Article in WSJ today by Zweig, "Safe, Sometimes Isn't Safe"...IQDAX....
"The fund's prospectus says that when pricing service "provides a valuation that in the judgement of the adviser does not represent the security's fair value," the manager may override that number - a standard warning in such disclosures.
Reference @sma3 mention prior of the notated "fair value pricing"
Zweig's article mentions "an investor"...who thinks fund holders could lose 20% or more of their monies...
Article speaks to reach for chocolate cake instead of broccoli...alternatives to high priced stocks, high priced bonds, uncorrelated investments with smoother rides...maybe better to go with less spending, save more.....mentions "jolt of heartbreak" over the years by investors thinking they have found the ideal low risk, uncorrelated strategy/fund.
Got it, lesson learnted.
Good Luck to all,
Baseball Fan

@Baseball_Fan

I want to know what the young man who was running the fund was exactly doing? Was there malfeasance? Or did he really believe the 3rd party model was incorrect and there was a "tweaking" for good reason? He's obviously lawyered up. Who else knew and who challenged him on his actions? Wasn't there a compliance/risk officer? What was he doing/not doing/getting paid for?

Good questions. To those I would add what was it that finally did bring this to the SEC's attention?
Regarding the audit question, I was referring to the annual reports.
This is from their August 2020 annual report:

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Trustees of Trust for Advised Portfolios and the
Shareholders of Infinity Q Diversified Alpha Fund
Opinion on the Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying consolidated statement of assets and liabilities of Infinity Q Diversified Alpha Fund, a series of shares of beneficial interest in Trust for Advised Portfolios, and Subsidiary (the "Fund"), including the consolidated schedule of investments as of August 31, 2020, and the related consolidated statement of operations for the year then ended, the statements of changes in net assets for each of the years in the two-year period then ended, the statement of cash flows for the year then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the years in the three-year period then ended, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the "financial statements"). The consolidated financial highlights for the years ended August 31, 2017 and August 31, 2016 were audited by another independent registered public accounting firm whose report, dated February 1, 2018, expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial highlights. In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of the Fund as of August 31, 2020, the consolidated results of their operations for the year then ended, their cash flows for the year then ended, the changes in their net assets for each of the years in the two-year period then ended, and financial highlights for each of the years in the three-year period then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Basis for Opinion
These financial statements are the responsibility of the Fund's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Fund's financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) ("PCAOB") and are required to be independent with respect to the Fund in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Fund is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Fund's internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.
Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of August 31, 2020, by correspondence with the custodian, prime broker and third-party counterparties. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Bold emphasis my own.
To answer my own question. My interpretation is that the audit just makes sure that there are no irregularities in the numbers or accounting in the financial reports but not an assessment of the validity of how the asset values are obtained or the actual pricing of the assets themselves. But I'm no expert on financial reports.
I also think the comparison of Infinity Q and T. Rowe Price is like comparing apples & oranges, even concerning TMSRX. Especially as Infinity Q was essentially a one man operation. Anything is possible & I definitely understand the concern.
@Sma3
Regarding IOFIX, my impression was they were not disclosing to shareholders the risks involved with some of their holdings- their method of buying & valuing odd lots not widely traded which during times of stress (ie last March) might become difficult to unload.
@Derf
I have no idea what a "reasonable" amount would be but for me, in general, I tend to limit any one holding to no more than 5-7%. TMSRX is currently around 6.5%. The main exception to that is PRWCX which I started investing in back in the 1990s. It sits around 16%.

1.47% right now. STILL very low. I'd not buy Treasuries at that rate. After all these years, I'm going to start my cash pile so I can buy some favorites, when those darlings fall far enough. I'm VERY glad I took a scheduled annual slug from the IRA BEFORE this current (brief?) "hit." Will it become an actual downturn? Who can say.

@Mark I got rid of all bonds except a very small position in FXNAX. My FNBGX was up quite a bit in 2020 (not sure why and it still trailed S&P index), thankfully I sold before 2021. Why? It’s down 10% YTD. I’m having a very hard time justifying any bond exposure right now. Actually, when I look back at the last 10-15 years, I held too many bonds (in case of?) and at the expense of many years of equity superiority. The crash(s) where bonds outperformed and helped me were few and far between. But I’m still learning and don’t know what I don’t know.

I am sorry you are stuck in this situation. After IOFIX we found out that "fair value pricing" was fair until it was not. I posted several years ago about selling MXBIX at one NAV and receiving another when the cash arrived.
This seems like fraud, not mistaken assumptions.
I think T Rowe Price is unlikely to allow things like this to happen and would be relatively comfortable with their methodology, but not so much so that I would put in big bucks.
While I don't fully agree with Buffet, "never invest in things you don't completely understand" doing due diligence and depending on reliable partners will help.

Having a large cash allows him to be tactical when opportunities present themselves. He talked about the stressful time in March when the team vetted through new companies in shorter timeframe and to build positions quickly. When one can buy companies with solid balance sheets at depressed prices, downside risk is greatly reduced. Utility stocks and GE are such examples. His mindfulness on risk management is under appreciated. Kinda like what Buffet did with BOA in 2008 and paid out nicely years later. In a 10 years period the fund was able to out-performed S&P500 while having lower drawdown. What more can you ask for?

12% cash???? That might very well account for the lagging performance.

Doubt it. He typically carries a lot of cash. Was up around 30% cash just before the mini-crash last February. And paid off handsomly. But I suspect he’s way over that 12% at this time. If so, that would explain the performance.
FWIW - D&C has overweighted financials for years. Paid a big price too in subpar performance, But this year DODBX is stomping PRWCX. I don’t think this proves anything except that investment trends come and go. With rising rates financials are doing better.
Disclosure: I own both funds, but have more in DODBX.

Circling back to this topic. @BenWP you make a good point regarding the fact that FSMAX is an index fund with 3200. If I ignore that for the moment, MFO Premium really doesn't like the fund (in it's category) - rating the fund a 2 BUT MFO Premium categorizes it in Small Cap Growth which pits it agains WAMCX and that doesn't seem fair. @Observant1 has the summary of what FSMAX should be categorized as.
In the past 5 years, it's handily beat the S&P 500 and even last year by 19.4 - so why such a low rating of 2? It's one of the better options in a 401k I'm managing which is why I'm interested in opinions on it.

Same here - really enjoy reading his report. His stock picking in utility sector way exceeded utility funds and ETFs. My Vanguard utility fund was flat for 2020 even though it provided a healthy yield. Ventured out to floating rate and short term high yield funds this year for higher yields. Also rotated more into value and small value funds earlier this year. Yacktman fund, YACKX, has recovered quickly after March last year and managed to out-performed the value index. The fund now holds 30% oversea stocks.
We also got a new iPads this year since our 7 years old iPad can no longer updated. They are lighter, run faster and with a larger capacity. We will upgrade our 6 years old iMac in fall while the Window 10 PC is use for work.

Whatever you folks are experiencing is something quite new. I've used Schwab for many years and never had any issues until recently, when logging in became flaky. It's been better, at least from here, in the last couple of weeks.
I experienced similar problems recently in attempting to obtain an additional CD from First Republic Bank, which is normally very responsive. It took several weeks to get a reply from the local branch two blocks from our home. Finally the branch manager replied, apologizing for the situation, which she attributed to issues associated with the staff working from home because of the Covid situation.
Additionally, Hartford renewed our auto coverage and homeowner's coverage on our weekend place, but failed to renew coverage on the SF home. Upon inquiry we were told that because of technical problems involved with working remotely they had been unable to renew the SF coverage, and needed to re-write a new policy (with the same coverage and costs), which they did within a few weeks. Sounds like maybe some computer data sort of disappeared.
So perhaps patience is indicated here, at least to some extent.

Actually, despite today’s date, the article appears to be addressing yesterday’s close. Gold is erratic. I doubt it will do very well as long as the bitcoin craze continues. Normally the miners get jerked around harder than the metal. But, today the miners are holding up better. At this time the VanEck Vectors Gold Miners ETF is ahead 1% while gold’s been down anywhere from $5-$15 most of the day.
Story
Miners ETF
I have very little in the miners. Decent exposure to the precious metals, however, through PRPFX and commodity and alternative type funds. PRPFX tends to own the metal rather than the miners. As such, it’s a bit more stable day to day. At around $1800 gold is still elevated compared to 2-3 years ago (but off its recent highs).

I've was intrigued with this fund as an alternative type approach a few years ago & purchased into it (though admittedly didn't actually understand it). Note to self- lesson learned.
About a month ago, they stopped taking any further purchases- either new or from existing shareholders. I got uneasy as their website didn't mention this closure and over the past year, they really stopped updating any information. I redeemed all except a very tiny foothold. Today I went to their website & found this:
infinityqfunds.com/
Which also included this link:
https://sec.gov/rules/ic/2021/ic-34198.pdf
At least

The Chief Investment Officer of Infinity Q has been relieved of his duties, effective February 21, 2021.

because

According to the SEC’s Order, the Fund learned on Thursday, February 18 that the Chief Investment Officer of Infinity Q had been adjusting the methodology for obtaining certain asset valuations, and that the resulting valuations may not have accurately reflected the fair value of those assets.

That makes me feel better!

Thanks @rforno
At the end of of 2020 cash was at 12%. I’m thinking he’s raised that over the past 1-2 months just looking at the lagging performance. However, Lipper still puts it at that modest 12% figure. Reads like an encyclopedia of investing. Perhaps a bit too much horn blowing. One has to be pleased with the amount of information and analysis contained.
And he’s unloaded Wells Fargo! :)
One interesting blurb: “Our biggest miss in 2019 was Apple and it was once again in 2020, as the stock rose 82% during the year ... The outperformance of Apple for the last two years has been a big detractor from our relative performance and a big disappointment for me personally. We continue to spend considerable time on Apple and have had multiple team members look at the stock, and yet we all come to the same conclusion: There is no reason a company with a long-term 6% EPS growth rate should trade for 30x earnings with two of its fastest-growing and most profitable revenue streams facing increasing regulatory scrutiny.”
Geez - Have a new Mac Air on order. Love Apple’s ecosystem, product support, etc. More important to me than the hardware. FWIW

Yeah, we get the portfolio value Fido discount, low but not nothing, close to the same as buying at say Costco most years, I believe. The high-trading discount, bwahaha, jeez.

I concur with all of the above responses. As far as TRP goes, with 169 funds (last count) it would seem an injustice to classify them as expert in any single area. Agree with you that they’ve had some fine tech funds over the years. PRMTX has been a standout. What I value (among other things) is their work with allocation funds. Their research is deep and they’re always fine-tuning those allocations looking to achieve an advantage (risk/reward) - though the changes may appear slight. They work hard to provide & operate funds with risk profiles appropriate for different types of investors.
“The company offers investors 169 mutual funds, in terms of unique funds, not share classes. In addition to mutual funds, the company also provides brokerage services, 401K and 529 plans, and active portfolio management. T. Rowe Price has its headquarters in Baltimore, Maryland.”
https://mutualfunds.com/fund-company/t-rowe-price-funds/

Apparently this doesn’t affect their substantial number of open-end mutual funds - many acquired from Strong about 20 years ago. I wonder the extent to which this sale might reflect a market outlook by Wells Fargo, as asset management suffers during times of poor market performance (not their stated reason).
(Unrelated) Generally, the steepening yield curve (higher farther out) has been good for banks and bank stocks this year.
- Announcement from Wells Fargo
- More details from Morningstar
- MarketWatch

Related
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/9-stocks-warren-buffett-just-221625228.html
Stocks Warren Buffett just bought:
-- AbbVie (ABBV)
-- Merck (MRK)
-- Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMY)
-- T-Mobile (TMUS)
-- Verizon Communications (VZ)
-- Chevron (CVX)
-- Kroger (KR)
-- Marsh & McLennan (MMC)
-- RH (RH)
Buffett is a beast, masterful at his crafts for 40+years IMHO
Wish I knew him and strategy when first started investing....brk.a was severely expensive before the split and not many folks have $$ to buy

It is possible say which fund families is relatively good at certain sectors. Funds performance are heavily rely on concept of fund manager. Unfortunately, mangers come and go, many lasted only 7-10 years. Of course, there are some last and become guru. For now, real estate sector, BREFX is the king in the last 5 years.

1) There were a lot of could's, possibly's and potential's in this analysis.
2) ARKK holds less tech stocks than the S&P 500
3) There is little doubt that the fund and possibly the fund manager are riding a wave. What will happen next is all speculation and guess work.
4) Weren't growth stocks supposed to be toast 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8 (and maybe more) years running? Maybe this will be the year.

Yes I noticed that today - luck vs. skill ... even some neg in FSEAX which was interesting. "but I will say almost every investment style comes in and goes out of favor' <-- so true. Logged into Fidelity today and they had a pop up espousing Will Danoff accumen - that he has beat the S&P for many years with a 13% avg. return since inception... need to look at that closer ... but interesting. I sold my remaining FCNTX early last year. If it's finally Value stocks time... I mean - I'm open to that but as Tom Jones would say -