https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/892071/000119312521258957/d158365d497.htm
TCW Funds, Inc.
Supplement dated August 27, 2021 to the
Prospectus dated March 1, 2021 (the “Prospectus”)
For current and prospective investors in the TCW Core Fixed Income Fund, the TCW Enhanced Commodity Strategy Fund, the TCW Global Bond Fund, the TCW Short Term Bond Fund, the TCW Total Return Bond Fund (each a “Fund” and together, the “Funds”)
TCW Investment Management Company LLC, the investment adviser to each Fund (the “Adviser”), has announced that Tad Rivelle, one of the portfolio manager for the Funds, will retire from the Adviser at year-end. The remaining portfolio managers for those Funds will continue to have responsibility for managing the Funds after his retirement.
The Adviser has provided the following statement regarding Tad Rivelle’s retirement:
“We are writing today to provide you news on developments that we have long prepared for in the management of our business and the trusted oversight of our client portfolios. Committing ourselves as we have over the years to a team approach to managing assets, focused on process, we have tapped the collective best thinking of our investment professionals and established redundancies that serve the essential need for consistency of approach.
It is against this backdrop that we announce forthcoming changes to our Generalist team, first that Tad Rivelle, following nearly 35 years in the industry, will retire from TCW Investment Management Company LLC, the Funds’ adviser, at year-end, and that Laird Landmann, Steve Kane and Bryan Whalen will continue as Generalist portfolio managers, with Steve and Bryan assuming Co-CIO roles for the Fixed Income team beginning in the fourth quarter 2021. The Specialist portfolio managers that comprise such a key element of our team and process, remain in place, and continue to guide the management of their sectors, supported by well-built out trading and research functions, in which TCW continues to make considerable commitments from a resource and systems standpoint.
Says Tad Rivelle: “We recognized very early on that asset management businesses are built on trust and competence. The enduring success of the team and of the TCW fixed income enterprise has been predicated not only on delivering the pattern of returns as represented but also on an unwavering commitment to transparency with our clients. I have had the pleasure and honor of working with a team of Specialist managers of unrivalled competence, led by a team of Generalists, for now some 20 to 30 years, who have first, last and always placed client interests above all else.”
As an additional dimension to these changes, longtime Senior Analyst to the Generalists Ruben Hovhannisyan has been promoted to a newly-established Associate Generalist position. Expectations are that these functions will scale over time, as a commitment to evergreen management and to building a deep bench of investment talent, as well as in response to business demands and emerging opportunities.
Naturally, change in our industry is one that brings with it plenty in the way of questions and we stand ready to address inquiries about this and all aspects of our business. We appreciate your ongoing partnership and look forward to those opportunities.”
Please retain this Supplement with your Prospectus for future reference.
From Metropolitan West:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1028621/000119312521258954/d160297d497.htm
497 1 d160297d497.htm 497
Metropolitan West Funds (the “Trust”)
Supplement dated August 27, 2021 to the
Prospectus dated July 29, 2021 (the “Prospectus”)
For current and prospective investors in the Metropolitan West AlphaTrak 500 Fund, the Metropolitan West Intermediate Bond Fund, the Metropolitan West Investment Grade Credit Fund, the Metropolitan West Low Duration Bond Fund, the Metropolitan West Strategic Income Fund, the Metropolitan West Total Return Bond Fund, the Metropolitan West Ultra Short Bond Fund, the Metropolitan West Unconstrained Bond Fund, the Metropolitan West Flexible Income Fund and the Metropolitan West Opportunistic High Income Credit Fund (each a “Fund” and together, the “Funds”)
Metropolitan West Asset Management, LLC, the investment adviser to each Fund (the “Adviser”), has announced that Tad Rivelle, one of the portfolio manager for the Funds, will retire from the Adviser at year-end. The remaining portfolio managers for those Funds will continue to have responsibility for managing the Funds after his retirement.
The Adviser has provided the following statement regarding Tad Rivelle’s retirement:
“We are writing today to provide you news on developments that we have long prepared for in the management of our business and the trusted oversight of our client portfolios. Committing ourselves as we have over the years to a team approach to managing assets, focused on process, we have tapped the collective best thinking of our investment professionals and established redundancies that serve the essential need for consistency of approach.
It is against this backdrop that we announce forthcoming changes to our Generalist team, first that Tad Rivelle, following nearly 35 years in the industry, will retire from Metropolitan West Asset Management, LLC, the Funds’ adviser, at year-end, and that Laird Landmann, Steve Kane and Bryan Whalen will continue as Generalist portfolio managers, with Steve and Bryan assuming Co-CIO roles for the Fixed Income team beginning in the fourth quarter 2021. The Specialist portfolio managers that comprise such a key element of our team and process, remain in place, and continue to guide the management of their sectors, supported by well-built out trading and research functions, in which TCW continues to make considerable commitments from a resource and systems standpoint.
Says Tad Rivelle: “We recognized very early on that asset management businesses are built on trust and competence. The enduring success of the team and of the TCW fixed income enterprise has been predicated not only on delivering the pattern of returns as represented but also on an unwavering commitment to transparency with our clients. I have had the pleasure and honor of working with a team of Specialist managers of unrivalled competence, led by a team of Generalists, for now some 20 to 30 years, who have first, last and always placed client interests above all else.”
As an additional dimension to these changes, longtime Senior Analyst to the Generalists Ruben Hovhannisyan has been promoted to a newly-established Associate Generalist position. Expectations are that these functions will scale over time, as a commitment to evergreen management and to building a deep bench of investment talent, as well as in response to business demands and emerging opportunities.
Naturally, change in our industry is one that brings with it plenty in the way of questions and we stand ready to address inquiries about this and all aspects of our business. We appreciate your ongoing partnership and look forward to those opportunities.”
Please retain this Supplement with your Prospectus for future reference.
LEGAL_US_W # 109241964.2

There's no question that in its early days when FLPSX was a small cap fund, it was virtually peerless. But that changed after it drifted into mid-cap territory. Performance was readily exceeded by several of the funds you list here. Perhaps you would have been better off changing horses in midstream.
The reclassification dates to about 10/31/2005. I derive that date from the M* analyst report of 1/31/2006:

Since 2000, the fund's stakes in mid-caps and large caps has shot up significantly, while its allocation to small and micro-caps has dropped sharply. We therefore recently moved the fund into our mid-blend category from our small-blend category to better reflect the fund's true composition.

That report discusses the portfolio report of 10/31/2005, so that's a reasonable date to use.
From that date through yesterday, the cumulative returns are:
SPECX: 837.91%
FCNTX: 572.63%
PRBLX: 552.48%
JENSX: 447.40%
VOO: 408.88%
FLPSX: 254.22%
FAIRX: 197.66%

Question for the math inclined - he has simply added these rates, should he multiply each component? IE: (1+a/100)(1+b/100)etc…-1?
You're right. Further, this fundamental flaw permeates the column, so I wouldn't look at any of the numbers. (I didn't even read much past the second paragraph because it was apparent that Rekenthaler was trying to turn a multiplicative question into an additive one.)
Consider how he calculates the contribution of multiple expansion. He calculates the multiple expansion at roughly 2.66 (31.5/11.8). He tries to back out this factor by saying that if we divide it out, we would have the remaining S&P growth. Dividing 100% by 2.66% leaves 37% for "everything else". So, obviously (and obviously wrong), multiple expansion accounts for 63% of the S&P growth.
This is so wrong that it left me scratching my head about where he got 63% for quite awhile until I saw what his simplistic calculation was. BTW, the 31.5 figure he used was wrong also. He erroneously transcribed the 30.5 figure that one gets from the data he cited.
I think I can illustrate the problem simply:
Consider a 1x1 square. Its area is 1. Suppose its height doubles (100% growth) and its length triples (200% growth). Its area is now 6 (500% growth).
Would you say that 50% of the growth was due to the height doubling? After all, had the height not doubled, the area would have grown just half as much (to 3 instead of 6). According to his reasoning, the trebling of the length thus must likewise account for half the growth.
It's nonsense because it ignores the cross terms - the effect that one factor growing has on the other factor growing. The (1+a/100) effect.
He starts with junk arithmetic. From there we're off to the races. It only gets worse after that, I assume (not having the stomach for the rest).

In retrospective mood tonight, I plotted the $10k-growth of several funds I used to be seriously interested in and most of which I owned off and on since Labor Day 2000. (Many of them before then, too, since the 1980s, when my career turned toward high tech.) It seemed a v tough time, fall 2000, hangover from the latest highflying tech phase. SPECX, FAIRX, more-sensible things like TWEIX and JENSX and PRBLX. VOO of course. FCNTX.
Anyway, I compared them all w old stalwart FLPSX, one man, one machine since seemingly forever (and Tillinghast is only mid-60s!). It was of him David Snowball famously wrote (maybe it was in email to me) something like 'I have never sold FLPSX and not regretted it.'
Of course these funds are not properly comparable. Still.
Check it out. Stay the course. Don't trade longterm winners even in slumps.

Vanguard Advice Select Dividend Growth will be managed by Donald Kilbride of Wellington.
This fund will be a more concentrated version of Vanguard Dividend Growth which Mr. Kilbride has managed since 2006.
Vanguard Advice Select International Growth will be comanaged by James Anderson* and Lawrence Burns. Both managers are part of the Baillie Gifford team which runs 70% of Vanguard International Growth.
Baillie Gifford invests with a venture capital approach which has generated high returns along with high volatility.
*Mr. Anderson will leave Baillie Gifford in April 2022 after nearly four decades with the firm.
Link

Both index and non index funds are NTF. One example ix VWIAX which I own. Minimum is $500.

Interesting that Schwab shows the fund closed today, a day ahead of the official closing. That's significant because Schwab allowed one to get in with a $2500 min.
Now that investors will have to go directly to RiverPark to open an account, they won't be able to get the cheaper shares for anything less than $50K.

@MSF. Agree with all your points. Firstrade is not my primary brokerage and as you have noted my Scudder and Wellstrade free trades went into the dustbin of history. My understanding though is that at Fidelity you would have to set up recurring investments in a TF fund to get the $5 fee. Then you would have to discontinue this with every purchase and repeat with the next one. If this is true I would continue with Firstrade until their fee changes. But if the above is true regarding Fidelity $5 purchases I would be happy to pay a 9.99 fee to not have to continually monitor all this at Fidelity. As usual ,thank you for your input on the forum.

“I do not believe that he understands the fundamentals that are creating explosive growth and investment opportunities in the innovation space.”Wood went on to tout her belief that the technologies ARK believes and invests in “should transform the world” in the next decade.

Ah, blasts from the past: https://forbes.com/1999/12/13/mu8.html?sh=317507435956
https://money.cnn.com/1999/04/09/mutualfunds/funds_jacob/
https://deseret.com/1995/4/25/19171779/small-investors-are-pouring-millions-into-technology-funds
https://pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/betting/etal/script.html
https://money.cnn.com/1999/04/30/mutualfunds/funds_vanwagoner/

I have been using Firstrade for years and happy with service overall. I can confirm that they do charge loads for load funds, but I still find they have the best selection of funds being offered at NTF AND institutional shares at low minimums in some cases.

Firstrade is great for access to shares that you can't get elsewhere. I used it for years to get Franklin-Templeton's lower cost Advisor class shares.
While it's not as bare bones as it was when I was a customer, it's still not a brokerage I'd use as my primary institution. It doesn't make ATM reimbursements (and charges foreign transaction fees except for one per month), and has check printing fees, ACAT transfer fees, and limited phone hours (M-F). They don't seem to offer mobile deposits. IMHO none of which is significant for a secondary brokerage.
The main question in my mind is how long the free fund trading will last. I'm repeating myself here: we've seen similar programs sent off to the dustbin of history including Welltrade, Scottrade, and Scudder Retirement Plus. Though even if it brings back its $9.95 charge per trade, that's little more than a nuisance fee and not much more than the $5 that Fidelity charges for incremental investments in TF funds.

These new actively managed funds will be available exclusively to clients of Personal Advisor Services (PAS).

Vanguard Advice Select Dividend Growth Fund will seek to outperform the broader U.S. market, focusing on financially sound, large-cap companies across a diverse range of sectors that have prospects for long-term total returns, as a result of their ability to grow earnings and their willingness to increase dividends over time. A more concentrated version of the strategy used in Vanguard Dividend Growth Fund, the fund will be managed by Wellington Management Company LLP and will have an estimated expense ratio of 0.45%, compared with the average expense ratio for large-cap core funds of 0.90%.3
Vanguard Advice Select Global Value Fund will provide global, all-cap, contrarian-value exposure by investing in discounted companies that are being avoided or overlooked. The fund will be managed by Wellington Management Company LLP and will have an estimated expense ratio of 0.40%, compared with the average expense ratio for global multi-cap value funds of 1.10%.4
Vanguard Advice Select International Growth Fund will employ a bottom-up equity strategy—analyzing the fundamentals of specific companies instead of broad sectors or industries—focused on exceptional international growth companies. The fund will be managed by Baillie Gifford Overseas Ltd., as a more concentrated version of the strategy used in Vanguard International Growth Fund. The fund will have an estimated expense ratio of 0.42%, compared with the average expense ratio for international large-cap growth funds of 1.13%.5

https://tiogapublishing.com/news/state/vanguard-personal-advisor-services-to-introduce-three-active-equity-funds/article_71cdffb1-e09e-50db-a7f0-6241876473e0.html
From an initial glance, the Select Dividend Growth Fund will be a clone of Dividend Growth fund with the same fund manager.
Global Value Fund is new but it is managed by Wellington. This fund is likely to be similar to Global Wellington but without the bond components.
Select International Growth Fund is different from Vanguard International Growth. This new fund will be solely managed by Baillie Gifford, not the co-managing team consisting of BG and Schroeder.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1004655/000168386321004663/f9509d1.htm
Admiral Class:
Vanguard Advice Select Dividend Growth Fund
Vanguard Advice Select International Growth Fund
Vanguard Advice Select Global Value Fund

Just received from TDA...
However, the transaction fee for your purchases of funds from certain fund families that do not pay TD Ameritrade for record keeping, shareholder, and other administrative services on the shares purchased will increase to $74.95.

WOW I am sure Schwab will apply $75 fee across the board

People may not be aware of how brokerages are compensated by funds, even TF funds, for shelf space. For example, Schwab discloses:

To compensate Schwab for various shareholder services, NTF Funds pay Schwab an asset-based annual fee, which usually equals 0.40% of the average fund assets held at Schwab but may be as high as 0.45%. ... When adding a new fund to Schwab’s NTF platform, NTF Funds also pay Schwab a one-time establishment fee.
...
Most [Transaction] Fee Funds pay Schwab a low annual asset-based fee, typically 0.10% annually of the average fund assets held at Schwab, although the fee can range up to 0.25% annually. ... When adding a new fund to Schwab’s platform, [Transaction] Fee Funds also pay Schwab a one-time establishment fee.

As a business decision, brokerages may decide to carry funds that refuse to pay even this "low" fee. Conversely, funds may make a business decision not to offer their funds on some platforms even if they are charged nothing. This is where the $75 fee kicks in and why you can't get Admiral shares on most platforms.

“Vanguard doesn’t compensate us for the services we provide,” a Fidelity spokeswoman told Barron’s. “That’s why there’s a higher transaction fee for its funds,” she added, referring to the $75 fee that Fidelity charges to buy a Vanguard fund, well above its normal $49.95 rate.
...
Maintaining the exclusive rights to sell its low-cost Admiral shares for active funds is one way to prevent firms like Fidelity or Schwab from poaching client assets. “Vanguard is saying, ‘Why should we offer our best priced item on someone else’s shelf when we want investors to stay with us?’” Daniel Wiener, editor of monthly newsletter The Independent Adviser for Vanguard Investors, tells Barron’s.

https://www.barrons.com/articles/vanguard-lowest-cost-funds-fidelity-retirement-schwab-51556315451 (April 28, 2019)

Firstrade:

A Short Term Redemption Fee of $19.95 will be applied to redemptions of mutual fund shares held less than 90 days. Broker-Assisted redemptions will incur a charge of $19.95. Redemptions of less than $500 will incur a $19.95 fee, unless the entire value of that fund is less than $500. For mutual funds transferred to Firstrade, the 90 day holding period will begin when the account transfer process is complete.

https://invest.firstrade.com/cgi-bin/main#/content/customerservice/pricing/
Once one logs in, there's a fund screener that gives not 11,000 funds but 16,854 funds, of which 10,265 are described as no load, and 6,589 of which are called load funds.

Before Firstrade dropped all fund transaction fees, it charged no transaction fee for funds on its NTF list and for load funds (since it collected loads on those funds), while charging $9.95 for no load, TF funds. I'm inclined to think that all Firstrade did was remove the $9.95 charge on the TF funds but that it still charges loads on funds it labels load funds. Especially since it shows 6K load funds in addition to the 10K+ funds that are "no load".
NTBAX is one such fund. Firstrade lists it as open but as a load fund. However, it does also list NTBIX as a noload fund, albeit with a $25K min.
While you won't find NTBAX on the Firstrade's public pages, you will find its sister fund NAVAX / NAVCX there, displayed as a load fund. That gives you a good indication of how NTBAX is handled there as well.
Interestingly, you will also find its purported sister fund NDNAX /NDNCX listed. The problem is that this fund is defunct. Which suggests that the number of funds Firstrade is claiming is inflated, whether intentionally or not.

I have been using Firstrade for years and happy with service overall. I can confirm that they do charge loads for load funds, but I still find they have the best selection of funds being offered at NTF AND institutional shares at low minimums in some cases.

Firstrade:

A Short Term Redemption Fee of $19.95 will be applied to redemptions of mutual fund shares held less than 90 days. Broker-Assisted redemptions will incur a charge of $19.95. Redemptions of less than $500 will incur a $19.95 fee, unless the entire value of that fund is less than $500. For mutual funds transferred to Firstrade, the 90 day holding period will begin when the account transfer process is complete.

https://invest.firstrade.com/cgi-bin/main#/content/customerservice/pricing/
Once one logs in, there's a fund screener that gives not 11,000 funds but 16,854 funds, of which 10,265 are described as no load, and 6,589 of which are called load funds.

Before Firstrade dropped all fund transaction fees, it charged no transaction fee for funds on its NTF list and for load funds (since it collected loads on those funds), while charging $9.95 for no load, TF funds. I'm inclined to think that all Firstrade did was remove the $9.95 charge on the TF funds but that it still charges loads on funds it labels load funds. Especially since it shows 6K load funds in addition to the 10K+ funds that are "no load".
NTBAX is one such fund. Firstrade lists it as open but as a load fund. However, it does also list NTBIX as a noload fund, albeit with a $25K min.
While you won't find NTBAX on the Firstrade's public pages, you will find its sister fund NAVAX / NAVCX there, displayed as a load fund. That gives you a good indication of how NTBAX is handled there as well.
Interestingly, you will also find its purported sister fund NDNAX /NDNCX listed. The problem is that this fund is defunct. Which suggests that the number of funds Firstrade is claiming is inflated, whether intentionally or not.

@carew388. goofed. SVARX and NTBAX both available. $500 minimum. PACLX and PRWCX both closed to non shareholders

The available funds listed on the informational pages without an account is far from complete. With an account the available funds are many more. I own SVARX as a matter of fact and both this fund and PACLX are both available with $500 initial amount. The other 2 are available but closed to non shareholders. Hope this helps.

Forgot to add. Free cash management is available with a minimum 25K in the account. This has to be applied for separately and comes with checks, atm card,etc

I am in no way affiliated with Firstrade so I can report without hesitation after 1 year now, that I have been, for the most part ,happy with this account that allows every, yes every of the 11,000 funds on the platform NTF. Fees occur if a transaction occurs within 120 days if I remember correctly. I do not sell any positions less than 120 days anyhow. There have been a few hiccups ,but if anyone has issues with TF's this may be a solution. Customer service is not on the same level as with my other brokerages, Fidelity being one. But for no fees ,I am willing to put up with this issue .Many institutional and Vanguard Admiral funds have low entry amounts ,many at $500.