No sales. Just buys. I wish I had bought more for my wife's IRA. Still quite a bit of "dry powder" after transferring out of a retirement plan at Prudential. She still has a nice setup at TIAA-CREF that is fully invested.
There will be more buying opportunities down the road.
When to sell? You should have some sort of plan for that in advance so that you understand what you are responding to rather than acting on reflex.

Fidelity data shows nearly one-third of their investors 65 and older sold all of their stock holdings at some point between February and May while just 18% of all investors across their platform sold out of stocks.
I had a number of discussions with investors who were contemplating selling out of stocks in March. Many we retirees who worried about how an extended downturn could impact their retirement plans.
I understand why this group is more trigger happy with their portfolio. The U.S. stock market was up 10 out of 11 years heading into 2020. This crisis was looking like it could turn into Great Depression 2.0.
We’re living in scary times.
But scary times and panic are never good reasons for selling out of your stocks.

https://awealthofcommonsense.com/2020/06/when-should-you-sell-your-stocks/

As I said several times before I don't follow any of these but my own rules which I started years ago preparing for retirement. Since 2018 I practiced stricter rules 1) 6+% average annually 2) SD under 3 3) never lose 3% from any last top 4) complete flexibility to do whatever I want/need. I exceeded these rules by a lot.
===============
Anyway, the thread is about bond funds so let's get back to it.
Last Thursday was another pivotal day for me. VIX jumped to almost 41, stocks crashed, the risk is elevated, rated are down sharply but BND wasn't up which is what you expect from a high rated bond index. VBTLX which is equal to BND but doesn't trade was up 0.08%. When rates decrease so much I expect bond fund like VBTLX to make more than 0.08%
All the above didn't make sense to me. Maybe it is just short term. I do the usual when the markets don't make sense to me I sell. It is unusual because in most cases I'm invested at 99+%. In the last 10 years, I was out of the market just 12 weeks (only in 5 weeks I was at 95+% in cash)
Last Thursday I was at about 50% cash and Friday at 95+% in cash. HY Munis which I had close to 60% of my portfolio were on a tear in the last month and even last week. It was time for me to sell.
YTD I'm way over my goals of 6%. I can take time out and can "miss" some performance.

Some people like posting narratives. I prefer hard numbers.
Start with $1,000, withdraw $40 (4% real, i.e. inflation adjusted) annually over 30 years. Do this with declining equity portfolios (e.g. 100% down to 0%) and with rising equity portfolios (e.g. 0% to 100%). Backtest against historical data, using rolling 30 year periods starting with 1900-1929, ending with 1980-2009.
Then look at the failure rates (portfolios that didn't last 30 years), and how much you'd wind up with at the end of the 30 year period.

Equity %	
(Start->End)	100->0	0->100	90->10	10->90	80->20	20->80	70->30	30->70
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Failure Rate	 8.6%   21.0%    6.2%  	17.3% 	 4.9%    11.1%   4.9%	 8.6% 
Mean 		$1,388 	$851  	$1,336	$901   	$1,283	 $954	$1,230	$1,009 
Median		  $947	$171	  $873 	$293 	  $908 	 $424 	  $951    $527

Data from Exhibit 1 in Estrada,The Retirement Glidepath: An International Perspective, The Journal of Investing (Summer 2016).

Pfau and Kitces (2014) find support for RE strategies during retirement and justify their findings with the notion of sequence of returns risk. ... [I]f large negative returns occur at the beginning of the retirement period, the portfolio is far more likely to be depleted than if the same returns occurred by the end of such period...This is a plausible argument and perhaps applies to the simulations discussed in Pfau and Kitces (2014). ... However, the support for DE [declining equity] strategies found here (at least when compared to RE [rising equity] strategies) calls into question how relevant sequence of returns risk has been empirically... In other words, however plausible in theory, sequence of returns risk does not seem to have been a key determinant of portfolio failure in this broad sample.

Big advantage for rising equity? Plausible but not borne out. Nor as noted previously do Pfau's simulations bear this out under market conditions like today's.
Way too often people go with their gut, or their fears, rather than rational analysis and cold hard numbers. That's why only about 5% of people wait until age 70 to take SS, it's part of why there's an annuity puzzle.
For those who don't want to read Estrada's complete paper, there's Larry Swedroe's page about it. He concludes:

To summarize, while Estrada presents evidence favoring the use of a DE [declining equity] glide path over a rising one, and also shows that a static 60/40 allocation is preferable to an RE [rising equity] portfolio, the most prudent strategy of all is not to “set it and forget it” with any of these options.
The most prudent approach is to adapt a strategy to actual market returns and valuations.

Call it confirmation bias, but I generally agree with Clements. At least a couple of years ago I wondered (and posted) whether low rates coupled with interest rate risk rendered the value of bonds over cash dubious. I've written favorably about Buffett's propsed allocation, 10% short term (effectively cash), 90% equities. Though I disagreed with his singleminded focus on the S&P 500. This cash/equity approach is also essentially Evensky's 1985 two bucket strategy.
Figuring on a 4% withdrawal rate, the 10% cash could buffer a bear market taking 2.5 years to recover. Clements suggests 25% cash, or around a 6 year buffer. I might split the difference and put half of that 25% in cash, half in vanilla bonds, figuring that the bonds will do better even with modestly rising interest rates, if one waits 3 years or more.
As Clements noted, the expectation value of SS is greater if one delays taking benefits. This is especially true if one is focused on one's own lifetime and not on legacies. If one has a financial need for monthly checks before age 70, one can fill the gap with a temporary life annuity.
Which brings us to annuities. Dr. Wade Pfau says much the same thing as Clements - that the lower the current interest rates, the bigger the bargain annuities are, thanks to mortality credits. "Essentially, while the cost of funding retirement with an annuity increases as interest rates decline, the cost of funding retirement in other ways increases even faster than for the annuity. Therefore, the annuity becomes a better relative deal."
Speaking of Dr. Pfau, while he and Michael Kitces suggested seven years ago that a rising glidepath might provide a slightly higher probability of success (not running out of money over 30 years), subsequent research by Dr. David M. Blanchett showed that a traditional declining glidepath would work better in an environment with low interest rates and highly valued stocks. As it was in 2015 when he wrote his paper, and as it is now.
They had an ongoing exchange about this. Here's one part:

I re-ran the analysis that Michael and I did in our initial article, but I switched to the new capital market assumptions I use which allow for increasing bond yields over time while keeping a fixed average equity premium over bonds. ... It does indeed seem that retiring at times with particularly low bond yields, which can be expected to increase over time, may not favor rising equity glidepaths during retirement. It essentially causes the retiree to lock in low bond returns and even capital losses on a bond fund as bond yields gradually increase (on average) over time.
This is not to say that rising equity glidepaths are never a good idea. ... If interest rates were at a higher initial starting point, I’m guessing that rising glidepaths would look much better in his analysis.

Reliable Clements has some thoughts:
https://humbledollar.com/2020/06/farewell-yield/

From the article and then my comments
1) Abandon bonds = Rediculous idea. I have talked to many retirees and they don't want the high volatility that stocks offer
2) Delay Social Security: you can do lots of calculations based on estimates but you can't predict the future. Just start in the middle, my wife and I will start taking SS at age 65 because of the above + Medicare and taxes will be deducted from SS too.
3) immediate fixed annuities: not an easy choice. If you don't have enough you can't afford it. If you have enough you don't need it. You also can't assume treasury yield will stay lower and since I don't care about treasuries I also know funds that pay over 4%. PIMIX stills pays over 5%.
4) tax efficiency: always important.
Most of these generic articles/research hardly ever offer what to do such as 1) not all bonds are treasuries 2) there are several great mutual funds 3) most retirees can't work forever or delay their retirement and don't have enough money. I want to see more ideas.
Example1: in one month, GWMEX,ORNAX,NHMAX made over 6%.
Example 2: I think that Kitces has better ideas than most. See (link) “rising equity glidepath” actually does improve retirement outcomes = start at lower % in stocks and increase gradually

A little old (2012), but still timely advice:
A Total Return approached discussed by Vanguard's Colleen Jaconetti:
investing-income-todays-environment

https://money.usnews.com/investing/funds/slideshows/best-t-rowe-price-funds-for-retirement
These funds stand out in a crowded market.
When you’re choosing how to invest for retirement, T. Rowe Price funds are a recognizable name. T. Rowe Price retirement funds vie for investors’ attention alongside options from other large brokerages such as Vanguard and Fidelity. However, these funds feature some unique characteristics that set them apart from the competition. “Their goal seems to strive for steady and consistent returns without the razzle-dazzle of some other firms,” says Steve Azoury, financial advisor and owner of Azoury Financial in Troy, Michigan. “They don’t go for home runs and they rarely strike out, making them one of the most steady and respected firms in the investment business.” With a wide range of mutual fund options to choose from, it’s possible to build a customized retirement portfolio centered on your needs and goals. Here are seven of the best T. Rowe Price funds to consider when investing for retirement.
The seven best T. Rowe Price retirement funds:
— T. Rowe Price Growth Stock Fund (PRGFX)
— T. Rowe Price Blue Chip Growth Fund (TRBCX)
— T. Rowe Price Retirement 2040 Fund (TRRDX)
— T. Rowe Price Retirement 2030 Fund (TRRCX)
— T. Rowe Price Capital Appreciation Fund (PRWCX)
— T. Rowe Price U.S. Bond Enhanced Index Fund (PBDIX)
— T. Rowe Price Health Sciences Fund (PRHSX)

yeah
these are retirement accounts, but the same as reg brokerage
just wish they did it like fido

You should be nervous!’—legendary money manager slashes stock market exposure from 55% to 25%
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/you-should-be-nervouslegendary-money-manager-slashes-stock-market-exposure-from-55-to-25-2020-06-05
/As investors we should always get nervous when we start making too much money too easily. As a foolish youth I once ignored that rule while speculating on interest rate futures, and got my fingers slammed in the door very quickly and very hard./
Do you agree with his views....
Maybe it's a v shape after all
Maybe it's a great day to bail if I am 6 12 months from retirement

Every post you make FD is all about you. "I saw this. I did that. Every one else is dumb for missing it." The point is the likelihood of anyone 'investing" in this fund, not trading, would not have seen a 40% drop in 2 days on the horizon.
Yes, totally BS. And what is the smiley face for?

You are correct, I didn't know in advance how bad it could be but I expected it to be bad.
Your reaction is typical, I see anger and disbelief when I tell you my thoughts and how I operate. The smiley is to let you know it's all expected.
In this thread(

link), I documented many trades that I have done since 2-28-2020. I made several similar posts on MFO too, see (here). Why no admit I made a great call.
I'm pretty sure you will come back and request me to post every trade I make :-)
My trading style has been established for years which helped me in the last 3 years since retirement in 2018. I will sell any bond fund that loses more than 1%, actually, I even sell earlier if other funds in the same category behave differently or I can find a better fund according to my goals.
Here is the bottom line: while you claim it's all BS the facts show I sold all my portfolio to cash prior to the meltdown.

You sound a little cocky, but I wouldn't worry too much. There's some sour grapes goin around lately. I got some crap for commenting on a post on someone bummed on staying in cash, not buying the dip, and furthermore, anticipating a second covid wave to justify in another thread. These things happen. We've all f-ed up. No big deal.

Every post you make FD is all about you. "I saw this. I did that. Every one else is dumb for missing it." The point is the likelihood of anyone 'investing" in this fund, not trading, would not have seen a 40% drop in 2 days on the horizon.
Yes, totally BS. And what is the smiley face for?

You are correct, I didn't know in advance how bad it could be but I expected it to be bad.
Your reaction is typical, I see anger and disbelief when I tell you my thoughts and how I operate. The smiley is to let you know it's all expected.
In this thread(link), I documented many trades that I have done since 2-28-2020. I made several similar posts on MFO too, see (here). Why no admit I made a great call.
I'm pretty sure you will come back and request me to post every trade I make :-)
My trading style has been established for years which helped me in the last 3 years since retirement in 2018. I will sell any bond fund that loses more than 1%, actually, I even sell earlier if other funds in the same category behave differently or I can find a better fund according to my goals.
Here is the bottom line: while you claim it's all BS the facts show I sold all my portfolio to cash prior to the meltdown.

The basics are still the same: Know what you own, expect the worse(which is what I do) and past performance and volatility are not guaranteed.

I call BS on that advice FD. None of what you said is usable. This was a fund with good consistent returns and a very low STD to boot. It would have been easier to interpret the risk if the funds literature would have been more accurate, especially on liquidity and possible fire-sale risk. The fund collapsed 45% before the dust could settle. 40% within 2 days. Trading limits on mutual funds that only allow trades after the market closes gives an investor 2 days as the quickest reaction time to unload. Most here aren't day traders so your advice on this fund is worthless.
Sorry, but your infallible preaching is a bit nauseating.

Well, several quotes from the past
1) 2-28-2020-According to MFO databased when you search for Multi sector funds for 3 years + best martin ratio you get the following funds
Fund performance ANFIX 5.3 IOFIX 10.6 SEMMX 5.1 BDKNX 5.7 ANGLX 4.2
2) 2-29-2020-I'm taking my profit and watching. There is no way to be sure how IOFIX will do if markets go wild
3) 3-3/2020-There is no guarantee of what will happen in the future. I think the worse was in 11/2018 when IOFIX lost more than 1% in one day.
Over the years:
I have watched IOFIX jumping 2-3 times annually 2-3% within days while others didn't.
In 2008 MBS got crushed. ORNAX(HY Muni) fell over 40% and more than others.
I can't remember the fund name but it was a bond fund in 2010-11 that I owned, sold before it crashed and you couldn't sell it for years.
Look at the above, item 3, how can a fund make 10% annually which is double than most in its category. IOFIX is an exotic fund with illiquid bonds and its daily pricing is just a guesstimation. When something looks too good to be true, it usually is
So, with the above in mind, I always watched IOFIX very carefully and was in/out over the years.
Did I know it will crash over 40%? of course not, but I thought 20% was a possibility.
As a trader, I also have specific guidelines. Prior to retirement, I would sell any bond fund that lost 3%, after retirement, it's just 1%.
I also learned years ago while trading stocks that when markets get wild and you try to sell a stock with low volume, it can go down 30% in seconds while QQQ,SPY go down just several %.
BTW, I also sold my other riskier fund which was NHMAX(HY MUNI), prior to the crash and it lost over 22%.
If you still think the above is BS, then be it :-)

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1074440/000138713120005366/amidex-497_060120.htm
(AMDAX,AMDEX,AMDCX)
497 1 amidex-497_060120.htm SUPPLEMENT DATED JUNE 1, 2020
REVISED FOR REVIEW AND DISCUSSION
AMIDEX™ Funds, Inc.
4300 SHAWNEE MISSION PARKWAY, SUITE 100
FAIRWAY, KS 66205
1-888-876-3566
SUPPLEMENT DATED JUNE 1, 2020 TO THE SUMMARY PROSPECTUS, PROSPECTUS AND
STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION DATED SEPTEMBER 30, 2019, AS SUPPLEMENTED
This Supplement updates certain information contained in the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”) of AMIDEX Funds (the “Fund”), dated September 30, 2019, as supplemented. You should read this Supplement in conjunction with the Prospectus and SAI and retain it for future reference. You may obtain an additional copy of the Prospectus and SAI, free of charge, by calling 1-888-876-3566 or by sending an e-mail request to [email protected], or you can view, print and download a copy of these documents at the Fund’s website at www.amidex.com.
The purpose of this Supplement is to provide you with information about the liquidation and termination of the AMIDEX35 Israel Fund (the “Fund”).
Information Regarding the AMIDEX35 Israel Fund
At a meeting held on May 15, 2020, the Fund’s Board of Directors (the “Board”), upon the recommendation of Index Investments, LLC, the Fund’s investment adviser, the Board determined that is was in the best interests of the shareholder’s of the Fund to close and liquidate the Fund and on May 28, 2020 the Board of Directors approved a Plan of Liquidation (the “Plan”) under which the Fund will liquidate and terminate. It is expected that the liquidation will take place on or about June 19, 2020 (the “Liquidation Date”). Under the Plan, the Fund will sell its portfolio securities for cash and will convert any other assets to cash or cash equivalents by the Liquidation Date and pay any liabilities. On the Liquidation Date, the Fund will distribute cash pro rata to all remaining shareholders who have not previously redeemed all of their shares. This distribution will be a taxable event for each shareholder that is not tax-exempt, resulting in a gain or loss measured by the difference between the amount distributed to the shareholder and the shareholder’s basis in the Fund’s shares. Once the distribution is complete, the Fund will terminate.
In anticipation of the liquidation, the Fund will close to new investments, effective on June 1, 2020. In addition, the Fund will sell its portfolio holdings in an orderly manner to convert its assets to cash. During this time, the Fund might not pursue its investment objectives or policies.
Please note that you may be eligible to exchange your shares of the Fund at net asset value per share at any time prior to the Liquidation Date for shares of the same share class of another fund under certain circumstances. Please also note that you may redeem your shares of the Fund at any time prior to the Liquidation Date as described in the Fund’s Prospectus, dated September 30, 2019, as supplemented. In general, exchanges and redemptions are taxable events for shareholders. If you own Fund shares in a tax deferred account, such as an individual retirement account, 401(k) or 403(b) account, you should consult your tax adviser to discuss a Fund’s liquidation and determine its tax consequences.
For more information, please call 1-888-876-3566.

In addition, owning just one fund does nothing to manage fund manager and strategy risk.

You couldn't be more wrong about PARHX @Old_Skeet, or any of the TRP retirement funds. This 1 fund is made up of 13 TRP equity funds and 8 fixed income funds. This fund holds 21 other funds with all different managers and is as diversified between market size and sectors and yes, managers as needed by most anyone's standards. To compare it to a fund with little liquidity and no diversification like IOFAX is silly and misleading.

This is why the board is so great as we can exchange ideas and concepts. What might be right for one just might not be so right for another.

Can't disagree with this statement. It doesn't mean though that exchanging ideas and concepts on this board or any board adds much to total return. It may very well act opposite.

GMO has been saying EM will out preform for years.. Eventually by the roll of the dice they will be right I guess. I think they base a lot of their opinion on valuations. This outpreformance may eventually be is true but the only thing Brazil is out preforming on now is new Covid cases and deaths, for example. I think Covid will decimate EM.
GMO website has many very long and very thoughtfully argued position papers, including a number by Grantham that are valuable about climate change, but I have never mad any money following their advice.
Inker has just cut equities to 25% in GBMFX the global allocation fund he has run for decades.
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/gbmfx/analysis
Mere mortals can't get into this fund, although it is not clear why you would want to with it's middling record over the last few years. TIAA offered it for years in their retirement plans, but recently removed it probably because of nonperformance. My wife's account would have been better off in VWINX which has a ten year return of 105% vs GBMFX 38%
Every dog may have it's day....

You can get into Inker's GMO fund. WARCX Wells Fargo Absolute Return is a feeder fund into GBMFX. However the expense ratio is 2.28% and a 1% differed load. Its track record is not stellar.

Hi @Derf, as of this morning self managed is down -5.5% YTD, -7% from high. The Schwab robo did better with -5.0 YTD, -5.3% from high. My biggest mistake was having my bond portion in non-diversified, low liquidity funds like IOFAX, MAINX and HY munis. I took a loss selling off IOFAX and MAINX and chalked it up to a lesson learned.
For a total portfolio at about 50% equity, my #s, -5% YTD aren't very good. If you look at a simple 1 fund portfolio like TRP retirement 2015 fund, PARHX, that fund is only down -3.3% YTD. I often ask myself why not just buy that fund and play around the edges if you want to have fun. Not to hurt anyone's feelings, I'm convinced most of us here do not add value to a portfolio. We may talk a good game with our buys and sells and timing but #s don't lie. Hard to beat a target date fund.

@bee, Depending on which phase the investors are in, retirees may have have 5.5 years timeframe to recover. The recent 30% drawdown would require 47% return just to reach the break-even point.
Assuming the retirees chose a more conservative allocation, say 50/50 as they approach the retirement date, the drawdown of their portfolio would near 15% and that is more manageable. Challenge today is finding bond funds with yields north of 2% without incurring higher risk including junk and EM bonds. Even the investment grade bonds went down to 8% during the sell off in early March as investors fled to cash. The market has recovered some in recent weeks but now the trade war with China just flare up again.

GMO has been saying EM will out preform for years.. Eventually by the roll of the dice they will be right I guess. I think they base a lot of their opinion on valuations. This outpreformance may eventually be is true but the only thing Brazil is out preforming on now is new Covid cases and deaths, for example. I think Covid will decimate EM.
GMO website has many very long and very thoughtfully argued position papers, including a number by Grantham that are valuable about climate change, but I have never mad any money following their advice.
Inker has just cut equities to 25% in GBMFX the global allocation fund he has run for decades.
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/gbmfx/analysis
Mere mortals can't get into this fund, although it is not clear why you would want to with it's middling record over the last few years. TIAA offered it for years in their retirement plans, but recently removed it probably because of nonperformance. My wife's account would have been better off in VWINX which has a ten year return of 105% vs GBMFX 38%
Every dog may have it's day....

Just received an email about the fund closing:
May 27, 2020
Dear Fellow Investors,
We are announcing today that the Grandeur Peak International Stalwarts Fund (GISYX/GISOX) will close to new investors through intermediary platforms after June 10, 2020. The Fund will remain open to existing investors. Retirement plans and financial advisors with existing clients in the Fund will still be able to invest in the Fund for existing as well as new clients as long as their clearing platform will allow this exception. The Fund will remain open to new investors who purchase directly from Grandeur Peak Funds.
The International Stalwarts Fund recently reached $1 billion under management, and the investment strategy in total is now roughly $2 billion. As you know, we carefully review capacity at the firm level and strategy level. We are committed to keeping all of our investment strategies small enough to be able to fully pursue their investment strategies without being encumbered by either their individual asset base or the firms’ collective asset base. Achieving performance for our clients will always be our paramount objective.
The International and Global Stalwarts Funds will reach their five-year anniversary this September. When we launched the Stalwarts Funds, we talked about capacity across the Stalwarts line being in the $5-7 billion range given the Stalwarts’ focus on more liquid SMid-cap (Small- and Mid-cap) companies. We also hoped that the Stalwarts Funds would therefore be able to stay open to clients longer than many of our small/micro-cap funds. We are moving the International Stalwarts strategy to soft closed to protect existing investors’ continued access to the Fund.
We have been very encouraged by the performance of the Stalwarts Funds and the value they have added to our collaborative research process over the last 4½ years (click here for Fund performance). We are excited to have recently added the US Stalwarts Fund to the Stalwarts line. The Global Stalwarts and US Stalwarts funds both remain open to new and existing shareholders. Part of the decision to close the International Stalwarts Fund is to preserve space for future assets in the Global Stalwarts strategy. Managing “sister” funds like the three Stalwarts Funds allows us to provide investment opportunities to a diverse breadth of investors.
Thank you for your continued interest and trust. If you have any questions, don’t hesitate to reach out to me or a member of our Client Relations Team.