Difficult to find the application forms (or even current prospectuses) online, but I came up with some things that may do. Though it's probably better to contact the fund directly for the forms.
Curious too that the prospectus says explicitly that the fund is offered to nonresidents (bold in original):

How to Purchase Shares
The Fund may be purchased by U.S. or non-U.S. shareholders, and the procedure for purchasing shares are the same for both U.S. and non-U.S. shareholders .

From the SEC site, the standalone IRA application (also found as an exhibit in the 2018 prospectus, see below):
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1679960/000116204418000223/state485bposexh5201803.htm
A search on the SEC mutual fund filings page for STATX comes up empty, but SeekingAlpha (of all places) seems to have all of them (set Filing Type to All):
https://seekingalpha.com/symbol/STATX/sec-filings
The March 29, 2018 485BPOS (also from SeekingAlpha) contains the IRA application form as (exhibit) Ex. 99.28.h.v, and the individual taxable account application form as Ex. 99.28.h.vi
https://seekingalpha.com/filing/3957574

https://gulfnews.com/business/markets/for-investors-an-ugly-three-months-after-10-very-good-years-1.61074505
Article from Dubai but gives very interesting perspectives
-Many are worried that the best days are in the past — at least for the foreseeable future-

I wanted to purchase this fund awhile back but it wasn’t available anywhere much less at TD Ameritrade where I trade. Still not available at TD but now I see it is available at Vanguard with a transaction fee. From what I hear these newer funds go to Schwab first so not sure if is available there now too. My kind of fund in that its equity curve is straight up with no volatility. One of the rare bond funds that is meaningfully up over the past 1 month, 3 months and YTD. A more volatile fund but with the same performance would be NVHIX/AX. At least for me, with money market funds closing in on 2.50%, I would prefer to see a fund where there is a potential return several percentage points above cash. The mini debacle in junk corporates has my attention but would like to see more blood there. Anxious to see what early January has in store for bonds.

A report of "Harold Evensky’s final presentation on investing."
https://www.advisorperspectives.com/articles/2018/09/26/the-investment-world-according-to-harold-evensky
Very straightforward, nothing earth shattering, though several points I've seen elsewhere are included here:
"Evensky cited the Shiller CAPE ratio, which is 31.1 versus its historical average of 16.2. 'It’s a very expensive market,' he said."
Maybe not as expensive as three months ago when this presentation was made, but still far from cheap.
"If a manager cuts turnover from 100% to 50%, the marginal reduction in taxes is negligible, Evensky said. Managers need to be closer to 10% turnover to be thought of as tax-efficient."
Which is why I may fret about Dick Strong-type churning, but don't obsess over "moderate" turnover. Though turning over an entire portfolio within a year still isn't "moderate" from other perspectives.
“'Our clients don’t need cash flow,' Evensky said. 'They need real income.' The problem with dividends is that they are not consistent; interest is also volatile, as bonds are subject to interest rate movements. 'Our clients need reasonably consistent income,' he said".
Hence a focus on total return.
“'we tend, particularly in planning, to focus on the probability but ignore the consequences. That can be really dangerous in planning.' If you know the probably of success is 95%, the consequences of failure still matter, he said. We need to plan, for example, for additional longevity of our clients."
Which is why I continue to be concerned about simulations showing 95% success that don't also tell me how bad the results are in those other 5% (miss by just a little, or spend golden years of poverty?)
Evensky has changed his outlook about annuities, which he once derided as an inappropriate vehicle for his clients. Single-premium immediate annuities (SPIAs) and deferred-income annuities (DIAs) will be the single most important tool in the coming decade, he said, mostly because their fees have come down

Curious to see if anyone owns this fund or their thoughts about this fund? Thanks for any information provided.
Fund website is http://www.tbil.co/
Already contacted the 800 telephone number on the above webpage. Telephone number appears to be to its main offices in Las Vegas, not the transfer agent Mutual Shareholder Services, LLC (http://www.mutualss.com/welcome.aspx ). Other telephone party directed me to contact Mutual Shareholder Services, LLC for an application if I was interested.
Fund investment strategy is:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1679960/000116204418000562/state497201809.htm
Principal Investment Strategies
Under normal market conditions, the Fund primarily invests its net assets (exclusive of proceeds (collateral) received with respect to securities lending, repurchase agreements and reverse repurchase agreement transactions) in U.S. Treasury securities, which include bills, notes, and bonds issued by the U.S. Treasury, that have remaining maturities of three months. The balance of the Fund’s portfolio will consist of a mixture of cash and U.S. Treasury securities, which include bills, notes, and bonds issued by the U.S. Treasury, with remaining maturities of less than three months and remaining maturities of longer than three months. In addition, under normal market conditions, the Fund will hold at least one U.S. Treasury security with a maturity of at least 14 months, as measured at the time of purchase, and the Fund will maintain a portfolio with a dollar weighted average maturity of at least 90 days. The Portfolio manager may adjust the dollar weighted average maturity of the Fund’s portfolio within the stated limit based on current and anticipated changes in interest rates. The foregoing specific maturity lengths are described as measured at the time of purchase. U.S. Treasury securities are backed by the “full faith and credit” of the U.S. Government, which means that the U.S. Government guarantees that the interest and principal will be paid when due. All of the Fund’s assets will be invested in U.S. dollar-denominated securities.
In order to enhance income, the Fund intends to enter into securities lending, repurchase agreement and/or reverse repurchase agreement transactions that provide the Fund with income at either fixed or floating (variable) interest rates and fees. The Fund may lend its portfolio of securities to broker/dealers, institutional investors, institutional investment managers, banks, mutual funds, and insurance and/or reinsurance companies located in one of the member countries of The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (“OECD”). Securities lending allows the Fund to retain ownership of the securities loaned and, at the same time, earn additional income from fees paid by borrowers. Loans will be made only to parties who have been reviewed and deemed satisfactory by New York Alaska ETF Management LLC, the Fund’s investment adviser (the “Adviser”), pursuant to guidelines adopted by the Board of Trustees (the “Board” or the “Board of Trustees”) of State Funds (the “Trust”), and which provide collateral, which is either (i) 102% cash or (ii) 102%-115% U.S. government securities. The collateral is marked to market daily and, if the value of the existing collateral decreases or the value of the securities lent increases, the borrower will be required to post additional collateral.
The Fund may enter into repurchase agreements and/or reverse repurchase agreements with broker/dealers, institutional investors, institutional investment managers, banks, mutual funds, and insurance and/or reinsurance companies located in one of the member countries of the OECD. Repurchase transactions involve the purchase of securities with an agreement to resell the securities at an agreed-upon price, date and interest payment. Reverse repurchase transactions involve the sale of securities with an agreement to repurchase the securities at an agreed-upon price, date and interest payment and have the characteristics of borrowing. the Fund will invest over 5% of its assets in reverse repurchase agreements in which proceeds (collateral) received with respect to reverse repurchase agreements will include cash, U.S. Treasury securities or debt instruments secured by U.S. Treasury securities. The Fund will earmark or establish a segregated account equal in value to its obligations to hold the aforementioned proceeds (collateral).
A bond’s “maturity” refers to the length of time until the bond’s principal must be paid back. “Dollar weighted average maturity” (“WAM”) is the weighted average amount of time it take for the Fund’s bond portfolio to mature. This means that the higher the Fund’s portfolio’s WAM, the longer it takes for all of the bonds in the portfolio to mature. WAM is calculated by computing the percentage value of each bond instrument in the portfolio. The number of days or months until the bond’s maturity is multiplied by each percentage, and the sum of the subtotals equals the WAM of the bonds in the portfolio.
WAM is not the same thing as “duration.” Duration is an approximate measure of a bond’s price sensitivity to changes in interest rates. If a bond has a duration of six years, for example, its price will rise about 6% if interest rates drop by a percentage point, and its price will fall by about 6% if interest rates rise by a percentage point. For investment purposes, the Fund uses the Macaulay method of calculating duration, named after its creator, Frederick Macaulay. Macaulay duration is the weighted average term to maturity of the cash flows from a bond. The weight of each cash flow is determined by dividing the present value of the cash flow by the price.
The Adviser may, but is not required to, use a securities lending agent to facilitate its securities lending transactions or may itself act as agent, for which the Adviser will receive no separate compensation. The Fund may split fees earned from securities lending with any unaffiliated lending agent, but in no event will the Fund pay more than 15% of the interest or fees earned from securities lending to a securities lending agent who administers the lending program in accordance with guidelines approved by the Board of Trustees.
The Fund seeks to maximize income from securities lending and reverse repurchase agreement transactions through entering into such transactions with counterparties who may reuse the securities obtained through securities lending and/or reverse repurchase agreements with the Fund to collateralize other transactions with different counterparties. Such counterparties may be willing to enter into securities lending and/or reverse repurchase agreement transactions with the Fund on more favorable terms than would otherwise be available.
Under normal market conditions, the Fund will invest not less than 80% of its net assets (exclusive of collateral with respect to securities lending, repurchase and reverse repurchase agreement transactions), plus any borrowings for investment purposes, in U.S. Treasury securities, which include bills, notes, and bonds issued by the U.S. Treasury, that have remaining maturities of three months.
The Fund is not a money market fund and thus does not seek to maintain a stable NAV of $1.00 per share. Additionally, the Fund’s investment strategy will cause the Fund’s portfolio to exceed the dollar weighted average maturity requirements imposed on money market mutual funds. Furthermore, the Fund’s use of reverse repurchase transactions will have a leveraging effect on the Fund’s NAV, which is generally inconsistent with the stable net asset value associated with money market mutual funds. In addition, although the Fund may invest in securities that may be held by money market funds, it is not subject to the regulations applicable to money market funds.

@msf The comment @Junkster made fits my situation well. I receive social security and have a modest but dependable inflation adjusted pension. I also receive somewhat substantial investment income (3.5% of beginning principal balance gets withdrawn each year). My three legged stool can probably remain stable after suffering significantly more investment loss than his two legged stool could. After a "bad" investment year, travelling and other frills may decline for one or perhaps a few years. But, day to day life is not impacted......

FYI: As Christmas shopping comes to an end, companies within the retail and consumer goods industries will be closing shop for the one day of the year. Following a large number of busy shopping sprees, the consumer discretionary and consumer staple sectors have predominantly successful Q4s in previous years. This year has not to been the case.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.etfstream.com/news/5727_fall-in-christmas-shoppers-burdens-the-consumer-spending-sectors

FYI: Japanese stocks plunged Tuesday and other Asian markets declined following heavy Wall Street losses triggered by President Donald Trump’s attack on the U.S. central bank.
The Nikkei 225 NIK, -5.01% fell by an unusually wide margin of 5%, hitting its lowest point since May 2017 with a close at 19,155.74. The index is now down just over 21% from highs reached in early October, which meets a widely accepted definition of a bear market. Loses were widespread, with all 33 Tokyo Stock Exchange subsectors posting losses. Fuji Electric 6504, -7.55% dropped over 7%, SoftBank Group 9984, -7.58% was off 7.6%, Fast Retailing 9983, -4.13% fell over 4% and Toyota 7203, -5.25% sank over 5%.
China’s Shanghai Composite Index SHCOMP, -0.88% pared losses to close down 0.9%, with the smaller-cap Shenzhen Composite 399106, -0.81% faring the same. Taiwan’s benchmark index Y9999, -1.17% declined more than 1%.
Markets in Hong Kong, Australia and South Korea were closed for Christmas.
Regards,
Ted
U.S.: (Closed
Europe: (Closed)
Asia: WSJ:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/japanese-stocks-track-u-s-drop-to-20-month-low-11545712962?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=1
Asia: MarketWatch:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/japans-nikkei-plunges-after-wall-streets-latest-slide-2018-12-24/print
Asia: Bloomberg:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-25/nikkei-225-falls-below-20-000-as-japanese-stock-rout-accelerates
Asia: Reuters:
https://www.reuters.com/article/japan-stocks-close/corrected-nikkei-hits-20-mth-low-after-wall-st-slides-on-u-s-political-worries-idUSL3N1YU1C0
Asia: CNBC:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/25/asia-markets-japans-nikkei-hits-20-month-low.html
Current Futures:
https://finviz.com/futures.ashx

Lost about >10% of my total portfolio .. What should I do now.

John, that’s why it’s important to maintain a well-stocked liquor cabinet.
While my funds are off almost 5% YTD, the half-dozen bottles of scotch whisky I stashed away last summer haven’t lost a dime in value.

I reached out to Holbrook Holdings this afternoon about the fund's 3 and 1-month underperformance.
Here's the reply:
The fund is struggling in this environment because all corporate credit is weak, but it is particularly bad in the BDC space. A fund that tracks BDC’s is down 11.5% over the last month, which is indictive of where these have traded. Since there is so much retail money in these, they tend to become extremely oversold in environments like this, where they seem to be thrown out at all levels. Issues that were paying 4-5% 3 months ago are now yielding 8-10%, and not a lot has changed except sentiment in that space. The spread on these has widened out to over 1 point which is as severe as it has been since August 2011, so we are continuing to hold and anticipate that after tax loss selling abates, but it is no fun in the meantime.
Hope this helps.
I profiled the fund in the July Observer.

Re: TRRIX - The fund lost 18% during 2008. The S&P was off 36.5% that year. Over the past 10 years (including 2008) the fund has averaged in excess of 6% annual. I’d guess that cash and cash-equivalency instruments failed to return even half that much over the same period.
I’m not a momentum investor. Further, I can afford to have 2 or 3 bad years back-to-back without seriously impacting my subsistence / standard of living. What I never hear mentioned here (or anywhere) are the dangers of paper currencies - implicit in their tendancy to self-devalue over the years. Just think about that new car sticker of $3,000 in 1970 (which I referenced above) to get a sense of what happens to virtually all paper currencies over time. Trying to fight that continuous devaluation of paper is the best reason I can think of for charting a long term investment course.
@Junkster is known to be a superb investor. He was so good trading in and out during his day that he was banned by at least one house. Says a lot. :) And I always welcome his contributions here!

I don't own this fund, but I disagree with your analysis. According to M* 93% of the bonds this fund owns are BBB or better, so it's not junk. It did drop last week, but is still up 0.5% ytd, which is better than the vanguard total bond market index (-0.8% ytd), a good proxy for the bond market in general. HOBIX is a tiny, new fund ($31M in assets, inception mid-2016), and expenses for a bond fund are high (1.34%). If I owned it I wouldn't be panicking.

Quite a drop, especially last week, even accounting for the distribution. While the projected inflation increases have cooled off, as best I can tell HOBEX/HOBIX got killed because of it's large holdings of BDC bonds. BDC stocks are down 15 t0 20%, and over 10% last week alone. Even pure junk bond funds like JNK have not done any worse than HOBEX. HOBEX looks more like a junk bond fund now than anything else. Anybody else thinking of selling?

FYI: Stocks slumped last week, with the Dow posting its worst weekly performance in a decade and the Nasdaq descending into a bear market.
The S&P 500 ended the week down 7%, while the Dow fell 6.87%. The Nasdaq plunged 8.36% for the week and entered a bear market, lower by more than 20% from its August 29 high of 8,109.69 points.
After last week’s crushing performance, the major U.S. indices are on track to end the year firmly in the red. The S&P 500 and the Dow are each down more than 9% in 2018, while the Nasdaq is down more than 8%.
The final full calendar week of 2018 will be a short one for investors. The stock market will close early at 1 p.m. ET on Monday and will be completely closed on Tuesday in observance of Christmas.
Regards,
Ted
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/government-shutdown-know-week-ahead-201945078.html

FYI: (Market's Close At 1:00 PM EST.)
U.S. stock futures rose Monday, indicating markets could bounce in a holiday-shortened session after the worst week of trading since the financial crisis of 2008.
Dow Jones Industrial Average futures YMH9, +0.36% rose 125 points, or 0.6%, to 22,533, while S&P 500 futures ESH9, +0.41% gained 15 points, or 0.6%, to 2,429.25. Nasdaq-100 NQH9, +0.60% futures rose 38.75 points, or 0.6%, to 6,102.
On Friday, the Dow Jones Industrial Averages DJIA, -1.81% fell 414.23 points, or 1.8%, to 22,445.37, while the S&P 500 index SPX, -2.06% fell 50.84 points, or 2.1%, to 2,416.58. The Nasdaq Composite Index COMP, -2.99% COMP, -2.99% traded down 195.41 points, or 3%, to 6,332.99.
The Nasdaq officially entered bear market territory Friday, down 21.9% from its Aug. 31 highs. That’s as the S&P and the Dow inch closer to bear market territory, with the S&P off 17.5% from its Sept. 20 highs, and the Dow down 16.3% from an Oct. 3 high.
The weekly performances for the Dow — off 6.9% — and the Nasdaq — down 8.4% — were the worst since 2008. The S&P fell 7.1% for its worst weekly showing since 2011. Friday’s volumes were the heaviest since August 2011.
Regards,
Ted
WSJ:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/global-stocks-slip-amid-treasury-department-comments-11545642300
Bloomberg:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-23/asian-stocks-set-to-slip-yen-up-as-caution-reigns-markets-wrap?srnd=premium
MarketWatch:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-stock-futures-point-to-a-christmas-eve-bounce-for-battered-equities-2018-12-24/print
IBD:
https://www.investors.com/market-trend/stock-market-today/dow-jones-futures-bear-market-trump-government-shutdown-fed-chairman-powell/
Reuters:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-stocks/index-futures-little-changed-ahead-of-holiday-shortened-week-idUSKCN1OM0M7
CNBC:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/24/us-stock-futures-fall-slightly-as-the-dow-attempts-to-rebound-from-its-worst-week-in-a-decade.html
Europe:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-stocks/european-shares-dip-in-thin-holiday-trade-idUSKCN1ON0CB
Asia:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/asian-markets-mostly-lower-as-investors-await-wall-streets-next-move-2018-12-23/print
Bonds:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/21/bonds-us-treasury-yields-continue-climb-ahead-of-auctions.html
Currencies:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/24/forex-markets-japanese-yen-swiss-franc-us-politics-in-focus.html
Oil:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/24/oil-markets-global-crude-supply-in-focus.html
Gold:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/24/gold-markets-us-politics-dollar-in-focus.html
Current Futures:
https://finviz.com/futures.ashx

I would be on suicide watch if I was down 4.6% YTD (or for that matter 1% or 2%). and I have definitely been around the block a few times.

I appreciate the sentiment. Different situations require different approaches. But I’m wondering if, perhaps, we’ve been around “different blocks” over our lifetimes? I’ve always associated increased risk with increased potential reward. Over my 50 years investing (my “block”, so to speak), I’ve witnessed the following:
A 22.6% one-day drop in the Dow Jones Industrial Average (1987).
An 86% one-year increase in the NASDAQ (1999).
A 50% decline in the NASDAQ the following year.
A 50% drop in the S&P in fewer than 2 years (2007-‘09).
The “halving” of home values across large portions of the U.S. over just 3 or 4 years (2007-10)
Japan’s Nikkei 225 topping out @ 39,000 (1989) & bottoming @ 7,055 20 years later.
Gasoline at 16-cents a gallon - and at $5.00 a gallon.
The price of gold @ $35 and @ $1600.
A United States prime lending rate of 22% (1983) and 3% (2015)
Mortgage rates as high as 15-20% and as low as 3%.
New full-sized American autos priced at $3,000 (1970) / new pickups priced at $70,000 (today).
The Enron (energy) fiasco, Michael Milken and junk bonds, Richard Strong and mutual funds, and Bernard Madoff with his ponzi scheme.
The Vietnam War, the 9-11 attacks, the impeachment of two Presidents and attempted assassination of two others.
In short, stuff happens. No one should ever put money at risk in the markets that they can’t afford to (or aren’t willing to) lose.

What makes for a good fund for staying invested through a downturn? YAFFX appears to be working its magic again during the current pullback.
Here is how it has fared this fall:
Fall of 2018
And here is how it fared during and following the 2008 to 2009 market decline:
2008 to 2009 Downturn
YAFFX had 24% in cash as of 9/30. So, there were plenty of $'s on the sidelines to put to work when valuations become more favorable. This might not be a bad pick for someone who wants to stay invested but is concerned about the direction of the U.S. stock market going into 2019.

New wall going up.
https://outabouter.com/2018/12/21/canadian-gofundme-raises-6b-in-two-hours-to-pay-for-privacy-hedge-along-entire-us-border-2/?fbclid=IwAR3QaDC8DYVg2VR1SOGiRAZ1LvkEud5EIfz9YJ9Hvu9rT4mlRT9bqT6FJ2Q

Dark humor.
My math shows the S&P off 17.5% since its high in late summer. Not cheap - but “cheaper” than during the most recent euphoria. To me that implies valuations are heading in the “right” direction. I’m most curious when the report was actually penned. Dated December, 2018 - but likely drafted sometime in November before the steepest losses of the current bear market. The 15+% YTD drop as of today (much greater in some segments) might have been enough to mitigate the paper’s bear case.
If I’m reading GMO’s “Executive Summary” correctly, it is suggesting “0” exposure to U.S. equities. I’ve been slanting more towards global equities (and currencies) due to the increasingly unstable and chaotiic U.S. political / governmental structure. Certainly bears consideration.
However, the report makes one wonder: Whatever happened to the diversified portfolio - long hearlded as the safest, steadiest approach to investing? Throwing all your marbles into one basket or another is one way to garner outsized reward - if you happen to get it right. But it also opens the door to huge losses if you’re wrong or decide to exit when the pain becomes greater than you can bear.
How bad are things? Price’s TRRIX, a well diversified conservative balanced fund targeted toward retired individuals and having near 60% exposure to fixed income, was off only 4.6% YTD. Their slightly more aggressive TRRFX - targeted towards those near retirement was off a bit less. For those who have been around the block a few times, these are not staggering losses or something one should lose much sleep over.

I would be on suicide watch if I was down 4.6% YTD (or for that matter 1% or 2%). and I have definitely been around the block a few times. My nest egg is about all I have. No pension and minimal SS benefits of only $1076 monthly of which they deduct $189 for my Part B premium. And now next year they are deducting another $12.40 for something I don’t quite understand. So $874.60 next year is all I will receive. So I have no choice but to live by two rules. - #1 Don’t lose and # 2 Don’t forget Rule #1.

Dark humor.
My math shows the S&P off 17.5% since its high in late summer. Not cheap - but “cheaper” than during the most recent euphoria. To me that implies valuations are heading in the “right” direction. I’m most curious when the report was actually penned. Dated December, 2018 - but likely drafted sometime in November before the steepest losses of the current bear market. The 15+% YTD drop as of today (much greater in some segments) might have been enough to mitigate the paper’s bear case.
If I’m reading GMO’s “Executive Summary” correctly, it is suggesting “0” exposure to U.S. equities. I’ve been slanting more towards global equities (and currencies) due to the increasingly unstable and chaotiic U.S. political / governmental structure. Certainly bears consideration.
However, the report makes one wonder: Whatever happened to the diversified portfolio - long hearlded as the safest, steadiest approach to investing? Throwing all your marbles into one basket or another is one way to garner outsized reward - if you happen to get it right. But it also opens the door to huge losses if you’re wrong or decide to exit when the pain becomes greater than you can bear.
How bad are things? Price’s TRRIX, a well diversified conservative balanced fund targeted toward retired individuals and having near 60% exposure to fixed income, was off only 4.6% YTD. Their slightly more aggressive TRRFX - targeted towards those near retirement was off a bit less. For those who have been around the block a few times, these are not staggering losses or something one should lose much sleep over.