@Derf
We will shop insurance again in 2025, as we have seen how switching companies (quality) for the same coverage every several years may provide a price advantage. I will note, as has been written by others here; is for the consideration of quality and proper service, if and when needed. A few neighbors in the past 2 years have had minor auto damage claims with the company we now use, and a representative was at their home the next day to take a few pics of the vehicle and fill the paperwork for a most timely process of repairs needed. The neighbors were quite pleased.
A snippet: 'How much an umbrella policy costs depends on many variables. Many of the factors that affect your home insurance and auto insurance costs may affect the cost of your umbrella policy. These could include location, the features in your home, the types of cars you drive and your claims history. The underwriting criteria for an umbrella policy can be more restrictive than an auto or home policy. Those with occupations deemed too risky or who have had liability claims in the past may not qualify for coverage.'
A longer write regarding an umbrella policy from Bankrate.com.

Utes today. Maybe it's just sector rotation after all.
I find it easier for me to already be there when things do rotate.

Indeed. A month or so ago I sold UTG and went into HTD…a John Hancock CEF holding both utilities plus preferred shares. I also hold a similar John Hancock fund, PTD. Both utilities and preferreds will benefit with moderation of rates. I consider it as fixed income with a kicker.

@hank Our umbrella follows the payment period for our home/auto; which is an 'annual' renewal. I can't provide a percentage number right now; but we do receive a percent discount for paying an annual lump renewal. As I recall, the options are pay monthly, quarterly, semi-annual and annual. 'Course if one can make better money with a MMKT, it might even be a deal to pay monthly and keep what will be owed in the future/until needed in a 5% MMKT. Just a thought, as one would have to do the math.

@Fred495. Yes I have looked at PRCFX. yes, VWIAX has had a disappointing most recent three year but lack of tech and longish duration FI explain that. Part of my search is for one fund my widow will be able to live with. Simplicity. But for me I want to dial up or down the FI portion myself. So I dither the months away with tons of 5% CD’s and 5% mm. My short terms goals are limited (happily) and longer term it’s the portfolio with the fewest parts and lower SD.

Utes today. Maybe it's just sector rotation after all.
I find it easier for me to already be there when things do rotate.

Right there with ya guys!. Agent called today. App is in the mail. About $80 a year . I’d never heard of one either. But the world was a much different place back when I first took out homeowners insurance in 1977.
Geez, you learn a lot here!
Edit 5/13/24 / I received the written application. I must not have understood the agent over the phone. Here’s the ditty:
- 1 Mil Umbrella
- Annual cost $138
- Cost to increase homeowner liability coverage: $60 per year
- Total additional annual cost to me: $198 annually
- Likely I’m receiving a discount for having home and 2 vehicles with same insurer
- There were 18 “yes / no” questions on the app - Things like “Do you have any pets?” and “Have you ever been party to a lawsuit?” They seemed especially interested in any powered recreational vehicles. I have none. (We pedal)

Looking at the portfolio data, a couple of top line figures stand out. (Yogi also commented on much of this; he posted as I was composing.)
M* reports that FMSDX has 45% of its assets in its top ten holdings, but that's misleading. Its top 4 holdings, at 11%, 8.5%, 8.5%, and 8% are Treasuries. Disregarding that, its portfolio doesn't look nearly so concentrated (i.e. closer to VWIAX's 12% of assets in top 10 holding).
Portfolio composition is a different story. While both funds are classified as moderately conservative (meaning similar stock/bond ratios), the Fidelity fund is noticeably more aggressive - as one might infer from its volatility.
Fidelity says that its fund is 41.5% in equities with the rest (excluding 1.35% cash/other) in bonds. Vanguard says its fund is 37.12% in equities with the rest (excluding 1.12% short term reserves) in bonds. Superficially similar, but ...
https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/composition/31638R717
https://investor.vanguard.com/investment-products/mutual-funds/profile/vwiax#portfolio-composition
Vanguard says that all of its bonds are investment grade (albeit 17% Baa), while Fidelity reports that nearly a third of its bonds are junk bonds. Those typically behave more like equities. In this sense, the Fidelity fund begins to look more like a moderate allocation fund. In fact, M* classified the fund this way in 2021 and 2022.
Wellesley is a traditional hybrid fund, with a large cap value-leaning equity portfolio. FMSDX currently has more of a large blend orientation, though it tends to skew more toward mid caps (even now it is right on the mid/large boundary).
All of these differences help to understand the overall performance differences you're seeing. They're both fine funds and which one you pick would seem to depend on the type of fund you want.

@ Fred495. Pondering the same question. I think you nailed the key differences. My research has shown that the Fidelity product has a broader mandate and may move into areas that might not be what you are looking for. Perhaps greater returns but a bumpier ride. The Wellington management team is deep and experienced,,, what you see is what you get.

Talking about trying to muddy the waters. I forgot about another moderately conservative allocation fund, PRCFX (T. Rowe Price Cap Apprec and Income), that is brand new but is run by the excellent and experienced manager of PRWCX.
Have you considered this fund in your deliberations?

@ Fred495. Pondering the same question. I think you nailed the key differences. My research has shown that the Fidelity product has a broader mandate and may move into areas that might not be what you are looking for. Perhaps greater returns but a bumpier ride. The Wellington management team is deep and experienced,,, what you see is what you get.

I am looking at FMSDX and VWIAX, two Moderately Conservative Allocation funds according to M*, for inclusion in a conservative retirement portfolio.
While FMSDX has a much better 1, 3 and 5 year performance record, it is also somewhat more volatile than VWIAX. On the other hand, if interest rates have supposedly reached their peak, wouldn't VWIAX, with a usually constant duration of around 6.5 compared to FMSDX's duration of 3.0, benefit more when rates start to come down in the future?
In addition, VWIAX is managed by Wellington, a well established and highly regarded management company.
I have a hard time making a decision and would appreciate any comments or suggestions. Thanks.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1414039/000158064224002661/millerconvert_497.htm
497 1 millerconvert_497.htm 497
Ticker Symbol By Class I
Miller Convertible Plus Fund MCPIX
Supplement dated May 10, 2024 to the Fund’s Prospectus, Summary Prospectus, and
Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”), each dated March 1, 2024
This Supplement provides new and additional information beyond that contained in the Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and SAI and should be read in conjunction with the Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and SAI. This Supplement supersedes any information to the contrary in the Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and SAI.
The Board of Trustees of Miller Investment Trust (the “Trust”) has concluded, based upon the recommendation of Wellesley Asset Management Inc., that it is in the best interests of the Miller Convertible Plus Fund (the “Fund”) and its shareholders that the Fund be liquidated. Pursuant to a Plan of Liquidation (the “Plan”) approved by the Board of Trustees, the Fund will be liquidated and dissolved on or about June 10, 2024.
The Fund is closed to all new investments as of May 10, 2024. The Plan provides that the Fund will begin liquidating its portfolio as soon as is reasonable and practicable. The Fund may pursue its stated investment objective until June 10, 2024, but may, at the discretion of the Adviser and in accordance with its Prospectus, liquidate its portfolio prior to June 10, 2024, and invest in cash equivalents such as money market funds until all shares have been redeemed. On or about the close of business on June 10, 2024, the Fund will distribute pro rata all its assets in cash to its shareholders and all outstanding shares will be redeemed and cancelled.
Prior to June 10, 2024, you may redeem your shares, including reinvested distributions, in accordance with the “How to Redeem Shares” section of the Fund’s Prospectus. Unless your investment in the Fund is through a tax-deferred retirement account, you will recognize gain or loss for federal income tax purposes (and for most state and local income tax purposes) on a redemption of your shares, whether as a result of a redemption that you initiate or upon the final liquidating distribution by the Fund, based on the difference between the amount you receive and your tax basis in your shares. The Fund may make one or more distributions of income and/or net capital gains on or prior to June 10, 2024, in order to eliminate Fund-level taxes. Please refer to the “Tax Status, Dividends and Distributions” section in the Prospectus for general information. You may wish to consult your tax advisor about your particular situation. Plan sponsors or plan administrative agents should notify participants that the Fund is liquidating and should provide information about alternative investment options.
You should read this Supplement in conjunction with the Fund’s Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information each dated March 1, 2024 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 1-877-441-4434. The Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information may be obtained by visiting www.MillerFamilyOfFunds.com. You should retain this Supplement for future reference.

Perhaps that page was just changed, but it now reads $1K min. Worth pointing this out to Schwab if they still balk at opening the account for less than $100K.

I did and will do so again, but this time in an email to the rep that I work with.

However, as you stated, APDKX is also available (albeit with a transaction fee), so I'd be inclined to go in that direction. You've already got Schwab agreeing that you can open a new account in Artisan International Value, so at this point it's just a quibble over the share class.
You might also look into converting the Roth shares to APDKX. A straight conversion might even help avoid the transaction fee. I haven't done this at Schwab, but I've tried conversions at Fidelity with mixed results:

Agree.

Lesson learned: one may be right about the rules, but one still needs to get the fund company to cooperate. If you can't do a straight conversion in the Roth, you could look at buying $1K of APDKX (to establish the Roth account), then selling all ARTKX shares and buying more APDKX shares. You'll get charged a transaction fee but you'll have cheaper shares for the long run.

Agree.

Finally, if all else fails and Artisan won't let Schwab open APDKX accounts, you could try opening the accounts directly at Artisan and then transferring them in-kind to Schwab. However, at Artisan, APDKX has a $250K min (see prospectus), so you might have to do some maneuvering to temporarily boost your account (and then sell off some shares when the account is moved to Schwab).

Artisan will allow Schwab to open ARTKX or APDKX. Artisan told me that the minimum initial purchase is up to Schwab. We are back to Schwab's website which says 1,000 minimum for either share class for an IRA. Schwab's website also says $2,500 initial minimum for a "Basic" account. I take this as meaning a regular non-retirement account. While I do believe that the minimum initial for ARTKX has always been $1,000, I always thought that $250,000 was the minimum initial for APDKX.
Let's assume for the moment that $250,000 is the minimum initial for APDKX and Schwab is recalcitrant regarding $100,000 as the minimum initial for ARTKX. As a last resort, I can purchase $100,000 of ARTKX and the next day sell as much as I want and pay the Short-Term Redemption Fee.

However, there was caveat, which is the minimum initial investment amount is $100,000. This is on Schwab's website.
https://www.schwab.wallst.com/Prospect/Research/mutualfunds/summary.asp?symbol=ARTKX
Perhaps that page was just changed, but it now reads $1K min. Worth pointing this out to Schwab if they still balk at opening the account for less than $100K.
However, as you stated, APDKX is also available (albeit with a transaction fee), so I'd be inclined to go in that direction. You've already got Schwab agreeing that you can open a new account in Artisan International Value, so at this point it's just a quibble over the share class.
You might also look into converting the Roth shares to APDKX. A straight conversion might even help avoid the transaction fee. I haven't done this at Schwab, but I've tried conversions at Fidelity with mixed results:
- I had an unusual share class of one fund. When the "A" shares were given NTF status (load-waived, no fee), I asked to convert my shares to A shares to shave a few basis points off the ER. Fidelity was willing but said that the fund company had to allow it, and they wouldn't. (This was in a taxable account, so I wasn't going to sell at a gain to repurchase on my own.)
- I had retail shares of closed fund. The fund prospectus said that any owner of that fund could open another account in the same fund. So when I had enough to qualify for the institutional share class, I asked Fidelity to convert the shares. Here too, the fund company balked at the idea of opening a new account, regardless of what the prospectus said. The fund company finally agreed once it realized that I was just converting an existing account. But that shouldn't have mattered.
Lesson learned: one may be right about the rules, but one still needs to get the fund company to cooperate. If you can't do a straight conversion in the Roth, you could look at buying $1K of APDKX (to establish the Roth account), then selling all ARTKX shares and buying more APDKX shares. You'll get charged a transaction fee but you'll have cheaper shares for the long run.
Finally, if all else fails and Artisan won't let Schwab open APDKX accounts, you could try opening the accounts directly at Artisan and then transferring them in-kind to Schwab. However, at Artisan, APDKX has a $250K min (see prospectus), so you might have to do some maneuvering to temporarily boost your account (and then sell off some shares when the account is moved to Schwab).

Expansion of SSI (Supplemental Security Income) Benefits for low income households will be effective 9/30/24. SSI eligibility (65+ or disabled) will be easier, some government benefit payments won't be counted, and reporting requirements will be fewer. There are no work requirements for SSI as there are for SSDI.
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/10/how-social-security-administration-will-expand-access-to-ssi-benefits.html
https://www.ssa.gov/ssi
https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-11000.pdf
https://www.ssa.gov/benefits

The CD in the TOD account could be covered for even more if you've got multiple beneficiaries on the account. As I described above, that CD gets $250K coverage for each beneficiary, up to a max of 5 ($1.25M). That's in addition to the $250K for the IRA as yogi described.
Here's the relevant section from Fidelity's CD Disclosure Statement:

Trust Accounts. Effective April 1, 2024, deposits ... are insured for up to $250,000 per eligible beneficiary, multiplied by the number of beneficiaries, up to a maximum of 5 eligible beneficiaries:

• Informal revocable trusts .... These trusts may be referred to as a “Totten trust” account, “payable upon death” account, or “transfer on death” account. ...

https://www.fidelity.com/bin-public/060_www_fidelity_com/documents/fixed-income/cddisclosure.pdf

@fred495, because your CDs will be in different ownership categories (taxable Brokerage TOD & Brokerage IRA), they would each be covered for $250K even when at the same bank.
You may also try using the FDIC calculator that @msf linked (it requires too much info for generic use),
https://edie.fdic.gov/calculator.html
BTW, most major brokerage have the FDIC coverage at the brokered CD level, but some small brokerages may have an aggregate brokerage level FDIC coverage. Double-check this.

You can have brokered CD from a bank, and then at bank itself, you can have personal a/c, joint a/c, IRA a/c, multiple POD/TOD CDs. Under the current system, all that can add up to a lot at the same bank. But the new FDIC limit will be $1.25 million for all assets associated with a person.

Sorry, yogi, to bother you again, but I am having a bit of a problem finding five highly rated national banks at my brokerage for my five $250K CDs with FDIC insurance.
Reading your above statement, it seems that if I opened a $250K CD in my TOD brokerage account, and another 250K CD in my brokerage IRA account, they would both be FDIC insured even though they are purchased from the same bank.
Am I reading/understanding this correctly?
Thanks, again, for your help. Much appreciated.

Hi @hank and @MikeM and et al
LCR vs LCORX

135 day chart

This short term time frame is from October 26, 2023; when both many U.S. equity and bond sectors began to advance from a sleepy period.
This chart is fully 'live' for your future use. At the very top one may enter whatever valid ticker(s). Separate multiple tickers with a 'comma'. Do the 'enter' key thing. Now, at the page bottom one will see 200 days (which is default). Double click this number (it will highlight), then type in 135 days, do the 'enter' key again, to load the chart back to October 26, 2023. This number will have to be adjusted as the calendar moves forward, but is valid for use as of May 10, 2024. At the bottom left is also a 'red/green' icon. Select this for a bar chart and more easily readable 'total' returns. One may switch back to the link graph when 'selecting' the graphic icon.
NOTE: at the days icon, one may right click for a default drop down list of time frames. ALSO at the days area, one may double click the number there and enter any number of days to move backwards in 'calendar' start dates of your choice.
I think I have all of the easy steps in place. Let me know, otherwise.
Save this 'StockCharts' site page, for future use, in your favorites list.
Remain curious,
Catch

Multisearch worked for me at 0525 MST.

The Week in Charts (05/05/24)
The most important charts and themes in markets, including...
00:00 Intro
00:24 Topics
01:15 Labor Market Cooling
04:18 Bad News Is Good News?
07:31 Will the Unwind Ever Happen?
09:20 The Next Fed Move
13:04 Manufacturing/Services Slowdown
14:20 The Undisputed King of Buybacks
16:31 The Amazon Economy
20:09 Higher Multiples
22:05 New Housing Highs
23:30 A Renter's Market
Video