See yogi's thread (citing also WSJ and IBD)
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/59772/vanguard-settles-on-tdfs-with-ma-regulators
The reporting on this has left me rather confused. As near as I can tell, Massachusetts was focused on the marketing of the funds, not how Vanguard disrupted them. The WSJ writes:

Vanguard hadn’t explicitly warned investors that the funds could generate gigantic tax bills, the Journal reported. ... In January, following the Journal’s report, Massachusetts regulators launched an investigation into how Vanguard had marketed the funds.

And an earlier Wealth Management.com piece talks about Mass.' concerns with "'potential tax disclosure issues' with b/d's target date funds" and that Mass. sent letters to "Vanguard, Fidelity Brokerage Services [not FMR as manager of its target date funds], ...".
All of which leads me to think that this settlement has got nothing to do with how Vanguard generated the cap gains distribution and everything to do with how the funds were sold.
Assuming that's correct, wouldn't any broker/dealer who sold these funds be a target of Mass.' ire? Admittedly most sales of Vanguard fund shares to retail investors are direct through Vanguard.
I'm troubled by Mass.' complaint (if I'm reading this correctly), that investors didn't have adequate warning. The ultimate marketing material for funds is their prospectus. By law it must precede or accompany any sale of a fund. The prospectus tax disclosures for the Vanguard target date funds is nearly identical, line for line, with the prospectus disclosure for VHCOX (Capital Opportunities), a higher risk fund. One finds the same bullet item:
    • Capital gains distributions may vary considerably from year to year as a result of the Funds' normal investment activities and cash flows.
If the target date funds failed to give adequate disclosure about potential risks (viz. that a large exodus could generate ginormous tax bills), then likewise VHCOX has failed to give adequate warning. The only difference is that the VHCOX investors haven't gotten burned yet.
An additional source of confusion is that none of the reporting indicates what effect, if any, this will have on investors' suit against Vanguard - for creating the tax liability, not for failing to warn. Does the settlement preempt this suit? Does the settlement permit investors to opt out so that they can continue their suit. What is the status of the investor suit?
https://www.financialadvisoriq.com/c/3536934/449764/vanguard_sued_over_taxable_distributions_tdfs
Class Action Complaint

Right about Montpelier; the state capital with the fewest number of inhabitants, a sweet town. That splurge was many years ago, when I had a metabolism like a volcano.

Several prominent fund managers and the CIO exited Matthews Asia since 2020.
Bill Hackett, the CEO for 13 years, retired on June 30, 2022.
From the July M* FundInvestor newsletter:
"Cooper Abbott joined Matthews International Capital
Management as CEO on June 13, 2022, succeeding
Bill Hackett, who had served as CEO for 13 years and
is retiring on June 30. This development is unsur-
prising, because Matthews announced in December
2021 that Hackett was planning on retiring in
mid-2022 and that a search was underway for
his replacement."
"Abbott has more than 20 years of senior investment
management experience. He previously served
as president and chairman at Carillon Tower Advisors
(where he led that firm’s acquisitions of several
asset managers during his tenure) and as executive
vice president of investments and co-chief operating
officer at Eagle Asset Management (which is an affil-
iate of Carillon Tower Advisors)."

As I said before, I read many articles that claimed you can't do it. I have been using my system over 20 years. Well, if you don't care, you don't. Over the years, I have learned a few techniques on several boards + my own interpretation.
As I said before, in order to swim, you got to be in the water. My system is explained (here) + actual results that were copied directly from my brokerage.
BTW, my portfolio (think 10/90) as of 7/5/2020, beat VWENX(about 64% stocks) for 1-3-5 years with SD for 1-3-5 year at 1.96-2.57-2.31.

“Traders and analysts say that some of the decline in commodity prices can be traced to the retreat of investors who piled into markets for fuel, metals and crops to hedge against inflation. JPMorgan Chase & Co. commodity strategist Tracey Allen said about $15 billion moved out of commodity futures markets during the week ended June 24. It was the fourth straight week of outflows and brought to about $125 billion the total that has been pulled from commodities this year, a seasonal record that tops even the exodus in 2020 as economies closed.”
From: The Wall Street Journal July 5, 2022
Article: “Falling Commodities Prices Raise Hopes That Inflation Has Peaked “ - by Ryan Dezember

I think the question was meant to be "is OCSL a BDC".
Below is the company's description, from a source deemed to be reliable..
Oaktree Specialty Lending Corporation is a specialty finance company. The Company is providing customized, one-stop credit solutions to companies with limited access to public or syndicated capital markets. The Company provides flexible financing solutions, including first and second lien loans, unsecured and mezzanine loans, bonds, preferred equity and certain equity co-investments. The company acts as a business development company. The Company serves various industries, including application software, multi-sector holdings, data processing and outsourced services, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, health care services, specialized finance, personal products, property and casualty insurance, industrial machinery, internet and direct marketing retail, construction and engineering. The Company’s investment advisor is Oaktree Capital Management, L.P.

I just find the notion that crypto is somehow liberating people, and poor people especially, absurd. These are largely unregulated markets manipulated and controlled by a handful of wealthy investors and speculators: https://cnbc.com/2019/11/04/study-single-anonymous-market-manipulator-pushed-bitcoin-to-20000.html Moreover, if paper currency "debasement" is theft, what can one say of the profits investors routinely extract from stocks and bonds of companies they do not work for, especially in the case of securities trading in the secondary market? Outside investors trading stocks and bonds that aren't providing new capital for companies to grow are essentially profiting off the labor of the employees of companies they invest in while doing no work for those companies at all. Isn't that a kind of theft?
At least in the case of the dollar, the currency is being debased via the issuance of Treasury bonds used to pay for all sorts of government services for citizens. And that currency is regulated by a centralized government that is democratically elected by its citizens. No such central regulation exists for bitcoin, but if our currency is thoroughly undermined by it, it will cause immeasurable damage to the USA. As the world reserve currency, the dollar has the benefit of being the currency oil and gold are priced in. Anytime some country wants to buy a barrel they have to purchase dollars to do so. It's funny but some of our worst enemies like Russia want the dollar to collapse for this reason.

Marks primary role in the past was managing OAK or Oaktree Capital Management LLC.
He sold it to Brookfield Asset Management which is publicly traded BAM but has Billions of dollars in other assets, mostly real estate and infrastructure.
OCSL lists Marks as a co-chairman, but I am not sure if he really is involved day to day. It is hard to figure out if OCSL is a BSD or really is buying distressed debt etc.
I would tread carefully

Link to Oaktree Capital for those interested in investing with Howard Marks
https://www.oaktreecapital.com/
(Minimum investment for individuals is generally $100 Million.)

From this week’s Barron’s: “Today I am starting to behave aggressively. Everything we deal with is significantly cheaper than it was six to 12 months ago.” - Howard Marks, Oaktree Capital
There was no accompanying article in Barron’s. The interview they were referencing appears to have been published in the Financial Times. I’m unable to access it.
I never felt Marks was telling you and me to start buying risky assets. Running a large investment company is much different than levering your family’s life savings.
Thanks @Junkster for the comments. +1
I’ll try to draw from original sources in the future. My thoughts are that Marks doesn't customarily dish-out investment advice to others. He runs his own ship and discusses his own methods and philosophy. I think trying to take instruction from him would be difficult. Personally, I love reading and learning about investing. It’s not important to me whether or not “actionable advice” can be gleaned from a source. But, others differ in expectations.

While it is true that prime m-mkt funds haven't had to impose gates/redemption fees, the latest m-mkt reforms are driven by the fact that 2014/2016 m-mkt rules (that had gates/redemption fees for prime m-mkt) decimated prime m-mkt funds in 2020 and other later times by huge outflows just from the fears of possible gates/redemption fees. This was so bad that it destabilized the commercial paper market. I haven't kept track of these latest m-mkt reforms but I recall that the idea was to do away gates/redemption fees in the favor of floating NAVs for all prime funds (thus eliminating distinctions between retail and institutional prime).
IMO, the small incremental yields offered by prime m-mkt funds aren't worth the associated headaches. This is especially so if check-writing is involved and some checks can remain outstanding for weeks, if not months.

I don't base my investing on outlooks or prediction, it's based on big picture + several indicators (link). Both signaled high risk months ago and why I'm in MM since then with only short term trades if the charts support it. It's not the first time. I sold before 03/2020(this post is from 2/29/2020(link) and Q4/2018 and bought back much lower after risk was lower.

I don't base my investing decisions on actions taken by momentum traders.
Regardless of how astute they claim to be.
Which brings to mind, why do certain investors feel obliged to frequently post
select trades on various anonymous investing forums?

I don't base my investing on outlooks or prediction, it's based on big picture + several indicators (link). Both signaled high risk months ago and why I'm in MM since then with only short term trades if the charts support it. It's not the first time. I sold before 03/2020(this post is from 2/29/2020(link) and Q4/2018 and bought back much lower after risk was lower.

M* had more details citing MarketWatch (owned by News Corp/NWS, parent of Barron's, WSJ, DJ & Co, etc), https://www.morningstar.com/news/marketwatch/20220628116/oaktrees-howard-marks-is-finding-bargains-i-am-starting-to-behave-aggressively-he-says
Original/MarketWatch https://www.marketwatch.com/story/oaktrees-howard-marks-is-finding-bargains-i-am-starting-to-behave-aggressively-he-says-11656414153
"That brings us to our call of the day from a well known voice on Wall Street, Oaktree Capital's founder Howard Marks, who says now's the time for "bargain" hunting follow the market's selloff.
Marks is best known for his lengthy investment letters, and warnings. In early May he cautioned over bull-market excess, which seems as prescient as his similar year-earlier warning.
"Today I am starting to behave aggressively," he told the Financial Times in an interview. "Everything we deal in is significantly cheaper than it was six or 12 months ago."
The manager said now seems like a "reasonable time to start buying," noting lower prices for such assets as high-yield bonds, mortgage-backed securities and leveraged loans. Oaktree specializes in alternative investment strategies.
"Things may well go lower. In that case, I hope we'll have the will to buy more. It makes no sense to say: "I'm not going to buy until we reach bottom." We never know when we're at the bottom, and certainly I'm not saying we are today," Marks said."

Our guest is David Rosenberg, President, Chief Economist, and Strategist at his independent economic consulting firm Rosenberg Research which he founded in January 2020.
High inflation is at the top of the Federal Reserve’s, Washington's, and Wall Street’s list. Rosenberg says they are looking at the wrong numbers and that disinflation is already taking hold.
Interest rates are expected to go higher for longer. Rosenberg cites evidence of economic slowing which will require easing sooner than expected.
As I just mentioned, the likelihood of recession is still being debated. Rosenberg is forecasting a recession this year.

https://youtu.be/44_kSXbuJYc

My thoughts on the topic:
-The Fed would prefer to just jawbone the capital markets to do the heavy lifting of slowing demand. (i.e. talk tough, but carry a wet noodle).
-That might have worked if Jay "Helicopter Cash" Powell had begun tightening in mid-2021, instead of mid-2022. But Jay was all about being re-appointed to a 2nd term. By waiting a year ("transitory" talk), inflation expectations are now strongly embedded in the behavior of economic actors.
-The only way to "kill" inflation is to kill demand. The asset bubbles need to be "pricked" to do so. Obviously some of that has happened. The Fed has a lousy history of avoiding recessions. To be fair, its a tough, nearly impossible job to "thread the needle" -- dampening demand "just enough", without pushing the economy into recession. Frankly, I wish Ben Bernanke were still running the show.
If not for the scheduled Q/T, I would think the bond market would be through correcting. It still may be: if stocks continue to grind lower --- due to downward earnings revisions -- a good chunk of the capital may move into bonds -- thus offsetting the Fed's Q/T sales.
_if the Fed is serious about killing demand -- and doesn't waiver, then a recession is my "base case". OTOH, if the Fed chickens out and "pivots", then a recession may be avoided --- but the cost will be higher, longer inflation, and a loss of confidence in the USD.
[[An aside: there may be bigger issues than "just" the economy this time, geopolitical issues. How can the West "de-fang" Putin? - crashing oil prices. How might that happen? -- a global recession. And which currency benefits from a de-risk trade? The USD. The USD has been very strong (against fiats, but not commodities). But a higher USD (prompted by higher rates) would tend to exert further downward pressure on oil prices. This would put incrementally more "hurt" on Russian oil revenues.
-So, I think bonds will find their final bottom b4 stocks. (Though stocks can have a countertrend rally any time, and July is usually an up month.)
- I always remind myself to "be mindful of the calendar". Even if we get a relief rally, the damage YTD has been extensive. -- Traders will want to register tax losses b4 year-end. (For many institutions, the tax year ends 10/31). So price-action in the weeks before Halloween may provide an opportunity to put money to work as institutional sellers close out their loss-positions.
-Mid-term election results may also provide a boost to the market in November -- assuming the SCOTUS Roe-reversal doesn't jinx a Red Wave result.
-Housing prices have not fallen yet. But that is one big asset bubble which needs to be popped to dampen inflation. If mortgage rates continue to climb, I would expect some of the corporate buyers (e.g. Blackstone, etc) to unload some of their holdings, in favor of bonds. That might precipitate downward price action, as inventory (finally) expands.
Given how 2022 is unfolding, 2023 may be lining up to be a good year. (3rd years of the Presidential cycle usually are)
Just my 8 cents.

I agree that seems like one part of the issue. Another perhaps related part may be the way the put spread collar works.
Because the three month collars have different start and end months in each of the funds, it's possible for one fund to be in the "protected" area, where market declines don't affect the payoff value, while another fund could have already blown through the protection.
See diagram below. In this example, where the collar kicks in after a 5% loss at which point it provides 10% loss "insurance". Suppose two months ago the market went up 5%, and in the past month it dropped 10%.
A collar that started two months ago would be protecting a fund with a net 5% market loss. That is, the collar would just be kicking in now. But a collar that started just one month ago would be half used up. It would be protecting a fund with a net 10% market loss. (5% of that loss would be covered by the higher strike price put option.)
After another 5% drop in the market, its protection would be used up. At that point, the value of the latter fund would follow the market down, while the former fund would still have some protection.

Here are a couple of threads that may help:
Oldest Mutual Funds Still in Existence (2019 thread)
Second Oldest Stock Fund Is As Nimble As A Teenager (2014 thread)
As to the merger of Quarterly Income Shares into American Business Shares in 1944, you can find the NYTimes story reporting it here. This was a case of the minnow ($5M company) swallowing the whale ($21M).
According to a 1942 NYTimes article, American Business Shares was sponsored by Lord, Abbett Co., Inc.
According to the SEC, American Business Shares changed its name on April 4, 1976 to Lord Abbett Income Fund, Inc., and from that to Lord Abbett US Government Securities Fund, Inc. on January 27, 1986.
Again according to the SEC, that first change involved a "change from Delaware to Maryland corporation accompanied by change in name, fundamental investment objective and institution of policy requiring automatic redemption of small accounts"
In 1997, the SEC announced the fund's impending demise:

A notice has been issued giving interested persons until May 13 [1997] to request a hearing on an application filed by Lord Abbett U. S. Government Securities Fund, Inc. (formerly American Business Shares, Inc.) for an order under Section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act declaring that applicant has ceased to be an investment company.

https://www.sec.gov/news/digest/1997/dig042297.pdf
As to Affiliated Fund, Inc. that's easy. Do a search on the name, you'll come up with Lord Abbett Affiliated Fund. That fund's webpage gives its inception date as 5/14/34, noting that the fund changed its investment strategy on 1/1/50.
https://www.lordabbett.com/en/strategies/mutual-funds/affiliated-fund.class-a.html

Some interesting ideas from one of my advisors
20% declines not caused by electronic trading (1987) or Pandemic ( 2020)
1970 down 35% Recovered 20 months later
1973 down 48% rec 2114 days later !!!
1982 down 26% rec 68 days
2001 down 42% rec 1842
2008 down 56% rec 1435 days
1970 Recession driven with high inflation
1973 high inflation but "misguided fiscal policies" prolonged decline
1980s inflation surge ppt bear market Fed hiked rates
2001 Tech bubble little inflation
2008 housing bubble little inflation
So if 1970 and 1982 are most applicable comparisons, we might be close to bottom, based on the decline, but neither started at 2022 valuations
1/1/2022 23
PE 16 at 1/1/1969 at start of the decline in 70s ( 30% cheaper to start than now)
and 7 to 9 1/1/1981 to 1/1/1982

Don't like to jump around, but losing my confidence in Int'l fund managers. Hold VWILX and MGGPX. Thinking of reducing positions and adding to VTSAX, a smoother ride. These guys did weather 2020 pretty well, but are getting beat up now. Stay the course? Thoughts needed!! Thanks!

I've owned VWILX for several years.
The fund has experienced significant losses YTD (-31.11%) and over the trailing 12 months (-34.31%).
I don't have any plans to sell VWILX in the short-term.
Guess I'm a glutton for punishment!