https://corporate.vanguard.com/content/corporatesite/us/en/corp/who-we-are/pressroom/press-release-vanguard-to-streamline-fund-lineup-with-planned-merger-and-liquidation-021423.html
or
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/889519/000168386323000714/f24283d1.htm
497 1 f24283d1.htm VANGUARD MANAGED ALLOCATION FUND MERGER
Vanguard Managed Allocation Fund
Supplement Dated February 14, 2023, to the Prospectus
Reorganization of Vanguard Managed Allocation Fund into Vanguard LifeStrategy® Moderate Growth Fund
The Board of Trustees of Vanguard Valley Forge Funds (the Trust) has approved an agreement and plan of reorganization (the Agreement) whereby Vanguard Managed Allocation Fund, a series of the Trust, would be reorganized with and into Vanguard LifeStrategy Moderate Growth Fund, a series of Vanguard STAR® Funds.
The reorganization will consolidate the assets of the Funds and allow the Managed Allocation Fund shareholders to become shareholders of a significantly larger fund with a similar investment objective and lower expenses. The Board of the Trust along with the Board of Vanguard STAR Funds, after careful consideration, unanimously approved the Agreement, each concluding that the reorganization is in the best interests of their respective Fund and that the interests of the shareholders of each Fund will not be diluted as a result of the reorganization.
The reorganization does not require shareholder approval and is expected to close on or about May 19, 2023. Prior to the closing, shareholders of the Managed Allocation Fund will receive a combined Information Statement/Prospectus, which will describe the reorganization, provide a description of the LifeStrategy Moderate Growth Fund, and include a comparison of the Funds. At the closing, shareholders will receive Investor Shares of the LifeStrategy Moderate Growth Fund in exchange for their Managed Allocation Fund Investor Shares, and after the closing, the Managed Allocation Fund will have no remaining assets and will be dissolved.
The Managed Allocation Fund will restructure its portfolio in anticipation of the reorganization and is expected to deviate from its investment objective and strategies. Since the portfolio transition period may take a significant amount of time, there may be times when the Managed Allocation Fund is holding large amounts of uninvested cash. This may negatively impact the Managed Allocation Fund's performance.
Although we anticipate that the reorganization will qualify as a tax-free reorganization under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, the reorganization will have tax consequences for certain shareholders. It is expected that approximately 47% of the Managed Allocation Fund's portfolio assets will be sold in advance of the reorganization in order to align the holdings of the Managed Allocation Fund with the holdings of the LifeStrategy Moderate Growth Fund. It is also expected that the Managed Allocation Fund will experience shareholder redemptions prior to the reorganization. In addition, Vanguard Alternative Strategies Fund, an underlying fund in which the Managed Allocation Fund invests, is scheduled to liquidate on or about April 19, 2023, which will also be treated as a sale of portfolio assets by the Managed Allocation Fund.
When the sale of portfolio assets occurs at a price in excess of the initial purchase price, the transaction results in capital gains. As a result of the expected sales of approximately 47% of the Managed Allocation Fund's assets plus the liquidation of Vanguard Alternative Strategies Fund as well as any additional sales required to satisfy shareholder redemptions, the Managed Allocation Fund is expected to realize capital gains, which must be distributed along with any undistributed net income to the then-current shareholders prior to the consummation of the reorganization. For example, if the Managed Allocation Fund had sold the approximately 47% of its portfolio assets on January 31, 2023, the Managed Allocation Fund would have realized net capital gains of approximately $75 million, representing approximately 6% of the Fund's net assets or approximately $1.00 per share. The actual pre-reorganization capital gain distribution could be lower or higher and, while unlikely, could be substantially higher than such amount. For comparison, the Managed Allocation Fund's capital gains distributions have historically ranged from 0%-6.2% of NAV. The final distribution amount will be dependent on certain factors, including market performance and shareholder redemption activity. Gain distributions will be taxable to shareholders who hold their shares in taxable accounts.
Shareholders should contact their tax advisors concerning the tax consequences of the reorganization and evaluate their individual cost basis and any potential tax liability resulting from investment decisions related to the reorganization, including redeeming their Managed Allocation Fund shares or exchanging them for shares of another fund prior to the consummation of the reorganization.
Closed to New Accounts
Effective immediately, the Managed Allocation Fund is closed to new accounts, and it will stop accepting purchase requests from existing accounts shortly before the reorganization.
© 2023 The Vanguard Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
PS 1498B 022023
Vanguard Marketing Corporation, Distributor....

Some things can appear so obvious that they become difficult to explain, yet be so unclear to others. I watched an economics teacher struggle to explain something having to do with averages, I forget what. As a 3rd party observer, these different perspectives were visible to me. Perhaps what is happening here is like that and I'm not explaining things well.
I wrote: there's a tendency for people to look at "what have you done for me lately" even when trying not to - sometimes it's baked into the numbers.
Here's a paragraph from CBS News describing how "what have you done for me lately" is baked into M*'s ratings. On the surface, it looks like M* is biasing its ratings toward long term performance, because it weights 10 year performance at 50%, while weighting 5 year performance at 30%, and 3 year performance at just 20%. But something else is going on.

Obviously, the past three years account for 30 percent of the past ten years, which means that they account for 15 percent of the overall rating (30 percent X 50 percent). They account for 18 percent of the five-year rating (60 percent X 30 percent); and 100 percent of the three-year rating. Sum them all up, and we find that the past three years account for 53 percent of a fund's overall long-term rating.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/whats-right-and-whats-wrong-with-morningstar-fund-ratings/
There's a similar problem in looking at good 1/3/5/10 year figures and concluding that performance is somewhat uniformly good, especially over longer terms. The final year's performance is influencing (I would say skewing) all the numbers. We saw this effect clearly (though with respect to bad, not good, performance) in figures published after March 2020. Suddenly good (and not so good) funds looked terrible, even long term.
Now I'm not expecting another once in a century pandemic anytime soon, nor do I think that nothing has been done to make economies more robust. So I'm inclined to discount (but not ignore) 2020 figures to the extent that they distort averages.

Mama largest holders are:
* fidelity 2015 tdf FFVFX (bulk of her holdings)
*Dodge cox and balance
*Fidelity contrafund FCNTX
*tlt and shy
*Lots Corp/ private Bond %large companies ytm ~5 6%, Ave ytm 5 YRS.
Portfolio moves upward like turtle since xmas but did not loose much last yr (-12%), think 5 7% from all time high
Capital preservations are keys. She is happy w fixed 3 5% annually returns
For mine very aggressive 15% in tsla + growth stocks
* 35% in sp500 (spy spxl)
*30s% in mid caps + small caps ( vo vong Tna soxl tqqq )
*10% in overseas etf indexes (yinn FXI veu)
*15% in private Corp Bonds.
Few % in speculative plays and btc ethe silver 3xgold etf tmf labu Tsll Fngu + smallcaps plays VRM nvta bbig, ~3% daily tradings (short term p&l was up 33% last wk but now only +13%)
Use 12% of margin powers for CSP
Lots leap call or monthly cover calls contracts for Tsla bros nvda snow Rivn amaz goog brk.b O. Sold lots bonds last 6 months cover csp and assignments
Mine overall portfolio is 10% down from all time high since dca aggressively past 6 wks
I am happy w yearly 5 7%% returns but hard to say
Hope bottoms don't fall out under
PLS do critique thankyou

You're proving my point - it's all about "what have you done lately".
Had you looked at the same figures at another point in time, say on SCHD's 10 year anniversary (10/31/2021), SCHD's cumulative performance would have underwhelmed:
10 year: 309.10% vs 348.91% (FXAIX)
5 year: 118.00% vs. 137.75%
3 year: 71.20% vs. 79.20%
1 year: 44.08% vs. 42.89%
The fairly recent outperformance should be obvious from my table showing SCHD outperforming FXAIX by a cumulative 20% over the three past calendar years (2020-2022).
Do you give any consideration to "regression to the mean"? The same table shows FXAIX outperforming SCHD by as much as 10% cumulative in other three year periods. With actively managed funds, there's a lot that can change. But with index funds, a "true buy & hold type" is going to need more than a one year anomaly to "sell & trade":
2023 YTD: 1.67% (SCHD) vs. 6.71% (FXAIX)
2022: -3.23% vs. -18.13% <-- 15% spread
2021: 29.87% vs. 28.69%
2020: 15.08% vs. 18.40%
2019: 27.28% vs. 31.47%
What's the theory for buying SCHD? That any time the market goes down, SCHD will win big? Or that we can expect, or at least hope for, another huge year (relatively speaking) for SCHD in the future? One that will make up for its typical slightly underperforming years?
At least we can dispense with the former idea - that SCHD outperforms in down markets.
2018: -5.56% (SCHD), -4.40% (FXAIX)
2015: -0.31% (SCHD) vs. 1.38% (FXAIX)
interestingly, FXAIX/IVV is on the honor roll too, and not SCHD
This is a good example of why I continue to urge people to understand numbers, not just quote them. Honor roll status is based on raw performance relative to category, i.e. top quintile over 1,3,5 year spans. Immediately we see one potential issue - these are funds in different categories.
At least as important is the fact that FXIAX's performance is being compared with that of (only) other S&P 500 funds. With a 2 basis point ER, it's a sure bet that FXIAX will always be in the top quintile of its narrow category of peers. Instant honor roll.
SCHD is in Lipper's Equity Income category - a broad category, and SCHD doesn't always come out in the top 20%.
The fact that FXAIX is a LC Blend fund (M* terminology) while SCHD is LCV goes far to explaining the 2022 split in relative performance. Value simply had a once in a generation (relative) banner year: VVIAX lost 2.08%, while VFIAX lost 18.15%. This 2σ+ fluke is hardly suggestive of future outperformance.
To reiterate, SCHD is a fine fund. But a better long term fund? I wouldn't place heavy bets on one style of investing - value or otherwise. Sure, use SCHD, but then counter balance it.

Over the long term they do slightly better than FXAIX
Do they do any better, or are you just looking relative to a particular moment in time (i.e. now)? Comparing their three year rolling cumulative returns by calendar years (e.g. Jan 2019-Dec 2021), the figures (from M* charts) are:

     2020-2022  '19-'21	'18-'20	'17-'19	'16-'18	'15-'17	'14-'16	'13-'15	'12-'14	'11-'13
FXAIX	24.75%	100.32%	 48.80%	 53.10%	 30.38%	 38.28%	 29.02%	 52.54%	 74.51%	 56.77% 
SCHD	44.56%	 90.14%	 38.51%	 45.45%	 32.84%	 40.22%	 29.53%	 48.09%	 65.32%	 56.42%
CDC	38.27%	 78.90%	 27.03%	 30.48%	 31.78%	 38.76%	   -	   -	   -	   -

Over its lifetime (July 1, 2014 through Feb 10, 2023), CDC has done slightly worse than FXAIX, returning a cumulative 138.04% vs FXAIX's 143.78%.
More importantly, all the cumulative figures ending Dec 31, 2022 are significantly skewed by FXAIX's sizeable underperformance in 2022 relative to the other funds: -18.13% vs -3.23% (SCHD) or -7.76% (CDC). (FXAIX has done better so far this year.)
I'm not knocking any of these funds, and I can certainly see the point in suggesting dividend oriented funds to someone who has been focused on cash returns. It's just that there's a tendency for people to look at "what have you done for me lately" even when trying not to - sometimes it's baked into the numbers.

For true buy & hold types, the argument for SCHD over SP500 is clear: SCHD has nontrivially outperformed 10/5/3/1y. (A flip occurred 4mos ago.) For those who fancy themselves slightly more conservative or at least 'non-volatilist', a second argument for SCHD is clear. For preservation Lipper gives SCHD 5* and FXAIX/IVV 4*. MFOP gives Great Owl status to both (interestingly, FXAIX/IVV is on the honor roll too, and not SCHD) but shows SCHD's UI to be ~50%-75% of SP500, depending on time period.

Your cynicism is not unjustified, though the process of introducing streamlined reports was a bit more neutral than that.
From the SEC proposal:

We request comment on the proposed scope of disclosure for the annual report, including the following: ...
4. A fund may have multiple share classes with differing fee structures. Should these multi-class funds be permitted to reflect only one or a subset of classes, rather than all share classes in a shareholder report so long as a fund produces a shareholder report that relates to each share class? Would such an approach reduce the complexity of the disclosure and provide more-tailored information that is specific to a shareholder’s investment in the fund? Or, conversely, would such a requirement not benefit shareholders? For example, could it reduce shareholders’ ability to compare classes of a fund? Should there be limits on the number or types of classes that a single annual report may cover to reduce potential complexity or length? For example, should we prohibit an annual report transmitted to retail shareholders from including disclosure related to a fund’s institutional class? Are there potential complexities or burdens associated with such an approach? Please explain.

https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2020/33-10814.pdf
The comments received by the SEC can be found here:
https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-09-20/s70920.htm
Few comments addressed the streamlined reports, as the bulk of the proposal deals with changes to the "full" reports. One comment worth noting is from Barbara Roper (at the time, the director of investor protection for the Consumer Federation of America).

Seeing [multiple share class] information could, for example, cause the investor to question why they are invested in shares that carry higher costs or suffer poorer performance relative to other available share classes.
...
We are therefore at least preliminarily opposed to the idea ...of permitting funds to reflect only a subset of share classes in a shareholder report. Despite our initial skepticism, we believe this approach is worth testing to see whether it results in a better investor experience. If testing demonstrates that limiting the number of share classes reported on in a single report offers benefits that outweigh the potential downsides, the Commission should proceed accordingly. However, ...

https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-09-20/s70920-8204376-227513.pdf
All I can find in Capital Research and Management's comments regarding the streamlined reports is that it is generally supportive of adopting them:

We support the Commission proposing a rule that creates a new streamlined shareholder report with key information and provides funds with an alternative way to keep shareholders informed instead of delivering annual prospectus updates to existing shareholders. We believe this approach furthers the Commission’s goal to address the concern that shareholder report and prospectus disclosures may appear redundant or inconsistent to shareholders, as well as the belief that prospectus disclosures in particular may often be less relevant to the informational needs of a shareholder who is simply monitoring his or her fund investments. However...

https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-09-20/s70920-8204356-227509.pdf

The SEC allows funds a 60 day lag in filing their annual and semiannual reports (also their quarterlies).
https://www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-8393.htm
Worse (or better, depending on your perspective), funds will be phasing in the annual report equivalent of summary prospectuses. Streamlined info (covering only an individual share class) will be distributed, and as with statutory prospectuses you'll have to go looking for complete (semi)annual reports.
https://www.sec.gov/investment/tailored-shareholder-reports-mutual-funds-etfs

Jaaaaaysus. This is the dumbing down of investors, indeed. Forcing curious, or detail-oriented investors to go onto a fund's website (or the SEC) to look for basic comparative information is insane.
I like the American Funds and held many of them them for years, but I totally suspect Capital Group, with its like 20 share classes per fund probably is behind the "fund documents to only report on a single share class" initiative. Why let individuals easily see that there are likely cheaper fund classes available and that the annual expenses DO play a major role in performance?
Fund companies must be ecstatic!

Over the long term they do slightly better than FXAIX
Do they do any better, or are you just looking relative to a particular moment in time (i.e. now)? Comparing their three year rolling cumulative returns by calendar years (e.g. Jan 2019-Dec 2021), the figures (from M* charts) are:

     2020-2022  '19-'21	'18-'20	'17-'19	'16-'18	'15-'17	'14-'16	'13-'15	'12-'14	'11-'13
FXAIX	24.75%	100.32%	 48.80%	 53.10%	 30.38%	 38.28%	 29.02%	 52.54%	 74.51%	 56.77% 
SCHD	44.56%	 90.14%	 38.51%	 45.45%	 32.84%	 40.22%	 29.53%	 48.09%	 65.32%	 56.42%
CDC	38.27%	 78.90%	 27.03%	 30.48%	 31.78%	 38.76%	   -	   -	   -	   -

Over its lifetime (July 1, 2014 through Feb 10, 2023), CDC has done slightly worse than FXAIX, returning a cumulative 138.04% vs FXAIX's 143.78%.
More importantly, all the cumulative figures ending Dec 31, 2022 are significantly skewed by FXAIX's sizeable underperformance in 2022 relative to the other funds: -18.13% vs -3.23% (SCHD) or -7.76% (CDC). (FXAIX has done better so far this year.)
I'm not knocking any of these funds, and I can certainly see the point in suggesting dividend oriented funds to someone who has been focused on cash returns. It's just that there's a tendency for people to look at "what have you done for me lately" even when trying not to - sometimes it's baked into the numbers.
For a set and forget fund that covers all bases ("foreign, global, world and U.S", and fixed income) one might consider VGWIX / VGYAX. Not an index fund, but still a low cost fund. Its 35/65 stock/bond mix may also suit someone moving from a cash portfolio. Funds with more traditional blends include VGWLX / VGWAX and CIBFX (though jumbo). A drawback of these funds (notably the Vanguard ones) is a dearth of EM investment. You may consider that a plus (arguably a more conservative approach).

Can't make this up - new ETF's
By: Jason Capul, SA News Editor
"Think U.S. lawmakers have the inside track when it comes to the stock market? Now there are ETFs that allow investors to track moves made by politicians of the two major political parties.
Unusual Whales, in conjunction with Subversive Capital, unveiled two politically charged exchange traded funds that cater to both the Republican and Democratic sides of the aisle. The two funds are the Unusual Whales Subversive Democratic ETF (BATS:NANC) and Unusual Whales Subversive Republican ETF (BATS:KRUZ).
NANC: Plans to invest insecurities purchased or sold by Democratic members of Congress and their spouses.
KRUZ: Offers exposure to securities purchased or sold by Republican members of Congress and their spouses.
From a holdings point of view, NANC’s top three positions are in Microsoft (MSFT), Amazon (AMZN), and Alphabet (GOOG) (GOOGL) at weightings of 7.31%, 6.67%, and 5.91% respectively.
KRUZ on the other hand has its top three stakes in Magellan Midstream Partners (MMP), Microsoft (MSFT), and Energy Transfer (ET), which have weightings of 3.44%, 2.55%, and 2.24% respectively. Additionally, both funds come attached with a 0.75% expense ratio."

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1753394/000121390023008278/s149169_497.htm
497 1 s149169_497.htm 497
RIMROCK FUNDS TRUST
(the “Trust”)
Rimrock Emerging Markets Corporate Credit Fund
SUPPLEMENT DATED FEBRUARY 6, 2023 TO THE SUMMARY PROSPECTUS, PROSPECTUS,
AND STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION EACH DATED SEPTEMBER 28, 2022
At the recommendation of Rimrock Capital Management, LLC, the Trust’s investment adviser, the Board of Trustees of the Trust (the “Board”) has approved the liquidation and termination of the Rimrock Emerging Markets Corporate Credit Fund (the “Fund” ) as a result of, among other factors, challenges faced by the Fund in conducting its business and operations in an economically viable manner under current market conditions. The Board approved the liquidation pursuant to the provisions of the Trust’s Agreement and Declaration of Trust after making a determination that the liquidation of the Fund is in the best interests of such Fund and its shareholders.
Effective immediately, shares of the Fund will no longer be available for purchase by new or existing investors. The liquidation of the Fund is scheduled to take place on or about February 28, 2023 (the “Liquidation Date”).
On or before the Liquidation Date, the Fund will seek to convert substantially all of its respective portfolio securities and other assets to cash or cash equivalents. Therefore, the Fund may depart from its stated investment objectives and policies as it prepares to liquidate its assets and distribute them to shareholders. Any shares of the Fund outstanding on the Liquidation Date will be automatically redeemed on that date. As soon as practicable after the Liquidation Date, the Fund will distribute pro rata to the Fund’s shareholders of record, as of the close of business on the Liquidation Date, all of the remaining assets of the Fund, after paying, or setting aside the amount to pay, any expenses and liabilities of the Fund. At any time prior to the Liquidation Date, shareholders may redeem their shares of the Fund pursuant to the procedures set forth under “How to Sell Your Fund Shares” in the Fund’s prospectus.
The Fund has the ability to distribute income and/or net capital gains on or prior to the Liquidation Date in order to reduce Fund-level taxes. For taxable shareholders, the automatic redemption on the Liquidation Date should generally be treated like other redemptions of shares, that is, as a sale by the shareholder that may result in a gain or loss to the shareholder for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Shareholders should contact their tax advisor to discuss the income tax consequences of the liquidation.
Please retain this supplement with your Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and
Statement of Additional Information.

Hi, I am a victim of TBO Capital Group. May I please have access.

..... And so, OK: I'm intrigued.
Does it make sense to convert from T-IRA to Roth if current filing status puts one in "no tax due" at all bracket--- AND spouse has no reportable earned income, as well? SS and pension plus interest, cap gains and divs are my own sources of income. But those cap gains and divs. all get reinvested into T-IRA. Come to think of it, I'm re-investing all proceeds from the taxable account, too. The taxable account at the moment is up to about 11% the size of the T-IRA. (That figure includes wife's own small rollover T-IRA, too, less than $11,000 right now.) Thanks for any thoughts. These rules just all seem so arcane to me./ And there's still a small slice of my T-IRA which is non-taxable upon withdrawal, because it was deposited as non-deductible, and no tax due in that year. My tax guy is on top of that. Very conscientious.

'Herding Cats'. In my mind, I envision perhaps 12 pieces of data that is the most important for the FED; but is also difficult to pin down for a given time frame and the FED 'watch'; to guide the economy. So, at times; the task is likely to resemble attempting to 'herd cats'.
My overall quick take on the FOMC discussion period this week was a 'new' soft touch version. The first 15 minutes were 'normal' talk, the second 15 minutes were 'relaxed', a kind of 'we're going to be nice and do no harm. Disinflation was uttered by Mr. Powell.
--- Wednesday, A bond love-fest, by those so inclined, after 2:30pm FOMC Q&A. Pricing rose nicely in many bond sectors.
--- Friday. HOT! HOT! HOT! Employment: January payrolls increase 517,000 versus estimate of 188,000. This isn't a data entry error, is it? January unemployment rate falls to 3.4%, a rate last seen in 1969. January average hourly wages, +.3%. AND of course, the bond folks gave back a lot of the Wednesday love.
--- disinflation v. deflation
Deflation means prices are falling and the inflation rate is in the negative, while disinflation means a slowdown in the rate of inflation while still remaining in the positive. Disinflation occurs more commonly than deflation.
Note: On the disinflation front.....reported that chicken wings and avocado prices are down about 22% YTD; and before the Super Bowl parties, too. Big move !!! I have not verified this locally.
--- U.S.$ UP 1.22% on Friday, for a +1.02% for the week.
The Money Market thing. FZDXX and two other Fido core MM's will be receiving yield bumps, although FZDXX usually leads first. 'Course, this comes from the Fed. Funds rate hike. I'm anticipating a 4.6% yield within the next week or so; and likely that MM yields will be at 5% or more in the summer. Other investment houses will provide similar yields.
*** See FOMC thread from Wednesday and current 'Real Yield' for other bond related information.
My non-qualified quick overview: Mr. Powell would have had a different tone, during the FOMC Q&A, if the employment/labor info was released Wednesday morning. Most bond sectors, although positive for the week, gave back a lot of gains on Friday, some at -1% for the day. 'Course, profit taking should be expected, regardless of financial health reports. TIPS funds did not find love by the end of this week. Common core MM's at fund companies may find a yield of 4.5% this summer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE; An excellent request was presented to add more important bond sectors to the list. The new adds are included below.
---Several selected bond funds returns since October 25, 2022. I'll retain this date, as it is a recent inflection point when bonds began to have positive price moves. We'll need to watch if this was just a 'blip'.
NOTE: I've kept the prior dated reports in the beginning of this thread; and have added YTD to this data.
For the WEEK/YTD, NAV price changes, January 30 - Febuary 3, 2023
***** This week (Friday), FZDXX, MMKT yield moved a bit to 4.33% . The core Fidelity MMKT's have continued a slow creep upward to 4.04%. The holdings of these different funds account for the variances at this time.
--- AGG = -.02% / +3.17% (I-Shares Core bond), a benchmark, (AAA-BBB holdings)
--- MINT = +.16% / +.94% (PIMCO Enhanced short maturity, AAA-BBB rated)
--- SHY = -.1% / +.59% (UST 1-3 yr bills)
--- IEI = -.12% / +1.84% (UST 3-7 yr notes/bonds)
--- IEF = -.21% / +3.16% (UST 7-10 yr bonds)
--- TIP = -.85% / +1.66% (UST Tips, 3-10 yrs duration, some 20+ yr duration)
--- VTIP = -.3% / +.56% (Vanguard Short-Term Infl-Prot Secs ETF)
--- STPZ = -.32% / +.6% (UST, short duration TIPs bonds, PIMCO)
--- LTPZ = -2.6% / +4.7% (UST, long duration TIPs bonds, PIMCO)
--- TLT = +.25% / +7.4% (I Shares 20+ Yr UST Bond
--- EDV = +.48% / +10.4% (UST Vanguard extended duration bonds)
--- ZROZ = +.74 / +10.9% (UST., AAA, long duration zero coupon bonds, PIMCO
--- TBT = -.4% / -13.5% (ProShares UltraShort 20+ Year Treasury (about 23 holdings)
--- TMF = +.22% / +21.3% (Direxion Daily 20+ Yr Trsy Bull 3X ETF (about a 3x version of EDV etf)
*** Additional important bond sectors, for reference:
--- BAGIX = +.2% / +3.23% (active managed, plain vanilla, high quality bond fund)
--- LQD = -.05% / +4.81% (I Shares IG, corp. bonds)
--- BKLN = +.47% / +3.67% (Invesco Senior Loan, Corp. rated BB & lower)
--- HYG = -.01% / +3.44% (high yield bonds, proxy ETF)
--- HYD = +.4 /+4.27% (VanEck HY Muni
--- MUB = +.12 /+2.45 (I Shares, National Muni Bond)
--- EMB = +.02 /+4.77% (I Shares, USD, Emerging Markets Bond)
--- CWB = +1.2 / +7.5% (SPDR Bloomberg Convertible Securities)
--- PFF = +.76 / +10.2% (I Shares, Preferred & Income Securities)
--- FZDXX = 4.33% yield (7 day), Fidelity Premium MMKT fund
*** FZDXX yield was .11%, April,2022. The rate of rise began an upward path again on Friday (Feb. 3).

Comments and corrections, please.
Remain curious,
Catch

https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1038469/000174177323000161/c497.htm
T. Rowe Price QM Global Equity Fund
Supplement to Prospectus and Summary Prospectus dated May 1, 2022
Effective April 5, 2023, the fund’s name will change from the T. Rowe Price QM Global Equity Fund to the T. Rowe Price Integrated Global Equity Fund. All references throughout the prospectus and summary prospectus to the QM Global Equity Fund are replaced by reference to the Integrated Global Equity Fund.
In connection with this change, effective April 5, 2023, the third and fourth paragraphs under “Principal Investment Strategies” beginning on page 2 will be replaced with the following:
The fund’s integrated approach to investing combines fundamental analysis and quantitative models to identify stocks that could be included in the portfolio. Stocks are selected based on a variety of metrics such as a company’s valuation, profitability, stability, earnings quality, management capital allocation actions, and indicators of near-term appreciation potential.
In addition, effective April 5, 2023, the fourth, fifth, and sixth paragraphs under “Principal Investment Strategies”, which begins on page 9 of the prospectus, will be replaced with the following:
The fund’s integrated approach to investing combines fundamental analysis and quantitative models to identify stocks that could be included in the portfolio. The fund draws on the adviser’s experience in global equity investing and takes into account both its quantitative and fundamental research capabilities. The portfolio is typically constructed in a “bottom up” manner, an approach that focuses more on evaluations of individual stocks than on analyses of overall economic trends and market cycles. Stocks are selected based on a variety of metrics such as a company’s valuation, profitability, stability, earnings quality, management capital allocation actions, and indicators of near-term appreciation potential.
The date of this supplement is February 3, 2023.
F203-041 2/3/23

https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1038469/000174177323000160/c497.htm
T. Rowe Price QM U.S. Small & Mid-Cap Core Equity Fund
Supplement to Prospectus and Summary Prospectus dated May 1, 2022
Effective April 5, 2023, the fund’s name will change from the T. Rowe Price QM U.S. Small & Mid-Cap Core Equity Fund to the T. Rowe Price Integrated U.S. Small-Mid Cap Core Equity Fund. All references throughout the prospectus and summary prospectus to the QM U.S. Small & Mid-Cap Core Equity Fund are replaced by reference to the Integrated U.S. Small-Mid Cap Core Equity Fund.
In connection with this change, effective April 5, 2023, the third and fourth paragraphs under “Principal Investment Strategies” beginning on page 2 will be replaced with the following:
The fund’s integrated approach to investing combines fundamental analysis and quantitative models to identify stocks that could be included in the portfolio. Stocks are selected based on a variety of metrics such as a company’s valuation, profitability, stability, earnings quality, management capital allocation actions, and indicators of near-term appreciation potential.
In addition, effective April 5, 2023, the third and fourth paragraphs under “Principal Investment Strategies” on page 9 of the prospectus will be replaced with the following:
The fund’s integrated approach to investing combines fundamental analysis and quantitative models to identify stocks that could be included in the portfolio. The fund draws on the adviser’s experience in small- and mid-cap investing and takes into account both its quantitative and fundamental research capabilities. The portfolio is typically constructed in a “bottom up” manner, an approach that focuses more on evaluations of individual stocks than on analyses of overall economic trends and market cycles. Stocks are selected based on a variety of metrics such as a company’s valuation, profitability, stability, earnings quality, management capital allocation actions, and indicators of near-term appreciation potential.
The date of this supplement is February 3, 2023.
F202-041 2/3/23

https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1038469/000174177323000159/c497.htm
T. Rowe Price QM U.S. Value Equity Fund
Supplement to Prospectus and Summary Prospectus dated May 1, 2022
Effective April 5, 2023, the fund’s name will change from the T. Rowe Price QM U.S. Value Equity Fund to the T. Rowe Price Integrated U.S. Large-Cap Value Equity Fund. All references throughout the prospectus and summary prospectus to the QM U.S. Value Equity Fund are replaced by reference to the Integrated U.S. Large-Cap Value Equity Fund.
In connection with this change, effective April 5, 2023, the first three paragraphs under “Principal Investment Strategies” beginning on page 2 will be replaced with the following:
Under normal conditions, the fund invests at least 80% of its net assets (including any borrowings for investment purposes) in equity securities issued by large-cap U.S. companies. The fund expects to invest predominantly in the common stocks of companies that appear to be undervalued by various measures.
The fund defines a large-cap company as one whose market capitalization falls within the market capitalization range of the Russell 1000® Index. As of December 31, 2022, the market capitalization range for the Russell 1000® Index was approximately $0.65 to $2,066.94 billon.
The fund’s integrated approach to investing combines fundamental analysis and quantitative models to identify stocks that could be included in the portfolio. Stocks are selected based on a variety of metrics such as a company’s valuation, profitability, stability, earnings quality, management capital allocation actions, and indicators of near-term appreciation potential.
In addition, effective April 5, 2023, the first three paragraphs under “Principal Investment Strategies” beginning on page 10 of the prospectus will be replaced with the following:
Under normal conditions, the fund invests at least 80% of its net assets (including any borrowings for investment purposes) in equity securities issued by large-cap U.S. companies. The fund expects to invest predominantly in the common stocks of companies that appear to be undervalued by various measures. Shareholders will receive at least 60 days’ prior notice of a change in the policy. The fund expects to invest predominantly in the common stocks of companies that appear to be undervalued by various measures.
The fund defines a large-cap company as one whose market capitalization falls within the market capitalization range of the Russell 1000® Index. As of December 31, 2022, the market capitalization range for the Russell 1000® Index was approximately $0.65 to $2,066.94 billion. The market capitalization of the companies in the fund’s portfolio and the Russell index changes over time; the fund will not automatically sell or cease to purchase stock of a company it already owns just because the company’s market capitalization falls below the market capitalization range of companies in the Russell index.
The fund’s integrated approach to investing combines fundamental analysis and quantitative models to identify stocks that could be included in the portfolio. The fund draws on the adviser’s experience in large-cap investing and takes into account
both its quantitative and fundamental research capabilities. The portfolio is typically constructed in a “bottom up” manner, an approach that focuses more on evaluations of individual stocks than on analyses of overall economic trends and market cycles. Stocks are selected based on a variety of metrics such as a company’s valuation, profitability, stability, earnings quality, management capital allocation actions, and indicators of near-term appreciation potential.
As part of the stock selection process, the adviser focuses primarily on companies whose securities, in the adviser’s opinion, are undervalued. The adviser employs various valuation metrics, such as price-to-earnings, price-to-cash flows, and price-to-book ratios, and compares these ratios with others in the relevant investing universe.
The date of this supplement is February 3, 2023.
F201-041 2/3/23

https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1038469/000174177323000158/c497.htm
T. Rowe Price QM U.S. Small-Cap Growth Equity Fund
Supplement to Prospectus and Summary Prospectus dated May 1, 2022
Effective April 5, 2023, the fund’s name will change from the T. Rowe Price QM U.S. Small-Cap Growth Equity Fund to the T. Rowe Price Integrated U.S. Small-Cap Growth Equity Fund. All references throughout the prospectus and summary prospectus to the QM U.S. Small-Cap Growth Equity Fund are replaced by reference to the Integrated U.S. Small-Cap Growth Equity Fund.
In connection with this change, effective April 5, 2023, the third and fourth paragraphs under “Principal Investment Strategies” on page 2 will be replaced with the following:
The fund’s integrated approach to investing combines fundamental analysis and quantitative models to identify stocks that could be included in the portfolio. Stocks are selected based on a variety of metrics such as a company’s valuation, profitability, stability, earnings quality, management capital allocation actions, and indicators of near-term appreciation potential.
As part of the stock selection process, the adviser focuses primarily on companies that, in the adviser’s opinion, are capable of achieving and sustaining above-average, long-term earnings growth.
At times, the fund may have a significant portion of its assets invested in the same economic sector.
In addition, effective April 5, 2023, the third and fourth paragraphs under “Principal Investment Strategies” on page 10 of the prospectus will be replaced with the following:
The fund’s integrated approach to investing combines fundamental analysis and quantitative models to identify stocks that could be included in the portfolio. The fund draws on the adviser’s experience in small-cap investing and takes into account both its quantitative and fundamental research capabilities. The portfolio is typically constructed in a “bottom up” manner, an approach that focuses more on evaluations of individual stocks than on analyses of overall economic trends and market cycles. Stocks are selected based on a variety of metrics such as a company’s valuation, profitability, stability, earnings quality, management capital allocation actions, and indicators of near-term appreciation potential.
As part of the stock selection process, the adviser focuses primarily on companies that, in the adviser’s opinion, are capable of achieving and sustaining above-average, long-term earnings growth. The adviser employs various growth metrics, such as a company’s historical and forecasted sales and earnings growth rates.
At times, the fund may have a significant portion of its assets invested in the same economic sector.
The date of this supplement is February 3, 2023.
F120-041 2/3/23

A similar check for Fidelity core/settlement m-mkt fund SPAXX with FYs 5/1-4/30,
2018 0.42%
2019 0.42%
2020 0.42%
2021 0.15%
2022 0.10%
Now 0.42%

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/313212/000174177323000146/c497.htm
497 1 c497.htm EEM STAT AND SUM STICKER 2.2.23
T. Rowe Price Emerging Europe Fund
Supplement to Prospectus and Summary Prospectus dated March 1, 2022, as supplemented
Effective Friday, February 17, 2023, the T. Rowe Price Emerging Europe Fund will close to all purchases. Accordingly, the summary prospectus and prospectus are updated as follows:
In the summary prospectus and section 1 of the prospectus, the disclosure under “Purchase and Sale of Fund Shares” is supplemented as follows:
Effective at the close of the New York Stock Exchange on Friday, February 17, 2023, the fund will close to all purchases from new and existing shareholders.
Section 2 of the prospectus is supplemented as follows:
CLOSED TO NEW PURCHASES
Currently, the fund is generally closed to new investors and new accounts, subject to certain exceptions. Effective at the close of the New York Stock Exchange on Friday, February 17, 2023, the fund will close to all purchases from new and existing shareholders. After February 17, 2023, even investors who already hold shares of the fund either directly with T. Rowe Price or through a retirement plan or financial intermediary may no longer purchase additional shares.
Shareholders with existing accounts may reinvest dividends and capital gains so long as they own shares of the fund in their account. In addition, the fund reserves the right, when in the judgment of T. Rowe Price it is not adverse to the fund’s interests, to permit certain types of purchases. The fund’s closure to additional purchases does not restrict existing shareholders from redeeming shares of the fund.
The date of this supplement is February 2, 2023.
F131-043 2/2/23