Just received from TDA...
However, the transaction fee for your purchases of funds from certain fund families that do not pay TD Ameritrade for record keeping, shareholder, and other administrative services on the shares purchased will increase to $74.95.

WOW I am sure Schwab will apply $75 fee across the board

People may not be aware of how brokerages are compensated by funds, even TF funds, for shelf space. For example, Schwab discloses:

To compensate Schwab for various shareholder services, NTF Funds pay Schwab an asset-based annual fee, which usually equals 0.40% of the average fund assets held at Schwab but may be as high as 0.45%. ... When adding a new fund to Schwab’s NTF platform, NTF Funds also pay Schwab a one-time establishment fee.
...
Most [Transaction] Fee Funds pay Schwab a low annual asset-based fee, typically 0.10% annually of the average fund assets held at Schwab, although the fee can range up to 0.25% annually. ... When adding a new fund to Schwab’s platform, [Transaction] Fee Funds also pay Schwab a one-time establishment fee.

As a business decision, brokerages may decide to carry funds that refuse to pay even this "low" fee. Conversely, funds may make a business decision not to offer their funds on some platforms even if they are charged nothing. This is where the $75 fee kicks in and why you can't get Admiral shares on most platforms.

“Vanguard doesn’t compensate us for the services we provide,” a Fidelity spokeswoman told Barron’s. “That’s why there’s a higher transaction fee for its funds,” she added, referring to the $75 fee that Fidelity charges to buy a Vanguard fund, well above its normal $49.95 rate.
...
Maintaining the exclusive rights to sell its low-cost Admiral shares for active funds is one way to prevent firms like Fidelity or Schwab from poaching client assets. “Vanguard is saying, ‘Why should we offer our best priced item on someone else’s shelf when we want investors to stay with us?’” Daniel Wiener, editor of monthly newsletter The Independent Adviser for Vanguard Investors, tells Barron’s.

https://www.barrons.com/articles/vanguard-lowest-cost-funds-fidelity-retirement-schwab-51556315451 (April 28, 2019)

Firstrade:

A Short Term Redemption Fee of $19.95 will be applied to redemptions of mutual fund shares held less than 90 days. Broker-Assisted redemptions will incur a charge of $19.95. Redemptions of less than $500 will incur a $19.95 fee, unless the entire value of that fund is less than $500. For mutual funds transferred to Firstrade, the 90 day holding period will begin when the account transfer process is complete.

https://invest.firstrade.com/cgi-bin/main#/content/customerservice/pricing/
Once one logs in, there's a fund screener that gives not 11,000 funds but 16,854 funds, of which 10,265 are described as no load, and 6,589 of which are called load funds.

Before Firstrade dropped all fund transaction fees, it charged no transaction fee for funds on its NTF list and for load funds (since it collected loads on those funds), while charging $9.95 for no load, TF funds. I'm inclined to think that all Firstrade did was remove the $9.95 charge on the TF funds but that it still charges loads on funds it labels load funds. Especially since it shows 6K load funds in addition to the 10K+ funds that are "no load".
NTBAX is one such fund. Firstrade lists it as open but as a load fund. However, it does also list NTBIX as a noload fund, albeit with a $25K min.
While you won't find NTBAX on the Firstrade's public pages, you will find its sister fund NAVAX / NAVCX there, displayed as a load fund. That gives you a good indication of how NTBAX is handled there as well.
Interestingly, you will also find its purported sister fund NDNAX /NDNCX listed. The problem is that this fund is defunct. Which suggests that the number of funds Firstrade is claiming is inflated, whether intentionally or not.

I have been using Firstrade for years and happy with service overall. I can confirm that they do charge loads for load funds, but I still find they have the best selection of funds being offered at NTF AND institutional shares at low minimums in some cases.

Firstrade:

A Short Term Redemption Fee of $19.95 will be applied to redemptions of mutual fund shares held less than 90 days. Broker-Assisted redemptions will incur a charge of $19.95. Redemptions of less than $500 will incur a $19.95 fee, unless the entire value of that fund is less than $500. For mutual funds transferred to Firstrade, the 90 day holding period will begin when the account transfer process is complete.

https://invest.firstrade.com/cgi-bin/main#/content/customerservice/pricing/
Once one logs in, there's a fund screener that gives not 11,000 funds but 16,854 funds, of which 10,265 are described as no load, and 6,589 of which are called load funds.

Before Firstrade dropped all fund transaction fees, it charged no transaction fee for funds on its NTF list and for load funds (since it collected loads on those funds), while charging $9.95 for no load, TF funds. I'm inclined to think that all Firstrade did was remove the $9.95 charge on the TF funds but that it still charges loads on funds it labels load funds. Especially since it shows 6K load funds in addition to the 10K+ funds that are "no load".
NTBAX is one such fund. Firstrade lists it as open but as a load fund. However, it does also list NTBIX as a noload fund, albeit with a $25K min.
While you won't find NTBAX on the Firstrade's public pages, you will find its sister fund NAVAX / NAVCX there, displayed as a load fund. That gives you a good indication of how NTBAX is handled there as well.
Interestingly, you will also find its purported sister fund NDNAX /NDNCX listed. The problem is that this fund is defunct. Which suggests that the number of funds Firstrade is claiming is inflated, whether intentionally or not.

And, MultiSearch now has ability to screen funds by 3, 6, 9, and 12 month "momentum" (@MikeW) ... both values and ratings. This new feature is also in the Trend & Momentum group of MultiSearch screening options.

MultiSearch now has ability to screen Trend using EMAs (exponential moving averages), which places more emphasis on more recent month(s) than the SMAs (simple moving averages). With those familiar (@Mav123), it uses the common 2/(N+1) weighted multiplier. You will find ability to screen on both values and ratings in the Trend & Momentum group of MultiSearch screening options.

+1 fundly Thanks for the info-quite a few funds available that I'm interested in. Possibly a brokerage to hold my Vanguard funds ,as well.

I am in no way affiliated with Firstrade so I can report without hesitation after 1 year now, that I have been, for the most part ,happy with this account that allows every, yes every of the 11,000 funds on the platform NTF. Fees occur if a transaction occurs within 120 days if I remember correctly. I do not sell any positions less than 120 days anyhow. There have been a few hiccups ,but if anyone has issues with TF's this may be a solution. Customer service is not on the same level as with my other brokerages, Fidelity being one. But for no fees ,I am willing to put up with this issue .Many institutional and Vanguard Admiral funds have low entry amounts ,many at $500.

So TDA still charges a $49.95 tf for non ntf funds and still maintains a 180 day holding period to avoid STR fees? For me, yawn... a big nothingburger. Make it a 9.99 tf and reduce the holding period to 30 days, and I'll reopen my TDA account in a heartbeat !

Rforno, what is the effective date of the revised fees structure you mentioned? Every place on the TDA site I looked it still shows the old pricing. I also checked Standard Retail Pricing: Commissions and Fees document revised 08/21 - TDA 4075 F 08/21. BTW, the $49.95, when effective, is consistent with Schwab pricing. I am more interested in the no fees on sales of TF funds.

Changes are effective 1 Oct.

Rforno, what is the effective date of the revised fees structure you mentioned? Every place on the TDA site I looked it still shows the old pricing. I also checked Standard Retail Pricing: Commissions and Fees document revised 08/21 - TDA 4075 F 08/21. BTW, the $49.95, when effective, is consistent with Schwab pricing. I am more interested in the no fees on sales of TF funds.

The email from TDA says the effective date is October 1.

Rforno, what is the effective date of the revised fees structure you mentioned? Every place on the TDA site I looked it still shows the old pricing. I also checked Standard Retail Pricing: Commissions and Fees document revised 08/21 - TDA 4075 F 08/21. BTW, the $49.95, when effective, is consistent with Schwab pricing. I am more interested in the no fees on sales of TF funds.

Graust, NTFs are subject to STR fees in most mainstream brokerages and are true at TDA as well. I wish they decrease the 180 day period to 60 days like Fido and Vanguard. The no fees on sales posted above would be only for TF funds, which has been the case at Fido and Schwab. So TDA is conforming to Schwab pricing in that respect, I suppose.

Color me confused (thanks for the heads up, by the way):
1. Current fee is $49.99…so 4 cents?
2. I didn’t think they charged a fee for sales, except in the case of the 180-day holding period for NTF funds (which meant a single fee paid, not on the buys, but on sales); are they eliminating the 180-day holding period? Do you can buy an NTF fund, and then sell it whenever and not pay any fees?
Obviously these are mainly rhetorical, but if anyone knows, I would appreciate a reply here. Or I can call too haha.
Thanks @rforno

ER @0.5% on $80B AUM is $400 million not $4 million in annual fees. A 75% drop in AUM still fetches $100 million in annual fees.

Liz Ann Sonders Chimes in on:
Why people are getting the inflation debate wrong: Charles Schwab's Liz Ann Sonders
why-people-are-getting-the-inflation-debate-wrong-liz-ann-sonders
Video Interview

This part of the common prosperity effort may dampen the headline growth rate:
China Property Market Curbs

Another filing as of 8/24/21:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1494928/000139834421016711/fp0068207_497.htm
497 1 fp0068207_497.htm
RiverPark Funds Trust
RiverPark Short Term High Yield Fund
Institutional Class (RPHIX)
Retail Class (RPHYX)
Supplement dated August 24, 2021 to the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”) dated January 28, 2021.
This supplement provides new and additional information beyond that contained in the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and SAI and should be read in conjunction with the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and SAI.
IMPORTANT NOTICE ON PURCHASE OF FUND SHARES
Further to the Supplement dated May 20, 2021, effective as of 4 p.m. on August 27, 2021 (the "Revised Closing Date"), the definition of existing shareholders who may purchase Retail and Institutional Class Shares of the RiverPark Short Term High Yield Fund (the "Fund") is modified as follows:
Existing shareholders will only include shareholders of record of the Fund as of the Revised Closing Date (although if a shareholder closes all accounts in the Fund, additional investments into the Fund may not be accepted).
After the Revised Closing Date, the following eligible investors may also open new accounts:
·New shareholders may open Fund accounts and purchase shares directly from the Fund (i.e. not through a financial intermediary).
·Any trustee of RiverPark Funds Trust, or employee of RiverPark Advisors, LLC or Cohanzick Management, LLC, or an investor who is an immediate family member of any of these individuals.
The Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to determine the criteria for qualification as an eligible investor and to reject or accept any purchase order. Sales of Retail Class Shares and Institutional Class Shares of the Fund may be further restricted or reopened in the future.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

Ask these meme lovers why GME went up +27.5% today (8/24), and they answer "Fundamentals". LOL. But pressed further, they have no idea how to answer. The new generation of uninformed traders thinks its the quickest road to riches. Seems a lot more like musical chairs to me. Is either GME or AMC worth more than $8/share?
Its a market gone mad, and this paves the way for a Cathie Wood type figure to get her 15 minutes of fame. Ride the wave.
Eventually, the wave crashes, and Cathie gets dumped into the dustbin of history. Fads come and go, and so do bubbles.

Lithium-ion batteries have provided the first serious competition in a century to fossil fuels and combustion engines for transportation. Now an honorary fellow at Asahi Kasei, the Japanese chemical firm where he has worked for nearly 50 years, Yoshino sees more disruption ahead as transportation and digital technology become one industry, sharing lithium battery technology.
And,
Right now, the auto industry is thinking about how to invest in the future of mobility. At the same time, the IT industry is also thinking about the future of mobility. Somewhere, sometime, with the auto industry and the IT industry, there is going to be some kind of convergence for the future of mobility.
Tesla has their own independent strategy. The one to look out for is Apple. What will they do? I think they may announce something soon. And what kind of car would they announce? What kind of battery? They probably want to get in around 2025. If they do that, I think they have to announce something by the end of this year. That's just my own personal hypothesis.

battery-pioneer-akira-yoshino-tesla-apple-electric-future

Whitesnake's Here I Go Again: