You can see a link to my previous post at Morningstar.

I don't see any reason to own this fund. YTD over 8% is impressive but I would not buy a bond fund that made over 5% in one day (that was at the end of 01/2019). This is a red flag. If I want to Multi sector funds see the following
Suppose I wanted to hold several bond OEFs without much trading. I searched at Schwab the following
Taxable Bond;
Morningstar Category: Intermediate Core Bond, Multisector Bond, Nontraditional Bond, Ultrashort Bond;
Morningstar Overall: 4 Stars, 5 Stars;
Standard Deviation: Less than or equal to 3.6;
Total Return (3 Month): Greater than or equal to 2; Average Annual Return (3 Year): Greater than or equal to 5; Average Annual Return (1 Year): Greater than or equal to 4.5; This criteria is to ensure a fund with good performance for 3-12-36 months to cover ST+LT performance.
Fees/Loads: OneSource Funds (no-load, no transaction fee); Open to New Investors: Yes
The following are pretty good choices I can live with (select 4-5 funds from the following VCFAX+PIMIX+JMUTX+PUCZX+JGIAX+IOFIX).

@msf,
I stand corrected; I should have said that it was not exactly the same, but has the same manager as RPHYX and similar investment philosophy.
I found the summary prospectus from the Crossingbridge Funds website. Institutional class is $250k; individual class is $2,500. Have not been able to find the regular individual class application on their website.
https://www.crossingbridgefunds.com/assets/fund/CrossingBridge_SummaryProspectus.pdf

My apologies. Normally I take note of funds that are still open via direct purchase (e.g. VWELX), but I completely missed this one. I can't even make the excuse that, well, it had been completely closed but subsequently partially reopened. The policy @TheShadow quoted has been in effect since the first day (April 5, 2017) that it partially closed.
RPHYX is definitely open if you are willing to go through the transfer agent (i.e. buy directly from the fund).
Edit: Regarding CBLDX - interesting way to get access to the same lead manager as RPHYX in another short term high yield fund. (Crossingbridge is a wholly owned subsidiary of Cohanzick Management, which manages RPHYX.)
From its prospectus, it doesn't appear to be using the same approach as RPHYX (e.g. buying orphaned securities). Though from its very short average maturity (3/8 years), it's hard to imagine what else it could be holding. It seems to have taken on more credit risk than RPHYX (M* saying its average credit rating is B, vs. BB for RPHYX), while going even shorter than RPHYX.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2012/01/riverpark-short-term-high-yield-fund-rphyx-july-2011/
As with Zeo, CBLDX is not available NTF. Also, it seems to require a $250K min (there's a ticker for investor class shares, but the prospectus says this isn't offered for sale). If you're going that high, you might look at RPHIX ($100K min).

Thanks guys. I had big positions in RPHYX until the fed raising cycle started in earnest. When you could get no risk 2.5%, it just didn't make sense to go for a risky 2.75-3.25%. I left a couple of stub positions so that I could contribute when the time comes.
Now that the fed may be on the verge of reversing course, RPHYX strategies may make sense again.

I thought RPHYX was open on a limited basis?
From the 1/28/19 summary prospectus,
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1494928/000139834419001751/fp0038745_497k.htm
The Fund is currently available for sale on a limited basis. The following groups will be permitted to purchase Fund shares:
1.Shareholders of record of the Fund as of April 5, 2017 (although if a shareholder closes all accounts in the Fund, additional investment in the Fund from that shareholder may not be accepted) may continue to purchase additional shares in their existing Fund accounts either directly from the Fund or through a financial intermediary and may continue to reinvest dividends or capital gains distributions from shares owned in the Fund;
2.New shareholders may open Fund accounts and purchase directly from the Fund (i.e. not through a financial intermediary); and
3.Members of the Board of Trustees of RiverPark Funds Trust, persons affiliated with RiverPark Advisors, LLC or Cohanzick Management, LLC and their immediate families will be able to purchase shares of the Fund and establish new accounts.
The Fund may from time to time, in its sole discretion, limit the types of investors permitted to open new accounts, limit new purchases or otherwise modify the above policy at any time on a case-by-case basis.
I do not want to discourage/disappoint prospective investors who want to invest in the fund.
Also, you may want to look at Crossingbridge Funds. They have a similar type of fund,
CrossingBridge Low Duration High Yield Fund. Investor class is available for $2,500 initial investment. The Fund is managed by Portfolio Managers, David Sherman and Michael De Kler.
From the Crossingbridge Funds website for the Low Duration High Yield Fund:
The strategy focuses on purchasing high yield debt with an expected effective maturity of 3 years or less and a weighted average investment horizon of 0.75-2 years. Our goal is to limit credit risk and interest rate risk.

I'm going to guess that you're talking about buying the Zeo funds at Fidelity or Schwab, where the transaction fee to buy a fund is $49.95. Elsewhere it ranges from $0 (direct investment or Vanguard (Flagship level only), to midlevel, e.g. Interactive Brokers ($14.95) and Vanguard ($20), to the $50 range (TDAmeritrade charges $49.99, not $49.95).
http://www.zeo.com/documents/Latest/ZEOIX.Platforms.pdf
Schwab and Fidelity charge $49.95.
While it is true that Schwab and Fidelity charge $49.95 to establish a position (which you could also do by buying direct and then transferring shares to the brokerage), they charge nothing to sell. Also, Fidelity lets you buy additional shares for $5/purchase if you use their automated investment service. If you're using the brokerage for stashing cash for several months, that may be a reasonable price for the convenience. If you're dollar cost averaging say, $2K or less per month, at Schwab you can spread that out as $99 daily purchases and pay no fee. (Schwab doesn't charge for purchases of under $100).
As to why Zeo doesn't make its funds available NTF, here's a typical disclosure from Fidelity:

For funds participating in the NTF program, Fidelity receives compensation that can typically range from 0 to 50 basis points based on the average daily balance. As of 12/31/2011, 96% of the mutual funds currently in the NTF program are in the 35–40 basis point range.

When the brokerage services the account, the distributor saves some money, but nowhere near 40 basis points. ZEOIX spends a total of 27 basis points on "other expenses", and much of that would remain after outsourcing the servicing to Fidelity. They could cover the extra, say, 30 basis points by adding a 0.25% 12b-1 fee and charging that to everyone, including those who were buying the fund direct from the transfer agent.
RPHYX seems to have a unique strategy, but if you don't already hold a position, it's closed. And as you observed, ZEOIX is a TF fund. If you're willing to go slightly longer with duration (still under 1 year) and consequently slightly higher volatility (thus somewhat at odds with the idea of a fund that shouldn't lose for more than a month or so), you might take a look at SSTHX. Load waived and NTF at Schwab and Fidelity, somewhat lower ER than the other funds. My guess is that the 1* rating (vs. the 2* for the other funds) is due to the slightly higher volatility.

wanted to start a positon but don't want to pay a $49.95 fee......why don't they go NTF? I have to pay $50 every time I want to dollar cost avg?
If fed about to cut, is it time to run back into RPHYX?

!@#$^&* BONDS !@##$^&^&*
After watching What TIPS wont do, I'm wondering if my investment in VTIPX is completely misplaced. I thought I was diversifying, but now I'm not sure. It's also the only way I own bonds outright other than funds like RPHYX and my balanced holdings.
The reason I went for the short-term version few years back was under the assumption since interest rates have nowhere to go but up and inflation couldn't possibly stay so low for so long, I decided VTIPX would be a better investment than VIPSX and I could have some of my cash earn some income because Bank Savings Accounts weren't, and for the most part still don't yield much interest.
At this time Marcus gives 2.25% interest. WTF I am still doing holding (the bag?) with VTIPX, given it would seem Fed is done raising interest rates. Appreciate if people who hang out with 007 can shed some light, because right not I'm effing shaken, not stirred, not to mention VIPSX did not end up being dangerous as was expected by experts few years back and VTIPX was supposed to be the way to invest in inflation protection securities.

Thx
From. Newmax
DFA Real Estate Securities I (DFREX) has a one-year return of 21.65%. Its biggest holding is American Tower (AMT)/
Neuberger Berman Real Estate (NREAX) has a one-year return of 20.72%. Its biggest holding is also American Tower (AMT).
Principal Real Estate Securities (PRRAX) has a one-year return of 20.25%. Its biggest holding is Prologis (PLD).
Cohen & Steers Real Estate Securities (CSEIX) has a one-year return of 19.98%. Its biggest holding is Equinix (EQIX).
DWS RREEF Real Estate Securities (RRRAX) has a one-year return of 19.54%. Its biggest holding is Simon Property Group (SPG).
Read Newsmax: Barron's: 5 REITs for Income Investors to Consider
Important: Find Out Your True Retirement Date in Minutes Online! Go Here Now

Thx sir @_old_skeet
For me keep investing w 80/20 distribution until 62 yo then change to ~60/40 and slowly to 50/50 (adjust as needed) there after

Interesting stuff. Charles reflects at length on the lessons of the Morningstar conference and the fund families he found most compelling. Ed gets pretty specific about advice for long-term investors. We talk a bit about the new Zeo and Cannabis funds; update you on INDEX, the S&P 500 equal weight index fund that shouldn't be able to outperform its cheaper competitor, but does; and a talk with Paul Privitera about an active ETF that balances bank loans and high-yield bonds.
Chip and I are about to head out for 11 days in the west of Ireland. The travel arrangements are ugly but the country's beautiful. Charles will watch over things while we're gone. Please don't give him a headache.
As ever,
David

Hi @Derf,
For me, I'm fully invested within my asset allocation of 20% cash, 40% income and 40% equity. Following my rebalance policy I can hold up to plus (or minus) two percent form the threshold weighting. With this, I can hold up to a 42% weighting in either my equity allocation or income allocation, or both, while letting cash float before having to do a forced rebalance. This means cash could fall to the 16% range, or below. For equities, I can tactically overweight by up to 5% from the 40% threshold, if felt warranted. So, cash could get as low as 13% and I still would be within my allocation guardrails.
Just this past week, I bought a little in one of my global equity funds that has a monthly distribution with a yield of 3.4%.
Remember, stocks usually go soft during the summer months. For me, being a long term investor and (if) wanting to add to my equity allocation I'd average in through the summer months. But, I'd also govern with caution and spread my buys out in a position cost average step buy approach based upon the price movement of the S&P 500 Index.
An example of my step buy approach would having me buying, from the recent high, at 2850, 2770, 2680, 2590, 2500, and so on and so forth. The deeper the Index falls, in retreat, I'd increase the amount of each step buy. The way I'd, most likely, step out of these positions would be to sell the 2500 step when the Index had moved upward reaching the 2680 mark. This would afford me about a 7% return for this step. Likewise, I'd step out of the 2590 position somewhere around the 2770 mark with a gain of just short of 7%. Through the years this is how I have managed my spiffs (special investment positions). Sometime I buy the equally weighted S&P 500 Index fund (VADAX) and sometimes I buy an equity mutual fund that has a good dividend yield such as EADIX or INUTX. Going the good dividend route pays me while I await the upward turn along with any capital appreciation that I would also make.
Remember, most A share funds can be exchanged into other A share funds through most mutual fund companies through a nav (net asset value) exchange program commission free. I'd did this many times moving between a bond mutual fund like (ABNDX) to an equity mutual fund like (AGTHX) and then back into a bond fund in the American Funds family for years without paying any commission for these exchanges whatsoever. This is one of the advantages of A share mutual funds that often times get overlooked by investors.

@Old_Skeet: Thanks for your thoughts. I was wondering what you were thinking after S&P cracked 2800, & now resting at 2752.
Have a good weekend, Derf

Here is my May ending market barometer report which follows the S&P 500 Index.
Old_Skeet being a retail investor provides this information for information purposes only. It simply reflects what I am seeing in the markets, my thinking, along with what has worked best within the Index and within my portfolio for the past month.
Old_Skeet's market barometer closed the month with a undervalue reading of 158 which is up from April's month ending reporting of 138 which indicated that the Index was overbought. Generally, a higher barometer reading indicates there is more investment value in the Index over a lower reading. Short interest in the Index has moved from 1.8 days to 2.9 days to cover so some investors have continued to increased their short positions during the month. The yield on the US10YrT has moved from 2.50% down to 2.13%. From last reporting the 500 Index has moved from 2940 to 2752 for a 6.4% loss. For the month of May, according to SPDR's Sector Tracker, the three best performing sectors were real estate XLRE +1.22% ... utilities XLU -0.78% ... and, health care XLV -2.22%. Trading volumes remain light and below their averages as investors leave stocks and move to the safety of bonds. Even though the barometer has moved into undervalue range, on it's scale, there are still some major troubling spots for the markets that investors should be concerned about. A few of these concerns that come to mind are trade issues with China, Brexit and now proposed tariffs on Mexico.
Generally, a higher barometer reading indicates there is more investment value to be had in the Index over a lower reading. With this, I have now begun to add to one of my equity mutual funds that pays a monthly distribution. Before doing any major buying, though, I'll continue to add to my cash allocation as my money market mutual funds (GBAXX & PCOXX) are both currently paying a yield of about 2.50%. For the month, my three best performing funds were FRINX +0.58% ... PONAX +0.43% ... and, TSIAX +0.39%. In comparison, both my money market mutual funds, each, produced a return of about +0.21% for the month.
My thinking, my positioning, along with my comments, should not to be taken as investment advice.
Thanks for stopping by and reading.
I wish all ... "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet

FYI: Real estate investment trusts have had a good 2019. The FTSE Nareit All Equity REITs index has returned 17.8% as of May 28, compared with 12.7% for the S&P 500 index.
REITs are popular among income investors because they’re required to pay out at least 90% of their taxable income to shareholders.
Selecting individual stocks can be tricky. There are 33 REITs specializing in retail properties alone, according to Nareit, a trade group. For guidance, Barron’s looked at the largest holdings of five real estate mutual funds with strong one-year performance. Those funds are listed in the accompanying table.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/reits-for-income-investors-51559165239?mod=past_editions

Looking at even this fund's ten year record is misleading. It used to be a player in an even narrower niche - e-commerce. (Think about this fund launching in Sept. 1999 to get a sense of how far off Landis was.)

Effective April 30, 2010, Firsthand Funds will change the name of Firsthand e-Commerce Fund to Firsthand Technology Opportunities Fund. ... The new name, however, reflects the adoption of a broader investment strategy by the Fund. Beginning on April 30, 2010, the Fund intends to invest at least 80% of its assets in high-technology companies in the industries and markets that the Fund’s investment adviser believes hold the most growth potential within the technology sector. After that date, the Fund will no longer be restricted to investing that portion of its assets in securities of e-commerce companies. ...

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/917124/000139834410000302/fp0001430_497.htm
A couple more blasts from Firsthand's past:
The Street, Firsthand Funds Again Swings the Ax, July 15, 2002

Assets in the ( TVFQX) Firsthand Technology Value fund, once among the most high-profile of the category, have declined from some $2.5 billion at their peak to $948 million today, forcing the firm to retrench for the second time.
Friday's layoffs, which included three research analysts, brings the firms total head count to 33 people, including three analysts. Firsthand first reduced its workforce on Sept. 24, 2001, when it let go 15 of its 65 workers, including two analysts. ...
The Tech Value fund, which was down 51% year-to-date as of Friday ...
Other funds in the Firsthand family haven't fared all that well of late, either. Its ( TIFQX) Technology Innovators fund is down 54% year to date. ( TLFQX) Technology Leaders has fallen 36% since the start of the year, and ( GTFQX) Global Technology is down 40% year to date.

Marketwatch, Former Internet-fund superstars, 10 years after the dot-com bust, March 8, 2010

What separated Kevin Landis from other tech-fund managers in the mid-1990s was that he'd actually worked in Silicon Valley and knew about semiconductors. ...
"They were industry insiders who had buddies who were in the same hot tub as the venture capitalists, and therefore were going to lead them to the next new thing," Kinnel [Morningstar] said. "It was more hype than reality."
In 1999, though, it was the returns of Technology Value and smaller sibling Firsthand Technology Leaders TLFQX that were unreal, up 190% and 153%, respectively. Had you split $20,000 evenly between these two funds in January 1997, you'd have been sitting on $115,000 just 26 months later. Fast-forward 10 years: The two investments were worth about $32,000. ...
Landis was ebullient as well about Firsthand e-Commerce Fund TEFQX, +0.23% which came to market in September 1999 and didn't have a positive year until 2003. "Our timing couldn't have been worse," he said, but pointed out that the e-commerce fund's performance for the past five years has been strong, posting a 10.1% annualized gain that puts it at the head of its class.

FYI: Gautam Khanna’s philosophy of “respond instead of react” is one he learned as a teenager mountaineering in the Indian Himalayas. “When you’re going into the elements at very high altitude, above the tree line, and snow-capped year-round, it’s all about preparation,” says Khanna, who moved to the U.S. after high school. “It’s understanding the risks and understanding how are you going to handle those risks when they arrive.”
The same can be said for fixed-income markets, where unexpected economic news or government policy can trigger losses. Khanna, who has been the lead manager of the $606 million BNY Mellon Insight Core Plus bond fund (ticker: DCPAX) since its 2010 inception, credits a rigorous investment process for the fund’s consistent returns. Its institutional shares have returned an average of 3.2% a year over the past five years, better than 92% of intermediate-term bonds. (Retail shares became available in 2018.)
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/bny-mellon-bond-fund-51559273407?refsec=funds
M*Snapshot DCPAX:
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/DCPAX/quote.html

Thanks John for posting the newsletter. I always enjoy reading what Dr. Madell has to write. I am most happy to see he posted his model portfolio asset allocations. Being an asset allocator, myself, this is something that I enjoyed seeing.
One of the ways I deal with fear (and greed) is by adjusting my asset allocation mix.
As many on the board my know, I recently moved from an asset allocation of 15% cash, 35% income and 50% equity to 20% cash, 40% income and 40% equity. This required me to reduce my equity allocation by 10% and raise both my cash and income allocations by 5% each. This was mostly done due to my age; but, also because of the current market climate.
This new allocation provides me sufficient income, allows for some growth of principal, over time; and, if a cash draw is needed, above portfolio income generation, then there is ample cash available. Plus, I also have enough cash available for new investment purposes if felt warranted.
Again, thanks for posting Dr. Madell's newsletter. I enjoyed reading it.
Old_Skeet

I hate to say this, but the author of this article should be ashamed. Look at the long-term history of this fund including before the 2009 recovery began compared to Berkshire or the S&P 500 and there's no comparison. You can do this by either clicking the "Maximum" link or entering an earlier start date on this chart which goes back to September, 1999 if you adjust it, then add the S&P 500 Benchmark and Berkshire:
quotes.morningstar.com/chart/fund/chart?t=TEFQX&region=usa&culture=en-US
To compare a pure tech fund to Berkshire or the broad market is absurd to begin with but especially misleading if you don't include the fund's previous history before 2009 as we've been in a super bull market for tech ever since. Since 1999, this fund even lags the average tech fund, which is an apter comparison.