At present we have enough exposure to US and international stocks to generate growth. Our focus is on bonds and how they meet our retirement goals.

Neither. There’s a huge gap between the two.
When I retired, I already had enough — all I needed was a 6% annual return, indefinitely. I could have gone with a simple 50/50 portfolio, but why? That approach would have allowed my portfolio to drop 20–30% from peak to trough.
Instead, I set clear goals:
-Earn at least 6% annually.
-Make money every single year.
-Never lose more than 3% from any recent high.
-Outperform a traditional 50/50 portfolio.
-Achieve the best possible risk-adjusted returns.
I’ve met and exceeded all of those goals.
=============
During the accumulation phase from 1995 to retirement on 2018, my stock portion beat the SP500, and my bond portion did too...and with better risk/adjusted performance.

Christine Benz pondered contradictory feedback after a recent, successful Bogleheads conference.
She came to the conclusion that the conference is attempting to serve two completely different audiences —
portfolio maximizers (or optimizers) and "satisficers."
Maximizers conduct deep research on how to best create a financial plan and manage their portfolios.
They'll often enjoy debating the finer points regarding their financial analysis/decisions.
Satisficers, on the other hand, are seeking acceptable options rather than optimal ones.
They're less interested in the nitty-gritty details and gravitate towards big-picture topics
like finding enough, retirement lifestyle considerations, and leaving a legacy, for example.
Throughout my investment career, I've tended to be a maximizer.
As I've entered the … umm, second half of my life, I'll strive to spend less time and energy managing my investments.
Are you seeking the optimal portfolio and very best investing solutions or will good enough do?
https://www.morningstar.com/personal-finance/case-good-enough-portfolio

To me, this screams "run fast, run far (away)!" and/or suggests the need to make sure your investment's watertight doors are working and the lifeboats are at least uncovered and stocked with provisions......
Per BBG:
Blackstone Inc. and other private equity firms are launching a campaign to sell their investments to everyday Americans, with ads, emails, and sports sponsorships.
The firms are trying to tap into the $13 trillion market for US defined-contribution retirement plans, after regulators opened it up to private equity and other alternative assets.
Despite concerns about the timing and potential returns, alternative asset managers are aggressively courting small-time investors, with some wealth advisers reporting being inundated with emails, calls, and other solicitations.
Full article @ https://archive.ph/vbmnF

@msf I hear you. But I tend to keep thinking about young people starting out and forming a family while facing job disruptions and high housing costs. Also, from what I can see the direction of the country safety net is headed, they will need to have wages that cover private pay, unsubsidized, of things like healthcare, food and retirement. This means wages that grow from jobs that are secure. What counts is prospering over time. Stagnation won't get them there.

@FD100 - Why hasn’t some big mutual fund company snatched you up yet to run some of their funds? I’d imagine you could make David Giroux look like a rank amateur. Quite amazing TRP hasn’t lured you in with a big singing bonus …

I retired with enough money to cover our expenses for 25 years, not including SS.
Then I doubled our portfolio.
I don't need a job. We have enough for all the good stuff.
Retirement is the best job I have ever had.
Many investors still haven't learned the lesson, stop investing based on politics and complaining about it.

YTD: GLD=62.7%...SPY=13.8%
1 Month: GLD=16.5%...SPY=0.3%
So, you can doubt the future of GLD, but in 2025 it's so much better, and that's why I have based my investments on current markets. I don't care about the past either.
I don't own risky stuff anymore since retirement in 2018.
It doesn't mean you must own a high %. A 10-15% is all you need.

I'm happy to discuss what expenses should be counted as fund expenses. But we can do without the rhetoric, especially in the passive voice: "There is concern that" (which comes from the cited article).
The second line of Zweig's piece reads: "A bill passed by the House and pending in the Senate would authorize portfolios often used in retirement accounts to skip reporting the expenses of certain funds they may invest in." There is nothing in the bill that is specific to retirement accounts; this was thrown in to agitate not to enlighten.
On to the main question: what should be counted as fund expenses?
I think most people agree that direct expenses incurred by the fund should be counted. Manager salaries, paying to keep the lights on, brokerage fees (not currently counted), borrowing costs regardless of use (including borrowing costs to short securities).
Most people seem to feel that some indirect fees should not be counted. Such as Warren Buffet's salary (if a fund owns BRK), even though people may view the company as a conglomerate or holding company. How about Fernando Fernandez's compensation at Unilever?
Moving on to BDCs, Zweig writes that "Being regulated as funds gives BDCs special tax privileges". Just like REITs. Zweig is concerned that BDC expenses might not be counted with mutual fund acquired expenses. Just like REITs today. And just like REITs their special tax privileges extend to being treated as pass-through entities.
While the current bill proposal deals only with BDCs, it's still curious that he didn't say anything about how it would merely harmonize BDCs with REITs. Especially since OBBB just made the "special tax privileges" of BDCs even closer to REITs' by giving them the same 20% deduction (Section 199A) that REITs have.
https://www.akingump.com/en/insights/tax-insights/tax-bills-section-199a-expansion-would-boost-bdcs
If one is going to count some indirect (acquired securities) expenses as fund costs, then where and why does one draw the line? Why don't we include REITs? Conversely, why should we count any indirect costs? They're explicitly excluded from the financial statements precisely because their impact is already reflected in the portfolio's performance.
Yogi suggests that many investors don't read even summary prospectuses. If we go down that path to the lowest common denominator, then why worry about this at all? Many people just look at performance, d**n the expenses. In which case this whole discussion is moot.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/811030/000089418925010867/ottercreekfocusstrategyetf.htm
497 1 ottercreekfocusstrategyetf.htm 497E
Filed pursuant to Rule 497(e)
Registration Nos. 033-12213; 811-05037
Otter Creek Focus Strategy ETF (the “Fund”)
Ticker: OCFS
Listed on NYSE Arca, Inc.
a series of Professionally Managed Portfolios (the “Trust”)
Supplement dated October 9, 2025
to the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information
each dated February 28, 2025
The Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of Professionally Managed Portfolios, based upon the recommendation of Otter Creek Advisors, LLC (the “Advisor”), the investment advisor to the Fund, has determined to close and liquidate the Fund. The Board concluded that it would be in the best interest of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund be closed to new purchases, except for purchases made through an automatic investment program or the reinvestment of any distributions, as of the close of business on October 9, 2025 (the “Closing Date”) and liquidated as a series of the Trust effective as of the close of business on October 30, 2025 (the “Liquidation Date”).
The Board approved a Plan of Liquidation (the “Plan”) that determines the manner in which the Fund will be liquidated. Pursuant to the Plan and in anticipation of the Fund’s liquidation, the Fund will be closed to new purchases, except for purchases made through an automatic investment program or a purchase exception that is approved by Trust officers, effective as of the close of business on the Closing Date, after which the Fund’s assets may be entirely invested in money market instruments or held in cash or cash equivalents. Accordingly, the Fund will no longer be pursuing its investment objective. Any distributions declared to shareholders of the Fund after the Closing Date and until the close of trading on the New York Stock Exchange on the Liquidation Date will be automatically reinvested in additional shares of the Fund unless a shareholder specifically requests that such distributions be paid in cash. Although the Fund will be closed to new purchases as of the Closing Date, you may continue to redeem your shares of the Fund until the Liquidation Date, as described in “How to Sell Shares” in the Fund’s Prospectus.
Pursuant to the Plan, if the Fund has not received your redemption request or other instruction prior to the close of business on the Liquidation Date, your shares will be redeemed and you will receive proceeds representing your proportionate interest in the net assets of the Fund as of the Liquidation Date after the Fund has paid or provided for all taxes, expenses, and any other liabilities, subject to any required withholdings. As is the case with any redemption of Fund shares, these liquidation proceeds will generally be subject to federal and, as applicable, state and local income taxes if the redeemed shares are held in a taxable account and the liquidation proceeds exceed your adjusted basis in the shares redeemed. If the redeemed shares are held in a qualified retirement account such as an IRA, the liquidation proceeds may not be subject to current income taxation under certain conditions. You should consult with your tax advisor for further information regarding the federal, state and/or local income tax consequences of this liquidation that are relevant to your specific situation.
The Advisor will bear all of the expenses incurred in carrying out the Plan.
Shareholder inquiries should be directed to the Fund at 1-800-617-0004.
* * * * *
Please retain this supplement for future reference.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/811030/000089418925010868/ottercreeklongshortopportu.htm
497 1 ottercreeklongshortopportu.htm 497E
Filed pursuant to Rule 497(e)
Registration Nos. 033-12213; 811-05037
Otter Creek Long/Short Opportunity Fund (the “Fund”)
Institutional Class – Ticker: OTTRX
Investor Class – Ticker: OTCRX
a series of Professionally Managed Portfolios (the “Trust”)
Supplement dated October 9, 2025
to the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information
each dated February 28, 2025
The Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of Professionally Managed Portfolios, based upon the recommendation of Otter Creek Advisors, LLC (the “Advisor”), the investment advisor to the Fund, has determined to close and liquidate the Fund. The Board concluded that it would be in the best interest of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund be closed to new purchases, except for purchases made through an automatic investment program or the reinvestment of any distributions, as of the close of business on October 9, 2025 (the “Closing Date”) and liquidated as a series of the Trust effective as of the close of business on October 30, 2025 (the “Liquidation Date”).
The Board approved a Plan of Liquidation (the “Plan”) that determines the manner in which the Fund will be liquidated. Pursuant to the Plan and in anticipation of the Fund’s liquidation, the Fund will be closed to new purchases, except for purchases made through an automatic investment program or a purchase exception that is approved by Trust officers, effective as of the close of business on the Closing Date, after which the Fund’s assets may be entirely invested in money market instruments or held in cash or cash equivalents. Accordingly, the Fund will no longer be pursuing its investment objective. Any distributions declared to shareholders of the Fund after the Closing Date and until the close of trading on the New York Stock Exchange on the Liquidation Date will be automatically reinvested in additional shares of the Fund unless a shareholder specifically requests that such distributions be paid in cash. Although the Fund will be closed to new purchases as of the Closing Date, you may continue to redeem your shares of the Fund until the Liquidation Date, as described in “How to Sell Shares” in the Fund’s Prospectus.
Pursuant to the Plan, if the Fund has not received your redemption request or other instruction prior to the close of business on the Liquidation Date, your shares will be redeemed and you will receive proceeds representing your proportionate interest in the net assets of the Fund as of the Liquidation Date after the Fund has paid or provided for all taxes, expenses, and any other liabilities, subject to any required withholdings. As is the case with any redemption of Fund shares, these liquidation proceeds will generally be subject to federal and, as applicable, state and local income taxes if the redeemed shares are held in a taxable account and the liquidation proceeds exceed your adjusted basis in the shares redeemed. If the redeemed shares are held in a qualified retirement account such as an IRA, the liquidation proceeds may not be subject to current income taxation under certain conditions. You should consult with your tax advisor for further information regarding the federal, state and/or local income tax consequences of this liquidation that are relevant to your specific situation.
The Advisor will bear all of the expenses incurred in carrying out the Plan.
Shareholder inquiries should be directed to the Fund at 1-855-681-5261.
* * * * *
Please retain this supplement for future reference.

The first time I invested in gold and silver (CEF, IAU, and SIVR -- all in my retirement portfolios) was because I followed Rono on this Board. I've stuck with those investments for 15+years and I'm glad I did.
THANK YOU, Rono -- for sharing your wisdom and perspective here. I'm glad to see you posting again.

I try to remind myself of these fees each time I am offered a "free" steak dinner from these wealth management companies.
In my world, management fees would only be allowed on positive performance (the gains), not the initial investment amount (the principal).
For example, If I give you $10K to invest and that investment becomes $11K in a year, I am willing to pay you 1% on the gain (1% of $1K or $10), not 1% on the entire $11K.
You helped me make $1K... I brought you $10K.
Conversely, If you lost money for me that year, you get $0 fee.
Or even better, how about you pay me 1% of AUM in the years when my portfolio had negative returns. We are a team, right? If "we do better when you do better" is true, than how about "we both do worse when you suffer a loss (do worse)".
In terms of retirement Safe Withdrawal Rate (SWR) of say 4%, a typical 1% management fee equates to 25% of that SWR (1% of the 4%). That a significant reduction in retirement income.
I'll take that steak dinner to go please!

Yeah, well said!
Maybe I am just a cheapskate, but I am not paying for anything that I can do myself, that doesn't involve a septic tank.
A free steak is not worth hours of my time and enduring a sales pitch.

I try to remind myself of these fees each time I am offered a "free" steak dinner from these wealth management companies.
In my world, management fees would only be allowed on positive performance (the gains), not the initial investment amount (the principal).
For example, If I give you $10K to invest and that investment becomes $11K in a year, I am willing to pay you 1% on the gain (1% of $1K or $10), not 1% on the entire $11K.
You helped me make $1K... I brought you $10K.
Conversely, If you lost money for me that year, you get $0 fee.
Or even better, how about you pay me 1% of AUM in the years when my portfolio had negative returns. We are a team, right? If "we do better when you do better" is true, than how about "we both do worse when you suffer a loss (do worse)".
In terms of retirement Safe Withdrawal Rate (SWR) of say 4%, a typical 1% management fee equates to 25% of that SWR (1% of the 4%). That a significant reduction in retirement income.
I'll take that steak dinner to go please!

@bee Thanks. Timely for me, as I contemplate Roth conversions starting possibly 2026 or 2027.
My goal is to stay below the 24% tax bracket at RMD time. The calculator forces some assumptions, of course. And I previously determined that a Roth conversion adds to your income for that tax year. So, I may delay conversions an additional year to try and use the 0% LTCG rate and sell some highly appreciated stock.
What complicates things is that my state does not tax retirement income, but does tax LTCG at ordinary income tax rates. So, one strategy sort of offsets the other. I definitely need to study this more.
Between the assumptions and unknown variables (age, tax rates, mortality, income levels) I think that one needs to make, at best, an educated guess.
I like this calculator too: https://www.irscalculators.com/tax-calculator

These calculators were shared this week by Rob Berger. Seemed worth sharing.

This Tax Return and Refund Estimator is for tax year 2025 and currently based on 2024/2025 tax year tax tables. As soon as new 2025 relevant tax year data has been released, the tool will the updated accordingly.

efile.com/tax-return-calculator-for-2025-refund-estimator
Here's Vanguard Roth Conversion Calculator:

Conventional wisdom states that if you expect your client’s future tax rate to be lower than their current tax rate, it would not make sense to do a Roth conversion. However, Vanguard research shows that you should consider additional factors to determine a “break-even tax rate” which will help you decide whether or not to convert your client’s traditional IRA to a Roth IRA or traditional 401(k) to a Roth 401(k).

vanguard.com/tax-center/tools/roth-betr-calculator
2025 Tax & Retirement Contribution Guide:
https://advisors.vanguard.com/content/dam/fas/pdfs/FATXGD10.pdf
*Vanguard's link seems to be missing the saver's credit...here's info is:
savers-tax-credit-2025.pdf

For decades now, I don't look at one sleeve of my portfolio but the whole portfolio.
This allows me to use all categories.
I came to the conclusion to only hold leading categories/funds and look for the portfolio's total risk-adjusted performance and limited number of funds.
In retirement it's a lot more important for me to have much lower volatility. I pay less attention to performance because I have enough.
Simple example:
Instead of holding stocks + bond fund I may use QLEIX instead in the last 5 years.
Suppose I want just 30% in stocks. Instead of 30/70 VOO/BND, I select VOO/RCTIX. See 10 years (https://testfol.io/?s=18uGeuEjL0F)

@JD_co. Big fan of PRPFX here. Have it in both taxable and retirement accounts. My question is on what data are you placing ALLW in taxable accounts? Seems like turnover might be part of the plan. Lots of gains that would be taxable?

We shall see, thanks for pointing this out. ALLW distributes annually with 12-31 ex-date.
Per their website:
"Despite investing in commodity-linked derivatives, the fund does not issue a Schedule
K-1 as the fund holds the commodity-linked derivatives through a wholly-owned Cayman
Islands subsidiary to minimize non-qualifying income."

@JD_co. Big fan of PRPFX here. Have it in both taxable and retirement accounts. My question is on what data are you placing ALLW in taxable accounts? Seems like turnover might be part of the plan. Lots of gains that would be taxable?

And private credit will try and lure in investors via 401k exposure, shifting the risk to retirement savers, for good or for ill.

Barron’s Funds Quarterly+ (2025/Q3–October 6, 2025)
https://www.barrons.com/topics/mutual-funds-quarterly
(Performance data quoted in this Supplement are for 2025/Q3 and YTD to 9/30/25)
Stocks of FUND ASSET MANAGERs have languished: BlackRock (BLK; yield 1.8%; fwd P/E 23.6; #1 by AUM), Invesco (IVZ; yield 3.7%; fwd P/E 10.9), T Rowe Price (TROW; yield 5.0%; fwd P/E 10.6); Franklin/BEN is mentioned; private Vanguard is also mentioned and it now has 50% of the fund industry assets (excluding money-market funds). The fund industry is changing and growing overall. The most problematic are active mutual funds/OEFs but the mutual fund category (passive and active) hasn’t been growing. Mutual funds flourished during the baby-boomers era but now they are in retirement-decumulation phase.
New growth is in ETFs/ETPs, ETF classes of funds, retirement TDFs (soon to include alternatives), interval-funds (IFs), alternatives (cryptos, private-equity/credit) (other developments have been in CITs and guaranteed-income options within 401k that involve partnerships between fund firms and insurers). These listed asset managers are also adjusting to this new environment and should do well long-term. Goldman Sachs/GS is investing $1 billion in TROW to develop Price TDFs with some GS alternatives.
QUARTERLY REVIEW. WINNER – gold-miners. High gold prices finally kicked into the bottom lines of gold-miners and they have rallied furiously. Mentioned are gold-miners GDX, GDXJ, SGGDX, OPGSX; gold-bullion GLD; silver-miners SLV (gold:silver ratio recently peaked at 105 in 04/2025 and is currently around 82).
RUNNER-Ups – China region funds and digital assets (cryptos). In a boost to cryptos, stablecoins became mainstream through GENIUS Act.
Ironically, many mainstream investors stayed away from these highflying categories. Among the traditional fund categories, the best was large-cap-growth. LC-blend SP500 easily outperformed bonds. Inflows into ETFs (passive, active) were strong. Outflows from OEFs continued. But some unusual observations: (i) strong inflows into money-market funds despite the expectations of lower rates (maybe the investors were derisking a bit), (ii) outflows from small-caps despite strong performance (investors getting out after years of frustration?), and (iii) weak inflows into foreign funds despite their strong outperformance vs US funds (weak dollar added to the performance of foreign funds). So, there was euphoria, but not extreme euphoria. (By @LewisBraham at MFO)
MFOP data for Q3 pending.
Top 5 Categories, Q3

Bottom 5 Categories, Q3

LINKs: Quarterly Digest1 Digest2
Accessible from Mutual Fund Observer (MFO).