@ MFO Members: Here are the funds discussed by David on the show this morning.
GPEOX, GPROX, SFGIX, RGHVX, ROSSX, RYSEX, MGIAX, JGMAX, MSGAX
Regards,
Ted

FWIW, Scottrade still has it available under RiverPark. On an unrelated note, Morningstar shows RGHVX as almost entirely long as of 3/15.

Here's all I've got so far: TCW Gargoyle Hedged Value (TFHIX/TFHVX).
The identity section writes in the future tense but gives no effective date:

The following performance information relates to the Institutional Class shares of the RiverPark/Gargoyle Hedged Value Fund, a series of RiverPark Funds Trust (the “Predecessor Fund”). The Predecessor Fund offered two classes of shares, Retail Class (RGHVX) and Institutional Class (RGHIX), which invested in the same portfolio of securities, but had different returns based on their respective expenses. Retail Class shares had lower returns than Institutional Class shares because of their higher expenses. Prior to the Fund’s commencement of business, the Predecessor Fund will reorganize into the Fund, a series of TCW Alternative Funds.

The effective date of the prospectus filing is 4-10-2015.
It might be an interesting conversation.
More as soon as I have something to share,
David

@David_Snowball There are 2 Gargoyle Hedged Value funds:
(1) the one @ the Gargoyle Asset Management
http://gargoylegroup.com/gargoyle_hedged_value_master_fund_hedge_fund&pid=96
(2) the one subadvised for RiverPark (still posted on the RP fund list today)
http://www.riverparkfunds.com/Funds/GargoyleHedgedValue/Overview.aspx
Obviously, if the TCW prospectus refers to RGHVX as the predecessor fund, then this cannot be a case of an additional subadvisory relationship having been born. Is there an "effective date" mentioned in the prospectus for when this change of affiliation will occur? Strange that there is no announcement on the RP website (that I can find as of this afternoon), that the subadvisory relationship with Gargoyle has been severed.... but stranger things have happened.

I've slowly come to the conclusion that Ted and a few others are right. These funds add nothing to a diversified portfolio. They in general, do not out-perform a decent balanced fund. If you have to be right twice, in an up market and in a down market, your odds are very slim the manager can pull it off. If you look, most of these funds are only decent in one market or the another. I was sold on RGHVX when it looked great over the last couple years. But it had no protection in a down market based on the latest slow down.
A bond substitute? Pick a conservative balanced fund with 15-30% stocks. A little spice to a portfolio? Say you put 10% into one of these funds for spice or protection. In a down-turn they may save you a 10% drop over equities. So your portfolio is down 1% less. Big deal. You will get that back when the market moves up again.
Nope, I'm convinced now these "interesting and intriguing" funds were a marketing ploy feeding off investors fears of the last great recession.

I think RGHVX is RiverPark not RiverNorth. Not sure why we are comparing here. RNBWX also is different than RGHVX.
Agree nothing compelling about RGHVX. In general not sure I'm on board with hedged equity funds while I have no issue with managers hedging prudently, not all the time. FVALX is my holding in this "space".
However, again, why did we bring RGHVX into conversation on RiverNorth?

I agree with davidmoran. I also dumped RGHVX.

I looked at RGHVX lagging performance in each of as many dip periods as I could, granular and higher-level, brief and less brief, and have decided to bail, fwiw (and it's not included in the above website obvs).
They once wrote
\\\ Objective and strategy
\\\ RiverPark/Gargoyle Hedged Value seeks long-term capital appreciation while exposing investors to less risk than broad stock market indices. ... In theory, the mix will allow investors to enjoy most of the market’s upside while being *buffered for a fair chunk of its downside.*
Emphasis mine. Fail is my judgment. Something strange going on consistently in the implementation.
(Now if someone can explain why DSENX has done well through recent volatility.)

All good thoughts.
I dropped ARLSX a while ago, just because I did not care for how it behaved, and put the moneys into RGHVX and GLRBX. You might check them out; I would recommend the latter over the allocation funds already mentioned. RGHVX I am waiting to see about (not fine prose, sorry).
As others have suggested knowing, how old, tolerance of risk, what kind of moneys are we talking here (macro and gross, not details, do not want to seem intrusive)? I would not argue against canning ARLSX for sure. But tell us more, please.

Basically, you had generation one of L/S funds where managers often seemed to feel required to have a bunch of longs and a bunch of shorts. Either the funds didn't do that much of anything or didn't do that well. Then you started to have funds able to dial up and down risk more significantly and able to actually participate more in the markets. Now people are upset when the markets are down 7% or so and the funds were not able to move in a week or two.
They're not hedge funds, if you think they are going to dramatically change their holdings in a week's time, you're going to be disappointed. L/S funds are not going to shield you from every move lower in a market. If the market moves lower over months and over the course of 6-9 months they pull a "it's bad, not our fault market sucks", then yeah, that's a problem.
Funds like Pimco's All Asset/All Authority are upsetting because they're too conservative until they're not. People act like the manager of ARIVX is an evil lunatic for holding near 75% cash until this happens and the fund is suddenly near the very top of its category YTD and MTD and now I'll guess people are probably scrambling back into it. If things suddenly change for the better, those people will be all upset again.
Pimco Managed Futures has done astonishingly well. I can guarantee you that there will be a period where it's positioned wrong and people will be upset and dump it. That said, I remain rather fascinated by a managed futures mutual fund that is doing better than some managed futures hedge funds. It is also ahead of its category average by about 11%.

I have FVALX which does not call itself a hedged equity fund but does same thing in times manager deems bad. Needless to say M* classifies it as L/s. What a joke.

Doing better than Hussman, with a much simpler strategy that likely leads to far less costs for shareholders - it's what I've thought Hussman should be doing for a few years now: if you're that bearish, stop holding things like Panera and having a complex options hedging strategy and go to mostly cash and things like Walgreens.

Looks like they are all in. Not what I would have expected from a L/S fund.
http://portfolios.morningstar.com/fund/summary?t=RGHVX

Most L/S funds are heavily invested. People weren't happy with L/S funds that were basically close to market neutral, now you have ones that can be more long and .... most of them are.

>> (re)learning this lesson to my dismay
oh, hear. I thought I was the only one. Chasing rich-neighbor tips, for example, over the decades.
I am sticking with RGHVX for now for all the reasons cited and I honor their previous history. But I may not stick as long as I had planned if their downside protection is so damn weak. This is a seriously oversold market in any case.

Looks like they are all in. Not what I would have expected from a L/S fund.
http://portfolios.morningstar.com/fund/summary?t=RGHVX

Wonder what the heck is going on with their strategy and bets the last month.

RGHVX?

I guess this one is similar to SWHEX too. Notice I left HSGFX out which I own. Funds that simply invest and hedge exposure I left out. To me they are not "alternative". I mean even FPACX and CGMFX take short positions, and I am not looking at them that way either.
Not to say RGHVX should 't be worthy of consideration otherwise.

RGHVX?

I go back and forth in my mind on these 'alternative hedging' funds. But I think, Ted, comparing them to an all equity index misses the point why people by them.
I own one such fund, RGHVX. My goal is to get equity like returns or even be okay with slightly less over time with a more stable ride with downside protection. Much the same reason people buy standard equity/bond balanced funds. So with that, a better question for these alternative funds would be - do they give better returns then funds like FPACX, MAPOX or PRWCX?
The answer so far has been no. WBMAX has underperformed most balanced funds in it's short existence, but it may be to early to judge. You can say the same about other alternative board favorites like MFLDX. It also has underperformed the typical balanced fund. So the quandary, at least in my mind, why not just stick with a well managed balanced fund? Newer ideas don't always work out to be better ideas.

A brutal day today 7/31/2014:
Markets:
Dow -1.88%
Nasdaq -2.09%
S&P -1.98%
Russell 2000 -2.31%
EFA -1.67%
EEM -1.75%
GLD -1.15%
GDX -2.12.%
AGG -0.12%
Alternative Funds:
Whitebox Market Neutral Equity Investor WBLSX +0.09%
Whitebox Tactical Opportunities Investor WBMAX +0.55%
ASTON/River Road Long-Short N ARLSX -0.67%
BlackRock Global Long/Short Equity Inv A BDMAX +0.17%
PIMCO EqS Long/Short D PMHDX -1.53%
MainStay Marketfield I MFLDX -0.91%
Robeco Boston Partners L/S Equity Inv BPLEX +0.19%
Robeco Boston Partners L/S Rsrch Inv BPRRX -0.87%
RiverPark Structural Alpha Retail RSAFX -0.86%
RiverPark Long/Short Opportunity Retail RLSFX -1.38%
RiverPark/Gargoyle Hedged Value Retail RGHVX -1.59%
AQR Multi-Strategy Alternative N ASANX -0.30%
AQR Diversified Arbitrage N ADANX 0.00%
AQR Risk Parity N AQRNX -1.44%

Noteworthy were BUFOX (+.52) and JAGLX ( +1.17) so guess biotech was positive. One fund that David told us about ---RGHVX was +.14 Unfortunately these three are all minor positions. The only major "up" position was OAKIX at +.15

Pondering getting more defensive.
Thinking of replacing all my FCPVX with PVFIX.
Thinking of selling my TGBAX in a taxable account and replacing it with DODLX in my Roth.
Wondering if I should buy more FMLSX or instead some ARLSX or RGHVX.
Recently added RSEMX. Bought some more AQMNX.

Thanks much, all. I cannot go all in (or even half in with RGHVX) with something with a track record going back only to last fall. But these postings and queries have been thought-provoking.