Wanna chase a dividend, eh?
Here's what is in your bowl of REIT chili:
AGNC Investment Corp. (“AGNC”) is an internally-managed mortgage real estate investment trust (“REIT”). We invest predominantly in agency mortgage-backed securities (“agency MBS”) on a leveraged basis, financed primarily through collateralized borrowings structured as repurchase agreements. Our principal investment objective is to provide our stockholders with attractive risk-adjusted returns through a combination of monthly dividends and net asset value accretion. We generate income from the interest earned on our investment assets, net of associated borrowing and hedging costs, and net realized gains and losses on our investments and hedging activities. We utilize an active portfolio management philosophy with the goal of preserving net asset value over a wide range of market scenarios.
YA want some extra hot sauce with that order???

Thanks very much for providing these details @msf. You raise some great questions. I’m going to call up TRP to ask specifically about access to Capital appreciation and New Horizons. It will also be interesting if they provide broader access to all closed funds once TRP spits in two

'The Fund seeks long-term capital appreciation.'
M* is not making up their data feed, I expect. The fund evidently has adjusted its mix. Why not? Unclear about the anxiety part.

Great explanation of Musk sales
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/authors/ARbTQlRLRjE/matthew-s-levine?cmpid=BBD111121_MONEYSTUFF&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_term=211111&utm_campaign=moneystuff&sref=OzMbRRMQ
Copied below if interested if you cannot open paywall
Oh Elon
Well here you go sure sure sure:
Tesla Inc. Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk unloaded $5 billion of stock in the electric-car maker, shortly after restoking a social media debate over the tax treatment of billionaires’ shareholdings.
The world’s richest person so far has disposed of more than 4.5 million shares this week, according to regulatory filings. Those were his first sales in more than five years.
Musk, who frequently stokes controversy on Twitter, created a firestorm over the weekend with a survey asking whether he should sell part of his Tesla stake. While he portrayed his proposal as having to do with debate over the ultra-wealthy avoiding taxes, the filings released Wednesday show some of the transactions were pre-arranged in mid-September -- weeks before the poll. He also didn’t mention in the tweets that he has millions of stock options that must be exercised before next August, when they expire.
There are two sets of sales. On Monday, he exercised 2.15 million stock options that were granted in 2012, paying about $13.4 million to acquire 2.15 million shares; then he sold 934,091 of those shares for about $1.1 billion. The Form 4 disclosures for the exercise and sales are here and here. Footnote 1 of each of Musk’s Form 4s says: “The transactions reported on this form 4 were automatically effected pursuant to a Rule 10b5-1 trading plan previously adopted on September 14, 2021 and established by the reporting person for the purpose of an orderly sale of shares related to the exercises of options scheduled to expire in 2022.” Actually it says that in all caps. I like my readers so I rendered it in sentence case for readability, but now I’m going to say it again in all caps, for accuracy but also for emphasis: “THE TRANSACTIONS REPORTED ON THIS FORM 4 WERE AUTOMATICALLY EFFECTED PURSUANT TO A RULE 10B5-1 TRADING PLAN PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED ON SEPTEMBER 14, 2021 AND ESTABLISHED BY THE REPORTING PERSON FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN ORDERLY SALE OF SHARES RELATED TO THE EXERCISES OF OPTIONS SCHEDULED TO EXPIRE IN 2022.”
On Tuesday and Wednesday, he sold a total of about 3.6 million of the 170.5 million shares that he already owned (i.e. not shares subject to options), for proceeds of about $3.9 billion. There are a bunch of Form 4s for these sales (here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here).[1] They do not mention a prearranged 10b5-1 plan; presumably he decided to sell them this week, and then did.
Some background. First, in September, a few weeks after he put this Rule 10b5-1 plan in place, he said publicly at a conference that “a huge block of options will sell in Q4 — because I have to or they’ll expire.”[2] He has 22,862,050 options in the tranche set to expire next August; he exercised 2.15 million of them on Monday, leaving him with about 20.7 million options in that “huge block” that he plans to “sell in Q4.”
Second, this past Saturday, Musk tweeted a poll. “Much is made lately of unrealized gains being a means of tax avoidance,” he wrote, “so I propose selling 10% of my Tesla stock. Do you support this?” In a second tweet, he said “I will abide by the results of this poll, whichever way it goes.” The poll closed on Sunday, with 57.9% of the votes in favor of Musk selling 10% of his stock.
It is not clear what “10% of my Tesla stock” means. At the time of the poll, Musk owned about 170.5 million shares of Tesla stock. But he was also, for legal purposes, the “beneficial owner” of another 73.5 million shares underlying options; Tesla’s filings show him owning 244 million shares. So if Musk were to sell 10% of his stock that would mean selling somewhere between 17 million and 24 million shares, give or take.

It seems to me that when we opened the T-IRA rollover in BRUFX, Morningstar had it included among other 50-70 percent stock funds. That was in April, 2020. It now is labeled in the 70-85% equity group. Yes, Morningstar is often wrong and inaccurate. This is still causing just a bit of anxiety on my part.
Anyone else notice this?

Perhaps April 2020 might have been a more advantageous time? I know I would have bought both these funds back then.

@JD_co & @MikeM
Thanks for the pointers. Will check them out. TAIL gained over 20% in Qtr. 1 2020. (Guess that met the definition of a collapse.). I’ve had it 2-3 weeks and it looked rock steady. But didn’t hold up well today.
Compared to the inverse Dow (DOG), which I played around with, TAIL has been less volatile over the time it’s been in existence. I’d agree with @JD_co that it’s not going to make you money in decent markets. FWIW - Here’s a cut & paste of its strategy:
“The Cambria Tail Risk ETF seeks to mitigate significant downside market risk. The Fund intends to invest in a portfolio of "out of the money" put options purchased on the U.S. stock market. TAIL strategy offers the potential advantage of buying more puts when volatility is low and fewer puts when volatility is high.”
TAIL
Side note: Musk wanted to sell some Tesla. But didn’t want to “spook” the market. So he set up this Twitter gig to make it look as if he were being coerced into selling by his loyal followers. (There are reports his brother sold a big chunk the prior day.). The market didn’t buy it. Now - push hard on the sky-high technology sector and it can set in motion a whole chain of unwanted consequences.

I have been looking into these for my wife's accounts. And Tesla can be an issue depending on the underlying index. Given the recent runup These are fund whose returns aren't so heavily influenced by Tesla.
Descriptions are from etf.com. For various categories of energy I'm looking at:
PBD

passively managed to invest in a wide array of global renewable energy companies, including those involved in conservation, improving energy efficiency and advancing renewable energy. The index may invest in large cap firms and those that derives at least 10% of its market value from clean energy activities, but has bias on pure-play, small- and midcap companies. Importantly, PBD’s portfolio companies are selected based on the index provider’s opinion of their “potential for capital appreciation.” In that sense, PBD is more akin to an actively managed strategy than other funds in the segment. The index is rebalanced and reconstituted quarterly. For diversification, the fund caps its largest holdings at 5% and is required to invest half its assets internationally.

ICLN

ICLN invests in global clean energy companies, which is defined as those involved in the biofuels, ethanol, geothermal, hydroelectric, solar, and wind industries. Aside from holding companies that produce energy through these means, ICLN also includes companies that develop technology and equipment used in the process. Selected by the index committee, the fund is weighted by market-cap and exposure score — subject to several constraints — and reconstituted semi-annually. Prior to April 19, 2021, the index followed a more narrow methodology.

Both are down this year. But that's a feature for me. Ten year returns seem reasonable compared to traditional utilities. There isn't much overlap in their top ten holdings anyway. They weight sectors differently. Neither has much exposure to China. Another feature as far as I am concerned.
Then there is GRID.

GRID is concentrated fund targeting global equities determined to be in the smart grid and electrical energy infrastructure sector as determined by Clean Edge. The fund includes companies that are either Pure Play — more than 50% revenues or Diversified — less than 50% revenues are derived from the smart grid and electrical energy infrastructure sector. The sector may include business in electric grid, electric meters and devices, networks, energy storage and management, and enabling software. GRID also screens for minimum liquidity and market cap. To enhance exposure to the smart grid market, the index provider uses a tiered weighting scheme. Securities are initially market cap weighted. Then a collective weight of 80% for Pure Play and 20% for Diversified are allocated. The Index is reconstituted semi-annually and rebalanced quarter.

GRID is on the MFOpremium Honor Roll. Lipper/Refinitiv lists it as global infrastructure.
I am also looking at three water funds:
CGW

The fund starts with all eligible securities from the S&P Global BMI Index that are classified in either water equipment & materials or water utilities & infrastructure cluster. To identify industry relevance, each company from both clusters will be assigned an exposure score based on its business description and most recent reported revenue. The 25 largest companies with an exposure score of 1 from each cluster will be selected for inclusion. However, if fewer than 25 companies have an exposure score of 1, the fund will select the largest companies with a 0.5 exposure score until the portfolio contains a total of 25 constituents for each cluster. Stocks are weighted by market-cap within each bucket and are constrained, such that securities with an exposure score of 1 are capped at 10% and those with 0.5 exposure score are capped at 5%. Index rebalancing occurs semi-annually.

PIO

The fund's (ironically appropriate) liquidity-weighting scheme produces a concentrated portfolio that only loosely resembles our market-cap-weighted benchmark. PIO is dominated by large- to midcap firms that create products that conserve and purify water for homes, businesses, and industries. Also, only companies participating in the “Green Economy” as determined by SustainableBusiness.com LLC are eligible for inclusion. The index currently limits weighting in both the country and issuer level, to ensure diversification between constituents. Lastly, it is important to note that the fund uses a “full replication” method to track the underlying index. Rebalancing is done quarterly while reconstitution is done annually.

FIW

FIW holds 36 of the largest US-listed water companies, ranked by market cap and weighted equally within five tiers. Companies of any market capitalization that derive revenue from the potable and wastewater industry are selected. In addition, its tiered equal-weighting scheme boosts the weight of small- and micro-cap companies, hence, reducing concentration. FIW changed its name from First Trust ISE Water Index Fund to First Trust Water ETF on December 14, 2016, which had no impact to FIW's investment strategy. The index is rebalanced and reconstituted semi-annually.

Still not too much overlap for me.
I check out holdings and weights using this link to the old M* data:format
http://portfolios.morningstar.com/fund/holdings?t=fsmex&region=usa&culture=en-US
Just replace the FSMEX with the code you want to look up.

Everything that goes up must come down at some point.
Also, keep in mind Tesla rose exponentially prior to its stock split which occurred in August 2020. From an article I read which stated:
When Tesla announced the split to when it actually happened at the end of the month, shares rose 81%. The Board announced the stock split on August 11, 2020.

From a WSJ January 10, 2021 article, "The Top Stock Funds of 2020
Morgan Stanley’s Inception Portfolio, under Dennis Lynch, won the stock-fund race with a gain of 150%," the fund's performance was due to investments in several stocks, but not limited to the following:
Square, Tesla, Zoom Video, Spotify and Twillo during the pandemic.

For those not familiar, and those who will soon wish they were not.
That was NOT a serious question. Rather...
FD1000 is a constant troll of mine who is Living in the Past (Thanks, Jethro!) , desperately trying to discredit me wherever he goes, with whatever vague, twisted memory he might still retain from years of our joint posting activity on several forums.
He appears to have no life other than his inherently flawed and underperforming Yugo Racing Scheme, while trying to sell his wares on whatever forum allows his continued participation. Sadly he somehow still however finds the time for daily trolling of my posts. If he would have just done what he daily tells "Average Joe Investor" to do, buy and hold an S&P index fund, he'd likely have twice the net worth he currently has. A tall glass of FOMO juice would have served him well. It's truly sad.
FWIW, I currently have a smallish 5-yr CD ladder yanking down 3.35% APY. All proceeds from maturing CDs over the past several years have been rolled into stocks. The ladder was started after early retirement at age 56 to bridge the Red Zone divide. It's done its job exactly as meticulously planned and has been being liquidated for several years.
For 30+ years I was 99% stocks. That dropped to ~60/40 in the coupla years prior to retirement. Since retirement I have always maintained an acceptable % in stocks but increased that to a significant % since the 2020 crash. I've posted all that several times on several forums, but somehow selective memory and ill intent can get in the way of some posters.

I wish I did but sadly don't. There were a bunch of interviews (late 2020/early 2021) with Dennis Lynch (he was being touted as the Cathie Wood of MFs for a bit) that delved into reasons for its explosive year. If interested, I trust you can track some of those down and get your answer.

@stillers: I didn’t intend to bring out the Keith Jackson in you. I transposed the fund symbols on the chart I (mis)used last night. My bad. MSSMX has superior LT performance to DVSMX. The MS fund did have one sickening decline in the past year that might have shaken the most ardent fan’s resolve, while DVSMX has moved more steadily higher over the same period. I did not compare MSSMX to DSMDX; the “former” in my post refers to DVSMX only. Do you know what propelled MSSMX to its fantastic performance in 2020?

@stillers
Sorry for the slow response. I have looked at several managed futures over the years, including AHLPX AQMNX AMFAX CSAAX, but not PQTAX.
AHLPX is the clear winner with better performance ( 42% vs -3% 26% and 25% with better risk metrics than my previous choices, although PQTAX is running about equal. PTQAX has only recently caught up ( last year outperformed by 5%) by a significant outpreformance in 2021
M* still has a "human" analysis of AHLPX
"Man AHL (this strategy’s subadvisor) predominantly uses a systematic momentum-based approach that aims to profit from trends in prices across various markets and provide uncorrelated returns. The approach looks for trends across a two-month timeframe, on average, which is shorter than the typical peer in the managed futures Morningstar Category. That can reduce the strategy’s drawdowns in fast-moving markets relative to peers that are slower to adjust. The strategy’s responsiveness was on display during the first quarter of 2020, for instance, when markets took a sharp turn. It returned a healthy 7.8% during the quarter, outperforming the category average return by nearly 7 percentage points."
It is hard to determine how they differ in portfolio, and I haven't delved into that much, as up-to-date data is hard to find, and they change positions frequently.
In the past I have read that the usual reasons for these funds performance is if they guess the trend in interest rates properly.
Both seem to be better diversifiers than TMRSX as the latter fund has not delivered much with a correlation to the SP500 of .61, while managed futures are both - 0.15

"Fifteen percent of households in the labor force without employer-sponsored pensions indicated owning an IRA in 2019."
Congressional Research Service, Individual Retirement Account (IRA) Ownership: Data and Policy Issues, Dec 9, 2020.
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46635/3
So for the vast majority of people without jobs offering 401(k)s or 403(b)s, the size of the IRA contribution limit makes no difference.

A retirement plan for those without access to traditional 401k/403b plans could include an automatic enrollment provision to increase participation rates. Vanguard released a study earlier this year which indicates that participation rates tripled in 401k plans with an automatic enrollment feature.
This can be a very useful "nudge".
PDF

Roth IRA used to have $2,000 limit when it started in 1998. Many people don’t have jobs with 401K) and 403(b) plans. How can one save enough for retirement with $6,000 and 1,000 catch-up, per year?

"Fifteen percent of households in the labor force without employer-sponsored pensions indicated owning an IRA in 2019."
Congressional Research Service, Individual Retirement Account (IRA) Ownership: Data and Policy Issues, Dec 9, 2020.
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46635/3
So for the vast majority of people without jobs offering 401(k)s or 403(b)s, the size of the IRA contribution limit makes no difference.
If the concern is in encouraging the 75% of households (ibid) who do not have any IRAs to save for retirement, I might suggest better publicizing the Savers Credit and making it a refundable credit.
https://www.irs.gov/retirement-plans/plan-participant-employee/retirement-savings-contributions-savers-credit

Its too soon for me to be certain its different this time. But, the global central banks have been astute and activist enough in recent years to keep investors engaged and satisfied -- garden variety stock market corrections excepted. Accommodative global fiscal policies also made important contributions to this outcome during the past couple of years. Current and projected economic conditions suggest this recent trend could continue through 2022. That said, I suspect any future stock market gains through 2022 will be more modest and will be more interrupted along the way than they have thus far been in 2021.

@lynnbolin2021,
Looking forward to your next MFO article..should be interesting as always....
Curious as to your thoughts for addition in the "all-weather" approach regarding funds such as:
PVCMX Palm Valley Capital Fund. Invests generally in small cap value co's, high quality, strong balance sheets, strong free cash flow, profitable co's. Not afraid to hold cash in market bubbles (whatever that means anymore) Absolute return focused.
TANDX (Castle Tandem Fund) Invests in Large cap, growing dividend payers, that are capable of growing earning regardless of economic conditions, not afraid to hold cash if need be, does not make market call to go to cash, only if can't find the appropriate value in a stock
Trying to look forward as to what may come rather than backwards look at performance, data etc.
Very intrigued by BLNDX/REMIX as mentioned by Prof David, have initiated starter position.
If you would, please define your interpretation of what "all weather" means from your viewpoint.
Is it a marketing term, maybe overused like ESG, maybe nebulous terminology or maybe not?
Mine is of a fund that you could have significant holdings of your wealth and hold thru a 30-40% drawdown in the markets, while sleeping well and having the confidence that the fund mgmt will make the right decisions over the next few years. Also, do like funds that have a succession planning in place...no funds with the boomer aged guru with no protege learning and next in line etc.
I also define as all weather fund as a fund that could compete when compared with a 45% SPY/55 SCHO ETF backwards look performance wise...most can't, no?
Best to all, I enjoy your postings, makes me think...
Baseball Fan

I own it, but have tactically been reducing its proportion in my portfolio. PRDSX. It's my smallest fund holding now. Down to 2% of total. I sense it's lost its mojo. Even though a quant fund is all about statistics and algorithms and such, and not so much about Fund Manager "savvy" and legerdemain. Is the Quant Model they're using not very effective any longer? This is the 2nd year in a row that the fund is a serious laggard vs. peers. (Well, "peers" as categorized by Morningstar.) Longer-term numbers mean much more, of course.
...So, when I see a couple of good up-days, I've been taking tiny bites out of it and putting it into PRSNX, a dollar-hedged TRP bond fund. I want to be growing my bonds, anyhow. And what's with the rather big estimated capital gain in 2021 for PRDSX? ($6.00/share--- if memory serves me.) I'm also thinking I could "afford" to put 6% of my portfolio into TRP Junk Fund TUHYX. Six percent. I would take that 6% from my RPSIX holding. At the moment, RPSIX = 21.95% of portfolio total, and PRSNX = 21.20% of portf. total. The other bond fund is 6.10% of total: PTIAX.

I’m also thankful to have the write-up on REMIX. Last year I committed a hefty sum to TMSRX, thinking I’d be satisfied if it out-performed cash. What I discovered was that I was less than thrilled with performance of 0.94% YTD, given that the fund had done much better than that in 2019 and 2020. I sold at a modest profit and redeployed elsewhere. While REMIX is not completely comparable, it represents an alternative to the vast majority of my portfolio holdings which are traditional OEFs, most of which are not defensive. I’m dipping a toe in the water.