Thank you for all your diligent work on downside protection. Look like we will revisit March 2020 again in coming months as the pandemic rages on.

Both of you are mincing words to avoid my point and to support your brethren. The fact is that Mark DIRECTLY blamed Florida's "moronic" governor for the death of his friends in Florida who were healthcare workers. He wrote: "I have lost friends in FL because of the moronic way the governor and money grubbing crowd in that state have chosen to deal with Covid." We can debate how bad California has done on Covid in light of its policies (even "morons" know that if you lock everything down you will reduce covid) but the FACT is that many healthcare workers in California still died even with "smart" policy. It's simply not a fair debate if you ignore the social impact of lockdowns. That's where reasonable people can disagree and it is a fair point of debate. Mark also said on the heels of MSF's post softening Cuomo's blame for the nursing home fiasco that Cuomo, unlike DeSantis "did as the scientific and medical advisors suggested." This is also untrue. Cuomo himself did not defend his decision based on science. He essentially though falsely said he followed Trump's CDC guidance (according to PolitiFact https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jun/13/andrew-cuomo/new-yorks-nursing-home-policy-was-not-line-cdc/) Just as clearly, Cuomo did not follow the "science." The day after Cuomo issued his directive the AMDA responded that it was "over-reaching, not consistent with science, unenforceable, and beyond all, not in the least consistent with patient safety principles." https://paltc.org/sites/default/files/Statement on the March 25 NYSDOH Advisory.pdf

My impression is that he is rather inflexible in his bond investing. Never quite understand his love of thinly traded junk bonds. Also the large asset base does not help either. Drawdown in 2008 and spring 2020 showed the downside risk.

Read: "130,000 – 210,000 AVOIDABLE COVID-19 DEATHS – AND COUNTING – IN THE U.S.”
https://ncdp.columbia.edu/custom-content/uploads/2020/10/Avoidable-COVID-19-Deaths-US-NCDP.pdf

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/773757/000119312520311432/d33073d497.htm
Columbia Multi-Asset Income Fund
Columbia Pacific/Asia Fund
497 1 d33073d497.htm COLUMBIA FUNDS SERIES TRUST I
Supplement dated December 7, 2020
to the Prospectuses, Summary Prospectuses and Statement of Additional Information (SAI), each as supplemented (as applicable), of the following Funds (each a Fund and together the Funds):
Fund Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and SAI Dated
Columbia Funds Series Trust I
Columbia Multi-Asset Income Fund----Prospectus and Summary Prospectus: 9/1/2020; SAI: 12/1/2020
Columbia Pacific/Asia Fund-----------Prospectus and Summary Prospectus: 8/1/2020; SAI: 12/1/2020
The Board of Trustees of the Funds has approved a Plan of Liquidation and Termination (the Plan) pursuant to which the Funds will be liquidated and terminated.
Effective at the open of business on January 11, 2021, the Funds will no longer be open to new investors. Shareholders who opened and funded an account with the Funds as of the open of business on this date (including accounts once funded that subsequently reached a zero balance) may continue to make additional purchases of Fund shares, including purchases by an existing retirement plan that has a plan-level or omnibus account with the Transfer Agent or other omnibus accounts relating to new or existing participants seeking to invest in the Funds. Effective January 11, 2021, any applicable contingent deferred sales charges will be waived on redemptions and exchanges out of the Funds.
Under the terms of the Plan, it is anticipated that the Funds will be liquidated on or about February 5, 2021 (the Liquidation Date) at which time the Funds' shareholders will receive a liquidating distribution in an amount equal to the net asset value of their Fund shares. For federal income tax purposes, the liquidation of the Funds will be treated as a redemption of Fund shares and may cause shareholders to recognize a gain or loss and pay taxes if the liquidated shares are held in a taxable account. You should consult with your own tax advisor about the particular tax consequences to you of the Funds' liquidation. Shareholders of the Funds may redeem their investments in the Funds or exchange their Fund shares for shares of another Columbia Fund at any time prior to the Liquidation Date (as described in the next paragraph). If the Fund has not received your redemption request or other instructions prior to the Liquidation Date, your shares will be automatically liquidated on the Liquidation Date.
As of the close of business on the business day preceding the Liquidation Date, the Funds will no longer accept any orders for the purchase of or exchange for shares of the Funds. Orders for the purchase of or exchange for shares of the Funds may, in the Funds' discretion, be rejected prior to the Liquidation Date, including for operational reasons relating to the anticipated liquidation of the Fund.
During the period prior to the Liquidation Date, the Funds' investment manager, Columbia Management Investment Advisers, LLC (the Investment Manager), may depart from the Fund’s stated investment objectives and strategies to reduce the amount of portfolio securities and hold more cash or cash equivalents to liquidate the Funds' assets in a manner that the Investment Manager believes to be in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders. Shareholders remaining in the Funds may bear increased transaction fees incurred in connection with the disposition of the Funds' portfolio holdings. Any such transaction costs would reduce any distributable net capital gains.
Shareholders who hold their Fund shares through a retirement plan or account (such as a 401(k) plan or individual retirement account) and who receive a distribution of liquidation proceeds will be subject to taxes and, if under 59½ years of age, applicable early withdrawal penalties, unless the distribution proceeds are reinvested as a rollover in an eligible retirement plan or account within 60 days after the proceeds are received.
The Funds will seek to pay out all distributable net income and net capital gains prior to the Liquidation Date. Shareholders will receive liquidation proceeds as soon as practicable after the Liquidation Date.
Shareholders should retain this Supplement for future reference.

"Sorry you lost friends, but in Florida that was very likely a result of choices THEY made, unlike Cuomo who gave nursing home residents none."
Yes, they decided to become doctors and nurses. So stupid.

70% of COVID related deaths in CT occurred in nursing homes...Our elderly parents...and workers (more often low wage nursing home workers).
https://ctpost.com/news/coronavirus/article/Data-70-of-CT-coronavirus-linked-deaths-have-15271386.php
On Cuomo's executive orders:

Cuomo, who received praise for his early and high-profile response to the pandemic, has come under fire from state Senate Republicans, industry advocates and others for his administration’s handling of the outbreak at nursing homes and adult care facilities.
“Obviously the way it rolled out here was pretty disastrous for people — for residents and their families. … This hit us, perhaps, harder than it should have,” Richard J. Mollot, executive director of the Long Term Care Community Coalition, told POLITICO. “Some of this was avoidable, preventable — some of it still is if we take the appropriate actions.”

https://politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2020/05/06/cuomo-under-fire-for-response-to-covid-19-at-nursing-homes-1282821

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/917469/000168386320014977/f7564d1.htm
LOOMIS SAYLES FUNDS
LOOMIS SAYLES BOND FUND
LOOMIS SAYLES FIXED INCOME FUND
LOOMIS SAYLES INSTITUTIONAL HIGH INCOME FUND
LOOMIS SAYLES INVESTMENT GRADE FIXED INCOME FUND
(each a "Fund" and together the "Funds")
Supplement dated December 7, 2020 to the Loomis Sayles Funds' Summary Prospectuses, Statutory Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information ("SAI"), each dated February 1, 2020 as may be revised or supplemented from time to time.
Effective March 1, 2021, Daniel J. Fuss will take a significant step back from portfolio management and will no longer serve as a Portfolio Manager of the Funds. This is the latest phase of the Loomis Sayles portfolio management team's succession plan, which has been in place for more than 20 years.
Accordingly, effective March 1, 2021, all references to Mr. Fuss as a Portfolio Manager of the Funds in the Summary Prospectuses, Statutory Prospectus and SAI are hereby deleted.
Matthew J. Eagan, Brian P. Kennedy and Elaine M. Stokes will remain as Portfolio Managers of the Loomis Sayles Bond Fund, Loomis Sayles Fixed Income Fund and Loomis Sayles Investment Grade Fixed Income Fund.
Matthew J. Eagan and Elaine M. Stokes will remain as Portfolio Managers of the Loomis Sayles Institutional High Income Fund.
Change to Fiscal Year End of Loomis Sayles Bond Fund and Loomis Sayles Investment Grade Fixed Income Fund
The Board of Trustees of Loomis Sayles Funds I has approved a change to the fiscal year end of Loomis Sayles Bond Fund and Loomis Sayles Investment Grade Fixed Income Fund from September 30th to December 31st. The implementation of the change to the fiscal year end and the expected disposition and realignment of certain foreign currency-denominated positions over the next few weeks are likely to result in additional trading costs, increased realized capital losses and currency losses from the sales of portfolio securities, and increased audit, printing and mailing expenses for the Funds in the short term. Further, these changes are expected to reduce the future impact of currency exchange losses on taxable monthly distributions and reduce the amount of currency-related losses available to offset future taxable ordinary income for Loomis Sayles Bond Fund and Loomis Sayles Investment Grade Fixed Income Fund shareholders. Increased monthly income distributions going forward may result in an increased tax liability for shareholders who are subject to state and federal income taxes on their income distributions from the Funds.
LOOMIS SAYLES HIGH INCOME OPPORTUNITIES FUND
Supplement dated December 7, 2020 to the Summary Prospectus, Statutory Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information ("SAI") of the Loomis Sayles High Income Opportunities Fund (the "Fund"), each dated February 1, 2020 as may be revised or supplemented from time to time.
Effective March 1, 2021, Daniel J. Fuss will take a significant step back from portfolio management and will no longer serve as a Portfolio Manager of the Fund. This is the latest phase of the Loomis Sayles portfolio management team's succession plan, which has been in place for more than 20 years. Accordingly, effective March 1, 2021, all references to Mr. Fuss as a Portfolio Manager of the Fund in the Summary Prospectus, Statutory Prospectus and SAI are hereby deleted.
Matthew J. Eagan, Brian P. Kennedy, Elaine M. Stokes and Todd P. Vandam will remain as Portfolio Managers of the Fund.

Right, @JoJo26. If it’s not « cherchez la femme, » it must be the pursuit of ill-gotten gains.

@wxman123 - who said "I don't have any great ideas on how we could have dealt with Covid any better." So you think that denying that it even existed, calling it names (China virus), calling it a hoax and stating that it would just magically disappear was the way to go huh? How has that worked out so far?
You also said "How many lives were saved by shutting hair salons and gyms?" How would you even quantify this since the intent was to stop the spread of the virus between folks who don't frequently share their life's activities outside these venues. The same goes for wearing of the masks. I have lost friends in FL because of the moronic way the governor and money grubbing crowd in that state have chosen to deal with Covid. Unlike you I consider their choices as idiocy.
Edited Sunday morning to add:
Trump’s Operation Warp Speed promised a flood of covid vaccines. Instead, states are expecting a trickle.
So maybe just a 10th as brilliant.

So what approach worked well (outside of a few islands)? Gun to your head: had Hilary or Biden been in office do you think we'd fall more on the New Zealand side of the ledger or closer to the UK, France, Spain? Same question on the vaccine, do you think Hilary or Biden would have done better? Was Cuomo genius as DeSantis was "moronic"? Now, after one of the fastest vaccines in history is developed the liberal media is criticizing the speed with which it will get distributed, and before it even happens? Sorry you lost friends, but in Florida that was very likely a result of choices THEY made, unlike Cuomo who gave nursing home residents none.

All ratings have been updated on MFO Premium site, including MultiSearch, Great Owls, Fund Alarm (Three Alarm and Honor Roll), Averages, Dashboard of Profiled Funds, Portfolios, Quick Search, and Fund Family Scorecard. The site now includes several analysis tools, including Correlation, Rolling Averages, Trend, Ferguson Metrics, Calendar Year and Period Performance.
November marked the second time this year that the S&P 500 posted a greater than 10% return. The other month was April, the beginning of the current bull market … 8 months ago … or was that 80 years ago?
There are about 2,400 mutual funds and ETFs in the US Equity category (aka SubType). Their average 8-month return is nearly 50% and 24 of these funds have more than doubled, as described here.

> I tried VBILX, for YTD old M* chart was close at 9.05, new chart 8.77%, real number 9.06
Real number? According to whom? Morningstar? That's a secondary source.
>Chuck says VBILV 9.04 YTD I say I can live with .04, .05, or .06 !
Consider chucking Chuck.
That's a tertiary source: "Except as noted below, all data provided by Morningstar, Inc."
(Footnote on Chuck's page for VBILX)
Primary source, Vanguard: 9.05% YTD (Recent investment returns table, YTD as of 12/4/20 column)
https://investor.vanguard.com/mutual-funds/profile/performance/vbilx
Of course Vanguard is correct. You can prove it yourself.
Start with 100 shares purchased on 12/31/2019. Calculate the dollar amount of the divs paid each month and how many shares that buys based on the end of month reinvestment price. (Vanguard provides a table with all this data here.) Add those shares, rinse and repeat. After 11 months (divs for Jan-Nov), you'll have 102.107 shares.
Add to the current (12/4/20) value of those shares the accrued divs for four days. One can approximate that by taking: 4/30 x Nov div/share x 102.107 shares = 28¢
The increase in value (from $1181.00 to $1287.85) , is 9.05% of the original value.

Per share	Record/		Reinv	Bought	Total 	Share		Accrued
dividend	reinvest 	price	Shares	Shares	Value		Divs
(Now)		$12.61 			$1,287.57 	$0.284
$0.020830	11/30/2020	$12.66 	0.168	102.107		
$0.021910	10/30/2020	$12.55 	0.178	101.939		
$0.021760	9/30/2020	$12.65 	0.175	101.761		
$0.022890	8/31/2020	$12.66 	0.183	101.586		
$0.023520	7/31/2020	$12.75 	0.187	101.403		
$0.023540	6/30/2020	$12.59 	0.189	101.216		
$0.024980	5/29/2020	$12.47 	0.202	101.027		
$0.024320	4/30/2020	$12.34 	0.198	100.825		
$0.025300	3/31/2020	$12.10 	0.210	100.627		
$0.024390	2/28/2020	$12.30 	0.199	100.417		
$0.026390	1/31/2020	$12.09 	0.218	100.218		
$0.026630	12/31/2019	$11.81 	100.000	100.000	$1,181.00 	
(Share value + accrued divs - original purchase) / original purchase = 9.05%	

BTW, the new chart shows 9.0584% from 12/31/19 to 12/4/20. Take a closer look.

Chinese scientists claim to have built a quantum computer that is able to perform certain computations nearly 100 trillion times faster than the world’s most advanced supercomputer, representing the first milestone in the country’s efforts to develop the technology.

Getting Faster

@wxman123 - who said "I don't have any great ideas on how we could have dealt with Covid any better." So you think that denying that it even existed, calling it names (China virus), calling it a hoax and stating that it would just magically disappear was the way to go huh? How has that worked out so far?
You also said "How many lives were saved by shutting hair salons and gyms?" How would you even quantify this since the intent was to stop the spread of the virus between folks who don't frequently share their life's activities outside these venues. The same goes for wearing of the masks. I have lost friends in FL because of the moronic way the governor and money grubbing crowd in that state have chosen to deal with Covid. Unlike you I consider their choices as idiocy.
Edited Sunday morning to add:
Trump’s Operation Warp Speed promised a flood of covid vaccines. Instead, states are expecting a trickle.
So maybe just a 10th as brilliant.

RConnor delves a bit:
https://humbledollar.com/2020/11/rate-debate/
cape ratio this weekend just under 34

That's a great list of most of the important numbers.
One class of figures it left out is charitable contributions. For 2020 only, if you make contributions in cash to a public charity excluding DAFs, you can contribute up to 100% AGI. This drops back down to 60% in 2021. The limit of appreciated property (including fund shares) to charities is 30% of AGI. Then there are all sorts of combo limits. When giving to public charities, any unused deduction can be carried forward for five years.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/berniekent/2020/04/03/giving-more-than-60-of-income-to-charity-cares-act-says-deduct-it/?sh=7382a816b34f
There's also the $300 above the line deduction for cash contributions to charities (excluding DAFs).
https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/special-300-tax-deduction-helps-most-people-give-to-charity-this-year-even-if-they-dont-itemize
This appears to be available in future years as well: "Under new Sec. 62(a)(22), for tax years beginning in 2020, eligible individuals may deduct up to $300 in qualified charitable contributions made to qualified charitable organizations."
https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/issues/2020/sep/cares-act-charitable-deduction-for-nonitemizers.html
Finally, let's not forget one of the most important (and underfunded) numbers:
(800) TAX-1040

dtconroe.
I'm OK with VCFIX but the meltdown of over 18% was too much, even PIMIX was down less than that around 11%. I don't put a lot of faith in Schwab bond selections. I think Fidelity is better and free to all investors even if you are not a client, right now their selected Multi list(link) is as follows:PTIAX, HSNAX, BMSAX, DINAX, JHFIX (PONAX/PIMIX used to be on this list for years). Fidelity always promote their funds as selected but I disregard it until I verify their superiority and in most cases I can find better choices.
I think funds like TSIIX,PTIAX are more of a hold than VCFIX.
As usual, I don't trust any fund/managers, volatility can show up any time and I hope not to be there.
wxman, GIBLX is still doing well in its category at one month=2.2% and 3 months=1.4% This is still in the top 15% in its M* category. For most investors who are looking for a ballast, performance and longer term hold, it's a great fund.
For a much smaller group of investors like me, who rely more on bonds for higher performance and use momentum successfully, I hardly ever use Core and Core Plus funds. I would not recommend this for most investors.
Junkster, I stayed away from IOFIX for several months after the crash, I made most of my money after that with HY munis. I wanted to see more calm and was glad the Fed actions worked. I sure missed a lot of performance from the bottom but I also missed all the meltdown in March of 2020 (documented in this thread). Every Saturday I write down my portfolio performance for the last week and YTD. I can't complain too much when I'm up 18% in 2020, only one week loss at -0.3%, 5 weeks at zero and the rest are all up.

Great work FD, I wish I could say the same for my portfolio...but happy I'm up a bit. Been about 47% cash all this year. On the other hand, you could have stayed in ANBEX (one of your choices) and been up over 17% YTD while you did nothing but sip wine and coffee!

social reminder
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/12/04/stock-market-stimulus-unemployment-figures/

Oakmark has a bond fund in advisor and institutional share classes. No retail as of yet. Here is the December 2020 prospectus.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/872323/000110465920111005/tm2031542-1_485apos.htm

My calculation for peak to trough...VCFIX -19.7% from M* new charts found (here) from 2/25 (10000) to 3/25 (8027.67). Stockchart gives me -19.85% for VCFAX(link)
I agree with you that if you are looking for a securitized bond fund VCFIX is a good one. I actually posted in several sites that I'm selling almost everything at the end of 02/2020 and the rest several days later. I don't feel guilty at all. These sites are just for information and each investor should do their own due diligence but I see your point ;-)

dtconroe.
I'm OK with VCFIX but the meltdown of over 18% was too much, even PIMIX was down less than that around 11%. I don't put a lot of faith in Schwab bond selections. I think Fidelity is better and free to all investors even if you are not a client, right now their selected Multi list(link) is as follows:PTIAX, HSNAX, BMSAX, DINAX, JHFIX (PONAX/PIMIX used to be on this list for years). Fidelity always promote their funds as selected but I disregard it until I verify their superiority and in most cases I can find better choices.
I think funds like TSIIX,PTIAX are more of a hold than VCFIX.
As usual, I don't trust any fund/managers, volatility can show up any time and I hope not to be there.
wxman, GIBLX is still doing well in its category at one month=2.2% and 3 months=1.4% This is still in the top 15% in its M* category. For most investors who are looking for a ballast, performance and longer term hold, it's a great fund.
For a much smaller group of investors like me, who rely more on bonds for higher performance and use momentum successfully, I hardly ever use Core and Core Plus funds. I would not recommend this for most investors.
Junkster, I stayed away from IOFIX for several months after the crash, I made most of my money after that with HY munis. I wanted to see more calm and was glad the Fed actions worked. I sure missed a lot of performance from the bottom but I also missed all the meltdown in March of 2020 (documented in this thread). Every Saturday I write down my portfolio performance for the last week and YTD. I can't complain too much when I'm up 18% in 2020, only one week loss at -0.3%, 5 weeks at zero and the rest are all up.