Another recent M* change is the elimination of computer-generated Q-ratings. Justification provided is that the computer-generated ratings are now as good as genuine Analyst Ratings - may be a wishful thinking. I see lots of gobbledygook in the computer-generated ratings reports. M* needs more work on "Mo", its version of AI chatbot, or just use ChatGPT or Bard in the meantime.
FWIW, M* Analyst Ratings are forward-looking and based on multiple factors, while the Star-Ratings are purely based on past performance over 3, 5, 10 years (weighted). With old regular and Q ratings, this covered universe is now substantial.

The old screener enabled one to select on many criteria, including 5 year trailing percentile ranking. The new tool (I hesitate to call it a screener, with so few screening criteria) returns 452 share classes of moderately conservative allocation funds.
With the exception of various classes of American Funds College 529 funds for 2030 (e.g. CTHFX) and 2027 (e.g. CTSFX), and Dunham Enhanced US Market DASPX / DCPSX / DNSPX, they all have analyst ratings.
I suspect Yogi is surprised that some of the usual names aren't regarded more highly. I've never been enamored with the analyst ratings, so this doesn't surprise me. Though perhaps he can identify some funds that are missing. All the T. Rowe Price and Vanguard moderately conservative funds are rated silver or gold.
As to the OP's question, the Investor Screener says the top 5-10 funds based on five year performance are: FMSDX, VTMFX, USBLX, TNXAX, WBALX, TRIFX, HBLYX, GSBFX, TAIFX. These may not be in precise rank order because funds have multiple share classes and I tried to list the highest ranked share class that could be purchased by a retail investor.

Purchased 5 Yr. TIPS (06/22 auction) for inflation protection and capital preservation.

@msf, IRS rules specifically allow one in this instance to take a deduction for the Accrued Interest paid in the year paid. There is no magic or transformation suggested.
"Expense paid in advance. An expense you pay in advance is deductible only in the year to which it applies, unless the expense qualifies for the 12-month rule.
Under the 12-month rule, a taxpayer is not required to capitalize amounts paid to create certain rights or benefits for the taxpayer that do not extend beyond the earlier of
the following.
• 12 months after the right or benefit begins, or
• The end of the tax year after the tax year in which payment is made."
Page 8 Publication 538 (January 2022)
One of the benefit of taking a deduction in the year Accrued interest is paid to the sellers is it eliminates for me accrued interest deduction recording keeping on a bond by bond basis. Less chance of making a mistake and over or under reporting the deduction. Accelerating deductions is not important to me because I always have tons of tax overpayment which I always roll all of it into the next year estimated taxes. It is more important for me to get my tax returns done right so I do not have to revisit them in audits.
I was only asking what you would do so I may know the benefits of your choice that I may not have thought through. No need to answer.

@msf,
It seems I can take a deduction for Accrued Interest in the year paid (and not wait until the next year in which related coupon payment was received.)
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p538.pdf see Expense Paid In Advance under Cash Method on page 8.
I paid Accrued Interest on some bonds in 2022 but the first coupon was not paid to me until 2023. This created more Accrued Interest paid than Interest Income from Treasury obligations in 2022. It seems I can take a deduction for all the Accrued Interest paid in 2022. My overall interest income is higher than Accrued Interest paid and so Line 2, Schedule B will not be negative.
Initially, I was planning to take a deduction only when the related interest income (coupon) was taken into account because that provides better matching of income and deduction. But as a cash basis taxpayer it felt weird to defer the deduction of Accrued Interest paid to the following year. Taking a deduction in the year paid also did not harm the IRS or any taxpayer. Yr 1, Seller reports income, Buyer reports the deduction for the same amount, and the IRS receives the tax on coupon in Yr 2 when it would have received if the seller did not sell the bond.
What would you do - when would you take the deduction for the accrued interest paid?
Thanks.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1697196/000158064223003285/acpmi497stkr.htm
497 1 acpmi497stkr.htm 497
AlphaCentric Prime Meridian Income Fund
(the “Fund”)
June 22, 2023
The information in this Supplement amends certain information contained in the Fund’s current Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”) dated February 1, 2023.
______________________________________________________________________________
Due to the Fund’s small asset size and limited number of shareholders, the Board of Trustees of the Fund has determined that it is in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders to apply for the deregistration of the Fund under the Investment Company Act of 1940. When granted, the Fund will operate as a private fund and certain legal protections afforded to shareholders under the Investment Company Act of 1940 will no longer apply.
In connection with these changes to the Fund, the Fund will not accept new investments, effective immediately.
* * *
You should read this Supplement in conjunction with the Fund’s Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information, which provide information that you should know about the Fund before investing. These documents are available upon request and without charge by calling the Fund toll-free at 1-888-910-0412, or by writing to the Fund at c/o U.S. Bancorp Fund Services, LLC, 615 East Michigan Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202.
Please retain this Supplement for future reference.

QUAL v. JQUA - a SeekingAlpa article comparing the two June 8, 2023

Interesting web call today from Doug Ramsey. Leuthold is, as you know, determinedly quant so it's rather more data-rich and informative than folksy and engaging. They've promised to share a copy with me, and I'll share it with you if I can.
Highlights:

• both yield curve inversions and six-month drops in the index of Leading Economic Indicators are pointing to a business downturn beginning in fall. Both are eight-for-eight with no false positives as predictors, though their "predictions" occur with "long and variable lags." The window for a yield curve inversion has been four to 16 months previously. Others observe that Fed actions presage recession by about two years.
  
• the last false signal from a yield curve inversion was in the mid 1960s. Doug talked a bit about the differences in economic conditions between then and now.
  
• the stock market generally rallies - on average by 13% - immediately after a curve inversion, before rolling over. Currently it's up 16%.
  
• US inflation has dropped like a rock but “…Fed policy has never been this tight with inflation having already come down significantly.”
  
• the stock market is not in a bubble, but in in the top 10% of historic valuations
  
• seven to nine stocks have gone crazy, driving all of the year's returns of the S&P 500. They're the best candidates for a smackdown.
  
• midcap valuations are good, small cap valuations are historically good. That judgment looks only at the valuations of the 80% of small caps that operate in the black, so "small quality" might be worth your attention.
  
• the valuation on small caps relative to large caps is as extreme as the late 1990s. Remember that the S&P 50 corrected by 50% in 2000-02. The S&P Equal Weight index and small caps vastly outperformed back then.
  
• assuming 6% earnings growth and normal valuations as the base, large caps are priced for 3.5% returns in the medium term, mid caps are 6-7% and small caps are at 8-9%. Foreign corporate earnings still have not returned to their 2007 levels which makes such calculations for EAFE and EM, given Leuthold's discipline, impossible.
  
• Average stock likely to perform much better over the next 3-5 years than the average index because the average index is so beholden to a few vastly overextended stars.
  
• Leuthold Core Investment today is 51% net equities with no evidence that they're going to drop toward their 30% minimum allocation; their investable universe looks like the S&P 1500 Equal Weight and that's not looking nearly as risky as it did 18 months ago.

Don't hold me to all of that yet. Those reflect my type-as-he-talks notes, and I'll need to cross-check against the original when I get it. I'm guessing that I got 95% right ... leading to only a 5% chance that I'm leading you to insanity, despair and poverty!
For what that's worth,
David

I personally believe Gold will do over the next 45 years what the SPY did the last 45 years. Too much debt fueled by "only so much gold on the Earth" hype behind it (think bitcoin 21M max). My opinion is in the minority but I believe steadfast regardless. I own zero but will acquire at some point going forward.

Anyone pay for M* services?
What are the top 5-10 funds in the Moderate Conservative Allocation Category for top Percentile Rank over 5 years?

Lynch was great, but he did it when a lot of information wasn't available and most investors didn't have an easy access to all the tools we have in the last 20 years. See below BRK.A performance. It is very clear that the best performance was in the 70-90s and it's probably a similar reason. BRK.A performance in the last 20 years trails SPY(https://schrts.co/SvTMAdUw).
And you forget that Giroux superior risk-adjusted performance while investing usually in 60-65% stocks makes his case stronger + AUM is much bigger.
https://www.1stock1.com/1stock1_2729.htm

I think Yogi answered the question. It's absentin QUAL because it is not in the pond they are fishing in.
Looking at QUAL vs. JQUA, I think JQUA may be a better choice.
The most glaring difference from the S&P500 for both is the absence of Tesla.

You're right about how the credit for accrued interest paid should be declared. My error. Typing too fast.
It's your option whether to declare the imputed interest from market discount annually or upon sale/redemption.

Instead of recognizing ordinary interest income on the disposition of a market discount bond, a taxpayer can make an election under Sec. 1278(b) to include market discount in income currently.

https://www.thetaxadviser.com/issues/2007/oct/taxtreatmentofmarketdiscountbonds.html
IRC 1278(b)
Sample form (from TIAA) for notifying broker of election
Baird has a nice seven-pager on tax treatment of market premium and market discount.
Note that despite the ratable method being the default method for calculating accrued interest, the IRS presumes you are using the constant yield method unless you explicitly declare otherwise. The instructions for box 10 on the 1099-INT explain how this works.
Form 1099-INT with instructions
The constant yield method works to your advantage, as it represents compounding of interest. So interest accrues more slowly at first and then faster as it compounds. The ratable acccrual method is linear - the fraction of the time to maturity that you hold the bond is the fraction of the discount that you accrue as interest.

Quality can be defined different ways of course, but by any reasonable definition would not BRK be the very epitome of a quality stock?

You can have that conversation with iShares, the folks that run QUAL. Their fund leans away from the value box, which is where you will find BRK.B.
If you want to buy an etf that holds lots of it, look here: https://www.etf.com/stock/BRK.B
Edited to add:
I didn't see Yogi's answer while typing mine. I guess dryflower will have to talk to the folks at MSCI about BRK.B absence from their index.
But I wonder if Berk.B's return on equity would make the cut for QUAL, even if it was in the MSCI index.
While poking around on the internet I ran into this piece from Samuel Lee, from back in the days when M* had compelling reads from time to time.

AAII Sentiment Survey, 6/21/23
Bullish remained the top sentiment (42.9%; above average) & bearish remained the bottom sentiment (27.8%; below average); neutral remained the middle sentiment (28.4%; below average); Bull-Bear Spread was +15.1% (above average). Investor concerns: Inflation (moderating but high); economy; the Fed; dollar; crypto regulations; market volatility (VIX, VXN, MOVE); Russia-Ukraine war (69+ weeks, 2/24/22- ); geopolitical. For the Survey week (Th-Wed), stocks were down, bonds up, oil up sharply, gold down, dollar down. Powell remained hawkish in the House subcommittee (today, the Senate). #AAII #Sentiment #Markets
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1079/thread

Powell's primary message to Congress was to reiterate the largely unwelcome news that the Fed's interest-rate hikes would continue until inflation was fully subdued. The Fed has raised interest rates 10 times since March 2022 to 5% to 5.25% in its fight against inflation. It took a break in its rate hikes last week, but Powell said more are likely on the way even as the rate sits at a 16-year high.
A photo of Powell at the Dead & Co. show has circulated in social media feeds with plenty of jocular observations about what this might mean for the economy and inflation. "That guy is the main reason tickets are $80 and up this tour," tweeted @SmokinBat. "You can’t just print money. We play for life!"
Link to Story: https://themessenger.com/news/fed-chairman-tells-congress-hes-been-a-deadhead-for-50-years
Link to Photo: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fxx4YIYXwAAOmf9?format=jpg&name=large

There was a good article about Peter Lynch on Yahoo Finance yesterday.
"Lynch headed up one of the most lauded mutual fund successes in history. During his tenure, Fidelity’s Magellan fund racked up a 29.2% average annual return for those investors who held the shares throughout. In other words, if you invested $1,000 in Magellan on May 31, 1977, and held on until May 31, 1990, that small investment would have ballooned to around $28,000. It was the best-performing mutual fund in the world under his watch, climbing from around $18 million in assets to over $14 billion with over a million shareholders. 'One out of every 100 Americans was invested in Magellan at the time of my tenure,' he said."
Link
Amazing results and he had the good judgement to get out while on top (unlike Bill Miller).
His books were pretty good too! ;-)

It depends. Someone who mostly buys and holds and what most should do, has no issues. Trading markets since Covid started is harder. Risk/volatility is elevated, market changes have been faster. I changed too because of it. I trade more often, think weeks instead of months. I stay more in MM. But, volatility makes it easier to trade. Sideways is harder.
Basically, I tell investors to stay within their skills. If trading worked for you which means, you look at your portfolio risk-adjusted performance over 3-5-10 years and it's better than the indexes, keep doing it. Otherwise, stop. Most should just use only 3-5 funds with a mix of indexes and managed funds and hardly do anything.

Regarding PARWX...
Jerome Dodson managed PARWX from inception (04/29/2005) until he retired on 12/31/2020.
Billy Hwan became a PARWX comanager on 05/01/2018 and the sole manager in 2021.
Mr. Dodson took a contrarian approach which resulted in an elevated risk profile.
Mr. Hwan takes a relative value approach and stated that he wanted to reduce the fund's beta vs. the S&P 500.
Past PARWX performance may not be very indicative of future performance.

Turnover is also a lot lower under Hwan than it often was under Dodson. I held it for a while in the early 2010's and got rid of it due to the high turnover. I probably should have held my nose. Whatever replaced PARWX in my portfolio probably didn't do as well.
IIRC they didn't even market it as a value fund until they started thinking about the transition. It was just Dodson's project.
I think Hwan gets some credit for the three year alpha of 4.53. Eight of the top ten holdings were bought under his watch, as were most of the top 25.
OTOH, they are no longer fully independent since their partnership with AMG. And their funds after PARWX and PRBLX are run of the mill.
Buying actively managed funds requires a lot more leg work, that's for sure. Given the OP's comments, he could also look at funds like DODGX and VEIRX as alternatives in the active space that would take him in different directions from growth.
For etf's I would add SCHD and RWL if they haven't been mentioned before.