I think the article correctly alludes to the AUM game being played by the mutual fund industry vs interval fund industry as the reason for the difference in marks. Too much manager discretion in marks makes timing / luck a big factor in trading these funds, causing frustration to some retail fund traders.
Edit: The article also correctly predicted additional negative adjustments to NAV for CBYYX (-0.6%) and EMPIX (-0.10%). While SHRIX closed 2.72% higher today. EMPIX was even, CBYYX and SHRIX are -1+% related to Milton. Given the larger SHRIX is marking back up, I am guessing the worse of negative marks for Milton could be behind us.
Did anyone here put their toe back into these today?
This article implies Milton's impact on Cat Bonds is not yet clear and that "Greater clarity may emerge next week." https://www.artemis.bm/news/hurricane-milton-estimated-principal-loss-cat-bond-market-twelve-capital/

@Charles ; 'The SEC also filed a complaint in federal district court in Madison, Wisconsin, against Senior Portfolio Manager, Edward Walczak, for fraudulently misrepresenting how he would manage risk for the fund.
When I googled his name , it show Jan. 2020,filed . Feb. 2022 judgement granted.
Thanks , just filling in a few missing blanks.
Derf

Thank you @davidsherman. For me, it's the association that took me aback.
Catalyst, Rational, AlphaCentric all seem like asset gathers. Really high er. Front loads. 12b-1 fees. Multiple share classes.
I came across Szilagyi back in 2017 profiling AlphaCentric Income fund. I absolutely loved Tom Miner and the folks at subadvisor Garrison Point, but I was skeptical of their association with Szilagyi's organization.
An excerpt:
Focusing on IOFIX, the adviser pays 0.33% “other” (mostly administrative and servicing). The remaining 1.16% “management fee” (after a 0.01% acquired fund fee) is then split between AlphaCentric and Garrison Point, or 0.58% each. Since another Jerry Szilagyi company “MFund Services LLC,” also gets paid to manage the overall trust, Szilagyi’s firms appear to receive more fee from the fund than GPC does.
Interestingly, AlphaCentric is listed along with Eventide, Pinnacle and Advisory Research as a strategic partner in a firm called Multi-Funds, which describes itself as “A Premier Marketing, Consulting and Distribution Firm.” While this channel may indeed have helped bring attention to IOFIX, allowing the sub-adviser to focus on its strategy and portfolio management … what it loves to do, Multi-Funds hasn’t helped other funds in the AlphaCentric family achieve anywhere near the assets attracted by IOFIX.
Jerry Szilagyi also runs Catalyst Funds, a collection of “Intelligent Alternatives … We understood that the market did not need another traditional family of mutual funds … we endeavor to offer unique investment products to meet the needs of discerning financial advisers and their clients … specialized strategies seeking to produce income and equity-oriented returns while attempting to limit risk and volatility.” There are 28 Catalyst Funds comprising $6.2B in AUM. Average age just under 5 years. Most come in three classes, including those imposing 4.75% front-loads and 12b-1 fees. Average fees: 1.76% (oldest share class, 2.01% all share classes).
When you stood-up CrossingBridge, it just seemed like a horse of a different color.
You're always 10 steps ahead of everybody else in the room, which puts me 20 steps back and surely missing something.
Or, simply being a Pollyanna.
But Szilagyi's brand also ran into regulatory issues, granted he's in good company, but still:
SEC Charges Portfolio Manager and Advisory Firm with Misrepresenting Risk in Mutual Fund
The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced charges against a New York-based investment adviser for misleading investors about the management of risk in a mutual fund. Catalyst Capital Advisors LLC (CCA) and its President and Chief Executive Officer, Jerry Szilagyi, agreed to pay a combined $10.5 million to settle the charges. The SEC also filed a complaint in federal district court in Madison, Wisconsin, against Senior Portfolio Manager, Edward Walczak, for fraudulently misrepresenting how he would manage risk for the fund.
https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2020-21
Fund That Lost $700 Million on Bearish Bets Fined for Misleading Investors
Catalyst Capital Advisors and CEO Jerry Szilagyi settled regulatory probes, will pay $10.5 million
A mutual-fund manager that lost 20% with wrong-way bets against the stock market agreed to pay $10.5 million to settle regulatory claims that it misled investors about its procedures for limiting losses.
Catalyst Capital Advisors LLC and its chief executive, Jerry Szilagyi, settled the regulatory probes Monday without admitting or denying wrongdoing. The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission also both filed civil fraud lawsuits against Edward Walczak, the portfolio manager who ran the Catalyst Hedged Futures Strategy Fund.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/fund-that-lost-700-million-on-bearish-bets-fined-for-misleading-investors-11580167076
I'll post more later on the Catalyst, Rational, and AlphaCentric families.

^MOVE, the bond risk, is over 120 and indicates elevated risk.
MOVE > 110 has a nice correlation to high volatility in bonds and in most cases, typical high-rated bonds don't do well.
On 3-2-2020 it was at 125 = sell everything = correct. The week before it was already over 110.
End of 02/2022 it was over 130 = sell and continue to get higher with some lower volatility.
Also at the end of 2007, it was over 130 and higher in 2008.
www.tradingcenter.org/index.php/trade/equities/stock-signals/354-move-index-bonds

conveniently? you're reading into my post in an odd way. i was simply offering up an explanation for those friday gains. it had nothing to do with buying or selling.

junkster wrote: "Regarding CBYYX where a few are invested including me. I re entered this fund in July after Hurricane Beryl had no impact whatsoever. Hurricane Beryl was a cat 5 and broke all sorts of meteorological records. Yet none of the cat bonds got hit. Since Beryl the cat bonds have been the best performers in Bondville even outperforming the S@P. Oddly enough almost all the gains have come on Fridays."
regarding Friday gains, i found this today on the artemis website that perhaps explains why that day is special:
"Investment managers are working to incorporate their projections and estimations of potential losses from major hurricane Milton into their catastrophe bond and ILS portfolios. Managers of 40’s Act registered US mutual fund structures need to mark their portfolios with a fund price daily, based on net asset value. This is a challenge given the catastrophe bond market only marks its positions on a Friday ...."
that being the case, it'll be interesting to see what this friday brings ...

You conveniently didn’t mention the rest of my post where I said I was exiting CBYYX and why.

junkster wrote: "Regarding CBYYX where a few are invested including me. I re entered this fund in July after Hurricane Beryl had no impact whatsoever. Hurricane Beryl was a cat 5 and broke all sorts of meteorological records. Yet none of the cat bonds got hit. Since Beryl the cat bonds have been the best performers in Bondville even outperforming the S@P. Oddly enough almost all the gains have come on Fridays."
regarding Friday gains, i found this today on the artemis website that perhaps explains why that day is special:
"Investment managers are working to incorporate their projections and estimations of potential losses from major hurricane Milton into their catastrophe bond and ILS portfolios. Managers of 40’s Act registered US mutual fund structures need to mark their portfolios with a fund price daily, based on net asset value. This is a challenge given the catastrophe bond market only marks its positions on a Friday ...."
that being the case, it'll be interesting to see what this friday brings ...

There's a fascinating piece in the WSJ on the ascendance of active ETFs (Jon Sindreu, "Investment Industry Loses Active ETFs," 10/8/2024). Not quite sure what to say about it. Key points:
1. Passive is a low margin, commoditize business which is "killing many midsize asset managers that lack the scale of compete."
2. Smart beta was the industry's first attempt to raise its margins by offering passive-like (or "passive-light") ETFs with higher fees. That cascaded in ESG and other niche preferences.
3. Active ETFs "are the latest attempt" to add to margins, and their investors "are paying more to get less performance." In particular, large cap active ETFs trail both large cap funds and passive ETFs in performance. Active mid-caps trail passive mid-caps. None of those calculations take volatility into account.
4. Active ETF launches this year outnumber passive by 3:1.
5. Active ETFs are outperforming in small caps and bonds.
6. The largest active ETF is JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF, "which sells covered calls to reduce volatility," an activity that Mr. Sindreu describes as "a sure way to miss out on big gains during rallies while retaining unlimited downside risk."
To which I say, "hmmmm..."

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1103243/000141304224000794/enscls497.htm
497 1 enscls497.htm
A series of PFS Funds
Supplement dated October 8, 2024
to the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information
dated February 28, 2024
This supplement updates information currently in the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information. Please retain this supplement for future reference.
The Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the PFS Funds (the “Trust”) has approved a Plan of Liquidation (the “Plan”) relating to the Ensemble Fund (the “Fund”), effective October 3, 2024. Ensemble Capital Management, LLC, the Fund’s investment adviser (the “Adviser”), has recommended to the Board to approve the Plan due to the pending acquisition of the Adviser and the acquiring entity’s desire not to continue the mutual fund business. As a result, the Board has concluded that it is in the best interest of the shareholders to liquidate the Fund.
In connection with the proposed liquidation and dissolution of the Fund called for by the Plan, the Board has directed the Trust’s principal underwriter to cease offering shares of the Fund immediately as of the date of this Supplement. Shareholders may continue to reinvest dividends and distributions in the Fund or redeem their shares until liquidation. While undergoing an orderly liquidation, the Fund will invest in cash equivalents and will not be pursuing its investment objective.
It is anticipated that the Fund will liquidate on or about October 24, 2024. Any remaining shareholders on the date of liquidation will receive a distribution of their remaining investment value in full liquidation of the Fund. If you have questions or need assistance, please contact your financial advisor directly or the Fund toll-free at 1-800-785-8165.
IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR RETIREMENT PLAN INVESTORS
If you are a retirement plan investor, you should consult your tax advisor regarding the consequences of any redemption of Fund shares. If you receive a distribution from an Individual Retirement Account or a Simplified Employee Pension (SEP) IRA, you must roll the proceeds into another Individual Retirement Account within sixty (60) days of the date of the distribution in order to avoid having to include the distribution in your taxable income for the year. If you receive a distribution from a 403(b)(7) Custodian Account (Tax-Sheltered account) or a Keogh Account, you must roll the distribution into a similar type of retirement plan within sixty (60) days in order to avoid disqualification of your plan and the severe tax consequences that it can bring. If you are the trustee of a Qualified Retirement Plan, you may reinvest the money in any way permitted by the plan and trust agreement.
This Supplement, and the existing Prospectus dated February 28, 2024, provide relevant information for all shareholders and should be retained for future reference. Both the Prospectus and the Statement of Additional Information dated February 28, 2024, have been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, are incorporated by reference, and can be obtained without charge by calling the Fund toll-free at 1-800-785-8165.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355064/000158064224006059/alphstrategic-497.htm
497 1 alphstrategic-497.htm
AlphaCentric Strategic Income Fund
Class A: SiiaX Class C: SiicX Class I: SiiiX
(the “Fund”)
October 7, 2024
This information supplements certain information contained in the Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information for the Fund, each dated August 1, 2024.
______________________________________________________________________________
Effective on or about November 1, 2024, the Fund’s name will change to “AlphaCentric Real Income Fund”.
Effective on or before November 5, 2024, AlphaCentric Advisors LLC intends to retain CrossingBridge Advisors, LLC (“CrossingBridge”) as the new investment sub-advisor to the Fund, subject to approval by the Board of Trustees of the Fund. CrossingBridge is a boutique investment firm specializing in corporate credit, with an emphasis on high yield debt and opportunistic credit. CrossingBridge manages over $3.2B in assets across nine funds and includes a management team of nine investment professionals with an average of 20+ years of investment experience. The Fund’s investment strategy and focus on real estate related securities will remain intact. Additional information regarding the sub-advisory services provided to the Fund will be made available on or before November 5, 2024.
Effective on or before November 5, 2024, Goshen Rock Capital, LLC will no longer serve as the investment sub-adviser of the Fund.
* * * * *
You should read this Supplement in conjunction with the Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information for the Fund, each dated August 1, 2024, which provide information that you should know about the Fund before investing. These documents are available upon request and without charge by calling the Fund toll-free at 1-844-ACFUNDS (1-844-223-8637) or by writing to 4221 North 203rd Street, Suite 100, Elkhorn, Nebraska 68022.
Please retain this Supplement for future reference.

I think the other issue is they went to a "team" approach, so even if you have substantial $ you do not get one individual to work on your issues, unless maybe you pay for "personal advisor". I explored using their Personal Advisor but they only use Robo funds/etfs and made no reference to legacy positions with large capital gains
I don't know but I left and never looked back

Ended up holding on to CBLDX, it was actually up last Friday. It had positive returns in 2020 and 2022. That's the kind of bond fund I like. The five year returns are also pretty good, though I doubt we'll be in that sort of rate environment any time soon.
Sold TBUX, USTB, XONE, and WSHNX. It was too many funds anyway. I will likely consolidate into USFR and VRIG or PULS. Yes, they are boring, but I'm holding onto MNHAX, CBLDX, THOPX, and WCPNX, so there is still some excitement in bond land. Eventually I'll have to consolidate those holdings, but I don't think this is the best time. If the rate environment continues to deteriorate I won't hesitate to lock in profits.

All I have left is HOSIX, SCFZX, CBLDX, and SEMMX/PX. The later on a short leash. Keep wanting to buy AHTFX and JSVIX on a downdraft but never sure when the downdraft will become something more ominous. Stating the obvious, oil is causing a big problem for bonds. You were among the first to go back in THOPX so hope it continues to work for you.

I thought THOPX would be temporary to begin with. I'm guessing it will make way for WCPNX, CBLDX, and MNHAX over some period of time. But hard to tell when that day will come.
I don't expect rates to go up the way they did in 2022. So dividends should cover some of the pain on the longer duration funds.
I'll add your funds to my bond watch list.

Ended up holding on to CBLDX, it was actually up last Friday. It had positive returns in 2020 and 2022. That's the kind of bond fund I like. The five year returns are also pretty good, though I doubt we'll be in that sort of rate environment any time soon.
Sold TBUX, USTB, XONE, and WSHNX. It was too many funds anyway. I will likely consolidate into USFR and VRIG or PULS. Yes, they are boring, but I'm holding onto MNHAX, CBLDX, THOPX, and WCPNX, so there is still some excitement in bond land. Eventually I'll have to consolidate those holdings, but I don't think this is the best time. If the rate environment continues to deteriorate I won't hesitate to lock in profits.

All I have left is HOSIX, SCFZX, CBLDX, and SEMMX/PX. The later on a short leash. Keep wanting to buy AHTFX and JSVIX on a downdraft but never sure when the downdraft will become something more ominous. Stating the obvious, oil is causing a big problem for bonds. You were among the first to go back in THOPX so hope it continues to work for you.

The SP500+QQQ has been great since 2010. From 2000 to 2010, the SP500 lost about 10% and QQQ lost almost half.
FAIRX was a great fund during 2000-10 but has been far behind since 2010.
ICMUX made more than PIMIX for 3 years (chart)
But PIMIX made more from 2015 to 2020 (chart) and PIMIX management is pretty good.
Based on my history of following many funds, I hardly ever found a fund that stays at the top every 2-3 years. Maybe PRWCX is the exception.

@FD1000, you totally didn't understand or ignored what I said. My opinion is that, for most investors (not traders), it's the portfolio construction that matters more so than individual funds. Of course no fund stays in the top tier of category year in and year out. But there are plenty of funds that stay consistently good over time and fill that portfolio segment, like ICMUX.
Your comparative selection of funds above is all in hindsight and therefore irrelevant to portfolio construction IMHO.

Ended up holding on to CBLDX, it was actually up last Friday. It had positive returns in 2020 and 2022. That's the kind of bond fund I like. The five year returns are also pretty good, though I doubt we'll be in that sort of rate environment any time soon.
Sold TBUX, USTB, XONE, and WSHNX. It was too many funds anyway. I will likely consolidate into USFR and VRIG or PULS. Yes, they are boring, but I'm holding onto MNHAX, CBLDX, THOPX, and WCPNX, so there is still some excitement in bond land. Eventually I'll have to consolidate those holdings, but I don't think this is the best time. If the rate environment continues to deteriorate I won't hesitate to lock in profits.

It's my perception that people who move in and out of funds are "fund" investers, maybe even collectors, not over-all "portfolio" investors. My hope is having a portfolio that trends upward with the least amount pf volatility I can obtain. The portfolio is, hopefully, made up of managers and a mix of fund type with a winning long-term history. Not the best fund that month or year. If ICMUX has a so-so year, I don't jump out to get into the hot fund at the time. ICMUX, and I'm just using this fund as an example, has history of good management and returns and a risk level that fits the portfolio.... Is there better funds at this precise time? Probably. Just another 2-cents.

Good management is not guaranteed to be good every year or even several years and in every situation and/or market.
I never believed in diversification either because it led to lower performance for years.
BTW, in very high risk markets, you learn pretty quickly that most funds sink together. You even learn that bonds don't always save you, think 2022.
The SP500+QQQ has been great since 2010. From 2000 to 2010, the SP500 lost about 10% and QQQ lost almost half.
FAIRX was a great fund during 2000-10 but has been far behind since 2010.
ICMUX made more than PIMIX for 3 years (chart)
But PIMIX made more from 2015 to 2020 (chart) and PIMIX management is pretty good.
Based on my history of following many funds, I hardly ever found a fund that stays at the top every 2-3 years. Maybe PRWCX is the exception.
In bondland the exceptions are so much better and can last for months, sometimes years.
An extra of 3% in bondland annually for many retirees is so good that you can own a small % in stocks (or none) with a much lower volatility portfolio.
The investors who believed in B&H; in the last 10 years, the most recommended bond fund, BND (US Total index) made just 1.7% average annually, far behind inflation.
In the last year, I owned 2 bond funds for most months and hardly traded. Not every trader changes funds every week/month. I always admitted I'm a trader but I see many who trade so much more than me and claim they don't.

How far does anyone think this reversal on the 10 year may go? I understand the “bond vigilantes” taking control of longer rates out of the Fed’s hands (not that they ever really had it) but am surprised by the speed and magnitude of the reversal. Friday’s hot jobs report really blew the lid off the rate structure. Just a temporary bump - or are we heading a lot higher? The damn election throws a whole lot of monkey wrenches into the equation too, with several possible outcomes. I think the Fed is being a little restrained right now due to the election. At some point afterward (assuming it ever ends) they might decide to clamp down harder if the economy keeps running hot. And, counterintutively, that could cause the short end to spike and longer rates to drop.
Maybe too off topic - But does anyone think as I do that the big gains in equities the past 2 years (and to a lesser degree bonds and cash) are helping keep the economy hot by providing consumer spending stimulus - mostly for the people who already have enough? So to a degree it becomes a virtuous circle with spending propping up stocks and stocks propping up spending. What could possibly go wrong? Just some far out thoughts. You won’t hear this on Bloomberg.
Anybody know what’s coming? Is that light at the end of the tunnel a locomotive heading our way? I don’t pretend to know. Just throwing some crazy questions out there for the smarter board members.

I have the same question too. If bank loan bonds are risky, why does David Giruox, PRWCX holds 7-10% of bank loan in the portfolio? He spoke why he held bank loans and other high yield bonds being held in the portfolio. And yet the fund done well through several full market cycles.
In spring 2020’s pandemics, bank loan funds underwent a free fall as many of the oil fracking bonds went busted. Same goes for junk bonds. Only Treasury’s stay unaffected. Then came the FED emergency rate cut.

For the past two months, I have been following two "Market Neutral" funds, QQMNX and VMNFX, which held up very well and provided some protection during recent market downturns. New managers have been at the helm of both funds since 2021.
As MikeM said: "I have to admit, QQMNX is a tempting alternative in this alternative field for a less bumpy ride and, so far, excellent returns."
..............QQMNX....VMNFX
YTD.........15.6%.......8.9%
3 YRS.......14.4........14.8
5 YRS.......10.3..........8.2
2022..........9.5.........13.5
Std. Dev....8.6%.......7.3%
As a retired investor who doesn't need a lot more money, preserving capital is more important to me than seeking sizeable returns on capital. While both funds have excellent risk/reward profiles, I have decided to add QQMNX to my portfolio at this time of fairly high equity valuations.

A couple other market neutral funds you can consider: BDMAX and JMNAX. BDMAX has outperformed QQMNX over the last 1 and 2 year trailing periods, and has a higher Sharpe ratio and lower standard deviation over the last 3 years according to Morningstar data. JMNAX has had lower returns, but has a smooth ride. I use a combination of BDMAX and JMNAX, but I might consider adding QQMNX. Thanks for bringing it up.

BaluBalu: Interesting, albeit new, fund! I'll track it over time, but it might have a place for people. Another one to consider are the Capital Group ETFs (CGDV, CGGO, etc) which are also fairly concentrated. BBLU is another one, too.