I know of some investors who have held RPHIX/RPHYX as a cash alternative fund, during its closure period. Now that it is open again, I expect it will garner quite a bit of interest from new investors. Riverpark has a good history of managing HY bond funds, with a low risk approach.

Here is the link:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1494928/000139834420000731/fp0049672_497.htm
497 1 fp0049672_497.htm
RiverPark Funds Trust
RiverPark Short Term High Yield Fund
Institutional Class (RPHIX)
Retail Class (RPHYX)
Supplement dated January 14, 2020 to the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (the “Disclosure Documents”) dated January 28, 2019.
This supplement provides new and additional information beyond that contained in the Disclosure Documents and should be read in conjunction with the Disclosure Documents.
IMPORTANT NOTICE ON PURCHASE OF FUND SHARES
Effective as of the close of business on January 15, 2020 (the “Re-Opening Date”), the RiverPark Short Term High Yield Fund (the “Fund”) will be publicly available for sale without limitation.
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.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.

I had a very pleasant, though short, conversation with David Sherman today. They've filed a reopening notice (technically, a 497 / Material Change notice) with the SEC today. Fund assets peaked north of $900 million, they closed and now assets are down to $700 million or so. That's manageable, so they reopened. David speculates that the outflows are FOMO-driven; every time the stock market hits a new high, investors yank more cash from the fund.
RPHYX had the distinction of having the highest Sharpe ratio of any fund in existence for years. It's a low volatility / low risk fund that's best used as a strategic cash fund. (I've owned it for a long time and use it in lieu of a savings account.) It has averaged 3.1% annually with a maximum drawdown, lifetime, of 0.6%. David's current reading of the market, bond as much as equity, is that it's time to maximum caution and his funds are positioned commensurately.
Morningstar calls it a high-yield fund, which is silly (it's correlation to the group is about .6) but unavoidable given the categories available to them. Lipper classifies it as short-term high-yield, which is fair. It's a Great Owl.

Howdy.
Good question, and I suspect that Mark is about right. Mr. Cinnamond is, beyond any reasonable question, a very talented stock selector. He's also adamantly unwilling to pay more for stocks than he thinks they're worth. He probably one of 10 or 15 managers left with an absolute value orientation; the Fed killed off the rest by pouring in stimulus any time the market threatened to dive.
As of 9/30, he owned seven stocks and was maybe 7% invested. Those seven have outperformed their benchmark but the portfolio, as a whole, is up just 1.3% since launch on April 30.
I suppose the best way to use Palm Valley is the same way you'd use a hedge fund. It would be a 10% position that's uncorrelated with the market and likely to offer a substantial buffer when things turn south. In the meantime, it modestly outperforms an ultra-short bond fund (MINT or RPHYX, for examples).
David

ZEOIX has been on my wish list since 2014 when I wanted to find a low risk fund with similar risk-reward characteristics as the closed RPHYX. David did a nice review of ZEOIX back then and I know he has talked highly of it in interviews. Problem for me is that one of my buy criteria is not to pay a transfer fee for any fund. Alas, at Schwab and TRP where the bulk of my money sits there is that fee. I check periodically on my Schwab account to see if that has changed but it has not.
For those interested, Zeo Capital Advisers has started another low risk credit fund with similar objectives and style to ZEOIX. It is called Zeo sustainable credit fund, ZSRIX.
https://www.zeo.com/strategy/

I too am glad to see the emphasis on Liquidity. It was probably not responsible for the "flash crashes" of ETF prices some of us can remember but that is a good example of what it might look like if everyone in some of these junk heavy bond funds headed for the door at the same time.
Many of the positions are priced by proxy "fair value" but that number will be meaningless.
However many of the non traditional income funds profiled here ( I suspect widely used by MFO members) like ZEOIX, RPHYX, RCTIX, IOFIX PFUIX are loaded with these securities.
Does anyone have an idea how to predict in even a vague what might happen to even very short duration junk bonds or RMBS in such a situation?
ZEOIX dropped almost 1% in couple of days last December, a fact the fund said would soon be recovered because the bonds were soon to come due at par. When redeemed at par the NAV was restored.
Is duration then some protection for liquidity issues like this? IF you trust your fund manger to avoid defaults, and hope that she/he doesn't have to sell at reduced prices before bond redemption. I have no idea how a mortgage backed security would trade in that situation.

I am looking for some punch over my MM funds with minimum risk. I am not too happy with RPHYX and RSIVX.

You might look at the other fund in the Semper stable too: SEMRX/SEMIX. Mostly mortgages, very short duration (0.4), mostly investment grade, current distribution yield ~ 3%, avg. price a shade over par, 5* in M*'s ultrashort bond category.
NAV risk is pretty well contained in the current environment: NAV's varied in a very narrow range (9.88-9.90) since April 15, per Yahoo historic price tables.
Again, it's mostly floating rate, 74% per the current fact sheet.
Good luck out there -- AJ
P.S. I've been thinking of dumping one of the rate-sensitive funds I own now and partially replacing it with SEMRX next time there's a dip in T rates. I don't think holding a slug of intermediate and long duration is going to be the winner it was for a while there, and if another big rate dive does materialize, it's easy enough to rent exposure thru TLT or IEF.

TANSTAFFL. There's going to be a tradeoff between risk and return, and among different types of risk.
RPHYX takes on credit risk (junk bond fund), but tries to mitigate it by buying bonds with special situations (e.g. "redeemed debt" bonds - bonds that have already been called and will be redeemed shortly).
SEMPX invests in MBSs, which all else being equal tend to yield a bit more in exchange for negative convexity risk. Even though their effective durations appear short (based on expected time until borrowers repay their loans), as interest rates drop this expected time expands (they won't be refinancing or prepaying). That's negative convexity - duration extends, prices may drop as vanilla bond prices are rising. I'm beginning to rethink this risk in a low interest rate environment, because borrowers don't refinance for small drops in rates and there's no room left for big drops.
FPNIX remains one of my favorite funds that I have never invested in. It uses a variety of derivatives in a defensive manner to reduce risk based on market conditions. It has never had a down year in its over 30 years. It's unconventional in the breadth of its investments and the techniques it uses, keeping in mind that these are used to mitigate risk, not to boost returns while keeping risk constant.
Traditional ultrashort bond funds generally trade off volatility for yield. No magic - they eek out a little more yield than MMAs (banks) with a little more volatility, or up the yield a tad more with a bit more volatility.
There's nothing inherently good or bad about any of these approaches. Pick your poison, or diversify among them so that you'll have some (but not all) cash available at any time depending on which approach to risk mitigation is working at the moment. Also consider muni funds if you're in the 22% or higher bracket as another form of diversification.

confused. please tell me fund that has lowest risk. I thought MBS had much higher risk than another SD fund with same characteristics. Or is my judgement being clouded by the financial crisis?
I am looking for some punch over my MM funds with minimum risk. I am not too happy with RPHYX and RSIVX.

@_msf - hi sir. What private bond(s) / funds /etf do you hold in your portfolio.. Thx

Not sure what relevance specific investments have.
I do own shares of a bond fund that holds a significant amount of Mexican bonds, including some 8% coupons. It has an even larger exposure to Mexican pesos, so it appears that the manager is doubling down against the dollar.
If the manager is right, then another fund that simply owns these peso-denominated bonds unhedged should make a nice profit. As I tried to illustrate above, the clearly lower YTM of dollar denominated Mexican bonds vs. peso denominated bonds says that the market expects otherwise. (I prefer managers who don't follow the crowd, so I'm not disturbed by this divergence)
As to premium vs. discount bonds, I prefer to buy premium bonds, and have usually (but not always) done so, though I'm gradually trying to rotate out of individual bonds into funds. My preference for premium bonds is twofold. One is that because many people have an aversion to "paying up" (more than par) for bonds even with the same YTW, there's somewhat less demand for premium bonds. This results in slight bargains for those bonds.
There's also the possibility of a kicker. Many premium bonds are priced in anticipation of being called. If they're not called, then one continues to reap the benefit of the above market coupon. RPHYX, for example, also likes to purchase cushion bonds.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2012/09/riverpark-short-term-high-yield-fund-rphyx-july-2011-updated-october-2012/
That's the way I invest in so far as it relates to the considerations I introduced - Mexican currency, Mexican 8% peso-denominated bonds, premium bonds. What sort of Treasuries I own wouldn't seem to matter here, except to say I keep a diversified portfolio across countries, across currencies, across maturities, across quality ratings. And I don't buy individual foreign bonds. That's what fund managers are for.

Interesting link, @davidmoran, to 2013 MFO commentary. The link to Sam Lee's M* article on CAPE is worthwhile, particularly where he says he'd prefer more history than just back to 2002. He was also very prescient in saying he'd feel more comfortable if CAPE were shown to work in overseas markets. As members have said here, DEULX has not really shown much until this year.
My re-reading also reminded me that the Oakseed Boys were announced with some fanfare in that issue of MFO and RPHYX appeared to be a world-beater. History was not kind to SEEDX (liquidated in 2017) and RPHYX tested shareholders' patience when Mr. Sherman seemed to stumble in trying to explain a period of severe under performance. I previously in this thread noted (obliquely) that Ryan Caldwell's Chiron Capital Allocation (CCAPX) fund benefited from a nice write up in MFO and then promptly showed it couldn't keep up with its M* bogey. The success of CAPE really stands out against a backdrop of a several failed efforts to invent a new mousetrap.

@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.

I am a ZEO shareholder and have never paid a transaction fee. I don't use a broker. My wife invested in RPHYX a few years ago. We think of ZEOIX and RPHYX in a similar way: it's a "better mattress". I've been with ZEO a few years and I have gone directly to the transfer agent. Zeo uses Gemini in Omaha. Simple paperwork. No fee. ZEOIX shares are in a non-retirement account. Next week I'll have an IRA account in ZSRIX. If you want a ZEO fund in a 401k I suppose it might be harder to avoid a broker.

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.

Relative to the funds in the article (and the additional funds mentioned here), RPHYX doesn't look so impressive these days. It has an SEC yield of 2.10%. Clearly it's having difficulty meeting its objective of beating the 1 year Treasury (currently 2.4%, as noted by Lewis) by 200 - 400 bps.
Currently, Treasuries are essentially flat from 1mo to 7 years. With that sort of curve (actually dipping in the middle), it makes little sense to me to try to eek out yield by going longer than ultrashort. Also, buying a one year CD or Treasury could serve as a hedge against rates dropping in the short term.
https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/interest-rates/pages/textview.aspx?data=yield
Instead of keeping day-to-day money in a low/no interest checking account, one can keep money in Fidelity's SPRXX (2.25% SEC yield) or FZDXX (2.37% SEC yield) and write checks/pay bills directly from that fund. (Fidelity automatically sells the MMF if you have no cash in your core/transaction account.) Every penny helps.