Hello and welcome to the forum. First of all, I don't know which fund your specific target date fund is, but most of the ones with a retirement date of 2045 are going to be around 90/10 or maybe 85/15 stocks/bonds. Going much lower than that is unlikely (given historical patters) to raise returns by much, but it is likely to increase volatility. At around 85/15 or 90/10, the fractional marginal increase in expected return is not a very good trade off for the expected volatility.
Here is this in a picture that you'll see from time to time here:
What this shows is that if you want higher returns (i.e. move UP along the Y axis) then you have to take greater risk (i.e. move RIGHT along the X axis). When you look at this chart, an 80/20 allocation (move 4 squares to the left of the "100% Stocks" square) loses only 0.5% of returns compared to a 100/0 allocation, but the standard deviation (a measurement of volatility and risk) goes down 3%. This means that this portfolio will achieve nearly the same returns, but have much less volatility. Dialing it down to 60/40, which seems like a coward's portfolio, only lowers your expected return by 1%, but reduces your standard deviation from 16% down to 11% (almost a third less) for a smoother ride.
While volatility might not matter much to a 33-year-old with a long horizon, it's still a nice trait to have in a portfolio for many people, especially when you probably don't pay much for it when comparing a 95/5 portfolio, for example, to an 80/20 portfolio.
There have been many posts from others about the so-called impending bond collapse, so I'd recommend you read through some of them to get a better perspective.