As for me, I was happy with my 2020 results---even with not much EM at all. Maybe I'll move a small bite from where it is in my bond/ballast sleeve into foreign equities. It's a really nice problem for everyone, that Markets are flying high. I hate buying at these levels, but I'll be "playing with the house's money." PRIDX. But that fund is not, ostensibly, EM. But M* shows almost 18% of its portfolio in Latin America and Asia Emerging. Less than 0.33 in Europe Emerging. I'm not surprised by that last. Which developing European countries are not run oligarch-style, like Putin's Russia? Is Ukraine in the EU yet? Will they ever throw off the Russian invasion? Putin's logic there is EXACTLY what Hitler did for the poor, downtrodden, oppressed German-speakers in the Sudetenland. And uncle Neville promised the British: "Peace in our time." In fact, uncle Donald owes some of those oligarchs big piles of money. Come to think of it. Anyway, PRIDX is closed to new investors.

From the email I received:
"Here is a link to Robert Gardiner’s Chairman Letter reflecting on 2020."
Robert Gardiner's letter was written on January 4, 2021 with the first sentence:
"Amidst the many challenges of 2020, Salt Lake City was hit with a hurricane-strength windstorm on September 8th..."
How could it be about 2021 when today is January 8, 2021?

Good Morning @Derf,
Ha! Like your commentary!
FWIW,
ECD Company plans to build an esports arena in Chicago’s Near South Side, according to The Esports Observer.
Scott Greenberg, the president and CEO of ECD and SMASHotels, is focusing on turning the property at 2500 S. Wabash Ave. into a 106,000 square-foot venue that could hold 800 spectators. It would also be equipped with three kitchens to serve food and beverages.
On another note....According to a recent report by Newzoo senior market analyst Tom Wijman, the global gaming market will generate $159.3 billion in revenue in 2020. That would be 9.3 percent year-over-year growth. What’s more, Newzoo projects the industry to surpass $200 billion in revenue in 2023
For comparison sakes, US Movie and production revenue in 2019, ~ $35B
Mucho Grande business, this Activision, Take Two Interactive, Electronic Arts, Nintendo, Microsoft...
On another note, Fanatics, currently valued at ~$6.5B, likely going to IPO
Best,
Baseball_Fan

Buying a few shares of a recently born ETF "HEGD" from Swan Global Investments just to keep on my radar. I believe its their only ETF. We shall see if it does its job.
"HEGD aims to address long-term investors’ need for capital appreciation while hedging against the risks and volatility associated with today’s often volatile markets. This differentiated solution combines the benefits of low-cost, passive investing with an actively managed hedging strategy."

Short answer: the credit is what it is; you get to keep it all.

You don't have to pay back your stimulus check, because it's a refundable tax credit
Your stimulus payment is technically a refundable tax credit, which reduces your 2020 tax bill on a dollar-for-dollar basis. It's like having store credit at your favorite clothing shop: When you apply it to your total bill, it reduces what you owe. In this case, even if you have no tax liability, the government is "refunding" your credit back to you as a cash payment.

https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/will-we-have-to-pay-back-stimulus-check-2020-4

What Is a Tax Credit?
Subtract tax credits from the amount of tax you owe. There are two types of tax credits:

• A nonrefundable tax credit means you get a refund only up to the amount you owe.
• A refundable tax credit means you get a refund, even if it's more than what you owe.

https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions-for-individuals
If it's a gift, it's a per capita gift that nearly everyone (84%) gets. It's a gift like Medicare Part B, where most (92%) participants pay only 1/4 of the true cost and they are gifted the other 3/4 out of general tax revenue (see Medicare Financial Status: In Brief, p. 5, pdf p. 7).

Hi, guys.
Two quick notes.
(1) Teresa Kong, the manager, projects high single- to low-double digit returns in 2021.

We think EM corporates will outperform EM sovereign credits ... EM investors are still largely invested in EM sovereigns, not EM corporates. The EM hard currency corporate market is dominated by Asian issuers, of which more than half are China issuers. Given the V-shaped recovery of China and the positive spillovers onto much of the region, we expect Asia to outperform other EM regions. We also expect Asian corporates to outperform corporates from all other EM regions. When you take into account a yield of about 7.4% in Asia high yield, with help of some credit spread tightening, we are looking at returns of high single digits to 10% next year.

Corporate Emerging Market Debt Poised to Shine in 2021 (12/15/2020)
(2) Ms. Kong is pretty good at her job. I did a quick check at MFO Premium and she's pretty much consistently above average for returns, downside, and risk-adjusted returns. Typically, mid-single digit annual returns. The fund has an R-squared of just 6 against the US bond market and 40-ish against US equities, which likely reflects their corporate bond orientation.
I've owned the fund since launch as a diversifying holding in my fixed income sleeve; T. Rowe Price Spectrum Income is the other fund in that box for me. That's not particularly an argument that the fund (a) is great or (b) makes sense for you, but a potential 9 or 10% fixed-income return has some attraction.
As ever,
David

@catch22, things happen. I have no issue if you leaving it. I myself run into this too from time to time.
By the way, I heard several capitals across the country are having protests. There were bomb threat in Lansing capital. Think people ought to protest for their $2,000 stimulus check instead.

I just updated TurboTax and it has added lines to deal with the second stimulus credit. So the calculation is for a credit against our 2020 taxes as noted above.

@Derf Perhaps the domestic oil patch experienced enough carnage in 2020 and midstream suffered (and changed) enough over the course of the past 1/2 decade that both are poised to serve as good multi-year investments at this point. That's my generalist's assessment. Time will tell if it is correct.
2020 investments in high income portfolio included:
**RTLR in April and some more in September
**FANG, KMI, and ENB from August to November
(FANG has more than doubled since purchase to become the portfolio's largest holding. It just passed AVGO and is nearing 5% of the portfolio. So it may soon be time to consider a little trimming. But, no thoughts of more selling than that.)

I commend the decorum thus far, with comments in this thread.
The subject matter was placed in "fund discussions" as to the potential fallout implications into all areas of the investment markets; from the events of Jan. 6, at the Capitol building.
May 1, 2020 found gun carrying protesters inside the Michigan Capitol building face to face, literally; with Michigan State Police. One false move, accident or mistake could have caused a very nasty situation. One can easily imagine what could have taken place at the U.S. Capitol building, had "x" number of the protesters carried and chose to use weapons. I didn't see any long rifles, but I would not be surprised about 9mm pistols. Common GLOCK handguns may have 20 rounds in place.
What we may have considered in the past years to be a "black swan" event; has taken a new face, that still may affect investing markets going forward. Those who feel more empowered now about what a "patriot" may be; have not and will not disappear.
Thank you.
Catch

Thanks for setting up the Webinar @Charles and to those who joined in. Explaining how the systems works and what it means makes me think things through. As I mentioned, I just set up the three trending buckets. Since the Webinar, I realized that I need to fine tune them. Here are the recent changes that I made:
Trending Bucket
The Trending Bucket did a good job of showing the funds that have high 3 month trends, 3 month returns, and cash inflows, but I would buy the funds because "I was late to the party." I changed the Trending Bucket to only show funds that were less than 7 points above their 10 month moving average. Upon due diligence, these would be worth considering by some investors.
Name, Symbol, MaxDD, APR, Rtn 3 mon, Trend, Flow, SMA10
VanEck Vectors Fallen Angel High Yield Bond ETF, (ANGL), -14.1, 14.9, 9.5, 3.8, 8.5, 1.6
Vanguard Intern Div Appreciation Index ETF, (VIGI), -18.8, 20.9, 13.8, 7.4, 7.4, 5.3
Vanguard Intern Div Appreciation Index Admiral, (VIAAX), -18.8, 20.9, 13.8, 7.4, 7.4, 5.3
Vanguard ESG International Stock ETF, (VSGX), -22.9, 18.1, 16.1, 8, 11.5, 3.8
Nuveen ESG Small-Cap ETF, (NUSC), -30.8, 24.8, 29.3, 11.3, 9.4, 5.9
Crossing Bucket
I simplified this bucket and fine tuned it to be based more on three month trends to better identify trending funds that are near their ten month moving average. As I pointed out in the Webinar I have owned VGWAX and VEUSX since the 2020 market correction and the adjustments identify these funds. The funds crossing their ten month moving average are value and global funds.
Name, Symbol, MaxDD, APR, Rtn 3 mon, Trend, Flow, SMA10
Vanguard Windsor Inv, (VWNDX), -28.1, 18.4, 23, 9.5, 10.6, 0.6
American Funds Capital Income Builder F1, (CIBFX), -15.5, 10, 9.5, 5.1, 3.2, 0
Vanguard Global Wellington Admiral, (VGWAX), -15.6, 14.6, 10, 5.1, 6.9, 1.9
Nuance Mid Cap Value Inst, (NMVLX), -19.2, 17.1, 15.3, 5.5, 1, 1.7
Vanguard European Stock Index Admiral, (VEUSX), -25.7, 15, 16.4, 9.3, 11.3, 0
Bottom Fishing Bucket
The Bottom Fishing Bucket is where I made the most changes. I added that the funds must not only have positive 3 month trends, returns, and money inflows, but added that the trends have to beat some percentage of the median trend and inflow and now look for the ones furthest below the ten month moving average. Of the funds that I track, real estate is showing the biggest signs of recovering.
Name, Symbol, MaxDD, APR, Rtn 3 mon, Trend, Flow, SMA10
American Century NT Global Real Estate G, (ANRHX), -22.7, 14.8, 9.6, 5.5, 3.2, -6.1
Cohen & Steers Realty Shares Inc L, (CSRSX), -23.7, 13.6, 8.6, 4.9, 5.1, -6.5
Vanguard Real Estate Index ETF, (VNQ), -25, 10.8, 9.2, 5.1, 5.6, -7.8
BlackRock iShares US Real Estate ETF, (IYR), -25.6, 10.2, 8, 4.5, 12, -8.2
Virtus Duff & Phelps Global Real Estate Secur, (VGISX), -25.7, 13.3, 13.4, 6.9, 1.5, -7.9
Have a great weekend.

Here's the updated Asset Allocation Quilt:

updating-my-favorite-performance-chart-for-2020

near the 30% low end of the 30-50% category
"near" is good. It allows for fuzziness and the possibility of bouncing around the figure in a way that "on" 30% and "holding" 30% don't.
holds 30% equity
sitting on the lowest edge of 30-50% category
The iShares AOK website shows the benchmark index is S&P Target Risk Conservative Index. This Index construction shows a 30% equity allocation (2020 prospectus p. S-2)
Quoting from that section of the prospectus:

As of July 31, 2020, the Underlying Index included a fixed allocation of 30% of its assets in Underlying Funds that invest primarily in equity securities and 70% of its assets in Underlying Funds that invest primarily in bonds. As of July 31, 2020, the Fund invested approximately 32.27% of its assets in Underlying Funds that invest primarily in equity securities, 66.98% of its assets in Underlying Funds that invest primarily in bonds and the remainder of its assets in Underlying Funds that invest primarily in money market instruments.

Actually that isn't quite correct with respect to the index holdings. The Underlying Index did not have a fixed allocation of 30% of its assets in ... equity securities as of July 31, 2020
As with anything else, if you want an authoritative definition, go to the source. According to S&P, the index had a 30% allocation in equities as of April 30, 2020. It rebalances only semiannually, at the end of April and at the end of October.
Equities tend to outperform bonds. So between semi-annual rebalancing dates, statistically equities will be above the target allocation (and bonds below) on more dates than the opposite. Of course that wasn't true during the GFC, hence the low equity numbers for 2009-2010. Since then (a lot more years), equities have outperformed.
Regarding the annual statements - it would help if you would provide links to validate your figures. As it turns out, your "equity" figures in the early years are off because you didn't count real estate securities. For example, in the 2009 annual statement, instead of looking at the Management's Discussions section (p. 3) you could look at the actual details of the holdings in the Schedule of Investments for the fund (p. 16).
That shows iShares Cohen & Steers Realty Major Index Fund grouped under Domestic Equity (17.86%). Add in the International Equity holdings (5.81%), and one gets 24% equity. Still a far cry from 30%, but enough to illustrate why all figures are subject to verification.
(M* also considers real estate to be equity; it says that VGSIX is virtually 100% U.S. equity.)
Look at 2018. While M* may say that only 28% of the fund was in equity that year, the SEC filings tell a different story. The 2018 Annual Report says that equities amounted to 30% of the fund as of July 31. And the Semiannual Report says that equities came to 32% of the fund.
As I've explained above, the first year or so of this fund are outliers because bonds outperformed the equity market. (Also the fund was tinkering with its allocations as evidenced by the fact that it invested in real estate back then.) Likewise, you have implicitly labeled these years as outliers. Whether it's because they're not "near" 30% equity or they're not "on" the 30% edge, they're outside of your normal historical range.
Finally, as to the point that funds that bop around a boundary between categories could show up in a different category from what you're expecting: sure, I explained that in my first response. That goes for global vs. domestic, value vs. blend, etc. One can even use this to one's advantage as I illustrated in another thread. In looking for value funds near the value/blend boundary, one might search for value funds with a current blend portfolio style and for blend funds with a current value portfolio style. This doesn't catch all funds, but it's a good start.

I'm glad no MFOer paid attention to what I wrote about Distillate Capital ETFs because the ask prices are not being inflated by purchases of the big machers who post here. I have a couple of toes in the domestic version.

M* Historical stock style for AOK shows:
2020 30% equity allocation
2019 30%
2018 27%
2017 28%
2016 29%
More samples:
2015 31% Form N-CSR p.7 SEC filing
2013 30% Form N-CSR p.4
2010 22% Form N-CSR p.3
2009 21% Form N-CSR p.3
AOK clearly sits historically near the 30% low end of the 30-50% category.
The iShares AOK website shows the benchmark index is S&P Target Risk Conservative Index. This Index construction shows a 30% equity allocation (2020 prospectus p. S-2). M* places it in the 30-50% category. Takeaway: keep your eye out for funds historically near the category weighting limits as it might still be within your risk tolerance and more importantly possibly could provide good performance metrics you are seeking.

For those with an interest....Grantham's "epic bubble" market call and current investment suggestions...

The long, long bull market since 2009 has finally matured into a fully-fledged epic bubble. Featuring extreme overvaluation, explosive price increases, frenzied issuance, and hysterically speculative investor behavior, I believe this event will be recorded as one of the great bubbles of financial history, right along with the South Sea bubble, 1929, and 2000.
Today the P/E ratio of the market is in the top few percent of the historical range and the economy is in the worst few percent. This is completely without precedent and may even be a better measure of speculative intensity than any SPAC.
investors are relying on accommodative monetary conditions and zero real rates extrapolated indefinitely.
This has in theory a similar effect to assuming peak economic performance forever: it can be used to justify much lower yields on all assets and therefore correspondingly higher asset prices. But neither perfect economic conditions nor perfect financial conditions can last forever, and there’s the rub.
I expect once again for my bubble call to meet my modest definition of success: at some future date, whenever that may be, it will have paid for you to have ducked from midsummer of 2020. But few professional or individual investors will have been able to have ducked.....we believe it is in the overlap of these two ideas, Value and Emerging, that your relative bets should go, along with the greatest avoidance of U.S. Growth stocks that your career and business risk will allow.

https://gmo.com/americas/research-library/waiting-for-the-last-dance/

Per their crystal ball....

We expect a nearly complete recovery in crude demand as the pandemic subsides in 2021.
Energy remains the most undervalued sector, trading at a 22% discount compared with a 6% premium for the overall market.
higher prices are necessary. And if firms are unwilling to invest enough capital at midcycle prices ($55/bbl West Texas Intermediate, $60 Brent), we wouldn't rule out prices temporarily rising even higher.

https://morningstar.com/articles/1016129/energy-remains-the-most-undervalued-sector

Nah, I just looked for $600 in the text (it's the 8th one counting from the top).
The text itself reads: "there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by subtitle A [income tax] for the first taxable year beginning in 2020" and goes on to say $600/eligible individual and $600/qualifying child.
To give credit where it is due, I got the link last week from JoeTaxpayer in misc.taxes.moderated. He asked about the timing. There was one response, from Alan. It was similar to what I posted above. Following Reagan's advice (trust but verify) I looked at the legislation myself.

No where to run to, nowhere to hide, eh?
Risk.....
One could write a small book about the state of investments today. Money market funds are backwards/dead monies, except for short term parking, pending other choices. Too many equity sectors are hot and interest rates/yields have trended up in recent months.
We don't re-balance our portfolio based upon end of year or other time frames. The markets help establish any changes.
We're at 45% equity and 55% bonds at this time. Yes, we could have found investment glory changing some investments at the being of April, 2020. But, we stayed firm throughout the year. Everyone has there own assessment of risk. There are 1,000's of combo portfolios among those at this forum. I won't agree with some of the choices, as well as many would not agree with our choices. Tis the nature of the investment beast.
Cheap money and those investing on margin..... I don't have any data about how much hot money is in the market place; using margin or otherwise. Reportedly, there are about 13 million Robinhood accounts in the U.S. I don't know how much money these accounts are managing. More to this point is that I will presume much of this money is narrowly targeted to narrow sectors or stocks within those sectors. Twitter feeds have likely pushed a lot of this money in the past year. I don't imagine many of these folks are reading the WSJ or similar publications.
Lastly, is that we generally have little concern for investing choices based upon elections or politicians. The machinations of Congress and the government in general move along with their compromises and decisions. Many of these actions have slow moving parts that may cause some changes in a longer term investing environments.
However, some of our investment considerations going forward as of January 4 find a new set of circumstances that are beyond the normal, at this time; and just when we thought that Covid was the primary game changer. The Georgia Senate election and what FORM of government will find it's place in the next two weeks weighs upon investments changes at this time.
Wishing all of you well; for a variety of reasons.
Catch