When it comes to FoF I would consider looking at TDF, Target Date Funds.
Year ago I was impressed with FoF Vanguard Star Fund, VGSTX, (0.3 ER). FWIW, It is making changes to it's underlying FoF make up:

Changes to Vanguard Star’s holdings and sub-asset-class allocations are coming in the first quarter of 2025, but the fund’s strengths remain consistent.
This globally diversified balanced fund will stay true to its strategic 60/40 stock/bond split, but within those sleeves, investors will see a more defensive equity posture and increased exposure to lower-quality bonds.

https://morningstar.com/funds/xnas/vgstx/quote

However, my bottom line is a fund's risk/reward profile, not its fees. QDSNX is a very steady and very low risk alternative fund. It's YTD gain is a very pleasing 8.97%, and the one year total return is 14.98%, but its standard deviation is an almost bond like 6.56%.
I am very happy holding this fund in my conservative low volatility portfolio.

@WABAC - thanks for the post, and for reassuring me that I'm not an idiot posting about BBH and Payden. (Or perhaps we both are :-)).
Some of the funds you mentioned as not losing money did draw down microscopic amounts (in the rounding error range). Worth mentioning only to show that unlike cash, all bond funds can lose money. The Fed announced raising rates on March 16, 2022.
Portfolio Visualizer drawdown graph of BIL, TFLO, and USFR. Of the three, only USFR has beaten cash since March 2022.
I've looked at most of the other funds you mentioned. All worth the look, none that jumped out and said "pick me". Not that I don't have some preferences, e.g. USFR over TFLO. But the differences are minor, and I've been happy rolling my own 1-3 month T-bills as opposed to using Treasury funds. A bit more work, though.
RPHIX does hold lots of high yield debt. Normally that would concern me as well. Which is why I've been more inclined to look at funds like FLOT and FLRN than funds with lower grade assets. But RPHIX reduces risk in a few different and distinctive ways. With rare exceptions it has succeeded and has a long track record to point to.

To summarize the Fund’s goal and investment approach, we seek to invest the Fund’s assets in securities that we believe are ‘money good’, that we are highly confident will pay interest and principal without interruption largely because they are extremely short term in maturity, have been already called for redemption, or are uniquely positioned within their capital structure as it relates to their priority claim on assets and cash flows.

RiverPark Short Term High Yield update, March 2020

Generally speaking, how does a fund like RPHIX compare to a moneymarket fund like SUTXX?

I spend (waste) the next couple of paragraphs below going through this year's returns because RPHIX has been a bit of a disappointment in 2025.
YTD (in just over 3/5 of the year) RPHIX has returned 2.80%. That extrapolates to about 4.7% for 2025, or about 4¼% after taking out, say 10%, for Calif. taxes. That's still subject to Fed taxes.
Through July 31, SUTXX has returned 2.42%. Its current yield is 4.12%. Converting that to a daily yield and compounding that daily yield over the remaining 5 months (153 days) gives an additional return of 1.75%. Combining 2.42% and 1.75% (i.e. taking 1.0242 x 1.0175 - 1), the expected return for the year is 4.2%. So for 2025, the two funds should, after taxes, return about the same amount.
Over most stretches of time, RPHIX has fared better, even after taking out state taxes. Here's a link to a Fidelity page (no login required) that compares RPHIX to FSIXX (Fidelity's equivalent fund to SUTXX).
But you are adding volatility with RPHIX, along with bookkeeping nonsense. Since the share price of RPHIX fluctuates, each buy or sale generates a cap gain (or loss). In addition, if you're reinvesting divs, then you're subject to wash sales. For this reason I recommend not reinvesting divs, or if you do, suspending reinvestment a month or two before you expect to make a withdrawal. This is a concern with any bond fund, not just with RPHIX.
I think the two funds (RPHIX and SUTXX) can be used well in tandem. SUTXX to hold at least a few months worth or even a couple of years worth of cash, and RPHIX for longer term cash.
RPHIX also carries a transaction fee, though Schwab has introduced an Automatic Investment Program (like Fidelity's) that lets you buy additional shares of some TF funds for $10/purchase. Look for AIP on Schwab's pricing page.
https://www.schwab.com/legal/schwab-pricing-guide-for-individual-investors

My darling has PYLMX in her IRA at her broker. I have BBBMX in my IRA at my broker. Neither broker has both. It has been a while since I checked, but IIRC both held up pretty well during the GFC.
Looking at MFO Premium, RPHIX has the distinction of being a Great Owl, and a Three Alarm fund. Hmm. @Charles might want to take a look at that.
One has to be comfortable with a large amount of hi-yield fare in RPHIX. I ended up with CBUDX instead. Information on the composition of the funds is near the bottom of the links. Two funds near their range of M* standard deviation would be JPST and FLOT.
Funds with zero drawdowns since Normalization 2 (the beginning of Fed rate increases) are BIL, SGOV, OPER, USFR, and TFLO
BTW, at the present time CBLDX is my gamble.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2025-08-08/real-yield-8-8-2025-video
"Uncertainty complicates Fed's rate path."

In 2022 VTAPX lost nearly 3% while NEAR gained a little. To me the latter is a better cash substitute. Cash should not experience down years.
Calendar years are easy to get statistics on. But I think the sentiment here is that cash should not be down more than 12 consecutive months, regardless of whether those months exactly align with calendar years.
From its low on 10/6/21, NEAR did not recover (including divs) until 12/16/22. That's more than 14 months underwater. It took eight months for it to hit its nadir, down 1.32%, on 6/14/22.
NEAR is a good fund, it outperforms cash over periods of multiple years, and this short term bond fund should do better then ultrashort funds when/if the yield curve steepens. So if you're betting on a rate reduction (i.e. the Fed being more concerned with avoiding a recession than with rising inflation), or if you simply want to hedge your bets, it can meet those needs.
A couple of somewhat similar funds to NEAR are the ultrashort funds PYLMX and BBBIX. The former modestly underperforms NEAR but tracks it closely with under half the volatility and 1/3 the max drawdown. The latter is just slightly more volatile, has a max drawdown that's two thirds of NEAR's, and has outperformed over the past 1,3,5,10, and lifetime of NEAR.
Though for a cash substitute, it's hard to beat RPHIX. Never a down year (twelve consecutive months, whenever), infrequent miscues, and over the lifetime of NEAR much better stats including risk metrics and performance.
Testfolio comparison of the four funds

This is supposed to be a free gifted link. While an Ad pops up, i found it possible to knock it out and view article. Let me know if it doesn’t work. Thanks
https://www.barrons.com/articles/bond-yields-cpi-true-measure-inflation-c9a8ef2f?st=hF5dQ7&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

I think I've read and I hope true, green energy is becoming cheaper than fossil fuel. If so,it will grow on its own.

Yes, but who will be driving all that growth, and reaping the rewards? The U.S. or foreign competitors?

Bill Fleckenstein is a virtual encyclopedia on the precious metals and miners. I’d be much wealthier had I followed 100% of his advice going back about 5 years. From yesterday’s ”Daily Rap” (8/09/2025):
”… these tariffs won't impact demand or the spot gold price much. However, they do cause a problem for folks who arbitrage between London Gold and Comex Gold, because Comex Gold requires 100-ounce bars for settlement, which is what comes out of Switzerland and has now been sanctioned to the tune of 39%. Meanwhile, London gold has 400-ounce bars … what this has done is thrown a monkey wrench into the plumbing of gold … ”
Excerpt from: Daily Rap (Fleckenstein Capital LLC). This is a subscription based service. Link takes you to the site one year ago. You’d need to “pay-up” to read current commentaries.

@rforno said,

That's precisely why I am NOT in my state pension plan! My entire 403b is in a vanilla quality equity-only American Fund.

If you are a public school teacher I believe you are contributing to your state pension through monthly (payroll deductions) that are mandatory contributions to help fund the state pension fund. Your state also is required to contribute and often state's choose not to fully fund. Big problem when they don't.
Your 403(b) is an additional retirement option that you elect to contribute to individually. It is not mandatory.
In addition to 403(b) options you may also have 457 and 401(a) options.
At retirement, all teachers, who qualify (by age, years of service, etc.), will receive a pension (the State of CT in my case) based on a specific set of criteria and formula.
Your 403(b) is totally separate from your state/municipal pension. I too contributed to my 403(b).
When you separate service you can roll over your 403(b). Another option is to annuitize your 403(b). I did both.

Nope. As a university professor I had the option of selecting either the state pension or self-directed 403(b) - known as the Optional Retirement Plan - when hired. In my case the 403(b) contributions are pre-tax and 'above' my salary ... nothing I do or have touches the state pension system and I don't contribute to it myself. (Though pension and ORP folks alike can open up various pre- or post-tax 403b or 457b accounts as supplimental retirement accounts to save extra if we want.)
What you say is true for many K-12 teachers/staff in my state, but even then I believe they're also given the choice of either a traditional pension or ORP. But of course that varies by state and/or district.

@rforno said,

That's precisely why I am NOT in my state pension plan! My entire 403b is in a vanilla quality equity-only American Fund.

If you are a public school teacher I believe you are contributing to your state pension through monthly (payroll deductions) that are mandatory contributions to help fund the state pension fund. Your state also is required to contribute and often state's choose not to fully fund. Big problem when they don't.
Your 403(b) is an additional retirement option that you elect to contribute to individually. It is not mandatory.
In addition to 403(b) options you may also have 457 and 401(a) options.
At retirement, all teachers, who qualify (by age, years of service, etc.), will receive a pension (the State of CT in my case) based on a specific set of criteria and formula.
Your 403(b) is totally separate from your state/municipal pension. I too contributed to my 403(b).
When you separate service you can roll over your 403(b). Another option is to annuitize your 403(b). I did both.

Glad my 403b is not under the influence of such people sitting on our state investment committee!

You might want to look under the hood of your State Pension Plan...here's CT Teacher's Pension Plan...both Private Investment and Private Credit are part of their portfolio...17.8% in fact.

pension-fund-reports

That's precisely why I am NOT in my state pension plan! My entire 403b is in a vanilla quality equity-only American Fund. I don't trust state pension board 'experts' or investment committees ... if I'm going to lose (or make) money in my account, *I* want to be the one responsible. ;)

“Since the early 2000s, pension funds have increasingly added private assets to their investments.”
“Private assets didn’t measurably improve pensions’ returns, says JP Aubry, associate director
of research at the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, who conducted a study on them.
Before the financial crisis of 2008-09, they outperformed broad market, passive strategies slightly,
while they underperformed after.”
“Private assets might have a certain cachet, but public markets work just fine,
says Jason Kephart, senior principal, multi-asset manager research at Morningstar.
'People who have invested in public markets over the last 15 years have done well.'”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/economy/bitcoin-private-equity-and-other-alt-investments-are-coming-for-your-401-k-what-could-go-wrong/ar-AA1K77IJ

Being a gambler at heart I’m inclined to roll the dice a little. “Anything but cash” for me. I like Blackrock’s short-term bond fund NEAR for monies you guys would probably commit to cash.
[...]
Unless the economy totally tanks and goes into a very deep recession, I expect higher inflation going forward.

For a 'gambler at heart', who likes NEAR and is concerned about inflation, why not VTAPX? It seems to correlate pretty strongly with NEAR over the recent cycle w a bit more volatility and a good bit higher return. Plus, you get bonus inflation protection.
(There was a good discussion of the subject on Protecting Against Tariff Induced Inflation thread recently.)

The Week in Charts (08/08/25)
The State of the Markets, including...
00:00 Intro
00:32 Stocks
13:00 Bonds/Fed
20:55 Real Estate/Housing
27:29 Commodities
29:29 Currencies
31:58 Crypto
34:28 Intermarket
37:45 Economy
Video
Blog

Keeping with the general FWIW theme, my two main MM funds look to have been holding fairly steady, though WMPXX has been drifting down a bit...
IMRXX ($1,000 min)
May 30: 4.36%
July 14: 4.35% (decrease)
Aug 5 : 4.35% (no change)
Aug 7 : 4.34% (decrease)
Aug 8 : 4.35% (increase)
WMPXX
May 30: 4.36%
July 14: 4.33% (decrease)
Aug 5 : 4.34% (increase)
Aug 7 : 4.33% (decrease)
Aug 8 : 4.33% (no change)
Also, here is what I am seeing for Fidelity funds:
FIGXX
May 30: 4.18%
July 14: 4.19% (increase)
Aug 5 : 4.21% (increase)
Aug 7 : 4.20% (decrease)
Aug 8 : 4.20% (no change)
FNSXX
May 30: 4.28%
July 14: 4.28% (no change)
Aug 5 : 4.29% (increase)
Aug 7 : 4.29% (no change)
Aug 8 : 4.29% (no change)

Let’s say Fed Reserve cuts 75 bp this year. Will MM rates drop to 3.5% range?

A quick check of SWVXX: offering 4.13% yield. Just before midnight Eastern Time on Friday, 08 Aug, '25.

As the economy unravels, we will hear a lot more of "It had to be done". As if making us economically weaker accomplishes anything. Ot that they are fighting the "good fight". No proof will ever be forthcoming.

President Trump says US court ruling against tariff authority 'would be 1929 all over again'. If tariffs are overturned, $100B would have to be returned, which means more T bill sales. I think this was a warning to Appeals Court and Supreme Court that a depression will occur and the courts will be to blame. My guess is that 60% chance appeals court rules against tariffs, but 95% chance Supreme Court rules court has no authority.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-says-us-court-ruling-against-tariff-authority-would-be-1929-all-over-again-173011058.html