A little(?) late to this party, but M* finally downgraded the fund from silver to neutral:

This fund has stuck to its guns, and that means it has been wrong for a long time. Manager Michael Hasenstab has been bullish on emerging markets and bearish on U.S. bonds. The fund kept duration near zero while maintaining outsize bets on Ukraine and other emerging markets. We stayed positive on the fund given Hasenstab's past record, but eventually we have to conclude that he's not as good as we thought.

https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1058687/the-5-biggest-downgrades-of-2021

Wonder why it ever closed. $1B in assets spread among 535 or so stocks, mainly LCV. The only thing it ever left in its dust is 8 former managers/analysts but not its bogey.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/878719/000139834421018900/fp0068870_497.htm
497 1 fp0068870_497.htm
THE ADVISORS’ INNER CIRCLE FUND
Acadian Emerging Markets Portfolio
(the “Fund”)
Supplement dated September 20, 2021
to the
Summary Prospectus and Prospectus,
each dated March 1, 2021.
This supplement provides new and additional information beyond that contained in the Summary Prospectus and Prospectus and should be read in conjunction with the Summary Prospectus and Prospectus.
Effective October 1, 2021, Investor Class Shares, Y Class Shares and I Class Shares of the Fund are available for purchase by new investors. Accordingly, all references to the contrary are hereby deleted from the Summary Prospectus and Prospectus.
Please retain this supplement for future reference.

Summary prospectus:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1141819/000089418921006735/crossingbridgespacetf497k.htm
Registration filing:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1141819/000089418921003795/crossingbridgespac485a.htm
Portfolio Managers. David K. Sherman, President of the Adviser, is the Fund’s Lead Portfolio Manager and T. Kirk Whitney, CFA®, Assistant Portfolio Manager and Senior Analyst of the Adviser, is the Fund’s Assistant Portfolio Manager. Mr. Sherman and Mr. Whitney have been managing the Fund since its inception in 2021.

@hank
The chart below won't necessarily clarity much, but provides a reference to 2 other U.S. bond types. NOTE: TIP also has the feature of "flight to safety bonds" during a "melt", being a US gov't. issue.
3 year chart total return: TIP vs IEF (7-10 year Treasury vs LQD (investment gr. corp. bonds

@Catch22
Nice. Thanks. Has me wondering … Does this ETF only go up?
It’s possible that chart reflects investor enthusiasm for TIPS (a fad) rather than real value vs conventional bonds. Charts that go up in that manner sometimes do. Looks like it’s really ramped up since beginning of 2019. I don’t know the answer. Just asking those “in-the-know”.

Note that in recent months the “angle of attack” has really steepened. Were it an aeronautical craft it would be about to stall. :)

Not mentioned is that TD Ameritrade is reducing its fees on all other TF OEF funds
(by less than a nickel :-()
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/58605/td-ameritrade-new-oef-pricing
I view this more as duopoly pricing (Fidelity, Schwab) than a generic pushback on "low" prices. AFAIK, no other major brokerages charge fees one-way (pay to buy, free to sell).
As I recall (not positive of precise details/chronology), Fidelity went to one way pricing: $75 to buy, $0 to sell. Schwab followed with one way, $76 dollar pricing. Then Fidelity dropped fees to $49.95 except for a few families, and Schwab responded by dropping fees on all TF families to $49.95. Or the other way around, i.e. Schwab with Fidelity following.
Now Schwab is again closing the gap between it and Fidelity, though this time by raising the fee on a few families to $74.95.
A few pricing details to add to Lewis' chart:
Fidelity charges $75 to buy Schwab funds; Vanguard charges its usual $20; obviously Schwab charges nothing.
Vanguard charges $0 for the first 100 trades for Flagship Select (over $5M) customers. Both the Flagship ($1M) and Flagship Select ($5M) thresholds include all household assets, not just assets in the account. But only Vanguard fund assets count, not all assets held at Vanguard. That's except for Vanguard-managed accounts, where all assets in the accounts are included.
The number of free trades at Vanguard is reduced by the number of free option trades that were executed in the current calendar year.

A beautiful Sunday Michigan morning to you @hank
Travel the TIP ETF route or equivalent from whichever provider to fulfill the I-bond space.
E.R. = .19%, the majority of holdings are 1-5 year duration, no limitation for when to buy or sell, no $ limits, well suited to a tax deferred account holding; a fully flexible holding in this area of one's total account.
Annualized return sample periods since Dec. 2003 inception = LIFE, 4.4% and 3 year of 7.5%.
TIP ETF performance
Regards,
Catch

- “IMHO, an argument for purchasing Series I savings bonds now instead of after Nov. 1 is that you're getting a guaranteed 3.54% (annualized) rate for six months in addition to whatever the future holds. Not too shabby.”
Not shabby at all. Is there an ETF or mutual fund that uses these to boost yield? Suspect there’s a timing element involved that would complicate the work of an ordinary investor in meeting what appear pretty stringent dates, Also, would it be possible to keep rolling the $$ over into these - perhaps automatically? (KISS).
- “Not mentioned is the opportunity for a deceased savings bond owner to pay tax on accumulated interest to date of death. This can be advantageous if the deceased is in a low tax bracket (likely if retired) … “
Most assuredly retired (one way or the other) :)

Follow up to my previous post -
Fixed interest rate on Series EE bonds currently being issued is 0.10%. I would not bother with them, even though they are guaranteed to double in value in 20 yrs because one is locked in for 20 yrs or earn practically nothing if withdrawn sooner, including a one year lock up. It is scary to think the Govt economic projections lead them to the current pricing @ 0.10%. From TreasuryDirect -
"How does Treasury decide on the interest rate?
We determine the fixed interest rate for EE bonds by taking market yields and adjusting them to account for the value of components unique to savings bonds, including options that permit early redemption (redemption after the first 12 months) and tax deferral.
We do this twice a year: May 1 and November 1. The new fixed rate of interest then applies to all EE bonds bought in the following six months."
P.S.: An IBond with a principal of $10K purchased on May 1, 2004 has a current balance of $17.3K, after 17 years. That is, a 73% accrued interest (or increase balance) in 17 years.

Schwab Raises Fees for Buying Fidelity and Vanguard Funds
“After years of fee wars with other brokers, Charles Schwab is pushing back. Starting on Nov. 1, the cost for retail investors to buy Vanguard, Fidelity, and Dodge & Cox funds at the broker will rise from $49.95 to $74.95—a 50% increase. Similarly, at TD Ameritrade, which Schwab acquired in October 2020, prices for the same fund families will rise from $49.99 to $74.95 on Oct. 1.
“Schwab's stated reason for this shift is covering its record-keeping and other administrative costs. ‘The majority of mutual fund families pay Schwab/TD Ameritrade for necessary and important shareholder servicing expenses, but some do not,’ says Alison Wertheim, a representative for Schwab (ticker: SCHW), in an email. ‘We are applying this different amount on retail mutual fund purchases only for funds from which we do not receive shareholder servicing compensation in order to offset the expense we incur in providing shareholder servicing.’ But is it a coincidence that Schwab is raising prices on two fund families with brokerage divisions that are its biggest competitors and the source of the fee wars?”
Excellent article. Delves into the history of the fee price wars, some of the causes and motivational factors and makes some inferences about where things may be heading.
From: Barron’s - September 20, 2021
LINK (May require subscription to access complete article)

@Sven - this article too from Jim Sloan @SeekingAlpha.
I-Bonds Have it All

For I Bonds bought by October 31, the one year yield will likely be 4.8%
This is understated. He's assuming 0% inflation in August and for September. It was 0.3% for the month of August, or 5.3% Y/Y Aug 2021/Aug 2020.
The combined return from November 1, 2021, through October 31, 2022, will therefore be close to the combination of 1.77% for the six months ending and the 3.07% (6.14% annualized) likely for the subsequent six months, if not higher. The total one year inflation component combining the two is 4.84%
Assuming a savings bond purchased Nov 1, the inflation adjustments would be the Mar '21 - Sept '21 inflation rate for the first six months, then the Sept '21 - Mar '22 inflation rate. The old 1.77% rate (inflation Sept '20 - Mar '21) would be irrelevant.
OTOH if you were to purchase a savings bond before Nov, then you would get the rate as described for a year. But that year would start the in the month you purchased the savings bond and terminate before Oct 31, 2022. At that point you'd start getting the Sept '21 - Mar '22 inflation rate.
Either way, he's missing this future, completely unknown rate in what you'd earn through Oct 31, 2022.
https://www.treasurydirect.gov/indiv/research/indepth/ibonds/res_ibonds_iratesandterms.htm#change
IMHO, an argument for purchasing Series I savings bonds now instead of after Nov. 1 is that you're getting a guaranteed 3.54% (annualized) rate for six months in addition to whatever the future holds. Not too shabby.
One can argue about the defects of the Urban CPI but it's what is used for all important measures such as resets of Social Security payments.
Bzzzt. Try again. CPI-W is used for the all important measure of SS COLA.
For I Bonds bought by October 31, the one year yield will likely be 4.8%. You can buy $10,000 electronically at TreasuryDirect and another $5000 with your tax refund.
Yes, but a couple can't buy $10K with their refund if they file jointly. The purchase amount is limited to $5K/savings bond type/filing. So a couple filing jointly could purchase just $5K, though they could purchase $5K each if they filed separate returns.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/09/your-money/us-savings-bond-inflation.html
I Bonds give you the opportunity to avoid this [tax on phantom income] problem by electing to defer taxes until maturity.
Meaning that you have the option to pay tax annually, e.g. if the savings bond is in the name of a low income tax payer.
Not mentioned is the opportunity for a deceased savings bond owner to pay tax on accumulated interest to date of death. This can be advantageous if the deceased is in a low tax bracket (likely if retired), or in the alternative, if the deceased is subject to estate taxes at state or federal level. If the deceased elects to pay the deferred taxes after death, that reduces the size of the taxable estate. And similar to inheriting a Roth, the beneficiary inherits savings bonds with no built in tax liability. Though liability attaches going forward, as the savings bond continues to accrue interest.

+1

Good thread @bee. The Sept 17 episode is quite thought provoking and actionable.

I am aware of Schwab's Fundamental Index Funds. Do they have an equal weighted 500 Index mutual fund?

As an aside, I believe “bank loans” are ST, floating rate (secured?) loans given to companies that couldn’t float a regular bond/loan…NOT loans taken out by banks. Less interest rate risk, but more credit risk (which seems ok at this point in economic cycle)

*snip*
In his previous interviews he mentioned that bank loans (or floating rate bonds) are attractive because of their high yield (3%) and short duration (1-2 years). Even though bank loans are rated junk, they are safer because they are high in capital structure in case of the banks defaulting on the loans. Also he mentioned that utilities are attractive and stable while offer 3-4% yield.

Good thread @bee. The Sept 17 episode is quite thought provoking and actionable.

“A WSJ investigation found that Facebook knows its platforms cause users harm. Anyone who thought Facebook just ‘woke up like this’ need only read The Wall Street Journal’s Facebook Files series this week to understand that things aren’t so flattering right now beneath the surface. But even the harsh light of critical media reports hasn’t been enough to scare away investors.
“The Journal’s investigation found that the social-media giant knows its platforms—which are now used by nearly half the world’s population—cause users harm, often in ways only the company fully understands. Some of the evidence was particularly troubling: Facebook’s internal research showed that, among teens who reported suicidal thoughts, 13% of British users and 6% of American users traced the desire to kill themselves to Instagram … Yet investors seemed to largely gloss over the disturbing revelations: As of Thursday’s market close, Facebook’s stock had lost less than 1.5% of its value this week. Say what you want about Facebook’s platforms, but it is hard to quit them.”
- By Nina Riggio / Bloomberg News (reprinted in The WSJ - 9/18/21)
I’ve excerpted roughly the first 2 paragraphs of a substantially longer article. Here’s a LINK. You’ll probably need a subscription to access full article.

Sept 17th episode:

Giroux’s annual reports are well written. His interviews confirm his sector positioning and buying strategies. At the height of the pandemic, I have cash but lacking the skills to take full advantage of the buying opportunity. That is why I hire a skillful manager such as Giroux.
BTW, barbell strategies have also been used by other well established fund such as Fidelity Contra and Vanguard Primecap.
@hank, my % allocation was obtained from the semiannual report dated on 6/30/21. So the values are dated by 3 months from those that you are reading today. The top 10 holdings listed on TRP website is dated as of 8/30/21.