Tip of the iceberg perhaps? How many zombie companies are there out there that are publically traded? Maybe 15-20% of companies? Can't service their debt? At what rates will they have to refinance? Peloton, Carvana, etc. I'd be looking for another job if I worked there.
More to come? Meaning the downdraft? Who knows?

Another view of ARKK's collapse....

Scroll down to #4 in the link for more details....
4. ARK runs aground

September CPI was +8.2% y-o-y
Updating calculations for unadjusted CPI,
New fixed rate (November 1) 0-1.5% est
New I-Bond Rate (November 1) 6.47-8.02% est

For the week ending on 10/12/22, Bearish remained the top sentiment (55.9%; extremely high) & bullish became the bottom sentiment (20.4%; extremely low); neutral became the middle sentiment (23.7%; extremely low); Bull-Bear Spread was -35.5% (extremely low). Investor concerns: Recession; inflation (new data this week); supply-chain disruptions; the Fed; US elections; market volatility (VIX, VXN, MOVE); Russia-Ukraine war (33+ weeks); European banks & UK pension funds; geopolitical. For the Survey week (Thursday-Wednesday), stocks were down sharply, bonds down, oil down, gold down, dollar up. #AAII #Sentiment #Markets
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/thread/141/aaii-sentiment-survey-weekly?page=7&scrollTo=805

You’re not alone @Anna. Most of us and many fund managers are befuddled by this year’s markets. I’ve assembled below a few adjectives that might apply.
confused bewildered confounded nonplussed bemused baffled stunned puzzled befuddled stumped flummoxed dumbfounded muddled mystified addled discombobulated bamboozled bushed disconcerted distracted fazed fuddled thrown wildered mazed beaten nonplused uncomprehending uncertain troubled blank foxed worried at sea at a loss mixed up hard-pressed hard put
https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/another-word-for/perplexed.html
John Rogers at Ariel Investments addressed this on Bloomberg today, calling the current markets “Crazy“ . Rogers added, “We’ve never seen this kind of volatility, up and down, the ups and downs intraday, it’s something we’ve just never, ever experienced,” he
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/markets-crazy-ariel-touts-old-163756433.html
And I agree that for we boomers or pre-boomers our investment options are pretty constrained.

That’s a nice post from @carew388.
Stocks do generally “recover”, although the amount of time to recoup losses and get back to par value can range from days to many years. Depends a lot on how fairly priced they were when purchased. So, stocks bought at a very hefty price will take longer to recover.
Bonds are a very diverse asset class. If you buy an investment grade bond with a predetermined interest rate and term (number of years) you will in nearly all cases receive your coupon (interest payment) along with the price paid for the bond if held to maturity. It’s rare, but exceptions can occur even with investment grade credit.
If you buy sub-investment grade bonds, you have a greater “reward” characteristic (higher interest payments) but also a higher chance the bond will default, leaving you high and dry.
Bond funds, however, do not behave in the same manner as individual bonds. The difference is most stark at the investment grade level. Say your bond fund bought a bunch of 10 year bonds paying 2.5% a year ago when 2.5% seemed like a good return. But now, investors can earn 4% on a similar 10 year bond. So in the open market folks begin selling those 2.5% bonds well before their maturity date. They sell for a loss just to get out of the position and to be able to reinvest their $$ in newer bonds paying a higher rate. So the bonds your bond fund holds fall in value. The fund’s lower NAV reflects the falling value of the bonds it holds. In addition, fund holders may “bail out” as the NAV starts falling, making it hard for the manager to buy those new higher yielding bonds for the fund.
What if you hang tight and don’t sell your bond fund? What will happen? Probably 1 of 2 things: (1) If interest rates fall over the ensuing years the bonds the fund owns should increase in value, They might even come to be worth considerably more than you (through your fund) paid for them initially. So, the fund’s NAV rises. However, (2) if interest rates continue rising, than your bond fund will continue to lose value and a lower NAV should result. Of course, as owner of said fund you should continue to receive interest payments, regardless of the value of the underlying securities. So even in a falling bond market (like now) there is a source of income to soften the hit.
@Anna - Your initial remarks are correct. Except, you seem to be assuming interest rates will continue rising (and bonds therefore “crash”). There is no absolute way to know that. Obviously, conventional wisdom at the moment does suggest your assumption is well grounded. Conventional wisdom is sometimes wrong. Just saying …

Bonds can recover in at least 2 ways. Treasuries recover when bond prices rise generating capital gains. I'm sure many astute investors bought the EDV etf in 2008 hoping to capitalize on interest rate cuts and rising bond prices. Junk bond funds recover when their bond prices rise to approach par at 100. So in theory a junk bond fund with bonds priced at 60 would generate nice gains in an equity recovery when those bonds rise in price to approach 80 or 90. Some junk bond funds returned 50% or more in 2009, resulting from price gains and interest payments when QE commenced. Current bond funds are priced so that their effective yield matches the stated yield of newly-issued bonds.

SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON CO SER 2021J 0.70000% 08/01/2023
Got mama this bond.. Ytm 5.5%
Prob buy bank of Canada bond tomorrow
For me got couple puts $ON 47$strike mature 1.23, Delta 09% good preminums.. Has more cash by then... Good solid growth semi company

@johnN, September CPI +8.1% y-o-y is the consensus. I used it to estimate the new I-Bond rate (November 1) in this link that I will update tomorrow. BTW, est for Social Security COLA will also firm up tomorrow.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/154463/#Comment_154463

Thanks Yogi -
The drop from yesterday (around 5%) was so large I checked first to see if maybe due to a distribution - but doesn’t appear to be. These types of companies are really volatile. I owned a similar one for perhaps a week or two a while back and bailed on it. Never cared for carnival rides!
Interesting issue here. By some reports, the “big money” exited equities early in the year while the retail crowd hung on. But your info. plus other I’ve seen indicates the Mom & Pop crowd have been fleeing!
Wow - Add those outflows at TRP to the drop in AUM that would occur naturally from lower bond and stock prices and it’s got to really hurt.

Good point about payments (none or nominal?) for benchmarks for active funds. For index funds (OEFs, ETFs) & naming, they do have to pay.
Another difference is that MSCI has been slower to raise China weightings (vs FTSE).
Vanguard had a dispute with S&P too over whether the S&P original license applied only to then Vanguard's SP500-related funds (S&P's view), or also to Vanguard's future SP500-related funds (Vanguard's view). This was settled too.
With internal/self-indexing gaining respectability, may be Vanguard will get rid of everybody else to do indexing on its own.

This seems to be a little different than 2012. According to Morningstar, Vanguard switched the benchmark index " on 22 index funds and exchange-traded funds in 2012."
In contrast, VINEX is an actively managed fund. The internals (components) of the benchmark are not being used to drive the security selections. Only the performance figures are used, as, well, a benchmark. "Vanguard believes the new benchmark will improve investors’ ability to assess performance relative to peer funds."
Here's an article from 2012 describing the Vanguard move then. It is "premium content" in the Philadelphia Inquirer. But it was written by an AP writer, so it is available for free at Yahoo Finance. Now there's an idea - switching to a different provider to reduce cost. Maybe Vanguard should look into that :-)
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/vanguard-move-highlights-little-known-211153486.html
It is not clear whether Vanguard (or any institution) pays simply to compare performance with published benchmarks. This article illustrates the confusion. Its Inquirer headline reads: Looking at Benchmark Licensing Fees, while the AP headline (at least in Yahoo) reads: Vanguard move highlights little-known index costs.
The body of that article starts out with "Index mutual fund investors are a cost-conscious bunch." It goes on about how index funds are cutting costs.
So do the benchmark providers receive remuneration every time someone reprints their performance figures? Does the WSJ pay MSCI, S&P, and all the rest when it reports how much they moved yesterday? Do they have agreements with all the benchmark providers waiving fees? Or is this data in the public domain? I don't know, and I hadn't thought about it before.
Once again, the shift to MSCI means Korea is benchmarked differently. The old benchmark was from S&P that treats Korea as a developed country and gives it more weight in the S&P EPAC SmallCap Index. MSCI still treats Korea as an emerging market. So there's no Korea in the new MSCI EAFE Small Cap Index benchmark (as represented by SCZ).
This won't make any difference in how the fund is managed - as of last April only 1.6% of the fund's assets were invested in Korea, vs. 6.1% in the old S&P benchmark (Sept. data). It will just result in the chosen benchmark being better aligned with the actual fund portfolio.

I found this lengthy interview (with a book plug) to be fascinating and entirely relevant to today’s investing environment. Not sure about the M* paywall for non-subscribers. I definitely saw myself making the same mistakes with my trades and portfolio that he warns about. Very insightful comments on momentum, investor behavior, and costly errors. Pisani also provides info on what he himself owns and says that rarely do the talking heads on the media reveal what they own, despite what they have to say about a stock, a fund, or a strategy. If Pisani’s book reads as well as the interview, I might put it on my Christmas wish list.
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1117225/bob-pisani-everyone-talks-their-book-on-wall-street?utm_source=eloqua&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_morningdigest&utm_content=39323

Interval-funds are newer types of funds with some features of CEFs, OEFs, ETFs. Note para 3 of the filing for limitations of interval-funds:
"Interval Fund. The Fund is designed primarily for long-term investors and not as a trading vehicle. The Fund does not currently intend to list its Shares for trading on any securities exchange and does not expect any secondary market to develop for its Shares. The Fund is an “interval fund” (as defined below) pursuant to which it, subject to applicable law, will conduct quarterly repurchase offers for between 5% and 25% of the Fund’s outstanding Shares at net asset value (“NAV”). In connection with any given repurchase offer, it is likely that the Fund may offer to repurchase only the minimum amount of 5% of its outstanding Shares. It is also possible that a repurchase offer may be oversubscribed, with the result that shareholders may only be able to have a portion of their Shares repurchased. The Fund does not currently intend to list its Shares for trading on any national securities exchange. The Shares are, therefore, not readily marketable. Even though the Fund will make quarterly repurchase offers to repurchase a portion of the Shares to try to provide liquidity to shareholders, you should consider the Shares to have limited liquidity."

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1949594/000119312522260617/d351784dn2.htm
Principal Investment Strategies. Under normal circumstances, the Fund will invest at least 80% of its assets in Credit Instruments (as defined below). The Fund will opportunistically allocate its investments in Credit Instruments among (i) foundational credit, which includes private credit (direct lending and real estate debt), and liquid and less liquid credit (leveraged loans, high yield bonds and collateralized loan obligations (“CLOs”)) and (ii) opportunistic credit, which include stressed and distressed investments (distressed debt, special situations, rescue financing and hung deals) and opportunistic investments (convertible bonds, preferred stock, commercial mortgage-backed securities and privately originated reverse inquiry credit solutions) (together, “Credit Instruments”). The Fund may invest in additional types of Credit Instruments and strategies in the future.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/787623/000119312522260357/d256905d497.htm
TRANSAMERICA FUNDS
Transamerica High Quality Bond
Supplement to the Currently Effective Prospectus, Summary Prospectus
and Statement of Additional Information
The Board of Trustees has approved a reorganization pursuant to which the assets of Transamerica High Quality Bond (the “Target Fund”), a series of Transamerica Funds, would be acquired, and its liabilities would be assumed, by Transamerica Short-Term Bond (the “Destination Fund”), a series of Transamerica Funds, in exchange for shares of the Destination Fund. The Target Fund would then be liquidated and shares of the Destination Fund would be distributed to the Target Fund shareholders in complete liquidation of the Target Fund.
Under the reorganization, Target Fund shareholders would receive shares of the corresponding class of the Destination Fund with the same aggregate net asset value as their shares of the Target Fund. It is anticipated that no gain or loss for Federal income tax purposes would be recognized by Target Fund shareholders as a result of the reorganization.
The reorganization of the Target Fund into the Destination Fund is subject to the approval of the shareholders of the Target Fund. A proxy statement/prospectus describing the proposed reorganization was mailed to Target Fund shareholders on September 29, 2022. If the reorganization is approved by Target Fund shareholders and all other closing conditions are satisfied, the reorganization is expected to occur in the fourth quarter of 2022. Effective on or about December 8, 2022, the Target Fund will be closed to all investments. Prior to that date, shareholders can continue to purchase, redeem and exchange shares of the Target Fund subject to the limitations described in the Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information.
* * *
Investors Should Retain this Supplement for Future Reference
October 11, 2022

@yogibearbull and @Sven: thanks for those directions. As soon as the TD site informed me my trade did not occur, it froze my bank information to the extent that I can't do anything, either re-enter the info, delete it, or add another bank. When I referred above to jumping through hoops, I meant that I despaired of trying and left it for another day. Signature guarantee? Spare me.
FWIIW, the IRS had no difficulty yesterday in accepting my tardy 3rd quarter estimated taxes debited from the same Schwab account. I missed the 9/15 deadline because we're dealing with a death in the family. I've been filling out forms for the funeral director and my patience and tolerance are at ebb tide.

@hank: you're thinking -66% off the old high???????

- From March 2000 to October 2002 the NASDAQ lost more than 70%.
- From September 2007 to March 2009 the NASDAQ lost more than 50%.
The NASDAQ is typically more volatile than the S&P or Dow. John Templeton once remarked that a market doesn’t often decline more than 50% from its top and remain at that level for very long. Exceptions have occurred. Japan comes to mind.
* NASDAQ numbers came from Wikipedia articles. They may not be precise, but I believe them close approximations
@Crash - My original comment was intended to be light-hearted. I don’t have a number in mind. But I’ll allow for worst case scenarios. There are other things to consider. Down 50% and up 65% in short order is one thing. But down 50% without a snapback is an entirely different matter.

IMO trying to parse inter-meeting FedBabble is akin to debating whether the weatherperson is saying the outside temperature is 57 or 59 degrees with greater accuracy. You're better off going outside for yourself and see if it's comfortable enough wearing only a light fleece. (But it makes for solid media punditry....)
For example, the Fed's "transitory" comment is about as useful as the weatherperson saying there's a "50% chance of rain today."

Foreign central bank holdings of Treasuries at the US Fed are down sharply as the dollar has become strong (there is an inverse relationship). For foreign central banks, these are savings/reserves to be used in difficult times. They are using these dollar-funds to defend their own currencies and for other purposes. Anyway, the Fed is the first to know about this trend. Twitter LINK