Related story

The Fed is expecting to cut 75 to 100 basis points. The race to the bottom is on! Next is to buy assets at even more higher level than 2008.

(I’m agnostic on the issue of duplicate links.)
More importantly - on the bond issue Catch raises, I’ve been searching for a word to characterize the present situation. A seldom used noun, “Confuscation” seems to best fit. The word is so rarely used that your spell-checker will likely try to override it.
Confuscation - Collins Dictionary: (1) n. “designed to confuse, e.g. a maze or puzzle” (link)
Just when everyone was expecting rates to decline forever in the lee of Fed rate cuts, bond rates have begun to rise. As Gomer Pyle would say, “Surprise, Surprise!”. The 10-year spiked from somewhere around 0.40% early in the week to near 0.90% at week’s end. That’s a doubling in less than a week’s time.
The Fed can try to set market rates with its peg on the overnight lending rate (and often succeeds), but there is no absolute guarantee longer rates will follow suit. Apparently, the “real world” bankers and bond vigilantes fear price inflation / depreciation of paper currencies more than the Federal Reserve does. I suspect this is all related to the repo and liquidity issues David and others have commented on in the past - but it’s a bit beyond my pay grade.
Bonds got hammered late in the week. If your bond fund has some credit risk (ie BBB / high yield) it probably held up better at week’s end as equity markets stormed ahead (good for lower rated bonds). The bloodbath Friday was more related, I think, to the high quality (rate sensitive) areas. By way of example, here’s one way it affected me: Over the past 7-10 days the nav on T. Rowe’s ultra-short bond fund TRBUX has tumbled from around $5.05 / $5.06 all the way down to $5.01 on Friday. That’s a huge decline for a sedate cash-equivalency fund like this one.
As Catch mentions, many other synergies investors had come to depend on over recent years decoupled last week as well. Miners suffered double-digit losses on several days (-13% on Friday alone). Absolute carnage. That move defied the prevailing wisdom among many gold “experts” that the miners were undervalued relative to gold. A lot of $$ was lost last week by those employing leverage to bet on miners outpacing the metals. Likely we haven’t yet seen all the fallout from that bust.

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3551661-gold-suffers-worst-week-in-eight-years
Gold bug not going well at least recently
Nothing works well now

@Crash
You're are likely still in the sleep zone at your house. But, you may review this link regarding the reactions of your bond fund relative to the broad bond market actions.
While it is unknown what the managers attempted of the fund did during the past week, if you review the fund web page, you may have a better understanding based upon (somewhat) the last reported holdings.

I've already stepped through this previous; but a re-do for those who didn't read/see.
A quick look at S&P's bond rating guide:
"AAA" and "AA" (high credit quality) and "A" and "BBB" (medium credit quality) are considered investment grade. Credit ratings for bonds below these designations ("BB," "B," "CCC," etc.) are considered low credit quality, and are commonly referred to as "junk bonds."
For those wondering why no support for their portfolio via the bond route, well; this past week didn't really matter. AAA U.S. gov't. issues had no support for whatever reasons remain in something still "broke to hell" with credit freeze or whatever is amiss. For bond portfolios that have a much lower rating for bond holdings, the damage was more critical. I'm sure active managed funds attempted to "fix" their holdings with better quality bonds, but this didn't help either. I expect more action from the Treasury and/or the Fed. next week to attempt to slow down the falling knife.
I now see, my link has already been posted while this write was delayed in draft mode. None the less, this will stay here.
Corporate debt at $75 trillion.

As of market close March 13th, according to the metrics of Old_Skeet's stock market barometer, the S&P 500 Index remains extremely oversold with a reading of 175. This is on the high side of the barometer's scale. A higher barometer reading indicates there is more investment value in the Index over a lower reading. For the past two weeks, the short volume has averaged 64% of the total volume for SPY. The VIX (which is a measure of volatility) has moved from 36 to 53 which reflects volatility has been high. The the stock Index's valuation lost ground during the week moving from a reading of 2972 to 2711 for a -8.8% loss and off it's 52 week high by 19.9%. From a yield perspective, I'm finding that the US10YrT is now being listed at 0.98% while at the beginning of the year it was listed at 1.92%. With the recent stock market swoon the S&P 500 Index is currently listed with a dividend yield of 2.15% while at the beginning of the year it was listed at 1.82%. As you can see there is now a good yield advantage for the stock Index over the Ten Year Treasury. With this, I'm favoring equity income over fixed income due to this yield spread. I also feel that the stock market is somewhat oversold and bonds are somewhat overbought.
For the week, I was a buyer of equity income at the 19% and 27% decline marks with also having bought equities earlier during this swoon at the 8% and 13% decline marks. I most likely will continue to buy equities as long as they remain in bear market territory and there is a fit for them within my asset allocation. Otherwise, I will simply sit tight and enjoy the upward equity ride when it comes.
It is interesting how my asset allocation has moved with the changes that have taken place within the capital markets. Both my cash and income percentages have risen (acting as stabilizers), during this stock market swoon, while my equity allocation percentage has fallen due to the decline in equity values. With this, Old_Skeet has been busy buying equities during the stock market swoon thus keeping my equity allocation on bubble. This equity buying caused a cash draw. As I write, I am 18% cash, 42% income and 40% equity.
From my perspective the advantage of my buying during the swoon means I should get back to even quicker when the upswing comes. Plus, I increased my portfolio's income generation as the equity income funds that I bought have a yield of about 3% to 4% while the cash used to make these purchases was yielding about 1%.
Thanks for stopping by and reading.
I wish all ... "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet

http://www.wicz.com/story/41895546/heres-what-could-really-sink-the-global-economy-19-trillion-in-risky-corporate-debt
/Here's what could really sink the global economy: $19 trillion in risky corporate debt
Posted: Mar 14, 2020 2:32 AM CDT
By Julia Horowitz, CNN Business
Companies have spent the years since the global financial crisis binging on debt. Now, as the coronavirus pandemic threatens to push the world into recession, the bill could come due — exacerbating damage to the economy and feeding a meltdown in financial markets./
We may have to monitor the junk bonds closely, value declined significantly few wks. Difficult tell if they recover in short terms especially oil energy sectors

Now I see for EACH of my $100 x 4 investments I've been charged $50 commission. If anyone contemplating TIAA, stop. I'll try to figure it out. The funds STILL show NTF. And I was never charged for my initial investment. It's also clear additional investment is just $100. Either they fix the problem, or I'm filing complaint with (WHO? someone tell me please) and closing my account.

I've had recent success filing a complaint with the SEC. (I filed because Merrill Edge had doctored up quantities and prices of fund purchases - Merrill couldn't handle fractional shares.)
I don't recall if the SEC form below was the exact one I used, but it should suffice:
https://www.sec.gov/oiea/Complaint.html
See also Investor Complaints at Investor.gov
https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/general-resources/news-alerts/alerts-bulletins/investor-bulletins-48
I've posted before about botched brokerage transactions in TIAA's managed accounts (details irrelevant here). TIAA provides a good product for 403(b)s, notably the TIAA Traditional and TREA options. And they have a good retail VA. Aside from those products, I'd be inclined to look elsewhere for investing services.

@Crash LOL. I'm not sure you have a legitimate complaint about your fund "only up 1.45%". Falling like a rock indeed :-D

PTIAX was approaching +5% for the year. Now at +1.45%, but this is from Morningstar, so take it with a pound of salt...

FYI. I bought VLAAX and VALIX each a $1000 investment in TIAA. Then I bought $100 in each. At the same time I also bought $100 in BEGIX and BOPIX. All show up NTF and I was never charged any commission.
Now I see for EACH of my $100 x 4 investments I've been charged $50 commission. If anyone contemplating TIAA, stop. I'll try to figure it out. The funds STILL show NTF. And I was never charged for my initial investment. It's also clear additional investment is just $100. Either they fix the problem, or I'm filing complaint with (WHO? someone tell me please) and closing my account.

Mother pus-buckets, eh? I hate when I run into that.

FYI. I bought VLAAX and VALIX each a $1000 investment in TIAA. Then I bought $100 in each. At the same time I also bought $100 in BEGIX and BOPIX. All show up NTF and I was never charged any commission.
Now I see for EACH of my $100 x 4 investments I've been charged $50 commission. If anyone contemplating TIAA, stop. I'll try to figure it out. The funds STILL show NTF. And I was never charged for my initial investment. It's also clear additional investment is just $100. Either they fix the problem, or I'm filing complaint with (WHO? someone tell me please) and closing my account.

Yes, I was buying this week. I've allocated about 50% of my cash pile into new and/or existing long-term positions as I've posed in the other thread.
My biggest buy this week was BIP, which I loaded up on in both accounts.

Why are you posting this? Until today MINT was down $7.50 on a thou for the last week, not terrible of course, but no, not 'a safe place to park your cash'.

I'd give the generic answer that Vanguard is better at running index funds - often holding less cash, trading with an eye to tax implications, etc. But there's an additional reason that Vanguard index funds are more tax efficient. They usually have an ETF share class.
This means that should the fund generate any cap gains, like any ETF fund it is able to purge those gains. You can see the difference by comparing the cap gains distributions of VFIAX and SWPPX.
Take a look at Schwab's web page for SWPPX:
https://www.schwab.wallst.com/schwab/Prospect/research/mutualfunds/summary.asp?symbol=SWPPX
Under Fund Performance, click on the Dividends & Distributions link.
You'll see green (cap gains divs) for 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019.
Now look at Schwab's web page for VFIAX.
https://www.schwab.wallst.com/schwab/Prospect/research/mutualfunds/summary.asp?symbol=VFIAX
No green - no cap gains dividends.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355064/000158064220001192/catalyst497.htm
497 1 catalyst497.htm 497
Catalyst MLP & Infrastructure Fund
(the “Fund”)
CLASS A: MLXAX CLASS C: MLXCX CLASS I: MLXIX
March 13, 2020
The information in this Supplement provides new information beyond that contained in the currently effective Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”) for the Fund, dated November 1, 2019, as supplemented January 24, 2020. It should be retained and read in conjunction with that Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and SAI.
______________________________________________________________________________
REVERSE SHARE SPLIT
On March 25, 2020, the Fund will implement a 5:1 reverse share split (“Reverse-Split”) of the issued and outstanding Class A, Class C and Class I shares of the Fund. As a result, although the value of the shares you own will not change, the number of shares you own will decrease. For example, if you currently own 5 shares of the Fund, after the completion of the Reverse-Split, you will own 1 share of the Fund. Shareholders of record at the close of business on March 25, 2020, will participate in the Reverse-Split, and the adjusted net asset value of your shares will be calculated as of that date. The Fund will complete the Reverse-Split after the close of the securities markets on March 25, 2020.
Shares of the Fund will be offered, sold, and redeemed on a Reverse-Split-adjusted basis beginning March 25, 2020. The total dollar value of your investment in the Fund will not change. The Reverse-Split is not anticipated to be a taxable event, nor will it have an impact on the Fund’s holdings or its performance. Because the Fund pays distributions on a per share basis and the number of shares of each Class will be reduced, the dollar amount of the distributions will not change as a result of the Reverse-Split, but dividends or other distributions will be adjusted in the same proportion...

Thank you @Old_Joe for the WSJ overview
The below link is from a report about noon on Friday. Most Treasury issues prices remain negative at 3pm, and in particular the 30 year stuff which is -2 to -3%. Yields moving UP. So, I still don't understand what is happening. Sure as hell, something is broken somewhere in the financial system.
The fully and totally beaten up corp. bond market is shining so far today, which are at about a +5%. Trading like an equity and may crash and burn before the end of the market day.
Treasury Buying issues starting with 30 year bond

@Catch22- Here's a short version of a current WSJ article which seems to be reflecting some of your concerns.

Funding strains in the banking system worsened slightly Friday despite the New York Federal Reserve’s offer to inject $1.5 trillion of extra short-term funding.
The strains suggest the Fed’s promised injection of central-bank money, announced Thursday, hasn’t fully solved the banking system’s issues. Some analysts and investors think a return to a full quantitative easing—or bond-buying—program will be needed to calm funding markets that lie at the center of the world’s financial infrastructure.
Bond and equity markets remained volatile and price moves may not reflect normal changes in investors’ appetite for risk, according to analysts.
In a sign of growing funding strains in the banking system, indicators of the difference between the rate at which banks lend to each other and the Fed’s interest rate increased to the highest level since the tail end of the 2008-09 financial crisis.
The Fed offered up to $1.5 trillion for periods of one month and three months Thursday and Friday. However, banks only drew a total of $119.5 billion, suggesting this wasn’t the kind of liquidity they needed. The low takeup suggests that the problems might not be so simple as a shortage of central-bank reserves.
“There is lots of money in the system but it is not circulating easily,” said a foreign-exchange strategist at UBS. “The ability of the financial system to intermediate in this market is now very constrained.”
The underlying problem, say some investors, is that banks are holding too many Treasurys and don’t want any more. It is a situation that hasn’t been fully resolved since it was exposed by a spike in borrowing costs in repurchase—or repo—overnight
borrowing markets in September.

The preceding is a substantially abridged selection from the original WSJ article.