"Separating business from politics is akin to believing that fish swim independent of the water’s current. America’s toxic uncertainty is urging capital to look elsewhere."
scott galloway 2025

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/802716/000168386325001674/f40971d1.htm
497K 1 f40971d1.htm VICTORY THB US SMALL OPPORTUNITIES FUND
Victory Portfolios
Victory THB US Small Opportunities Fund
Class A and Class I
Supplement dated February 28, 2025
to the Prospectus and Summary Prospectus dated November 1, 2024
On February 25, 2025, the Board of Trustees of Victory Portfolios (“Trust”), upon the recommendation of Victory Capital Management Inc., the Trust’s investment adviser, approved a Plan of Liquidation (“Plan”) for the Victory THB Small Opportunities Fund (the “Fund”). It is anticipated that the Fund will liquidate on or about April 29,
2025. On the liquidation date, the Fund will redeem all its outstanding shares at the net asset value of such shares.
In anticipation of the liquidation, at the start of business on March 3, 2025, the Fund will be closed to new investors and shareholder accounts. Through end of business on April 23, 2025, the Fund will continue to accept additional investments (including through the reinvestment of dividends and capital gains) from existing shareholders. In order to provide for an orderly liquidation and satisfy redemptions in anticipation of the liquidation, the Fund may deviate from its investment objective and strategies as the liquidation date approaches. It is anticipated that the Fund’s portfolio will be positioned into cash on or some time prior to the liquidation date.
The Fund may pay more than one liquidating distribution in more than one installment. Distribution of liquidation proceeds to Fund shareholders may result in a taxable event for shareholders, depending on their individual circumstances. Shareholders should consult their own tax advisors about any tax liability resulting from the receipt of liquidation proceeds.
If you wish to obtain more information, please call the Victory Funds at 800-539-3863.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR YOUR FUTURE REFERENCE.

I prefer ETF's in most cases because of the tax implications. When equitys are sold off in a downturn you face paying capital gain taxes on the OEF if you keep it in your portfolio where this is very rare in an ETF. The taxes can be substantial! Fidelity allows buys and sells of fractional ETF shares.

I uncovered RiverNorth about a week ago after searching several weeks for a CEF under the “market neutral” and “long-short” categories with no success. (Already owned Calamos’ CPZ). When I searched “tactical allocation” up popped RiverNorth’s closed-end RIV. After due diligence I made a small investment. (RiverNorth Headquarters: West Palm Beach, Fla.)
The following disclaimer on their website has me puzzled:
“RiverNorth’s mutual funds are distributed by ALPS Distributors, Inc. Member FINRA. ALPS Distributors, Inc. is unaffiliated with RiverNorth Capital Management, LLC, DoubleLine Capital LP or Oaktree Capital Management, L.P.”
If “unaffiliated with” … then why mention those other firms? unless perhaps the RiverNorth I invested with is different from the one David highlighted? Website
@Shostakovich asks a good question. Darned if I fully understand the eagerness of OEFs to convert to ETFs. But as others have said, ETFs are the popular trend - vastly outdrawing money over OEFs. I have an additional thought - Is it possible the ETF structure may reduce the chances of lawsuits by unhappy investors following a steep market slide? Oppenheimer in particular took a beating being sued after the ‘07-‘09 mess (re their their OEFs’ unanticipated steep losses) and eventually was acquired by Invesco. With an ETF you’re essentially buying directly into the market, whereas there seems to be more of an intermediary role for the sponsor under the OEF structure.

Thanks.
It's good to hear Bengen.
His 4% initial w/COLA is a good start, or a good benchmark.
But there are many approaches - variations of Bengen's, dynamic approaches, increasing equity gradually in retirement, % withdrawals with or without residual values.
I have explored my own that is a bit more flexible - start with 5% initial and review every 5 yrs and reset if portfolio balance is higher. Another is modification of SWR to SWRM.
All this means that the retirement withdrawal problem is still searching for a satisfactory solution decades after Bengen's pioneering work.

Yeah my parents are taking a very flexible approach to this as they ease into retirement. they are working part time because their hobby/passion even in retirement is their work. But beyond that they are W/D 5% of the portfolio and taking trips, annoying their children by spoiling their grandchildren and just paying attention to the balance while holding a 2 year cash bucket (will go to 3 when fully retire).
I took their 8 fund capital group portfolio and turned it into a single fund capital group portfolio. its a 65/35 portfolio its a single balanced fund and very easy to manage.
I read about 5 books FOR them on the subject and in the end I was like this isn't that difficult at least as it appears.

There is a PRCFX Prospectus Supplement that indicates change to daily accrual and payment of monthly dividend on the 1st of the month. Websites, including Price itself, have yet to catchup.
It looks like a sudden change. Supplement dated 3/7/25 became effective 3/19/25 for the new Prospectus dated 3/1/25.
Daily accrual with monthly payments is usual for bond funds, but a bit unusual for allocation funds - maybe posters can point out other examples for conservative-allocation funds.
https://www.troweprice.com/literature/public/country/us/language/en/literature-type/prospectus/sub-type/mf?productCode=CFN&currency=USD
"T. Rowe Price Capital Appreciation and Income Fund
Supplement to Prospectus and Summary Prospectus dated March 1, 2025
On or about March 19, 2025, the fund will begin to declare dividends daily, rather than monthly, and will pay them the first business day each month. Capital gains will continue to be declared and paid annually, usually in December....."

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1370177/000139834425007944/fp0093430-1_497.htm
497 1 fp0093430-1_497.htm
RIVERNORTH FUNDS
RiverNorth Core Opportunity Fund
Retail Share Class
(Ticker Symbol RNCOX)
Institutional Share Class
(Ticker Symbol RNCIX)
April 28, 2025
SUPPLEMENT TO PROSPECTUS DATED
January 28, 2025
The RiverNorth Core Opportunity Fund to convert to an Exchange Traded Fund.
At a meeting of the Board of Trustees (the "Board") of RiverNorth Funds held on April 23, 2025, the Board unanimously voted to approve, subject to shareholder approval, an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization and Termination (the “Plan”) to reorganize the RiverNorth Core Opportunity Fund (the “Fund”) into the RiverNorth Active Income ETF, an exchange traded fund (“Acquiring Fund”) which will be a series of the Elevation Series Trust (the “Reorganization”). The Acquiring Fund is being formed for the purpose of effecting the Reorganization, and the Acquiring Fund will not have engaged in any business prior to the Reorganization. RiverNorth Capital Management, LLC, the investment adviser to the Fund, would serve as the Acquiring Fund’s investment sub-adviser and TrueMark Investments, LLC would act as the Acquiring Fund’s investment adviser.
The Reorganization is subject to shareholder approval and shareholders should expect to receive proxy materials in May 2025. If approved by shareholders, the Reorganization is expected to occur early in the third quarter of 2025.
The Plan approved by the Board of Trustees also contains provisions for the merging of the Fund’s Class I share class into the Class R share class and the termination of the Fund’s Class R share Rule 12b-1 plan at future dates to be determined. These steps will align the Fund’s fee structure with the Acquiring Fund’s proposed fee structure.
Additional information regarding the proposed Reorganization will be included in the upcoming proxy materials and additional supplements to the Fund’s prospectus.
RIVERNORTH FUNDS
c/o ALPS Fund Services, Inc.
1290 Broadway, Suite 1100
Denver, Colorado 80203
1-888-848-7569
Please retain this supplement with your Prospectus for future reference.

Prior MFO post on CCLFX; there are also related posts in MFO/MFOP Ratings thread.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/182683/#Comment_182683
Morningstar has an updated feature on CCLFX - how it became the biggest interval-fund. There is also a good background on interval-funds.
"Along with privately held Cliffwater, big sponsors like Blackstone, Blue Owl Capital, Ares, KKR, and Apollo Global Management have been loading up on capital raised through open-ended evergreen funds that are registered as 1940 Act vehicles. More than new 30 such products hit the market in the past two years, according to Morningstar, and there were more than 115 vehicles in the interval category (AUM $93.4 billion) alone through February."
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/how-cliffwater-interval-funds-led-private-wealth-fundraising-bonanza

@PopTart- We held various American Funds/Capital Group growth funds for many years, and they did just fine for us. The dividend value play sounds interesting too. I always liked American/Capital because of their "committee" advisory approach... nothing depends on one "irreplaceable genius". Good luck to you also!

+1 on American Funds/Capital Group.
I was planning to move my entire Roth into AF WaMu with only a foothold in JHEQX* but it looks like my FA reversed the order. Not a huge deal, but I'm going to let it run for a while and see how it does ... though I'm kinda leery of the Mag7/market-cappyness of the (options hedged) fund.
* the SMA 'needed' more than one position, apparently.

@PopTart- We held various American Funds/Capital Group growth funds for many years, and they did just fine for us. The dividend value play sounds interesting too. I always liked American/Capital because of their "committee" advisory approach... nothing depends on one "irreplaceable genius". Good luck to you also!

This is the LAST ONE of the series. Hoping the numbers helped a bit.
AND, for today only (Friday, April 25); although you've probably already looked. NICE price gains in bond related areas, with lower yields, as of 5:30pm, EST.
NOTE: for below list. TIP indicated +.50% post market
--- AGG = +.37% (I-Shares Core bond), a benchmark, (AAA-BBB holdings)
--- MINT = +.03% (PIMCO Enhanced short maturity, AAA-BBB rated)
--- SHY = +.08% (UST 1-3 yr bills)
--- IEF = +.38% (UST 7-10 yr bonds)
--- TIP = +.05% (UST Tips, 3-10 yrs duration, some 20+ yr duration)
--- TLT = +.74% (I Shares 20+ Yr UST Bond
--- BAGIX = +.42% (Baird Aggregate Bond Fund (active managed, plain vanilla, high quality bond fund)
--- LQD = +.53% (I Shares IG, corp. bonds)
--- HYG = +.09% (I Shares High Yield bonds, proxy ETF)
U.S. Dollar Index Data indicated +.21% @99.59 @ 5:30pm.

In the late 70s and early 80s, several states passed statutes and/or constitutional amendments to slow the growth of property taxes. Perhaps the most famous (infamous?) is California's Prop 13. Unlike Michigan, California allows for a "reset" of a property's taxes when it is sold - the idea being to protect existing homeowners from being taxed out of house and home. But not to starve local communities. It didn't work out that way - commercial real estate almost never changes hands, so big companies can have low property taxes virtually in perpetuity.
https://calmatters.org/commentary/2020/08/how-prop-13-gave-californias-richest-corporations-a-multibillion-dollar-tax-break-they-didnt-want/
https://calmatters.org/education/2020/11/prop-15-defeat-california-schools/
There is one other state aside from Michigan where property taxes are tied to inflation. According to Colorado's Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR) (passed in 1992), "Generally, property tax revenues may not increase from one year to the next by more than inflation plus local growth; however, this restriction can be waived by local ballot initiative (a process referred to as "de-brucing”)."
https://www.gunnisoncounty.org/684/TABOR-and-Gallagher-Amendments

SPECIAL ADD FOR TODAY: With most investment sectors today being happy, one may suppose that it is no surprise that the Marijuana etf, MJ advanced today, +10.5%. So, be it a doobie, whacky weed or the 20 or so names..........light em up, eh? OR NOT.
AND, for today only (Thursday, April 24); although you've probably already looked. NICE price gains in bond related areas, with lower yields, as of 6pm, EST.
There has been a lot of mixed 'chatter' from the DC area all day. I've lost track of policy(s) today. Check back in 5 minutes.
--- AGG = +.35% (I-Shares Core bond), a benchmark, (AAA-BBB holdings)
--- MINT = +.08% (PIMCO Enhanced short maturity, AAA-BBB rated)
--- SHY = +.06% (UST 1-3 yr bills)
--- IEF = +.54% (UST 7-10 yr bonds)
--- TIP = +.53% (UST Tips, 3-10 yrs duration, some 20+ yr duration)
--- TLT = +1.05% (I Shares 20+ Yr UST Bond
--- BAGIX = +.51% (Baird Aggregate Bond Fund (active managed, plain vanilla, high quality bond fund)
--- LQD = +1.03% (I Shares IG, corp. bonds)
--- HYG = +.90% (I Shares High Yield bonds, proxy ETF)
U.S. Dollar Index Data indicated about a -.57% near 6pm.

AND, for today only (Wednesday, April 23); although you've probably already looked. Price gains in most bond related areas, with lower yields, as of 6pm, EST.
***Mike McKee, Bloomberg, noted this morning; that demand for the shorter duration UST's are slow and/or slowing. Both MINT and SHY below had price drops.
There has been a lot of mixed 'chatter' from the DC area this afternoon. Perhaps the food order was wrong and created a 'mood swing'.
--- AGG = +.25% (I-Shares Core bond), a benchmark, (AAA-BBB holdings)
--- MINT = -.02% (PIMCO Enhanced short maturity, AAA-BBB rated)
--- SHY = -.07% (UST 1-3 yr bills)
--- IEF = +.10% (UST 7-10 yr bonds)
--- TIP = +.29% (UST Tips, 3-10 yrs duration, some 20+ yr duration)
--- TLT = +.97% (I Shares 20+ Yr UST Bond
--- BAGIX = +.21% (Baird Aggregate Bond Fund (active managed, plain vanilla, high quality bond fund)
--- LQD = +.74% (I Shares IG, corp. bonds)
--- HYG = +.50% (I Shares High Yield bonds, proxy ETF)
U.S. Dollar Index Data indicated about a +1% through most of the day. No data is available at 6pm.

WIth all due respect, you seem to have a bee in your bonnet regarding Schwab. I can appreciate someone liking one's financial institution (e.g. USAA) and being upset when it is bought out by another company. I've had enough of my banks bought out from under me.
M&As happen all the time. Customers of acquired institutions are then serviced by the acquiring institutions, which may be better or worse. But customers don't get paid for the transition. I didn't expect to see an extra interest payment in my bank account when it was acquired. And when my pharmacy was acquired, I didn't expect to see an extra dozen pills in my refill order. We're customers who can vote with their feet (as you did), not owners.
In a literal sense M&As reduce competition (by taking one institution out of the market) but they rarely have an impact on pricing let alone attract antitrust attention from the government. When Schwab took over USAA brokerage accounts it increased the size of its client assets by not much more than a rounding error, just 2% ($80B out of $3,800B).
That's not the kind of acquisition that provides monopolistic power. OTOH, the Ameritrade acquisition was in a whole 'nuther league: adding $1.3T in client assets to Schwab's existing $3.77T. Over a quarter of the combined company's client assets came from Ameritrade.
Regarding robo trading, that's a different matter. Schwab is a big player (#2), but it's not the elephant in the room. That would be Vanguard, with 3x AUM of Schwab, and 4x the number of customers.
Schwab's robo-advisor pricing structure is legal. What Schwab did wrong was falsely advertise it. As the SEC wrote in its PR headline: "Schwab Subsidiaries Misled Robo-Adviser Clients about Absence of Hidden Fees".

"Schwab claimed that the amount of cash in its robo-adviser portfolios was decided by sophisticated economic algorithms meant to optimize its clients’ returns when in reality it was decided by how much money the company wanted to make," said Gurbir S. Grewal, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. "Schwab’s conduct was egregious and today’s action sends a clear message to advisers that they need to be transparent with clients about hidden fees and how such fees affect clients’ returns."

https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2022-104
Schwab originated NTF fund transactions. IMHO a similar deception, but one legitimized by most brokerages copying it. "Fund marketing history tells us that 'assets are never given away and, eventually, the shareholders pay,' said William E. Donoghue, publisher of Donoghue's Money Letter, in Ashland, Mass.
NYTimes, Mutual Funds; A Commission Break From Brokers, July 26, 1992.

https://www.morningstar.com/markets/what-new-sec-leadership-could-mean-crypto-private-markets-more
"We believe that the SEC will be active in three areas under Atkins’ leadership:
turning back the clock on cryptocurrency regulation,
democratizing access to private markets,
making it easier for companies to stay private.
...
Conclusion
In summary, three things investors should watch for from this new SEC are a step back from the world of digital assets, greater access to private investments for retail investors, and reducing barriers to capital raising in the private markets.
All of these potential changes will have significant implications for investor protection that we will monitor in the coming months and years."

Yogi's description seems reasonable in light of Schwab's restrictions: only S&P 500 stocks (no ETFs) and market orders only (limit orders are harder to track). Further, fractional share orders are treated as ...

market “not held” orders, and will be executed at market. A “not held order” means that you grant Schwab time and price discretion to transact your order(s) on a best-efforts basis. There may be a delay between the time when your order(s) are executed and when they appear in your account. You will not be permitted to enter limit or other conditional orders for Stock Slices purchases.

https://www.schwab.com/public/file/P-12533231
FWIW,

The broker uses personal judgment on the best price and time to enter or exit a trade. Nonetheless, a not-held order holds the broker harmless, and they will not be responsible for any monetary losses that the investor suffers in the process. Usually, not-held orders are common with international stocks. The opposite of not-held orders is held order, which requires immediate execution since the trader is given little discretion in finding the best price.

https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/career-map/sell-side/capital-markets/not-held-order/
Robinood is likewise explicit in saying that fractional share orders there are on a not held basis. It does not appear to constrain fractional share orders to market orders (i.e. limit orders may be okay).
Vanguard takes a different approach. The only fractional shares you can buy there are Vanguard ETFs. I infer that Vanguard handles these trades in-house.

as predicted, trump now claiming to be 'china friendly' means he is full turtle mode.
only a question of how much china gains simply by demanding greater concessions based on his inability to honor a deal. but the fact china has that trait in common means there is some foundation both grok.

krug on 'sudden stop' of foreign capital
https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/stop-in-the-name-of-trump?img=https://substack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com/public/images/116f69f1-d6cb-497a-94a6-08a22e02145f_2210x928.png&open=false

USAA mutual fund operations were sold to Victory Capital/VCTR, USAA brokerage ops to Schwab.
USAA just wanted out.