The FT article (OP) is dated August 25. Here’s what it states:
“But Giroux has cut the fund’s equity exposure down from about 70 per cent at the market low of 2020 to the mid-50s per cent level now …”
Lipper, which is usually pretty accurate, still has it at 70%.

Today the Fed (and other central banks across the globe) is part of the market. To support the stock market, quantitive easing, QE was introduced back in 2008. During the COVID-19 pandemic and the country is being locked down. The broader market fell over 30% within 2 weeks. As part of the rescue plan, the Fed cut the interest rate to near zero. In addition, they bought $80B treasury and $40B mortgage backed bonds on a monthly basis. The market responded quickly and marching upward toward recovery. By fall 2020, the recession is over.
Below is a short piece from Brookings Institute on tapering of Fed's bond buying.
https://brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2021/07/15/what-does-the-federal-reserve-mean-when-it-talks-about-tapering/

My initial sentiment was only about sticking with solid method over time.
Your initial post showed how wonderful FLPSX was compared with other funds you considered as alternative investments at the time of a market peak (give or take). The fund navigated that one bear market (2000-2002) exceedingly well, even gaining in value. In all other bear markets during the fund's lifetime, it roughly paced the market:
July 16, 1990 - Oct 16, 1990: -17.46% vs. -19.9% for S&P 500
March 24, 2000 - Oct 9, 2002: +18.05% vs. -49.1%
Oct 9, 2007 - March 9, 2009: -53.64% vs. -56.8%
Feb 19, 2020 - March 23, 2020: -36.85% vs -35%
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/14/a-look-at-bear-and-bull-markets-through-history.html
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/stock-market-sp500-hits-record-high-intraday-bear-market-recovery-2020-8
That one fluke does suggest that "Perhaps it is all luck" after all. Its "solid method" of investing didn't help it reproduce that success in other bear markets. Take away that one fluke and I think you'll find FLPSX 's performance is right in line with that of some good funds and below that of some others.
If the intent of the initial post was to show that funds with "solid methods" perform well, what was the purpose of including FAIRX? It hardly seems like a fund with a "solid method" of investing, at least not in recent years.
Rather than illustrate your thesis, FAIRX seems to act as a counterexample - that funds with lousy methods of investing can do as well as funds with solid methods.
Has he not largely adhered to the fund name?
FLPSX was a small cap fund for about half its lifetime. It managed to remain focused on small caps through the early 2000s even as AUM exploded. It used the tactic of buying more and more different small caps to spread out the money. This tactic ran out of steam when it hit 1,000 different companies.
As I recall, Fidelity explained that the fund was investing in a significant number of mid and large cap companies not because it had grown too large, but because it was remaining true to its "solid method". It claimed that its investing discipline naturally led to invest in larger cap stocks due to market conditions at the time. Ultimately Fidelity had to drop this charade and acknowledge that the fund had morphed into a mid cap fund.
With respect to adhering to its name, "Tillinghast concedes that Low-Priced, which purchases only stocks that sell for $35 a share or less, is 'a bit of a gimmick.'"
https://www.kiplinger.com/article/investing/t041-c000-s002-small-and-mid-cap-funds.html

The real numbers always fascinate me and are often hard to find: https://wsj.com/articles/small-cap-stocks-may-be-pricier-than-they-appear-11629640805

For the Russell 2000 benchmark, leaving out the unprofitable companies means setting aside what for the past year has amounted to more than one third of the market value of the small-cap index, according to an analysis from Jefferies looking at earnings over the previous 12 months....
....Yet, other analysts say it’s misleading to present a valuation metric that omits such a substantial share of the Russell 2000. Investors who own the stocks in the index aren’t weeding out the hefty portion without earnings.
“You’re taking out like six, seven hundred companies from your calculation,” Steven DeSanctis, small- and midcap strategist at Jefferies. “If you took out all the Cs and Ds that I got in high school, I was a solid B-plus student.”
Metrics that include negative earnings show the Russell 2000 went from trading at 27 times its past 12 months of earnings at the end of March 2020 to trading at 238 times earnings one year later, according to data from index provider FTSE Russell. That multiple fell by nearly half over the following month, and as of July was down to about 70.
With loss-making companies removed, the Russell 2000’s price-to-earnings multiple was both lower and less volatile: about 14 in March 2020, up to nearly 25 in March 2021 and then down to 19 at the end of July.

Sounds about right @Sven. According to Investopedia they have up to 60 days after a quarter’s end to file their holdings with the SEC. If this is tantamount to a “public release”, than the near 2-month delay in D&C providing the semi-annual report to investors makes sense.
The current Barron’s contains an article “A fresh Batch of Active ETFs“ written by some guy named Lewis Braham. In it he mentions the issue of front-running when fund holdings are revealed too early. Different companies and managers have differing views. But TRP was singled out in particular as one house that likes to withhold such information as long as legally possible. I’d be willing to bet D&C is another.
Link to Barron’s Article (subscription required): https://www.barrons.com/articles/capital-groups-american-funds-is-finally-getting-into-etfs-51630089111
Note: The online article carries a different title from the print version which I read. Same content.

Vanguard Advice Select Dividend Growth will be managed by Donald Kilbride of Wellington.
This fund will be a more concentrated version of Vanguard Dividend Growth which Mr. Kilbride has managed since 2006.
Vanguard Advice Select International Growth will be comanaged by James Anderson* and Lawrence Burns. Both managers are part of the Baillie Gifford team which runs 70% of Vanguard International Growth.
Baillie Gifford invests with a venture capital approach which has generated high returns along with high volatility.
*Mr. Anderson will leave Baillie Gifford in April 2022 after nearly four decades with the firm.
Link

I have been using Firstrade for years and happy with service overall. I can confirm that they do charge loads for load funds, but I still find they have the best selection of funds being offered at NTF AND institutional shares at low minimums in some cases.

Firstrade is great for access to shares that you can't get elsewhere. I used it for years to get Franklin-Templeton's lower cost Advisor class shares.
While it's not as bare bones as it was when I was a customer, it's still not a brokerage I'd use as my primary institution. It doesn't make ATM reimbursements (and charges foreign transaction fees except for one per month), and has check printing fees, ACAT transfer fees, and limited phone hours (M-F). They don't seem to offer mobile deposits. IMHO none of which is significant for a secondary brokerage.
The main question in my mind is how long the free fund trading will last. I'm repeating myself here: we've seen similar programs sent off to the dustbin of history including Welltrade, Scottrade, and Scudder Retirement Plus. Though even if it brings back its $9.95 charge per trade, that's little more than a nuisance fee and not much more than the $5 that Fidelity charges for incremental investments in TF funds.

@Mark

you speak as though she is deceiving/conning her investors and stealing their money.

No, I'm not. Don't put words in my mouth. I am speaking about a structural problem that has existed in the mutual fund and ETF industry since the beginning. This agency problem exists at any fund where there is a conflict of interest between the manager seeking to gather more assets and collect fees for himself/herself at the expense of fund shareholders. It's not a con, but it is a persistent problem that has often manifested itself especially with trendy niche funds. This phenomenon is nothing new. The irony is John Bogle spoke about it for decades in biblical terms, citing the roots of the fiduciary principal in the Gospel of Matthew: "No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other." In the fund industry he felt those two masters were the profit seeking fund management company and the fund investors, whose interests were often not aligned. It's the reason he created Vanguard with its quasi-non-profit structure. He wanted to eliminate the agency problem and have funds serve only fund shareholders. Unfortunately, the industry is fairly far from his original vision today. As for whether investors are capable of recognizing the risks of hot niche strategies, history has shown again and again that many are not. The tempation to performance chase is too great. I think 2020/2021's chasing after stocks like Game Stop is more than ample evidence that performance chasing persists. And when the music stops, the least sophisticated investors often get burned. What is irksome especially in this case is that this behavior is presented somehow as a godly pursuit. That and the extraordinary trendiness of companies with valuations exceeding many of those in the dotcom bubble with a portfolio p-e of 120: https://morningstar.com/etfs/arcx/arkk/portfolio For those that don't understand the risks this could end badly. The more trendy, faddish, narrowly focused, high cost and aggressive a fund is, the less like a fiduciary that puts his/her shareholders best interests first a manager seems.

That says that Moodys is sticking to its guns, having predicted 4.5% based on last month's data (CPI-W through June). However, unless you expect deflation in the next couple of months (Aug, Sept figures), the Moody's figure is too low.
Assuming no inflation for the months of August and September (and also no deflation), the 3Q average CPI-W for 2021 would be 267.789 (i.e. the July figure), and the 3Q 2020 average is 253.412.
https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/cpiw.html
That would make the COLA adjustment 5.67% since 267.789/253.412 = 1.0567.
To get a 4.6% COLA, prices in Aug and Sept would have to average 1.5% lower than July prices. For example, prices could drop 1% between July and Aug, and drop another 1% between Aug and Sept (i.e. 2% below July prices). This doesn't pass the laugh test.
It is true that the CPI-W M/M increases are moderating. Prices went up 0.91% from April to May, and 1.06% from May to June, but only 0.52% from June to July. If this deceleration continues, August prices could be the same as July's, and September's could be 0.5% lower. Still not enough of a drop for Moody's projection.
I'm not so interested in SS COLA, as there's nothing one can do about that. Besides, it's a nullity in terms of real dollars. But one has a choice about whether to buy some I-bonds. For this, it would be helpful to get a handle on the upcoming 6 month adjustment.
Even if Moody's is right and inflation, whether CPI-U or CPI-W, is running around "only" 4.6% through Sept, that would mean that I-bonds purchased now would average a 4.6% rate of return for a year. Can't find a better 100% secure place to park cash for a year or more.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1444822/000119312521252724/d210667d497.htm
497 1 d210667d497.htm AQR RISK PARITY II MV FUND
AQR FUNDS
Supplement dated August 20, 2021 (“Supplement”)
to the Class I Shares, Class N Shares and Class R6 Shares
Summary Prospectus, Prospectus
and Statement of Additional Information, each dated May 1, 2021, as amended, of the AQR Risk Parity II MV Fund (the “Fund”)
This Supplement updates certain information contained in the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information. Please review this important information carefully. You may obtain copies of the Fund’s Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information free of charge, upon request, by calling (866) 290-2688, or by writing to AQR Funds, P.O. Box 2248, Denver, CO 80201-2248.
At a meeting held on August 19-20, 2021, the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of AQR Funds (the “Trust”) approved a proposal to liquidate the Fund. Among other things, the Fund was not viable on an ongoing basis. Accordingly, effective 4:00 P.M. (Eastern time) on October 13, 2021, the Fund will no longer accept orders from new investors or existing shareholders to purchase Fund shares.
On or about October 13, 2021, AQR Capital Management, LLC, the Fund’s investment adviser, intends to begin liquidating the Fund’s assets in an orderly manner in advance of the Liquidation Date (as defined below), with the Fund’s commodities exposure potentially being liquidated in advance of this general liquidation. Proceeds from the liquidation of the Fund’s assets will be held in cash and similar instruments pending distribution to shareholders. As a result, the Fund may deviate from its investment strategies and policies and cease to pursue its investment objective. The Fund may incur transaction costs from liquidating portfolio holdings and performance may be adversely affected from holding cash and similar instruments.
The Fund has declared two dividends to occur prior to the Liquidation Date (as defined below), a special distribution to all holders of record as of August 30, 2021 and a second distribution to all holders of record as of November 1, 2021, collectively consisting of any undistributed income and capital gains (net of available capital loss carryovers). On or about November 5, 2021 (the “Liquidation Date”), the Fund will make a liquidating distribution of its remaining assets proportionately to any shareholders holding shares on the Liquidation Date. The Fund will then be terminated as series of the Trust. Shareholders may redeem their Fund shares or exchange their shares into shares of another series of AQR Funds, subject to any restrictions in the Fund’s Prospectus, at any time prior to the Liquidation Date.
The liquidation of the Fund is expected to have tax consequences for a taxable shareholder. Any final capital gain dividend will be treated as long-term capital gain, and any final income dividend will be taxable as ordinary income, or as qualified dividend income to the extent of the Fund’s income that so qualifies (which is taxed at the same preferential tax rate as long-term capital gain). The Fund’s final liquidating distribution will result in capital gain or loss to the receiving shareholder. Shareholders should consult their tax advisors concerning their tax situation and the impact of the liquidation and/or exchanging to a different fund has on their tax situation.
We appreciate your investment in the AQR Funds. For more information, please contact the Trust at (866) 290-2688.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR YOUR FUTURE REFERENCE

Looks like BG launched another China equities fund BGCBX, not to be confused with their China A equities fund BCANX which they launched at the beginning of 2020.

I can't say how much BG is getting per dollar under management. But I can address the capacity question.
As of August 31, 2020, the two BG fund managers at the time (Anderson and Coutts) were managing a bit less than $110B, including four mutual funds, around a half dozen pooled investments, and nearly two score other accounts. Of that, over half, $57B, came from the Vanguard fund. And the Vanguard fund accounted for nearly all the money that carried performance-based fees.
Data is from SAI, p. B-70 (pdf p. 80)
https://personal.vanguard.com/pub/Pdf/sai023.pdf?2210175721
Vanguard is not adding to the management burden, it is the management burden for this strategy.
I suppose BG could subadvise for a different family instead and charge more. With Vanguard they can be reasonably confident that the fund will not push more money at them than they feel they can handle. Vanguard would either add another investment management firm or close the fund, immediately. (None of this "we're closing the fund in two months" at Vanguard.)
As an example of what could happen with other families is what happened at IVINX two decades ago. The fund wanted to reopen. The subadvisor and original manager, Hakan Castegren, felt capacity limited. The fund reopened over his objections and he walked away. Sometimes, money isn't everything. Shocking. :-)
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/7158/ivy-international-replaces-castegren-with-former-scudder-kemper-manager

A year that has rewarded those who have simply enjoyed the ride.....

The gains are smaller, befitting a less hysterical year. When the S&P 500 Index has risen in 2021, the daily increase has been half what it was in 2020. But in terms of persistent, day-after-day gains, these seven months in the U.S. stock market have few historical precedents.
Over the last century, there has been just one other year when the benchmark set more high-water marks by this point in the summer -- in 1964.

Slow Slog
Plus, an optimistic view going forward:

What’s keeping stocks aloft? As usual, the answer is corporate America’s earnings machine.
...the equity market is not the economy. If you compare the two, the equity market has massive technology in it, a lot less small-caps. Those earnings are super defensive to a no-GDP-growth scenario.”
In the eyes of analysts who follow individual companies, profit growth is set to slow, but at roughly 10% in each of the next two years, that would still top the historic rate of 6% annually.
Profit margins, which just reached a record high, are expected to increase over the next years, analyst estimates compiled by Bloomberg Intelligence show.
To Paulsen, chief investment strategist at Leuthold, this boom cycle is just starting.

S&P 500 Snubbing Dire View

Here's the relevant data presented in the opinion column:
"consumer prices rose a lot less in July than they did in June."
At least that's two data points (July and June inflation figures) as opposed to the single data point that the Senior Citizens League seems to have used. Though hard numbers, even just those two, would have been informative.
In addition, since COLA is calculated using the consumer price "shadows", it really doesn't matter for the purpose of projecting COLA what the shadows represent. All that matters is how the shadows are flickering along the wall.
For a 3% COLA, the consumer price shadows (CPI-W) observed in August and September will have to average 3.8% lower than in July. That is, the CPI-W figure for July is 267.789, and the August and September values will have to average 257.628 (3.8% lower).
It's a simple calculation:
Avg CPI-W = (Aug 2021 + Sept 2021)/2 = [(July 2020 + Aug 2020 + Sept 2020) x 1.03 - July 2021]/2
https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/cpiw.html

I've also migrated much of my portfolio to ETFs. Each year I start a new spreadsheet with the expected distributions. The mutual funds is a big guess, but I look at the past few years for a ballpark number.
As the year goes by and taxable money comes in, I replace my guesses with the actual numbers. I still guess between qualified and regular dividends.
By the end of the year, thanks to the kind folks here at MFO, I find out what the fund companies are estimating.
I might sell at gains during the year, but it is starting in November when I make my final plans on what I sell. Seems to work for me.

We migrated to index funds and ETFs in order to minimize large capital gains distribution. So far so good, but we still pay tax on dividends.

M* warns of a couple funds that might have biggies...
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1052941/4-funds-to-watch-at-tax-time?utm_source=eloqua&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_fundspy&utm_content=31014
Disclaimer: With 96% of our nest egg in tax-deferred a/c's, CGs are NOT an issue for us.

Mackenzie Scott's "384 Ways to Help," posted December 2020 on her Twitter account:
https://mackenzie-scott.medium.com/384-ways-to-help-45d0b9ac6ad8

Ben ,one option is to ACH transfer the Vanguard funds to E-Trade, as Vanguard funds are ntf at E-Trade. As a former client , their customer service isn't great but it's better than Vanguard. A second consideration is how long will this arrangement last, given that E-Trade is now part of Morgan Stanley ? I left E-Trade once T Rowe Price funds became available ntf at Schwab, Fido and Vanguard.

Thanks. My investments in Vanguard funds are from pre-brokerage days. I hold these directly in a non-retirement account bypassing the brokerage. I don't think ACH is available this situation. One would have to first sell all shares and of course pay income tax on the gains.
I do own shares in one T Rowe Price fund. I didn't need a brokerage to do this. I just invested directly. And T Rowe customer service has been splendid. I know some people are not having not-so-good experience with this but I got lucky I guess.

... general statements:
1. In order to calculate the cost basis for inherited real estate, you will use either the value of the property on the date of the original owner's death, or a date selected by the executor no later this six months after the death.
2. The basis of an inherited home is generally the Fair Market Value (FMV) of the property at the date of the individual's death. If no appraisal was done at that time, you will need to engage the help of a real estate professional to provide the FMV for you. There is no other way to determine your basis for the property
>>> Given that there may be a variety of documents in place to legally allow the inheritance of real real estate; my question is more related to:
----- are there real estate specialists who provide a legal value assessment for tax purposes; and/or are there other methods or individuals who are also legally qualified.
ALSO that capital gains taxation/estate tax varies by state; but this topic is directed to federal capital gains taxation
Thank you if you are able to provide guidance in this area; either from personal experience or definitive links to information.
NOTE: A go to I use for many items to help with information about whatever, is a YouTube search. I have not yet done this. But, if you have a useful YouTube link, please provide.
Hopefully, this topic area will be of help many others here, too.
Regards,
Catch