After tax returns for the Primecap-managed Vanguard funds have been exceptionally disappointing for well over a decade due in part to heavy redemptions.

Funds managed by the Primecap team are best held in tax-advantaged accounts.
It's not uncommon for their funds to have sizable capital gains distributions.
Redemptions may have exacerbated the problem but I haven't looked into this.

Vanguard has never created an ETF share class of an existing actively managed fund. Until a few years ago that would have created disclosure problems (publishing portfolios daily) for the existing funds. Even now, it might find it difficult to shoehorn the newer ETF rules into its patent for ETF/OEF share classes. (Don't know, haven't checked.)
Nor is Vanguard likely to ever clone an OEF into an ETF. That could immediately trigger an outflow from the OEF into the cheaper ETF, at least in tax-sheltered accounts. Vanguard was burned by doing something similar not too long ago - opening a cheaper clone of a TDF to lots of investors by lowering the min for the clone. The resulting shifting of assets by investors created a hefty cap gains tax liability for those investors remaining in the more expensive fund.
The third alternative would be to convert the OEFs into ETFs. If that were such an obvious move, then one would expect most fund companies to have already done this. While some have, the number seems to be more like a trickle than a flood.
IMHO RK is understating VDIGX's performance issues. I agree that when one invests in a particular style of fund and that style by design underperforms, that's not cause for concern.
However ... a quick M* screen of large cap blend funds with "Dividend" in their name (e.g. Rising Dividends, Dividend Growth, etc.) turns up 60 share classes. VDIGX is 60th of 60 for 3 year returns. 97th percentile in 2023, 98th percentile in 2024, and 89th percentile YTD.
OTOH, with Primecap, ISTM that its moderate underperformance (55th percentile over 3 years, 63rd percentile over 5 years) may indeed be attributed to its long term style - investing more in large caps and less in mega caps, and investing 10-20% internationally. If one is looking for a pure US large/mega fund, this isn't it and never has been.
Finally, there's a difference between moving away from Vanguard's platform and Vanguard's funds. It may be possible to negotiate a waiver of transaction fees for Vanguard funds on another platform. I was able to do that with Schwab when I brought my (somewhat sizeable) Vanguard holdings there. Though it is very difficult to buy additional Admiral shares of actively managed Vanguard funds on non-Vanguard platforms.

CFPB is an oddball agency that has a complicated history. It's funding came out of the Federal Reserve, but the Fed, Fed Chair or FOMC didn't have much say in the operations of CFPB.
As CFPB tackled consumer finance issues, it wasn't a popular agency with banks or lenders.
Then, the way it was originally constituted, it's actions should be views differently for 2011-2020 and after 2020.
As initially constituted, CFPB had funding outside of the federal budget (i.e. from Federal Reserve operations) and the CFPB Director(s) couldn't be fired/replaced by the President without cause (although President nominated and Senate confirmed). After various court challenges, Supreme ruled in 06/2020 that CFPB funding was constitutional, but the CFPB Director served at the will of the President (so, he/she could be replaced without providing any reasons).
So, CFPB actions during 2011-20 period were different when it's Director felt truly "independent", but after 2020, its actions were a bit different due to service-at-Presidential-will. So, in the post-2020 period, it has been a semi-independent agency.

I'm not a fan of tactical allocation funds either.
A fund that adjusts its asset allocation based on varying market conditions sounds great in theory.
However, many tactical allocation funds fail to deliver good long-term performance
on an absolute or risk-adjusted basis.
Coincidentally, fees are also high as was previously mentioned.
@hank,
The first graph in the article compares annual returns for the Tactical Allocation
and Moderate Allocation categories with a 60/40 portfolio from 2020 - 2024.
Is this the data you were seeking?

And here's more on what was thought to be priced in from The Barron's Daily (BOLD added)
Trump Tariffs Cause Stock Market Chaos. Why Wall Street Didn’t Act on Warnings and 5 Other Things to Know Today.

President Donald Trump looks set to deliver on his promise and impose hefty tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China, with Europe next in his sights. Amid all the turbulence that’s causing in financial markets, one question is obvious—why is this such a surprise?
After all, this is what Trump promised to do since he started his campaign to retake the White House. He reiterated it after he was elected in November. He even gave specific numbers and dates for a start last week.
But traders were still skeptical that anything material would come of it. Stocks rose markedly in January, extending impressive gains since Trump’s victory in November on optimism that deregulation and tax cuts would bolster corporate earnings.
The reason investors dismissed the rather obvious signs was because the tariffs don’t seem to make sense. Maybe they would work as a negotiating technique to extract concessions on other things, but from an economic perspective it’s hard to see what tariffs accomplish—other than rapidly increasing prices for fuel and other goods that will hamper economic growth.
Furthermore, the actual announcement was on the extreme end of the spectrum of what was possible. George Saravelos, a strategist at Deutsche Bank, noted that the tariffs are three times larger than had been priced into the market—and five times as big as the cumulative action Trump took in his first term.
To be sure, Trump may yet de-escalate and walk back the levies—or be forced to do so by the courts or Congress. Given the market’s early losses Monday, it would still be a huge surprise if the tariffs lasted a long time—it certainly seems unlikely they will be in place for four years.
One thing is clear. Chaos and confusion will remain a feature of Trump’s policies.

+1.
Do not do anything illegal, even if intentions are noble, especially if other human beings depend on you.

Stock market is Trump's barometer of success. As investors we can vote with our dollars. I, for one, am willing to forego short term stock market gains and selling equities (tax deferred only) into the tariffs.

@Balu I sold off my Canadian pipelines that cross into the US but would happily buy them back again at some point. I kept my railroads, b/c I have huge gains on them and don't need the tax hit.
Otherwise not adjusting my portfolio in any way.

NVDA had 8 of the top 10 market cap losses in one day.
NVDA also had 5 of the top 10 market cap gains in one day.
Skip to the 4:37 mark for NVDA info/chart.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0DR2TnvIIk

Maybe the bigger question should be is why are so many Americans hooked on this crap anyway?
2019 Fentanyl Sources
Q: Where is most fentanyl seized?
A: According to a 2023 report from the Department of Homeland Security, most fentanyl is primarily found and seized from vehicles driven by US citizens at official ports of entry.

what an imbecile.
unless china tariffs are multiples more, this only discourages economic moves to closer (geographically and defense) allies. it effectively punishes those that already put in huge upfront capital to leave china for anyplace else.
i guess we are in for more MAGA junk made in china by agent orange.

Businesses, shoppers brace for higher prices if tariffs on Mexico and Canada imports start Saturday
Following are edited excerpts from a current NPR report:

Businesses and shoppers in the U.S. are bracing for higher prices on everything from gasoline to guacamole, as President Trump renews his threat to impose steep tariffs this weekend on imports from two of the country's biggest trading partners.
Trump told reporters at the White House Thursday that he intends to follow through with his threat to slap a 25% tax on imports from Canada and Mexico starting Saturday, in response to what he called a flow of immigrants and drugs across the country's northern and southern borders.
General Motors told financial analysts on Tuesday that it could shift some pickup truck production out of Mexico and Canada if tariffs are imposed. But the automaker is reluctant to act while the trade landscape is still uncertain.
"We are prepared to mitigate near-term impacts," said CEO Mary Barra. "What we won't do is spend [a] large amount of capital without clarity." The auto industry in North America is highly integrated, relying on manufacturing in all three countries.
Mexico is a leading producer of flat-screen TVs.
Canada is also a major supplier of crude oil to U.S. refineries, especially in the Midwest. "Increasing expenses by 25% is going to lead to higher costs at the pump for U.S. consumers and higher input costs for businesses around the country," said Matthew Martdin of Oxford Economics.
Mexico and Canada would likely respond to any tariffs by imposing taxes of their own on U.S. exports.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1593547/000139834425001451/fp0092095-2_497.htm
497 1 fp0092095-2_497.htm
THE ADVISORS’ INNER CIRCLE FUND III
(the “Trust”)
Mesirow Enhanced Core Plus Fund
(the “Fund”)
Supplement dated January 30, 2025 to the Fund’s Prospectus (the “Prospectus”) and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”), each dated January 28, 2025
This supplement provides new and additional information beyond that contained in the Prospectus and SAI, and should be read in conjunction with the Prospectus and SAI.
The Board of Trustees of the Trust, at the recommendation of Mesirow Financial Investment Management, Inc. (the “Adviser”), the investment adviser of the Fund, has approved a plan of liquidation providing for the liquidation of the Fund’s assets and the distribution of the net proceeds pro rata to the Fund’s shareholders. In connection therewith, the Fund is closed to investments from new and existing shareholders effective immediately. The Fund is expected to cease operations and liquidate on or about March 3, 2025 (the “Liquidation Date”). The Liquidation Date may be changed without notice at the discretion of the Trust’s officers.
Prior to the Liquidation Date, shareholders may redeem (sell) their shares in the manner described in the “Purchasing, Selling and Exchanging Fund Shares – How to Sell Your Fund Shares” section of the Prospectus. For those Fund shareholders that do not redeem (sell) their shares prior to the Liquidation Date, the Fund will distribute to each such shareholder, on or promptly after the Liquidation Date, a liquidating cash distribution equal in value to the shareholder’s interest in the net assets of the Fund as of the Liquidation Date.
In anticipation of the liquidation of the Fund, the Adviser may manage the Fund in a manner intended to facilitate the Fund’s orderly liquidation, such as by holding cash or making investments in other highly liquid assets. As a result, during this time, all or a portion of the Fund may not be invested in a manner consistent with its stated investment strategies, which may prevent the Fund from achieving its investment objective.
The liquidation distribution amount will include any accrued income and capital gains, will be treated as a payment in exchange for shares and will generally be a taxable event for shareholders investing through taxable accounts. You should consult your personal tax advisor concerning your particular tax situation. Shareholders remaining in the Fund on the Liquidation Date will not be charged any transaction fees by the Fund. However, the net asset value of the Fund on the Liquidation Date will reflect costs of liquidating the Fund. Shareholders will receive liquidation proceeds as soon as practicable after the Liquidation Date.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.
MES-SK-007-0200

There's more to that plane landing business and tariff fight than meets the eye. For example I didn't know that "... Colombia and the U.S. had an existing agreement for deportations under former president Joe Biden, and it accepted 475 deportation flights from 2020 to 2024, accepting 124 flights in 2024 alone."
Heather Cox Richardson - Letters From an American, January 27, 2025. Link

Will DeepSeek be the pin to the bubble?
Stay tuned.

YBB,
Necessity is the mother of invention. US companies have lost their minds with unlimited access to capital and Nvidia chips. So, they did not have to be disciplined. A $500B joke!
Corporate America is always trying to out grift American politicians. Both these cast of characters have conditioned us not to question their motives until conditions become extreme.
Jensen Haung knew today is coming, based on his behavior over the past few weeks. But all my cousins in Tech keep drinking the cool aid.
Today is too soon for me to buy any American company.

I am often reminded of the guy that built the Gossamer Albatross. I saw him on the speaking circuit back in 1979. IIRC, he asked Dupont why they gave him 200K to build his human-powered airplane. He said they told him that it would cost them 10 million to do the same thing.

Will DeepSeek be the pin to the bubble?
Stay tuned.

YBB,
Necessity is the mother of invention. US companies have lost their minds with unlimited access to capital and Nvidia chips. So, they did not have to be disciplined. A $500B joke!
Corporate America is always trying to out grift American politicians. Both these cast of characters have conditioned us not to question their motives until conditions become extreme.
Jensen Haung knew today is coming, based on his behavior over the past few weeks. But all my cousins in Tech keep drinking the cool aid.
Today is too soon for me to buy any American company.

Thanks. I am familiar with direct indexing, and in fact have spoken with Fidelity about it. (New rep assigned to us; I figured I'd let him go through Fidelity's various wealth management product permutations with us.)
The Barron's piece you linked to requires a subscription to read (I read Barron's online through my library). However, here's another article that Allan Roth wrote that for ETF.com (via Yahoo), supporting what I might have also said:
- For limited purposes (such as tax loss harvesting, minor portfolio customizations) direct indexing may provide benefits that exceed their higher cost
- For general index investing, net long term benefits are slim to none
On the first point, direct indexing is oriented toward mechanical tax loss harvesting. Customization is limited (you can exclude a small number of stocks from your "index"). Of note is that Fidelity offers most of its direct indexing strategies only in taxable accounts (i.e. aside from the tax loss harvesting, these vehicles are not competitive).
https://digital.fidelity.com/prgw/digital/msw/overview/a
Adding more flexibility comes at much higher min asset levels and with higher fees. These more flexible (active) accounts are not targeted at investors in the 0% cap gains bracket.
More generally, Allan Roth wrote:

About Those Taxes ...
But is direct indexing better than ETFs? Generally they are not, in my view, at least not compared to the best ETFs.
...
Typically after a few years, the tax benefit is minimal, and all that is left are fees and complexities. The 1099 tax form on my little $5,000 direct indexing experiment is 86 pages!

 https://finance.yahoo.com/news/allan-roth-direct-indexing-better-160000280.html
I'm not one easily spooked by lengthy statements (especially when computers deal with most of this gibberish), but even I have my limits!
Here's M*'s take, which is similar (i.e. minor positive sentiment)
https://mp.morningstar.com/en-us/articles/blt5e360f590235f987/direct-indexing-vs-etfs-myth-busting

Interesting exit strategies from the Fido article linked by @bee when one has high unrealized gains. Link may need subscription.
Option 1: Donate to charity or a donor-advised fund (DAFs have more flexibility)
Option 2: Hold until death (Step-up, but you must die first)
Option 3: Hold until retirement (hoping for lower tax bracket that may not be)
Option 4: In the future, you may be able to convert this SMA to a new lower cost etf (351-Exchange ETFs)

@msf
I wanted to share this article regarding the use of direct indexing investing (author uses a Fidelity product) for the purpose of tax loss harvesting to manage losses and unrealized gains to manage LT capital gains taxes.
articles/direct-indexing-allan-roth

Latest from Bowly (stockcharts.com/articles/tradingplaces/2025/01/whats-the-secret-to-crushing-t-702.html).
Quote

"Don't bet against a secular bull market advance!" We're all trained, or brainwashed, if you will, to believe that the next major stock market top is at hand or just around the corner. It completely immobilizes us when it comes to having belief in the major advance at hand. Give us a bit of selling and we'll quickly point out the likely recession and swift stock market drop ahead. Two weeks ago, reigniting inflation was a major concern and the S&P 500 was 5% off its high. Today, we're in all-time high territory after the ACTUAL inflation data said that inflation is NOT a problem. Or we can just be blindfolded and keep tuning into the circus that is CNBC.
Drown out the noise and all the bearish rhetoric, and instead focus on one of my favorite charts. This is a 100-year monthly chart of the S&P 500:....
The next time you think, "is this the start of the next secular bear market?", I want you to remember one thing. There have been TWO starts to secular bear markets in my entire lifetime - the early 1970s and the turn of the century as the dot com bubble popped. That's it. Just stop trying to call the 3rd one. There have only been 14 cyclical bear markets since 1950, which means that, on average, we see only one of these lesser bear markets every 5-6 years. Since 2018, we've had 3 of them (2018, 2020, 2022). That's waaaaay more than our fair share. Let the bulls do their thing.
If you look back above to the 100-year chart, you'll see that the S&P 500's monthly PPO is accelerating to the upside, telling us that long-term bullish momentum just keeps building. Bear markets don't begin until that monthly PPO moves into negative territory.

Let's play a game. The only way I declare Marks a winner is if 2 things happen in 2025. The SP500 must lose more than 20% + it's down for the year.
If we are in a bubble, it should be an easy test.

I bought a few shares of ProShares UltraPro S&P500 UPRO in 2020. 3X leverage on SP500. Shouldn’t hold for long term, but somehow still a triple today.
2024 64%
2023 69%
2022 -57%
2021 99%
2020 10%