There are no restrictions on how you can use CVD funds. If you’re cash-strapped, you can use the money to pay bills and recontribute later (within the three-year window) when your financial situation improves. You can help out your adult kids now and recontribute later. Whatever. So, a CVD can be a useful cash-flow management tool in these troubled times.
So far, so good.
The catch: not-so-great interim tax consequences

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/taking-cash-out-of-your-ira-under-new-cares-act-rules-is-more-complicated-than-it-sounds-2020-05-04

Value Investments work when they grow...

The best time to be invested in a traditional value stock is when the underlying company has figured out a way to stop shrinking and start growing again. That’s when you’ve got a bargain. The time between when that value stock is unrecognized for its growth prospects and when it becomes so highly recognized that it is now a growth stock – that’s where the money is made in value investing. It’s very hard to detect these opportunities, whether systematically or fundamentally. Most will not be able to. Value traps will be more prevalent than value companies that re-learn how to grow.

https://thereformedbroker.com/2020/05/12/value-investing-is-immortal/

Hard to believe, except when you have lived it.

Earlier this year I wrote about why market timing can be so appealing to investors. The key takeaway was that if you bought the Dow on a random day, there was a 95% chance that the index would be lower at some point in the future.
This implied that you could’ve gotten a better price 95% of the time if you waited (and knew the future). However, it also implied that nearly every time you buy the index, you are basically guaranteed to see your position lose money at some point in time.
But, the better question is: how much could you lose?

and,

This means that half the time you will lose 13.2% or less and half the time you will lose 13.2% or more. In addition, there is a 1 in 4 chance of losing 29.8% or more and a 1 in 4 chance of losing 4.2% or less.
And, for equities, you should expect to see a 50%+ price decline a couple times a century, a 30% decline once a generation, and a 10% price decline at least every other year.

You should always ask yourself, "how much am I comfortable losing?"
how-much-could-you-lose

With no ties to the world of high finance, Sarao accumulated $70 million buying and selling futures as if he were playing a computer game. The bulk of his winnings came during periods of extreme volatility. He also manipulated the markets, according to the U.S. government, creating a computer program that placed then canceled huge volumes of orders to deceive other participants about supply and demand—a brand-new offense known as “spoofing.” Authorities were careful to assert that Sarao’s antics had only contributed to the crash, essentially by creating false signals others reacted to, but that nuance was lost in the ensuing press coverage.

new-book-shares-more-details-on-trader-blamed-for-flash-crash

So I had learned 15 years back. Converted $50K to $75K in 2 months and then turned $75K to $40K in about 8 days. Closed my account and ran. It was a mistake.

Happened to me when trading futures during my doctoral years. Made insane profits & hideous losses until I found what worked for me and my temperment, then I eeked out a slow steady profit for a while before quitting due to life changes. Now when I play (key word) with futures, which is rarely these days, it's in 1-2 lots only which is barely 1% of my trading account value - nothing extravagant.
What worked for me back then was, say if I lost 20K one day ... I would half my position sizing and not increase it back to normal trading lots until I had earned that money back. My thinking was that would reduce my risk and also force me to "be better" in my analysis and trading, even when it was "so clearly obvious" which way the market was going --- which if I acted on that impulse, I'd probably have been wrong. :) (I also considered this my penalty box.)

PS - There are too many people out there selling too many "strategies". Ignore. You need to know what your objective is. Speculating buying calls and puts? or earn income? mine is the latter. I might have said this before. 0.25% a week should be the target. 1% a month. 12% a year. Now lets say 0.10% a week, 0.4% a month, 4.8% a year. I'll still take it.

This. A well known options hedge fund blew up a few years ago because they were selling Very OTM naked puts on various commodities (similar to what VF is doing on the SPY but I'm sure he's more rational/careful) ... which is a strategy that worked in most market conditions, until it didn't, and their positions experienced a multi-sigma move against them overnight, and BAM! Out of business.
Anyone selling you the idea you can make 5-15% overnight, per week, or per month using options (or anything, really) is likely selling you reckless ideas packaged as snake oil. Only pikers will buy into that b/c they are enamored only by the potential gains, not how the trades are structured or what could happen if they lose. In this case, the only person making a profit is the newsletter/signal provider.

interesting article but I'm also looking for actions. Based on the info what an investor to do?
The % of SP500/QQQ revenues that are coming from abroad are 40/50% and why I only hold US LC for years now. If I want more risk/reward I would use QQQ instead of some of the SP500. The top QQQ companies rule the world and the beauty of the big high tech is the ability to acquire the next customer cheaply and depress their competition.

Just another recyclable article.
The following is especially really deep...
"Even Goldman Sachs, which is bullish on stocks in the long run, is warning clients to brace for a bumpy ride this summer. "
When the market loses 10+% the articles are doom and gloom and usually talk about the DOW because it's catchy to say the DOW is down over 3000 points than to say the SP500 is down over 300 points.

I wasn't even invested 20 years ago. No money. But even with 58% bonds, 36% stocks, I'm down from my high-point by -7.5% tonight, including recent dividends. I'm not adding anything to the retirement portfolio. Minimal monthly additions into non-retirement account bond fund. So, not buying any more stocks, I am naturally more concerned about YIELD.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/05/12/investing/stock-market-dow-coronavirus-goldman-sachs/index.html
This is the most expensive time to buy stocks in 20 years
New York(CNN Business)The US stock market stands 4% higher today compared to a year ago, despite the death and destruction unleashed by the coronavirus pandemic.

So I had learned 15 years back. Converted $50K to $75K in 2 months and then turned $75K to $40K in about 8 days. Closed my account and ran. It was a mistake.
Since my daughter earned a scholarship to university, thought I would earn some income, so revisited some of my learning. Cash earning absolutely nothing.
Don't have to do anything drastic. Just sell a put. And sell it on SPY knowing it will not go to zero. Important to note, I shouldn't blab. I feel today might signal a downtrend. I was lucky to start after the sell off was mostly over and selling puts with markets going up is ideal. If you sell a PUT there is an obligation to purchase. So if you are assigned a share of SPY, you need to immediately sell a covered call. Or just simply sell and get out.
It's really not too hard. Just youtube for a basic options course. Will take 1 hour at most.
PS - There are too many people out there selling too many "strategies". Ignore. You need to know what your objective is. Speculating buying calls and puts? or earn income? mine is the latter. I might have said this before. 0.25% a week should be the target. 1% a month. 12% a year. Now lets say 0.10% a week, 0.4% a month, 4.8% a year. I'll still take it.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/3095166001
Looking to invest? Here's how to diversify your portfolio based on when you'll need money
'When it comes to money and divvying up your assets, time is either on your side or it’s not.'
Article discusses general ways to redistribute your 'baskets' base in your risks to gain reasonablyreturns. Many MFOs are doing this at least monthly or few times per yr.
Cash gives annual returns <1.0% maybe not be very attractive options for dome reviewers/investors [ones that may have long term horizons for retirements]
Enjoy

I purchased WAMCX, APGAX, and QQQ over the past 2 weeks. WAMCX is a great small cap growth fund with a focus on the tech and health care sectors. Consistently a top 1-5% performer among small caps.. APGAX is large cap growth and held up extremely well in the sell off. Very much of a steady eddy fund typically in the top 10-20% of top performers among large cap growth.

I read it the same way as @wxman123. They can make numerous increases in those 31 days or numerous decreases in 31 days, but can't do both. In fact, I see that they had numerous buys in March as the S&P 500 was falling.
I also can't figure out why they wanted to make the fund more aggressive, unless they just want to perform better in rising markets. It really hasn't done well in good times and maybe they want to change that.

Hi @wxman123,
My above comments come from the First Quarter 2020 Commentary. On page 3 of this Commentary you will find that the baseline asset allocation that the fund adjust its equity allocation begins at 10% equity allocation with the S&P 500 being over 3487. In addition ... At the bottom of the page it reads ... "Please note: the fund employs a 31-day trading rule to help reduce the risk of taxable events. If the fund has increased the allocation to stock funds or bond funds, it will not decrease that allocation for 31 days."
This complete commentary can be view through CTFAX's web page linked below.
https://www.columbiathreadneedleus.com/investment-products/mutual-funds/Columbia-Thermostat-Fund/Class-A/details/?cusip=197199755&_n=1
Scroll down until you find the Fund's Commentary button located under fund literature.

more about disconnects
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/10/business/stock-market-economy-coronavirus.html

One need not go further than his first bullet item, confirmation bias, to see an example of his confirmation bias.

A reluctance towards establishing a common ground is already widespread in America. According to a 2019 survey, 70% of Democrats believed their party’s leaders should “stand up” to President Trump, even if less gets done in Washington. Conversely, 51% of Republicans believed that Trump should “stand up” to Democrats.

While the January 2019 Pew survey did show that, the same page he linked to notes that a November 2018 Pew survey found that "Most Americans said they’d like to see cooperation between Trump and Congress."
By selectively absorbing just one part of what Pew found, he is exhibiting confirmation bias. Americans may be unclear about their interest in bipartisan cooperation, they may be saying that they won't move if the other side doesn't while still desiring more cooperation, or a variety of other things. But to this writer, all he sees is American intransigence.

Prices were up in April because the fiscal and monetary support was huge and markets are looking ahead. We haven't seen anything like this in the last 50 years.
This is what I posted on ‎03-17-2020 11:38 PM (link)
7) For me and others who don’t mind to use possible better performing categories, select the ones with better momentum.
IDEA1: QQQ looks to me as a better choice than SP500 coming out of this meltdown because these giant high tech companies rule the world and the indexes and the strongest. QQQ also has a lower loss YTD then the SP500.
IDEA2: I am going to let the charts, trend, and prices tell me what is hot.

To avoid large crowd in stores we go either early when the stores open or near the last 15 minutes before closing. It is also good that many customers are now wearing face covering and addition protection are installed to protect the cashiers and workers. Still see few large gatherings without face coverings and we avoid them when we go for walk outside.
Strange now in our work space as two separate shifts are used and the cubicles are spaced further apart. Instead of face-to-to face discussion we talk on the phone. Conference calls replace group meetings. Overall very impersonal and strange.

If I invest in HY it's only for trade. HY is a hybrid product that usually doesn't justify itself. Compare VWEHX(good HY) to VBIAX (60/40 indexes) (chart) and you will see VBIAX beat VWEHX for 1-3-5-10-15 years.
Most investors should not collect funds but use 3-7 funds and why HY doesn't have a place in my portfolio.
The only false justification is higher yield which I never like. The first thing you should look at investment is risk/reward and only then look for higher yield, that true with stocks and bonds.

@wxman123, The new baseline asset allocation can be found on The fund's Fact Sheet. As of 5-1-20 it is 50 percent. Under the old Fact Sheet it was 10 percent.
The 31 day trading rule is to prevent the fund from having wash sales. The fund's 31 day trading rule also prevents it from changing investment direction for 31 days from its last buy or sell transaction.

Maybe it's my reading skills...but as I read it the 31 day rule would not prevent the fund from increasing or decreasing stock allocation more frequently than 31 days. The rule only prevents an increase followed by a quick decrease, which would trigger a wash sale. An increase or decrease on two consecutive days would not have that effect. As the prospectus says: "The second exception is a “31-day Rule;” in order to reduce taxable events and minimize short-term trading if the S&P 500®Index price moves back and forth across a band in the allocation table, after the Fund has increased its percentage allocation to either stock funds or bond funds, it will not decrease that allocation for at least 31 days."
Also, according to the prospectus, the baseline increase is the current implementation of the strategy that has always been in place. Granted, the notion that the market has been "expensive" for the past 18 years (hence the former 10% stock baseline) and is now "normal" (50%) seems a bit disingenuous, but that's what the fund says. It also says that it can revisit this allocation more frequently then annually under unusual circumstances.