@Charles,
Thanks for the excellent synopsis of MICUS 2021!

Paul Harvey? Boy, you are old! :)

Maybe not.
"In late August [2001], 83-year-old broadcasting legend Paul Harvey returned full-time to radio land. For three months, he'd been out of commission thanks to a lingering virus that zapped his once invincible voice box."
https://www.salon.com/2001/09/25/harvey_2/
Paul Harvey Noon News and Comment - Feb. 16, 2009 (Last one by Paul)

And now you know ... the rest of the story.

Hi @stillers

BTW, it's not shouting with me, it's emphasis. I learned from three decades of communicating directly to senior management of many firms that people many times (1) don't read what was written, I mean literally, they don't read it, (2) many times do not open links and if they do they read only the headlines and/or first para, and (3) miss the main points of what is written unless they are bolded or capitalized.

AGREE (but not shouting, meaning emphasis).
Too many times, especially when companies really started using pcs/laptops for all employees, that folks didn't seem to read as well as from printed text.
I still CAP some words for emphasis and more so will text messages so the full meaning is NOT missed...

Glad you get the whole emphasis thing.
THIS IS SHOUTING!!! THIS is emphasis.
And yep, LOTS has changed with technology and LOTS of it ain't so good for us. (No, I am not related to the Unabomber.)
A way, way too educated, very close friend is schooling me on what he (at least) refers to as "liquid intelligence." (That might be one of his or his guru's phrases. I dunno. Online I only see fluid and crystalized intelligence.)
My buddy claims that we, who actually DO read, read SO much SO fast online these days, and we think we are improving our intelligence and/or wisdom with all that intake.
But truth be told, we are failing miserably on all that as the "liquid intelligence" that we score though all that reading does NOT routinely get converted to I and/or W.
Think it through.
Think back to the last five articles you read TODAY. Think of what you remember as the FACTS and/or MAIN POINTS of those articles.
Then go back and re-read them. Check yourself. How did you do? Maybe pretty good. Maybe not so good. And if you spoke to people TODAY about what you read, you may have sounded pretty intelligent, crap, maybe even wise, about those topics. Maybe not so much.
Now next week start talking to someone IN DETAIL about those exact same five articles. Tell them the FACTS and/or MAIN POINTS of what you read. How did you do this time?
If you didn't write them down, will you even remember what they were about in say a month from now when you try to re-test yourself? Good luck with all that.
I've tried this a coupla times. If it was financial or sports related, I did VERY good on the day I read the stuff. And I still pretty good a week later. A month later, not so good. (Read, "Failed miserably.")
On other stuff NOT related to finance or sports, the next day and a month later, as Sgt Schultz of Hogan's Heroes fame might say, "I know nothing!" Yep, that "liquid intelligence" easily passed through me.

Hey STIllers - Don’t change my words. I said relief bounce. You said relief rally. So, unless your reading in INVESTOPEDIA mentions specifically “relief bounce” don’t tell me I’m wrong. Bounces to me are the opposite of dips. As far as Goldman Sachs goes, it’s nice of them to hand out all that free analysis for we common folks. Kinda wonder what they tell their high dollar clients. Same advice?

I didn't change your words. I was simply differentiating.
Nobody (until now) knew that YOU have apparently coined a phrase that (1) likely only YOU use and (2) sounds VERY close to a commonly used industry phrase with a SPECIFIC meaning in the industry.
FWIW: The "relief" in "relief rally" is investor "relief" from the on-going beat downs in a bear market. We're in a STRONG, LONG cyclical bull market. So USING the phrase "relief bounce" in conversation or print, in reference to this market, would need to be explained to the learned person/investor.
And you did. So let's just move on with this last thought from me on this:
If was me, and it ain't, I'd simply say "bounce" and leave the "relief" out during a cyclical bull market.
==================================================
See my other most recent post about Q4 projections.

@stillers said:
GoldmanSachs for one I trust......

This is where you lose me. GS knows how to make money for GS, but that does not imply that they give out their best proprietary information (or important guidance) to the general public. Nor does any brokerage house.

What I said was
GoldmanSachs for one I trust uses some pretty sophisticated programs and their "guess" (if you can call it that) is for a S&P 9% gain in Q4.
Well I happen to pay the BIG bucks for a coupla newsletters (not GS) and they're saying pretty much the same thing.
Still lost?
If you know the history of the S&P's average annual path since 1950 as compared to this year's and that over 70% of semis stocks are already in Correction mode, you know that given that history and the current state of BIG tech, a 9%-10% move UP in Q4 2020 is a REAL possibility. And as I and people in much higher pay grades than me are saying, is likely.
And FWIW on the free stuff, GS is not alone in projecting a Q4 move UP:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/rate-fears-just-another-white-knuckle-moment-for-tech-stocks-says-this-analyst-whos-forecasting-rebound-of-at-least-10-11633427803?siteid=yhoof2
Excerpt:
...To closely followed tech analyst Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities, this is just a “white knuckle moment” that will soon pass. Ives says the worries around rising yields and growth stock valuations will give way to a year-end rally of at least 10% in the tech space...

Hi @stillers

BTW, it's not shouting with me, it's emphasis. I learned from three decades of communicating directly to senior management of many firms that people many times (1) don't read what was written, I mean literally, they don't read it, (2) many times do not open links and if they do they read only the headlines and/or first para, and (3) miss the main points of what is written unless they are bolded or capitalized.

AGREE (but not shouting, meaning emphasis).
Too many times, especially when companies really started using pcs/laptops for all employees, that folks didn't seem to read as well as from printed text.
I still CAP some words for emphasis and more so with text messages so the full meaning is NOT missed.
And here, unless doing a general reply to a thread; I will direct a statement or question to an individual(s).

Event based markets are difficult to bet on, especially when the event is 2 weeks away. Small and micro caps are in red today. So, it is not full on risk, notwithstanding a decent up day in large cap averages.

Yep. Anybody’s guess how it will all play out. Not only the debt question, but Evergrande and a lot of other newsworthy issues. I’d expect a “relief bounce” in many markets lasting a day of two if / when the debt issue is settled. However, I still think the path of least resistance near term is down - if we’re talking about the major indexes. That’s not to say some individual stocks and sectors won’t do well.

Well, for many it goes a bit beyond guessing.
GoldmanSachs for one I trust uses some pretty sophisticated programs and their "guess" (if you can call it that) is for a S&P 9% gain in Q4.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/05/goldman-sachs-sees-a-big-4th-quarter-with-a-9percent-sp-500-gain-from-here.html
=======================
Having been an auditor/audit manager for 30+ years, I'm pretty anal about words as I've seen one incorrect word in a FS footnote can change a person's interpretation of a company's entire financial outlook. (I know, I've read that incorrect "one word" many times and sadly applied ones myself more than I care to remember.)
"Relief bounces" or more commonly "Relief rallies" are generally associated with secular bear markets:
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/relief-rally.asp
FWIW, IMO, this is NOT a "relief rally" an I've NOT heard a single person in the biz refer to it as that. Just sayin'.

In case anyone has NOT noticed this, the national biz media tends to get a wee bit overly excited about SMALL moves DOWN in markets. Break the 50 dma and there's probably gonna be a CNBC "Markets in turmoil" special coming pretty soon. Ring the registers!

I'm simply reporting on a level below the 50 that we haven't seen in quite a while. There is NOTHING definitive about what's happening. What you do with the info is your business. PERIOD.
I'll stop shouting in caps if you agree to do the same.

That's life on the internet pretty much all the time/Life in America in 2021...
Um, I was NOT (sorry for the emphasis here but I can't say it's not necessary since you are incorrectly blasting me) responding directly to you.
It was a general comment (as noted by my SPECIFIC use of the word "anyone") based on the scores of articles and posts I've read during the recent Dip/Diplet.
If I'm responding directly to you, I'll quote you.
BTW, it's not shouting with me, it's emphasis. I learned from three decades of communicating directly to senior management of many firms that people many times (1) don't read what was written, I mean literally, they don't read it, (2) many times do not open links and if they do they read only the headlines and/or first para, and (3) miss the main points of what is written unless they are bolded or capitalized.

Interest rates on Treasury bills coming due in the next month are already rising to reflect the increasingly likely ( but still unlikely) possibility of default.

From Y Charts:
“The 1 month treasury yield is included on the shorter end of the yield curve. The 1 month treasury yield reached 0% in late 2008 as the Fed lowered benchmark rates in an effort to stimulate the economy. 1 Month Treasury Rate is at 0.06%, compared to 0.06% the previous market day and 0.09% last year.”
Well, it may be so that rates have risen. But I’m still not ready to back up the truck and start buying.
If my math is correct, $100 invested at 0.06% will net you 6 cents in a year’s time. In contrast, on just about any day you can stroll along a Michigan highway and collect discarded beverage cans and bottles which are redeemable immediately for 10 cents each.

The notion that massive inflation is a foregone conclusion because of economic stimulus is misguided: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2021/07/03/will-president-bidens-economic-stimulus-cause-inflation-economists-are-unsure/

The survey asked the experts whether they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: “The current combination of US fiscal and monetary policy poses a serious risk of prolonged higher inflation.” If so, how strongly and with what degree of confidence.
Of the panel’s 43 experts, 38 participated in this survey, and the results indicate considerable uncertainty and differences in views. Weighted by each expert’s confidence in their response, 33% agree with the statement, 36% are uncertain, 26% disagree, and 4% strongly disagree. The short comments that the experts are able to include when they participate in the survey provide more details on different perspectives.

When Washington enters the irrational bats--t crazy phase as it is right now, it's good to be prudent. Trim or sell if you want to lock in gains or preserve capital, do something, do nothing ... do whatever lets you sleep well at night.
Everyone says DC will avoid a default at the 11th hour and 59th minute, and I suspect that's why the markets have been fairly tame when the debt ceiling is in the headlines these days. But given the insane nature of things around this town, I really can't help wondering if "this time is different" and their brinksmanship will backfire on them -- and us.
As for me, I'll buy into any crash and perhaps trim a bit of things to lock in gains and/or TLH going into Q4. But that's not panic, that's prudence and fairly normal investment management.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1496254/000158064221004756/alternativestrat_497.htm
497 1 alternativestrat_497.htm 497
Alternative Strategies Fund
Class A: LTAFX
Class C: LTCFX
Class I: LTIFX
Supplement dated October 4, 2021 to the Prospectus dated September 29, 2021
______________________________________________________________________
Ladenburg Thalmann Asset Management, Inc. currently serves as the Fund’s investment adviser and has served as its investment adviser since the Fund commenced operations on September 28, 2010. After careful consideration, Ladenburg Thalmann Asset Management, Inc. notified the Fund’s Board of Trustees (the “Board”) that it no longer wished to serve as the Fund’s investment adviser. At a special meeting of the Board held on September 30, 2021, the Board approved a new investment advisory agreement with SCG Asset Management, LLC (“New Advisory Agreement”), subject to shareholder approval.
In connection with the New Advisory Agreement, the Fund will be changing certain investment strategies. In pursuing the Fund’s objective, SCG Asset Management, LLC will implement strategies that focus on structured notes in addition to master limited partnerships (MLPs), real estate investment trusts (REITs) and business development companies (BDCs). Shareholders will receive a new prospectus with the Fund’s revised strategies and risks, once effective.
Currently, the Fund’s fundamental policy regarding industry concentration requires the Fund to invest more than 25% of its assets in securities related to the real estate industry. The Board also approved a change in the Fund’s industry concentration policy such that the Fund will no longer be required to invest more than 25% of its assets in securities related to the real estate industry. The change in the fundamental policy will provide SCG Asset Management, LLC greater flexibility in pursuing the Fund’s investment objective.
Under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), shareholder approval of (1) the New Advisory Agreement between the Fund and SCG Asset Management, LLC; and (2) the change in the Fund’s industry concentration policy is required. The Fund will be holding a special meeting of shareholders to consider the approval of these two matters. It is anticipated that the special meeting of the Fund’s shareholders will be held in December 2021.
Shareholders that own shares as of the record date for the shareholder meeting will be able to vote on the New Advisory Agreement and revised fundamental policy. Shareholders who acquired their shares of the Fund after the record date will not be permitted to vote on the approval of the new investment advisory agreement. This Supplement is not a proxy and is not soliciting any proxy, which can only be done by means of a proxy statement.
The information in this supplement contains new and additional information beyond that in the Prospectus, and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”), September 29, 2021. This supplement should be read in conjunction with the Prospectus and SAI and should be retained for future reference.

In case anyone has NOT noticed this, the national biz media tends to get a wee bit overly excited about SMALL moves DOWN in markets. Break the 50 dma and there's probably gonna be a CNBC "Markets in turmoil" special coming pretty soon. Ring the registers!
Yeah, many T/A's and investors gotta get back above the 50 to "feel safe" but several T/A guys/gals I read yesterday expressed that we'll likely be at new highs within a coupla weeks. A coupla weeks or a coupla months makes NO difference to me.
FWIW, I welcomed yesterday's slightly DOWN day to continue to build my ITOT position that I recently started but didn't get fully funded by last THU. I've recently revamped my port and started a new 5-yr portfolio effective 10/01/21. So I'm reasonably certain the BTD moves I've made in the past few days will be MUCH higher in the 5 years they'll be invested there. And the seed came from either cash, maturing CDs, and/or bond OEF sale proceeds. So there's that.
The biggest questions EVERY investor who reduces stock allocations during smallish pullbacks (like this one) and plans to re-deploy back into stocks later needs to ask is:
Am I sure the market is headed DOWN further?
Did a bell ring at the interim top?
Where am I going to park these proceeds?
Is that interim parking spot anywhere near the LT investment as the stocks I cashed them from?
WHEN does my crystal ball tell me will be the best time to re-deploy the parked proceeds back into the market?
Have I been successful with these market timing moves before?
Will I be ready when the time is right this time?
Will a bell ring when it's time?
What is my history/odds of timing this thing right on both the "Run and hide" AND "Get back in the game" moves?
And the BIGGIE: WTF do I do if I whiff on my re-deployment timing and the market moves HIGHER, or god forbid, significantly HIGHER than where it was when I ran and hid?
Is there NOT a better strategy than this one?
I employed the "Run and hide" and "Get back in the game" strategy for a while in hopes (ugh, that unviable investment strategy Art Cashin learned about over 50 years ago and routinely reminds us of ) to score a nirvana moment like dumping ALL of my money back IN the market on a day like March 20, 2020.
What's that infamous Peter Lynch quote again on this topic?
FWIW, I currently employ the BTD strategy that has been working flawlessly (for me at least) since the 2020 crash and I feel safe continuing to do it for the next 5 years.
Disclaimer: We're 65, retired for about ten years, have SS and pensions, have 96% of our port in tax-deferred a/c's, have NOT paid a dime in FIT/SIT since retiring in 2012, and have more $ than we're probably ever to be able to spend. But we're gonna start trying! YMMV.

“Powell's chances have fallen from about 80% in August to 61% as of Monday morning. The sharp decline comes amid an ongoing stock trading controversy that has ensnared several Fed governors and led to the resignations of Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren and Dallas Fed President Robert Kaplan.”
Story
Third member now implicated amid growing public outcry
Federal Reserve Vice Chair Richard Clarida switched between $1 million to $5 million from a bond fund into stock funds a day before Chairman Jerome Powell said coronavirus poses risks to the US economy, according to his financial disclosures from 2020. Forms filed with the government ethics office show that Clarida shifted funds out of a Pimco bond fund on February 27 last year, and bought into the Pimco StocksPlus Fund and the iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor exchange-traded fund on the same day, Bloomberg reported on Friday.
Story
PS - I’ve played around with the caption - not wanting to allege wrongdoing by Clarida. For better or worse, his trading has drawn suspicion and he’s become part of the larger issue.

ICLN (global renewables), PORTX (global quality, heavy U.S. & Europe, no fossil fuels), and PCEBX (Pimco climate bond, acts like a slightly lower vol core bond fund). Don't own any of them now except a fraction of 1% in ICLN to watch for a buying opp'ty.
Yep, wear the damn mask.

From GP's Chairman's letter dated 1/31/2020:
Here is a link to that letter:
https://www.grandeurpeakglobal.com/documents/grandeurpeakglobal-is-20200131.pdf
Excerpt:
There is also a very important strategy that we’ve been developing for several years now, which we call Global Explorer. It follows the same idea as Global Reach, but would be managed by our geography teams rather than the industry teams. Launching Global Explorer is roughly targeted for 2021-2022.
Excerpt from the registration filing link above:
PRINCIPAL INVESTMENT STRATEGIES OF THE FUND
The Fund invests primarily in foreign and domestic micro- to mid-cap companies based on a geography-focused framework intended to identify companies that the Adviser believes are particularly well-positioned for long-term growth.
The Fund will typically invest in securities issued by companies economically tied to at least ten countries, including the United States. The Fund will invest a significant portion of its total assets (at least 40% under normal market conditions) at the time of purchase in securities issued by companies that are economically tied to countries outside the United States, including emerging and frontier market countries. The Adviser generally considers a company to be economically tied to a market based on where the company is organized, headquartered, has its primary stock exchange listing, or has substantial concentration of assets or revenues.

Amazingly, Grantham in the article says a 10% or more SPY drop is coming in the coming months. 10% or more is not news when it comes from Grantham. That is like Grantham’s breath. Sort of deflates the rest of the decent article.

Howdy folks,
The kid is selling. Sorry to be a downer but gee whiz folks, this is as frothy a market as I've ever seen or even heard of. BTD is akin to doubling down on your losing bet at the casino. Granted, I'm a momentum investor AND I have bought the dip a few times - '87 and the Gulf War, for example. This was more like buying the Crash. The difference is now, however, I see the risks far outweighing the potential rewards. Hell, we don't need a Black Swan event, we have the nightly news and it's ALL black swan. I liked Jeremy Grantham's outlook, although he's being a bit too optimistic.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/legendary-investor-jeremy-grantham-says-104259678.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmluZy5jb20v&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAAjSsNmuIEdYsi2i23Yzd7et9aMliiviWcZ4x24F7PxRP18FYK7VYZkPYkTi9LzS-A2z8iJZcQGQ8t9HSWXzx67I7XGiTgS88FsY0iTfvg7R9y0REf3p9AuYgSXJWCU-nhvGbsRKWrOLcwB4BqVfZOMMXtTppo0_XYsHCPgDXw2Q
and so it goes,
peace and wear the damn mask,
rono

Lipper seems screwed up tonight. For several funds the YTD figure displayed in the “overview” is starkly at odds with the YTD when one brings up “performance”. And in comparing M*, Yahoo and Lipper, it’s unlikely the YTD numbers will match. I realize it’s best to go right to the institution. Works with TRP, but when I checked on DIAL (Columbia) they were current only to August 30. As interest rates have been all over the place recently, the August 30 date doesn’t tell the whole story.
For DIAL, Lipper shows roughy -1% (ytd) in its “overview”, but than lists it as -3.08% on the performance chart. Makes me wonder if the former is from some recent data bank and the latter perhaps from Columbia’s dated August 30 figure? Just curious how the double whammy of rising rates and falling stocks (high yield bonds) has affected that one.