I've got to go along with hank here. If you want to say that "For me cash is cash", and "Calling any type of bond 'cash alternative' is a misnomer imho", then you have to go whole hog.
Those CDs that Skeet likes? Aside from a lack of instant liquidity, they're bank accounts - IOUs of a corporation. Sure they're insured, but at their core, they're nothing but promises to pay. You can't use a bank account as legal tender - you have to withdraw the cash first (or direct the bank to send the cash to your creditor).
T-bills are bonds, just very short ones, unlike multi-year T-bonds. Who knows if the US government will honor them after December, or next March, or whenever the Treasury runs out of cash absent Congressional action.
I qualify my "cash alternative" suggestions with the comment that it depends on what you want this for, and by implication how much liquidity you're willing to forsake and/or how much risk you're willing to assume.
Once we start talking about any return on cash, we're into cash alternatives. Whether that's a bank account or a "cash equivalents" like a T-bill or MMF. The question is just a matter of degree - how far one is willing to go with risk, with liquidity.

For me cash is cash ... and, there are few subsitutes for it.

I agree with old skeet here. Not sure where this term 'cash alternative' came from.

Here’s a couple strict definitions for the noun cash.
- “ Cash is money in the form of bills and coins rather than checks.
... two thousand dollars in cash.”
- “Cash means the same as money, especially money which is immediately available.”
Source: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/cash
You guys are a hard lot. Most terms in the English language are open to definition. But it sounds like both of you are pretty much in agreement with Collins Dictionary‘s narrow definition that cash means hard currency.
I might hide away a couple $50 bills when traveling, and maybe carry $150 cash in my wallet. I’d shudder to think, however, that the paper currency in my immediate possession was the only true cash I possessed.
Anytime you go beyond a U.S. minted coin or government issued paper certificate you’re introducing some degree of uncertainty. Will the bank that issued your CD remain solvent? Will the FDIC be willing and able to honor its guarantee? Will your money market fund remain solvent? Some have failed (broken the buck) in the past.
So, the question posed was Cash Alternatives. Yep - Anything beyond the actual currency (or T-Bill) entails some additional risk. I don’t think the folks responding to the thread are blind to that fact.

@Maurice: Based on the positive earnings outlook contained in your linked article, which sub-sector of energy should we purchase ? Or would we be better off buying individual energy stocks. Which mutual funds, or ETFs do you recommend.
Regards,
Ted
# 1: Integrated
# 2: Equipment and Services
# 3: Exploration & Production
# 4: Pipelines

@bee: I'm sorry, I think M* was referring to these bonds !:
Regards,
Ted :)
https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&q=james+bond+actors&oq=James+bond&gs_l=psy-ab.1.1.0l7j0i20i264k1j0l2.2301.5837.0.16206.11.10.0.0.0.0.82.613.9.9.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..2.9.610.0..46j35i39k1j0i131k1j0i67k1j0i46i67k1j46i67k1j0i46k1.0.pKVZLlaBwOg

Moved some of our taxable account from SWTSX to PONDX probably will need it in the next 3-5 years, so lowering equity exposure while allowing room to run still. 30% bonds, 15% international index, rest still us index. A bit nervous having a bond fund in a taxable account. But it seemed better than the NTF nontaxable funds available to us.

For me cash is cash ... and, there are few subsitutes for it. I also consider CD's as a form of cash and pehaps some short term treasuries as well. In a low interest rate environment I have barbelled an equal amount of cash on one side and growth funds on the other. When the two are averaged my return year-to-date on the barbell is about 13%. So as a stand alone asset, not counting what my mutual funds hold in cash, my cash position is about 15% of my overall portfolio ... and, like wise my growth area is about the same. For 2017 it is estimated that capital gain distributions on the growth side of the barbell will be somewhere between four to seven percent while the cash side will yield a little better than one percent. With this, form my perspective, this makes the barbell a good income generator with an anticipated payout of somewhere between 2.5% to 4% range. And, a thirteen percent year-to-date return is not too shabby on a 50/50 mix. In addition, this return (and yield) compares favorablely to some of my better performing hybrid funds found in the income and growth & income areas of my portfolio. Year-to-date my mutual fund portfolio (as a whole) has returned about 12% according to Morningstar's Portfolio Manager.
Morningstar's Instant Xray analysis reflects overall that I am currently at about 19% cash including what my mutual funds hold.

FYI: Taxable bond funds remained popular last month, and the sector equity category group took a surprising second place.
Despite expectations of rising rates, taxable bond was once again the most popular category group in September with $34.9 billion inflows overall, significantly higher than the $27.5 billion it had received in August. In a reversal from the previous month, passive taxable-bond flows surpassed active ones: $20.5 billion versus $14.4 billion.
Regards,
Ted
http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=830210

Interest rates and yields have climbed enough to take another look at where to put cash, even if the answers haven't changed. For example, VMMXX now sports an APY of 1.14%, and FZDXX ($10K min in IRA) has an APY of 1.11%. Those are comparable to FDIC-insured savings accounts, but not quite high enough to justify the added risk of MMFs. Nevertheless, high enough to consider in brokerage accounts such as IRAs where moving cash isn't easy.
It still depends on why you're holding cash, where (e.g. IRA or taxable) you're holding it, and what your time horizon is. I still think I-bonds are great if you're holding for more than a year and you can live with their coarse granularity (you can only cash out a complete savings bond, not a partial amount of a few dollars).
If you've got a time horizon comfortably longer than a year, and are looking to invest cash in a taxable account, I'm still fond of short to short/intermediate funds. VMLUX goes way back, and is one of the more conservatively managed funds of that breed.
The team (well, two of the three) managing BTMIX (started in 2015) goes back to BMO muni funds. Duane McAllister goes back the furthest, co-managing MUISX (ultra-short) from inception (2009) until moving to Baird, and MTFIX (short term) from inception (2012) until moving to Baird. Those would be the closest match funds. To get an idea of his 2008 success, you can also look at MITFX, that he co-managed from 2007 until moving to Baird. Not quite what expatsp asked for (a fund history back through 2008), but still something to hang your hat on.

expatsp said: “A whole lot of ultra-short bond funds crashed and burned then.” Absolutely correct. That’s where I think we sometimes miss the boat in not appreciating the culture of the fund family behind a fund. I don’t worry about TRP running an ultra-short. They consistently err on the side of caution in their lower risk offerings. Their in house research is tops. Were such a fund run by just about anyone else, I’d worry more.
-
Not sure why this old post was resurrected. My prophesy a year ago that TRBUX would soon be yielding over 2% proved wrong. TRP puts its current 30-day annualized dividend yield at 1.73%. But the NAV has gained a penny to $5.02. As I may have mentioned back than, for purposes of exchanges Price allows the same flexibility with TRBUX they do with their money market funds. That’s the only reason I’m not using their short term bond fund, PRWBX instead for cash. Want to be able to take advantage of compelling buying opportunities if / when they arise without the frequent trading restrictions.
As one of the older and more conservative here, I’m probably higher on cash than most. No problem. Am comfortable sacrificing a couple percentage points return over shorter periods for the added stability and downside protection cash affords. My allocation model is 75% “Core” and 25% “Flexible.” The Core (largely set in stone) consists of various types of conservative / moderate allocation funds and smaller allocations to a global bond fund and some real asset funds. The flexible portion contains both equity funds and cash. It allows me to add or take risk off the table as I wish. Currently, the Flex portion is heavily weighted towards cash, which consists of insured bank deposits, TRBUX, and a smaller slug of DODIX.
Fortunate to have a good pension and Social Security. Don’t keep any separate cash reserve as most do. I feel I’m conservatively enough positioned to continue withdrawing distributions no matter where the market runs. And, it occurs to me that this must be the type of approach the “new” income funds at Price and elsewhere adhere to.

The 1.74% expense ratio is not entirely a good representation. Take a look at the expenses reported here (under "Fund Expenses"): https://www.rivernorth.com/mutual-funds/rnsix-rndlx
For RNDLX, the "direct" expenses are 1.11% and the "total" expenses are 1.74%. The difference is that the total expenses includes the expense ratios of the CEFs that RNDLX holds in the CEF . But they aren't buying CEFs for their returns on the bonds they hold, but rather just trading the CEFs opportunistically as if they were stocks. So 1.11% might be a better representation of the actual ER of the fund.

FYI: In the treacherous world of finance, where investors confront biased advice, hidden costs and onerous fees, one investment giant seems to stand apart — the Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association, also known as TIAA. Calling itself a “mission-based organization” with a “nonprofit heritage,” TIAA has enjoyed a reputation as a selfless steward of its clients’ assets for almost a century.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/21/business/the-finger-pointing-at-the-finance-firm-tiaa.html?rref=collection/sectioncollection/business&action=click&contentCollection=business&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront
M* TIAA-CREF Family Of Funds:
http://quicktake.morningstar.com/fundfamily/tiaa-investments/0C00001YVW/fund-list.aspx

This time, this is not even a follow up, but a duplicate. From the article:

The article “New Target-Date Funds Are Geared for Withdrawal Time” first appeared in The Wall Street Journal.

MFO: New Target-Date Funds Are Geared For Withdrawal Time
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/35821/new-target-date-funds-are-geared-for-withdrawal-time
Having taken a closer look at the TRP fund, it appears to be simply another managed payout fund, like VPGDX. As such, it's not a new type of fund. The Vanguard fund targets a 4% payout based on the fund's value over the past three years, while TRLAX targets a 5% payout based on the fund's value over the past five years. I haven't compared glide paths.
The Fidelity funds, in contrast, claim that they're designed for RMD distributions, but don't manage the payouts. So ISTM that what's new with them is the marketing pitch, not the funds themselves.
Managed payout funds (including the TRP fund, but not the Fidelity funds) seem designed for people who want an annuity (cash stream) but are unwilling to cede control or ownership. As MikeM highlighted in his quote of Wade Pfau, if what you want is a cash stream and potential legacy, annuities are still the better way to go.

@msf,
You made my day with that one...Octothorpe!
#######

@bee - thanks, that's great!
I checked another utility, and it said: press 1 then 2 then 0# each time it asks for your account number. Now that's the kind of pounding away with zeros and octothorpes I was talking about. :-)

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318342/000139834417013299/fp0028629_497.htm
497 1 fp0028629_497.htm
Horizon Spin-off and Corporate Restructuring Fund
Supplement dated October 19, 2017, to the
Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”)
each dated September 1, 2016, as supplemented.
IMPORTANT NOTICE ON PURCHASE OF FUND SHARES AND ADJOURNMENT OF SHAREHOLDER MEETING
As previously disclosed, effective as of the close of business on August 31, 2017, the Horizon Spin-off and Corporate Restructuring Fund (the “Horizon Fund”) is closed to all investment, and the Horizon Fund’s transfer agent will not accept orders for purchases of additional shares of the Horizon Fund, either from current Horizon Fund shareholders or from new investors. Existing shareholders may continue to redeem Horizon Fund shares. If all shares of the Horizon Fund held in an existing account are redeemed, the shareholder’s account will be closed. This closure will last until further notice.
As previously disclosed, the Board of Trustees of Investment Managers Series Trust (the “Trust”) approved an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization (the “Plan”) providing for the reorganization of the Horizon Fund into the Kinetics Spin-Off and Corporate Restructuring Fund, a newly created series of Kinetics Mutual Funds, Inc. The reorganization of the Horizon Fund is subject to approval by its shareholders.
The Trust has called a shareholder meeting at which shareholders of the Horizon Fund will be asked to consider and vote on the Plan. Shareholders of the Horizon Fund have been provided with a combined prospectus/proxy statement with additional information about the shareholder meeting and the proposed reorganization. The shareholder meeting has been adjourned to December 7, 2017. If shareholders of the Horizon Fund approve the reorganization, the reorganization is expected to take effect on December 8, 2017.
Please file this Supplement with your records.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318342/000139834417013299/fp0028629_497.htm
497 1 fp0028629_497.htm
Horizon Spin-off and Corporate Restructuring Fund
Supplement dated October 19, 2017, to the
Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”)
each dated September 1, 2016, as supplemented.
IMPORTANT NOTICE ON PURCHASE OF FUND SHARES AND ADJOURNMENT OF SHAREHOLDER MEETING
As previously disclosed, effective as of the close of business on August 31, 2017, the Horizon Spin-off and Corporate Restructuring Fund (the “Horizon Fund”) is closed to all investment, and the Horizon Fund’s transfer agent will not accept orders for purchases of additional shares of the Horizon Fund, either from current Horizon Fund shareholders or from new investors. Existing shareholders may continue to redeem Horizon Fund shares. If all shares of the Horizon Fund held in an existing account are redeemed, the shareholder’s account will be closed. This closure will last until further notice.
As previously disclosed, the Board of Trustees of Investment Managers Series Trust (the “Trust”) approved an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization (the “Plan”) providing for the reorganization of the Horizon Fund into the Kinetics Spin-Off and Corporate Restructuring Fund, a newly created series of Kinetics Mutual Funds, Inc. The reorganization of the Horizon Fund is subject to approval by its shareholders.
The Trust has called a shareholder meeting at which shareholders of the Horizon Fund will be asked to consider and vote on the Plan. Shareholders of the Horizon Fund have been provided with a combined prospectus/proxy statement with additional information about the shareholder meeting and the proposed reorganization. The shareholder meeting has been adjourned to December 7, 2017. If shareholders of the Horizon Fund approve the reorganization, the reorganization is expected to take effect on December 8, 2017.
Please file this Supplement with your records.

When you think of electric batteries for power walls and electric vehicles do you think of Nickel? You should. Materials are a vital part of any technological system. I came across this website which looks at geology from a investor's perspective.

There’s a revolution going on in the auto industry right now. Tesla, Inc. has proven demand for electric vehicles (EV’s) and invited the entire industry to join in the fun. From the Bolt to the Volt, from the Focus to the Leaf, pure electric and hybrid cars are pouring off the assembly lines in ever greater numbers. In their own way they are picking a new class of winners in the metals space. This article will briefly discuss some of the rationale behind the excitement and the implications for the demand and use of metals in the future.

Metals and Electric Cars – A Revolution in the Making
and,
7 Commodity Winners In Electric Car Revolution:
7+Commodity+Winners+In+Electric+Car+Revolution
A quick screening (highest 3 yr Sharpe Ratio) for Funds in this space:

@davidrmoran Let us know the results of your research. I'm looking to sell some equities & take some risk off the table too. Right now as a cash alternative I've got some money in two conservative bond funds but am looking for other options. Though a little more cash (I'm at about 15%, plus 5% each in the above funds) also feels appealing right now.

Re - How many funds? ... Does it matter?
John Hussman’s been trying to convince his investors for years that one fund is all they need.
Do the math.
1 X -10% = -10%.
18 X +10% ÷ 18 = +10%
In the above example, the 18 funds clearly were better. In reality, it matters very little.

Hi guys!
How many funds? Really, Ted? I don't think you've ever asked me that question before. Good question, though.
slick: sold FSCRX a while ago....the manager thing.....and lagging.
Again, I own no small caps now.
Ted: please elaborate. I own 18 funds, can vote and go to war. How 'bout that?
God bless
the Pudd