CDs?
Sure for many, never for me because a good trader can do more.
For months now I posted about the following 3 funds from less risky/volatile to more RPHIX,CBLDX,RSIIX/RSIVX.
One year chart shows the results.
https://schrts.co/REtABeZs.
And 2024 would continue to deliver much better results than CDs with low volatility.
And yes, I know, CDs are guaranteed with no volatility but if I can make much more with bond funds and reduce my stock portion by a lot, it suites my needs.
So, goals and style matter.
BTW, this thread is about EM, why discuss CDs or bonds.

Adding to Pressup's comment: The adulation for CDs is turning into lost opportunity cost in hindsight. Not the once in a lifetime proclaimed by some. Take a MFO favorite RSIVX bond fund for example: up +9.3% the past year. 3.4% in the past 3 months. Even the very conservative RPHYX (discussed as a cash alternative) is up 5.7% 1y and 1.6% 3mo.

@MikeM, seems to me that depends on how comfortable you are with where you want to be. Some folks might feel the need to accumulate more. Some folks might be fine with where they are. Everyone has their own mode of travel.
Everyone should check their arithmetic periodically.

Adding to Pressup's comment: The adulation for CDs is turning into lost opportunity cost in hindsight. Not the once in a lifetime proclaimed by some. Take a MFO favorite RSIVX bond fund for example: up +9.3% the past year. 3.4% in the past 3 months. Even the very conservative RPHYX (discussed as a cash alternative) is up 5.7% 1y and 1.6% 3mo.

You are getting close, I'm a trader who may hold several weeks or months.
In 2021 JAAA was the worst.
In 2022, a unique crazy year, CBLDX+JAAA did better than RSIVX
Since 2023, JAAA has the best risk/reward.
But, in the last 1-3 months RSIVX leads.
Approach the above or not using your own style.

I can chime in but my style is different than yours.
CBLDX + RSIVX/RSIIX are good options with lower volatility and both yields are higher than most at 8+% and 9+%.
Usually, risk-adjusted performance is the most important, at least for me. That means performance + risk/volatility.
Just because a fund pays 6,7, or whatever %, doesn't make it a good choice, you want both.
Usually, higher yield = lower-rating bonds. This is why CBLDX+RSIIX are good choices, they have all 3. High income, good performance, excellent volatility. Not many funds have it.
Is it a guarantee that RSIVX would make more money than TUHYX? no, nothing is a guarantee, but there is a good chance it RSIVX would be less volatile.
Some people don't care. Investors have different goals.
Right now I know of 3-4 bond funds with excellent performance and the price hardly goes down in the last several months.

I have a similar question: Why not PAAA, or ICLO, or CLOI, or other ETFs which for the time being are very steady and grow faster than FCNVX? A possible answer is that JAAA was a bit volatile in March 2023, so it may become volatile again. But volatility of RSIVX and CBLDX is much higher.

thanks all, much food for thought if not grist for the mill. meanwhile, just looking at taxable bond funds, why might you choose them over JAAA? i guess it might have to do with taxes but it makes my head hurt trying to figure that out.

muni funds, yes, of course, but i'm wondering what else might fit the bill, at least to some degree. i hold funds like RSIVX and CBLDX in my IRA but the possible tax consequences make me leery of holding them elsewhere. so far, i've only been able to come up with the CLO-bank-loan etf JAAA, which has a M* 3-year tax-cost ratio of 1.37, along w/ a very appealing standard deviation of under 2. First, what do you all think of that ETF? Second, what do you think of it in a taxable account? And lastly do you see any better alternative with equally low SD?
Returns-wise, it looks steadier even than RSIVX and CBLDX, which ain't no mean feat, even though who knows what the future may bring, etc etc and so forth. https://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?JAAA,RSIVX,CBLDX&n=265&O=011000

Commenting about a few points in the discussion:
RSIIX/COVID: We discussed in our 1Q20 Letter. I refer you to: https://www.riverparkfunds.com/assets/pdfs/rpsthyf/commentary/RiverPark-Cohanzick_1Q20_Shareholder_Letter.pdf
OSTIX: I do not view OSTIX as a competitor but rather complementary. It is the investment community (including this board) that actively compares the two funds. I think folks should consider owning both OSTIX and RSIIX rther than just one of the funds. The underlying portfolio, construction and approach are very different with some but limited overlap in holdings (in name and allocation). Yet, our risk metrics are very similar. I have a great deal of respect for Carl and his team.
RSIIX/RSIVX: When making comparison, please use RSIIX as it is the institutional class that is most alike to others one is reviewing. For MFO participants that are interested in the lower expense institutional class (RSIIX), please contact [email protected] and he can inform you of ways to access via direct platform via US Bank.
2022 Industry Drawdown and COVID Drawdown: Very different scenarios and RSIIX as well as all CrossingBridge products were top in performance in 2022. As for COVID, RSIIX recovery back to high water mark took (if memory serves) around 2 mos longer than High Yield Index and others, but the continued upward return lasted longer (more sustained).
RiverPark Short Term High Yield (RPHIX): The mandate is to focus as a cash alternative profile for holding periods of 6 months or longer.
Cash: Nice conversation but way more nuanced than the board in regards to the funds in our family. For instance, a called bond has a 30 day effective maturity regardless of the stated maturity and I believe Morningstar may capture in calculation provided. Other examples such as event driven status also exist and one should read our commentaries to understand. Also, timing makes a difference based on financial market calendar activity and flow of funds. In a very sarcastic voice, I just love it when we get a large inflow between Christmas and New Year.
If you want to have a more detailed conversation one on one or in a group call, happy to schedule.

Thanks @Derf. That helps.
However, I get the sense this goes beyond the simple question in your referenced quotation: (“Does anyone remember why …?”)
Here’s a couple excerpts from Morningstar’s analysis of RSIVX:
“David K. Sherman brings over 13 years of portfolio management experience to the table. It is encouraging to see that the strategies managed by Sherman have outperformed on a risk-adjusted basis, with an average Morningstar Rating of 4.7. Isolating the analysis to the fund at hand, David Sherman has delivered a mixed track record, leading the average category peer but lagging the category benchmark for the past 10-year period ….
“Undergoing some change … Co-founder and co-chief investment officer Mitch Rubin departed the firm in November 2022 on the heels of weak performance across the firm’s equity strategies. Meanwhile, RiverPark’s assets under management has declined 35% since December 2020 as outflows across most of its products have been persistent in recent years.”
-
Since Mr. Sherman ( @davidsherman ) sometimes posts here, I’m assuming @BaluBalu’s question is intended for him. ISTM an informal / mostly anonymous / lightly moderated forum like this may not be the appropriate setting for an extended dialogue with a fund manager. Likely, the reasons the fund did not meet @BaluBalu’s expectations are complex. I suspect they may have already been addressed in the fund’s Annual / Semi-Annual reports from that period. In the absence of such, than it would seem appropriate for past or current clients to contact Mr. Sherman or one of his subordinates directly.
Link to M* https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/rsivx/quote

I found the ? in another thread !
"
BaluBalu
December 2023 Flag
I never owned either.
Does anyone remember why RSIVX lost quite a bit more than OSTIX during the Covid crash? What about RSIVX that prevented it from taking necessary actions to lose less? RSIVX AUM is about 1/10th of OSTIX - so size was not a constraint.

...will do well as we reallocate more from treasury...

Same here @Sven. Been building up an investment in RSIVX the past couple months. RSIVX is NTF at Schwab but has higher exp ratio than RSIIX, which does have a TF. I'll switch and pay the $50 TF one time when I reach my holding goal.

looking at a chart since 1-1-2018 (https://schrts.co/ABHTItFS), you can clearly see that RSIVX is a better risk/reward fund. I don't know what happened in 03/2020 but RSIVX had better volatility in other times. If you look at both since 1-1-2018 using PV(https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&sl=7PR7ukI53msSeMklaEkT2N) OSTIX has lower volatility, I think that 03/2020 was so bad that it affected the LT volatility of RSIVX.
But, for 2018-19, performance is similar but RSIVX has a lower SD.
From 4-1-2020 to 11-30-2023, RSIVX won on performance + SD = Sharpe is almost double, see (https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&sl=3Kn0yyPahzqRMl9wzQRoOf)

I never owned either.
Does anyone remember why RSIVX lost quite a bit more than OSTIX during the Covid crash? What about RSIVX that prevented it from taking necessary actions to lose less? RSIVX AUM is about 1/10th of OSTIX - so size was not a constraint.

@BenWP - Yes, it was David Sherman who proposed the challenge. I was intrigued with following the contest, so bought equal amounts of both funds in April. I’ve been thinking that OSTIX out-performance against RSIVX might be due to its lower ER, as both funds have been consistently positive.

Does anyone remember the announcement in an MFO discussion of an informal contest pitting these two funds against each other? Did David Sherman propose it? As Mr. Smith says in "The Bald Soprano" of Ionesco, "I have an excellent memory, but it's short." As for me, I remember lots of things, just not the ones I need right now.
In any event, the M* chart has OSTIX solidly in the lead so far. I hope I did not misinterpret the data. Help is welcome.

I would think in-flows into MM is good for banks, no? Sounds from this article that money from (short term) bond funds may be going into MM's, which would make me kind of a contrarian since I have been adding to RSIVX as CD's and treasuries mature.

Continuing to add minimum amounts to current positions in OSTIX and RSIVX. Waiting to see tomorrow’s 1-y and 2-y treasury auction on Wednesday. Hesitant to step foot in the secondary market for 2 and 3-y treasuries, though I’d like to lock-in these rates. Missed what appears to have been the peak last month.

Continuing to add to current positions in RSIVX and OSTIX. I look at it as a fixed income “barbell”component to our t-bill ladder.

Since this post has been bumped . . .
Prof. Snowball's thesis in his column:

in every measure of returns, more equity is better. In every measure of risk and of risk-adjusted returns, less equity is better. Several earlier MFO essays on the discreet charm of stock-lite portfolios found the same relationship is true for periods dating back 100 years. Lightening up equity exposure reduces your volatility by a lot more than it reduces your returns, so it always seems like the best move for risk-conscious investors.

And he chose four "Great Owls", which included FAGIX and FPACX as well as OSTIX and RSIVX, as great alternatives to only equities. All four buy more, or less, junk. I chose to run PV against FAGIX because I am not comfortable buying most bond funds whether they're buying junk, or agencies.
If David Giroux wants to buy junk, well, that's why I bought his fund. Let him worry about it. I don't need to pay above average fees to FPA.I can load up on cash myself. YMMV.
In this PV I'm looking at GLFOX versus FAGIX and FPACX. I think of GLOFX as a global version of Electric Company, Waterworks, and the railroads. So, Widows & Orphans take a ride on The Reading . . .
For those that don't follow links, GLOFX has the better standard deviation, Sharpe, and Sortino numbers, a better compound growth rate, lost less money in the worst year of holding, has less correlation to the market, and the lowest beta and highest alpha.

And here is the original W&O versus FPACX. Since July 1993 FPACX is the winnerin returns, while W&O beat FAGIX.
Here are some runs against what MFO Premium calls The Great Normalization (TGN), which they date from January 2022

First: W&O versus FPACX and FAGIX. My take away is that the fund with the best SD, Sharpe, and Sortino numbers also had the worst CAGR, worst yearly loss, and highest market correlation. YMMV
And here is W&O Ride the Rails. And it looks to me like the fund with the worst Sharpe and Sortino numbers has lost the least amount of your money. But I don't always spot things correctly. Let me know if you see something different.
Why did I run these numbers? It's the kind of thing I like to do when people say things like every. I like to dig a little deeper.

On Barron this week, Lewis Braham wrote an article on why bond index funds did so poorly this year relatively to actively managed funds. Several bond funds and ETFs mentioned:
Pimco Income fund, PONAX
Vanguard High-Yield Corporate, VWEHX
BlackRock High Yield Bond Portfolio, BHYAX
RiverPark Strategic Income, RSIVX
https://barrons.com/articles/bond-index-funds-interest-rates-active-passive-cc4b40f6