Thank you, Mr. Hindsight.

Where is the hindsight?
The above phrase is from another poster on another site that has been wrong for about 15 years now. When he posted about his timing, it was a disaster.
I sold on 2/29/2020 and posted about it on several sites, including this one.
I sold early in 2022, and bought in 11/2022 and posted about it. This is why I made 9+% in 2022.
There is plenty of evidence of my portfolio performance.
Several in my circle of traders all have done it.
It's obvious you can't do it, so your only response is trashing.
People like you are responsible for why I (and other great traders) don't post these anymore.
It doesn't bother or affect us, but posters have been interested for years. Actually, 1 of them joined our group after he paid attention for years and started using it.
Basically, you score a giggle, but others lose.

On another investment forum, a thread has recently been started to share portfolio allocation thoughts & strategies for discussion/comparison. I thought it would perhaps be a worthwhile exercise and/or learning experience to have a similar thread on this topic on this forum. Here was my contribution:
As a retired investor, "I dislike volatility!", to quote keppelbay. Especially in the current uncertain market and political environment, preserving capital is more important to me than chasing returns on capital. I prefer to err on the side of caution since I don't need a lot more money, and all my expenses are covered by generous pensions and Social Security.
Currently, my conservative portfolio allocation is as follows:
- 45% Bond OEFs (APDPX, DHEAX, PYLD and RCTIX)
- 30% CDs
- 25% Alternative OEFs (QDSNX and QLENX)
Once the CDs mature next year, I may shift my portfolio allocation to the following:
- 60% Bond OEFs (will probably add BINC and/or ESIIX)
- 25% Alternative OEFs (no change)
- 15% Allocation OEFs (probably split between PMAIX and PRCFX)
Hopefully, this will be a "sleep well portfolio" by keeping the standard deviations of the allocation and the alternative OEFs below 10%, and the bond OEFs below 5%. Of course, nothing is set in stone. I will always be dancing near the exit if the circumstances warrant it.
Good luck.
P.S. Based on Portfolio Visualizer, and back testing with a start date of July 2023 (inception date of PYLD), my current portfolio would have had an annualized return (CAGR) of 10.5% with a standard deviation of 2%, and a 0.47% correlation to the S&P 500.

Howdy folks,
I think you were trolling me with this thread.
I have been recommending a 3-7% stake in precious metals in everyone's portfolios for decades. More than that is speculation, which is fine, but it can be very dicey. The game is so very rigged, it's tough to win.
There are many ways to take position. Safest is physical bullion. Geez, a roll of American Gold Eagles is the size of quarter and 2" tall. Hide it in the Oatmeal. It's worth about $75K. Get a 100 oz bar of silver, paint it black and use it as a door stop. About $4500. You can buy ETFs that invest in bullion but you pay 28% in gains. Ouch. You can hedge this with some weird products or simply stash them in a deferred or exempt account. You can buy the mining stocks. My only homerun was in the Big Bonanza that took place in in 2002-2011 period. I bought Silver Wheaton in the $2-3 range and it went to $43. There is nothing quite so exhilarating as playing the penny silver miners. Pure nose bleed.
You don't even have to simply play the PMs and can take a broad based stance in commodities with any number of funds and/or ETF. Again, determine if they're in mining stocks or the actual commodities. Even though they more or less mirror each others performance, they are played in different markets that act different ways. I've been collecting coins for 70 years and I don't have a clue.
If you're thinking about establishing a new position in the metals, I'd really suggest a Dollar Cost Averaging tactic. If you're a momentum investor, you might consider scaling in.
Peace,
And so it goes,
rono

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1545440/000158064225005663/kempner497.htm
97 1 kempner497.htm 497
September 2, 2025
ULTIMUS MANAGERS TRUST
Kempner Multi-Cap Deep Value Fund
Institutional Class (FIKDX)
Investor Class (FAKDX)
Supplement to the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”),
each dated September 28, 2024
Assignment of Investment Advisory Agreement and Expense Limitation Agreement
Effective August 9, 2025, upon the passing of Harris L. (“Shrub”) Kempner, Jr., President and owner of Kempner Capital Management, Inc. (the “Adviser”), the investment adviser to the Kempner Multi-Cap Deep Value Fund (the “Fund”), an assignment of the Investment Advisory Agreement between Ultimus Managers Trust (the “Trust”), on behalf of the Fund, and the Adviser occurred, resulting in the automatic termination of both the Investment Advisory Agreement and the Expense Limitation Agreement between the Trust, on behalf of the Fund, and the Adviser.
All references to Mr. Kempner with respect to the Fund are hereby removed from the Fund’s Prospectus and SAI. M. Shawn Gault remains as portfolio manager of the Fund.
Interim Investment Advisory Agreement and Interim Expense Limitation Agreement
An interim investment advisory agreement between the Trust, on behalf of the Fund, and the Adviser (the “Interim Advisory Agreement”), with substantially the same terms as the existing investment advisory agreement with the Adviser (the “Prior Advisory Agreement”), except for the start and end date of the agreement as required under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”) and rules thereunder, has been approved by the Trust’s Board of Trustees (the “Board”) at a meeting held on August 21, 2025 (the “Meeting”) and became effective as of August 10, 2025.
Under the Interim Advisory Agreement, the Adviser provides the same advisory services to the Fund on the same terms provided under the Prior Advisory Agreement. There are no changes to the advisory fees payable by the Fund to the Adviser under the Interim Advisory Agreement.
In addition, at the Meeting, the Board approved an interim expense limitation agreement (the “Interim Expense Limitation Agreement”), between the Trust, on behalf of the Fund, and the Adviser because the prior expense limitation agreement for the Fund (the “Prior Expense Limitation Agreement”) terminated upon the termination of the Prior Advisory Agreement. The terms of the Interim Expense Limitation Agreement are substantially similar to those of the Prior Expense Limitation Agreement except for the start and end date of the agreement. The expense limitation for each share class of the Fund is identical to the respective expense limitation under the Prior Expense Limitation Agreement. The Interim Expense Limitation Agreement became effective as of August 10, 2025.
Liquidation of the Fund
Effective immediately, the Fund has terminated the public offering of its shares and will discontinue its operations effective October 15, 2025. Shares of the Fund are no longer available for purchase and, at the close of business on October 15, 2025, all outstanding shares of the Fund will be redeemed at net asset value (the “Liquidation”).
1
At the meeting, the Board, in consultation with the Adviser, approved the discontinuation of the Fund’s operations based on, among other factors, the Adviser’s belief that it would be in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders to discontinue the Fund’s operations. Through the date of the Liquidation, the Adviser will continue to waive investment advisory fees and reimburse expenses of the Fund, if necessary, in order to maintain the Fund at its current expense limits, as specified in the Fund’s current Prospectus.
In connection with the Liquidation, the Board directed that: (i) all of the Fund’s portfolio securities be liquidated in an orderly manner not later than October 15, 2025; and (ii) all outstanding shareholder accounts on October 15, 2025 be closed and the proceeds of each account, less any required withholding, be sent to the shareholder’s address of record or to such other address as directed by the shareholder, including special instructions that may be needed for Individual Retirement Accounts (“IRAs”) and qualified pension and profit sharing accounts. As a result of the Liquidation, the Fund’s portfolio holdings will be reduced to cash or cash equivalents. Accordingly, going forward, shareholders should not expect the Fund to achieve its stated investment objective. The Adviser will bear all of the expenses of the liquidation with the exception of brokerage costs associated with the orderly transition of the Fund’s portfolio holdings to cash and cash equivalents.
Shareholders may redeem all or a portion of their shares of the Fund on any business day prior to the Liquidation as specified in the Fund’s Prospectus.
The Liquidation will be considered for tax purposes a sale of Fund shares by shareholders, and shareholders should consult with their own tax advisors to ensure its proper treatment on their income tax returns. In addition, shareholders invested through an IRA or other tax-deferred account should consult the rules regarding the reinvestment of these assets. In order to avoid a potential tax issue, shareholders generally have 60 days from the date that proceeds are received to re-invest or “rollover” the proceeds into another IRA or qualified retirement account; otherwise, the proceeds may be required to be included in the shareholder’s taxable income for the current tax year.
For more information, or to obtain a copy of the Fund’s Prospectus or SAI free of charge, please contact the Fund at 1-800-665-9778.
Investors should retain this supplement for future reference.

no, i accumulated ~2% (2016-2018) and let the etf run (except trimmed some individual miners which have kept running !). this is because the data seems fuzzy where to stop, but concern not needed below 10% allocation.
plus, the gains taxes. was not taking much more than i can offset losses elsewhere.

OJ, not to worry, there have been many naysayers in the last 15 years.
In this (link) you can find several trades I made in crucial markets.
In fact, I posted my sale on 2/29/2020 on this site.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/55299/bond-mutual-funds-analysis-act-2/p2
LarryB, My trades were never perfect; I never claimed they were. When I'm wrong, I'm out of the market for up to a week. When I'm right, I was out for several weeks (in 2018, 2020, 2025) to 10 months in 2022. I can't do it with a lot of money, think above 10-20 million; after all, I trade in/out mutual funds. There were already times when the mutual company restricted me from trading their funds too often.
I don't need to prove anything anymore. All the real discussions happen now off the boards.
This is a screenshot in early 2020 (https://ibb.co/k2SKDPPg)
This is a screenshot of 2022 (https://ibb.co/1tKzDR4j)

”The commodity space is complex and the asset class can be volatile.”

Everything from coca beans to nat gas. Generally played using derivatives. Tremendous variation among funds.
Flashback - In March 2020, the price of a barrel of oil temporarily fell below zero dollars.
@LewisBraham authored the piece I linked. Thanks for the reminder.
@Observant1 - PIRMX looks like a good moderate approach. I find that with high-volatility funds it’s hard to hang on for long. So better served with a moderate approach from that standpoint.

In Europe and Asia, where government stakes, golden-shares or board seats are common,
companies are also restricted from acting quickly on labor or old plant shutdowns.
US companies are much quicker in taking labor or plant/capital decisions.
This has contributed to higher US productivity and profitability.
This may change with US Gov involvement in US companies.

The U.S. government may force companies to take or avoid certain actions for political reasons.
As yogi mentioned, productivity/profitability could be negatively impacted.

In Europe and Asia, where government stakes, golden-shares or board seats are common, companies are also restricted from acting quickly on labor or old plant shutdowns.
US companies are much quicker in taking labor or plant/capital decisions. This has contributed to higher US productivity and profitability. This may change with US Gov involvement in US companies.

Some unconventional thoughts on your allocation/drawdown plans, FWIW:
1. If all the money in your (future) RMDs will be taxed at the same rate, and if your RMDs will (along with other income including SS) will be less than your cash flow needs, then there doesn't seem to be much value in managing T-IRA and T-401(k) differently.
Reasoning: if RMDs are more than you need, then it is better to keep them down (and more assets tax-sheltered) by keeping slower growth assets in traditional accounts and faster growth assets in Roths, as you are doing. You don't want to be forced to draw more out of any sheltered account than you need. But this justification vanishes if RMDs are not sufficient for cash flow needs.
By "all RMD money taxed at the same rate" I mean: Suppose that you add up all your other ordinary income (SS, taxable interest, etc.) .and find that you're, say, in the 22% bracket. Then when you add in your RMD, you find that you're still in the same 22% bracket. Not higher. If this is true then it doesn't matter how you split investments between T's and Roths.
Say you've got $100K in your traditional accounts and $78K in your Roths. After tax, they're each worth $78K. Suppose you allocate assets so that your Roth accounts double and your traditional accounts stagnate. Then your Roth will be worth $156K after tax and your traditionals will be worth $78K after tax for a total of $234K after tax.
If you flip the allocations, then the traditional accounts will double to $200K pre-tax, or $156K after tax. The Roth will be sitting at $78K, for a total of $23KK after tax.
The trick is to keep after tax values in mind when allocating investments. Are there any portfolio trackers that can handle this?
2. Since cap gains don't (for the most part) affect what rate your ordinary income is taxed at, you might be better off holding onto your long term positions in taxable accounts (that are pseudo-tax-sheltered by deferring gain recognition) and instead sheltering cash by using it to pay the taxes on Roth conversions.
Suppose you have $22 in cash (taxable) and $100 in a traditional IRA (worth $78 post tax). That's worth a total of $100 after tax. Convert and you've got $100 in a Roth, also worth $100 after tax.
If you convert, then instead of having to pay tax on the cash as it generates income, you've fully sheltered that $22 in the Roth. As for the securities that you could have sold instead of converting, they'll continue to appreciate, tax-deferred, until you recognize the gain.
3. If you're planning on working past RMD age (currently 73), then you can defer RMDs longer in your 401(k) with your current employer. If that's the case, that may militate for keeping higher growth assets in the 401(k). Otherwise, allocation between T-IRA and T-401(k) doesn't seem to matter. Though the choice of investments available to you in your employer plan(s) could tilt the scales one way or the other.
4. Throwing a money wrench into all of this are oddballs like IRMAA and the 3.8% Medicare surtax. And Trump's $6K above-the-line (sort of) extra deduction for seniors in 2025-2028 that is also income-dependent.
In addition, your state may exempt some or all of retirement income from state taxes. Your state may also give other tax breaks that are income dependent (e.g. property tax reductions). And there's no certainty with respect to future tax rates.
I've been doing incremental Roth conversions since 2010 when the income limit on conversions was eliminated. So when I finally get to being subject to RMDs, their size will be closer to what I want to contribute to charities. And by identifying them as QCDs, I won't have to worry much about tax consequences of my RMDs.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1537140/000158064225005639/issachar_497.htm
497 1 issachar_497.htm 497
Lionx-Logo
Class N Shares (LIONX)
Class I Shares (LIOTX)
(a series of Northern Lights Fund Trust III)
Supplement dated August 29, 2025 to
the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information dated February 1, 2025
The Board of Trustees of Northern Lights Fund Trust III (the “Board”) has concluded that it is in the best interests of the Issachar Fund (the “Fund”) and its shareholders that the Fund cease operations. The Board has determined to close the Fund and redeem all outstanding shares on or about September 29, 2025 (“Redemption Date”).
Effective immediately, the Fund will not accept any new investments, will no longer pursue its stated investment objective, and will begin liquidating its portfolio and will invest in cash equivalents such as money market funds until all shares have been redeemed. Any required distributions of income and capital gains will be distributed as soon as practicable to shareholders and reinvested in additional shares, unless you have previously requested payment in cash.
Prior to or on the Redemption Date, you may redeem your shares, including reinvested distributions, in accordance with the “How to Redeem Shares” section in the Prospectus. Unless your investment in the Fund is through a tax-deferred retirement account, a redemption is subject to tax on any taxable gains. Please refer to the “Tax Status, Dividends and Distributions” section in the Prospectus for general information. You may wish to consult your tax advisor about your particular situation.
ANY SHAREHOLDERS WHO HAVE NOT REDEEMED THEIR SHARES OF THE FUND PRIOR TO THE REDEMPTION DATE WILL HAVE THEIR SHARES AUTOMATICALLY REDEEMED AS OF THAT DATE, AND PROCEEDS WILL BE SENT TO THE ADDRESS OF RECORD. If you have questions or need assistance, please contact your financial advisor directly or the Fund at 1-866-787-8355.
This Supplement, and the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information dated February 1, 2025, provide relevant information for all shareholders and should be retained for future reference. Both the Prospectus and the Statement of Additional Information, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, are incorporated by reference and can be obtained without charge by calling the Fund at 1-866-787-8355.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1480207/000119312525192866/d21840d497.htm
497 1 d21840d497.htm 497
DOUBLELINE FUNDS TRUST
DoubleLine Floating Rate Fund (the “Fund”)
Supplement dated August 29, 2025 to the Fund’s Summary Prospectus
(the “Summary Prospectus”), Prospectus (the “Prospectus”) and
Statement of Additional Information (the “SAI”), each dated July 31, 2025,
as supplemented from time to time
This supplement provides new and additional information beyond that contained in the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and SAI and should be read in conjunction with the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and SAI.
The Board of Trustees of DoubleLine Funds Trust (the “Board”) approved a proposal under which, subject to shareholder approval, the Fund would be merged with and into the American Beacon DoubleLine Floating Rate Income Fund (the “Acquiring Fund”), a series of the American Beacon Funds (the “Transaction”). The Fund and Acquiring Fund have substantially similar principal investment strategies and have the same portfolio management team. DoubleLine Capital LP, the adviser to the Fund, serves as the sub-adviser to the Acquiring Fund. American Beacon Advisors, Inc. serves as the investment adviser to the Acquiring Fund. Completion of the proposed Transaction, often called a “fund adoption,” is subject to, among other things, approval by the shareholders of the Fund.
If approved by the Fund’s shareholders, the proposed Transaction is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2026, although this timeline is subject to adjustment. A Combined Proxy Statement and Prospectus related to a special meeting of shareholders of the Fund is expected to be sent to shareholders of the Fund in the fourth quarter of 2025. Those materials will describe the Transaction in more detail and the reasons for the Board’s approval of the proposed Transaction. Shareholders of the Fund should watch for the arrival of these important materials. This supplement is not a proxy and is not soliciting any proxy, which can only be done by means of a proxy statement.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

Being retired at age of 77, I have enjoyed the last few years of finding CDs which pay at least 4% interest. I looked at Schwab this week, and it is almost impossible to find a noncallable CD paying 4% interest. I have been getting over 4% from Schwab Money Market accounts, but I would like to have some CDs to replace those maturing, and retain some FDIC protections. In my Taxable Schwab account, I have chosen to increase my investments in private banks and credit unitions. I just bought a 100k CD at Capital One for 4.2%, and have started looking at other banks for some of my Schwab holdings.

One fund is I suppose a worthy endeavor. I considered it - and gave up the idea sometime around 2020-21. The fund I had in mind was TRRIX a 40 (equity) 60 (fixed income) fund. In hindsight it was a fortunate decision not to go ahead because that fund had an uncharacteristically bad year (-13%) in 2022. A lesson in how even very “conservative” (previously deemed “safe”) funds can lose more than 10% in a year when the markets team up against them.
If one feels they have the mental acuity, knowledge & time I’d say go with several equally weighted funds designed to off-set each other in volatile times. 3 is a number you commonly hear. My favorite number is 7 (positions), equally weighted and including a cash position. Rebalance periodically. On a portfolio tracker pie-chart they migrate around as their fortunes rise and fall - a source of interest or amusement to duller minds like mine.
OTOH - if one is reaching a point for whatever reason where that’s no longer an option, chunk it all in cash / cash alts or one of the several good options offered up by others. Cash is not a bad choice as some have attested to in this thread. Sounds like the wife is an important consideration. Discuss with her and see what she might feel comfortable maintaining in your absence.

Mutual fund AUM has been flat even with capital growth. ETF AUM has doubled in like 4 years. Mutual funds hold 22 trillion dollars. ETF's 10 trillion (what 5 trillion in 2021).
OAKMX in 2015 had 18 billion in AUM. if flows were even over the past 10 years, its theoretical growth would be 65 billion in AUM. HOWEVER, its only today 23 billion in AUM. which is almost 1/3 of what it should be.
So I think they see the writing on the wall. its time to play ball.

My one-fund for the capital appreciation bucket is SGIIX. TIBIX would be an alternative.

@Sven…. You are correct. This is about capital appreciation,,, or inflation protection or for sport. No income need. The last few years we have been fine with CD’s and money market but really that bucket is just risk off. My one fund is the risk bucket. But as I am realizing one fund is just not any fun.

there is an inspiring list of innovations spouted by trump to industries of all flavors, him being a unique expert in all.
my take is that AMD is more than happy for intel to be forced to act on strategic advice from trump and his anti-STEM MAGA morons.
m.leder, noted forensic analyst on SEC postings, came from behind her paywall to comment on intel's CYA statement regarding the coercion. some clips....
...a lot to unpack in this risk factor and any number of parties that could potentially sue. But I love the nuanced language of “given the scarcity of recent US precedents”.
Really? The government doesn’t take 10% stakes in major American companies that employ over 100,000 people with virtually zero planning based on some tweet... I'm shocked, shocked! Based on today's close, it seems clear as if the promised cash infusion did nothing to boost Intel’s stock price, so it will be interesting to see what impact this has over the next few months and years.
I also thought the risk factor stating that there’s no requirement for the $8.9 billion infusion to be made by a certain date, although the 94-page filing spells out a closing date of Aug. 26 was worth noting. As too was the risk factor that the tax, accounting and financial impacts are uncertain and being evaluated!
linkedin.com
in short, intel is saying they have no idea, and by this disclosure take no liability regarding impact on legalities, capital deployment, taxes, and accounting.
SHAREHOLDERS, THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER.

@larryB, i presume your social security and pension cover the entire expense. And these two funds are for capital appreciation, correct?
If not, do you have another bucket to generate income to supplement the monthly income needs ?

A scorecard for M* US equity sector indexes lists calendar-year returns starting in 2015.
Not suprisingly, technology has been a frequent winner.
The energy sector underperformed all other sectors from 2017-2020
but gained the most in 2016, 2021, and 2022.
Industrials, consumer defensives, and financials were neither at the top
nor at the bottom of the performance charts during this period.
Healthcare has really struggled due to policy concerns and other issues.
https://www.morningstar.com/stocks/6-key-takeaways-examining-10-years-stock-performance-by-sector