@dstone42, your 529 plan is administrated by your state who sponsors the 529 plan. Not familiar specifically with TRP's 529 plan. Withdrawing 529 fund to pay for "Qualified College Expense" is straightforward. Several options you can do:
https://savingforcollege.com/article/how-to-pay-your-college-tuition-bill-with-a-529-plan
We chose to have the fund sent to us (account owner) to pay for tuition and room & board, and NOT to the university. By year end, a 1098-T Form you receive will only include the tuition. What is not included are Room & board, books, and computer supplies. Depending on the university, the housing billing is separated from the tuition billing. I like to keep these qualified expenses separately for accurate tax reporting purpose.

M* star-ratings are purely based on past performance in the category and are backward-looking. So, no judgements are required for 5* ratings for BST and BME. There are no forward-looking M* Analyst ratings for BST (Technology) or BME (Health).
Both M* Technology and Health categories are tiny.

I have been lucky in that when I re-established my download capability, all the transactions came through OK. A lot of people on the Quicken discussion boards report the same problem though. Look for "Schwab CC_501 Loop" or other Schwab transaction error threads.
Worried about Quicken security given this major snafu, I deactivated "share with Quicken " on the SChwab website ( Service- Security) REactivating today Schwab downloads worked, but none of Fidelity or Vanguard did
Had to go in and deactivate/reactivate all of those

@JonGaltill: right, BST is a BlackRock closed end science and tech fund, but it does have a global portfolio. Of its 3 managers, 1 also serves on BME, the Health Sciences CEF that has done well previously, although it has done little to merit its M* 5 star rating in recent years.

I own BME and it's been solid in my view. No concerns about that one ... not to go off-topic but I'm fairly impressed with how Blackrock allocates for their CEFs.

Interesting and useful discussion.
there are a lot of option hedged vehicles available. I have been satisfied with JHQAX and GATEX; both are close in preformance.
Simplify Asset management has a number of relatively new option based ETFs that closely match these hedges.
HEQT has a ladder of puts and call, aiming to ameliorate anything greater than a 5% loss in SP500, similar to JHQAX
SPD and CYA are others to look at
For the intellectually curious, I would recommend Harvey Bassman's blog
https://www.convexitymaven.com/
He produces a very detailed analysis of the usefulness of options to hedge volatility and inflation. Most of it is over my head, but it will give you a lot to think about and many of the Simplify ETFs are based on these ideas

@JonGaltill: right, BST is a BlackRock closed end science and tech fund, but it does have a global portfolio. Of its 3 managers, 1 also serves on BME, the Health Sciences CEF that has done well previously, although it has done little to merit its M* 5 star rating in recent years.

There 'Sales Charge' is $35 compared to Fido's $49.95 so that's better.
As I understand it, that's $35 to buy or to sell, as opposed to Fidelity's fees, which range from a high of $75 (to buy shares of Vanguard, Schwab, and D&C funds), to $49.95 to buy most other TF funds, to $0 to sell shares of any fund. Adding to an existing TF fund position at Fidelity can be done with most funds for $5 (via automated investing).
While there are some investing patterns for which TRP would come out less expensive, for most patterns Fidelity winds up costing significantly less.
With respect to the signature guarantee requirement, changing title (ownership) of assets is tantamount to withdrawing assets and giving them to someone else. Change of control (including the ability to withdraw assets). Which is why institutions generally require POAs to be guaranteed.
As yogi said, it's all for protection, though that may be more for protection of the institution than for protection of you.

What I experienced was exasperating and not well handled, but it was the exception.
So long as transactions have been ordinary and haven't deviated one iota from the norm, I've not had problems. But once one introduces even the slightest variation, that opens the door to errors, which in the worst case as here can cascade out of control.
The variation I introduced was to invest in a closed TRP fund. If one wants to blame the victim (me), I did have a single clue that TRP wasn't fully set up to handle this.
Online, one can usually prepare an IRA transfer form into TRP funds. But not into closed funds, even if one is an eligible investor. (In contrast, eligible investors can invest in a closed fund online via an internal fund exchange.) So something weird was going on with the IRA transfers to closed funds.
I'll have to reread hank's recounting of his problems to see if there was anything "unvanilla" there or if TRP simply botched a run-of-the-mill transaction.
My point is that I would not be too concerned about how TRP handles certain 529 plan withdrawals. That's precisely what these plans are set up to do. But I might watch carefully over a less common type of transaction or one new to TRP.
For example, TRP says one cannot currently, online, initiate a payment directly to a school. It might not be wise to be first in line to try this out when it becomes available.

Why isn’t there an online process to initiate a distribution payment directly to a school?
We are always working to enhance the options available to our account holders and hope to offer this service in the future. For now, you will need to call our College Savings Specialists at 866-521-1894 or complete a Distribution form and mail it in.

https://www.troweprice.com/personal-investing/troweprice-529/frequently-asked-questions.html

Yogi - you do understand that I wasn't withdrawing the money, only re-titling the ownership under terms of the trust. Also, I have $1.5M ADDITIONAL money in my account which they could have used as collateral. What is one supposed to do if they don't have an account at a commercial bank or brokerage house?

Now I'm worried. As I said above, I have 529 accounts at TRP for two grandsons. Fairly soon they'll be headed off to college.
How hard might the withdrawal process be!!
David

Be aware of the degree of liability that is in place to protect YOU.
If there is fraud, the Notary doesn't have any monetary liability. He/she may lose Notary license at best, or may just get a warning/reprimand from state.
Signature Guarantee, which is SAME as Medallion Signature Guarantee, has monetary liability with it. In case of fraud, the Signature Guarantor at credit union/bank/broker is liable for up to the insurance.
You may not care when things work fine. But if someone swindled you out of your $500K, you may think differently.
Actually, the Rep at Price did you a HUGE favor after talking to her superior(s) and also being reassured that you were really YOU. Just give it a few days.
Each firm has its own policies and limitations. Next time for Signature Guarantee, try banks or brokers (credit unions don't handle half-million worth of transactions routinely).

I saw this post by accident, and I would like to share my recent TRP experience by repeating the comment I sent to them:
" I'm writing this in hope that it will be forwarded to someone with the authority to act upon it.
My wife and I had an AB Living Trust. Upon her death, as permitted in the trust, I chose to disclaim her half of the trust value, and create an Irrevocable Trust. I received an new EIN for Trust A of the Living Trust, as recommended by my attorney.
I contacted T. Rowe Price, and after many discussions with the Life Change Events people, I was able to fill out the forms to retitle two of my accounts, valued at $500,000, to the Irrevocable Trust A. Now the fun began.
Your Ownership Change form requires a Medallion Signature Guarantee. The credit union
where I do my banking could only guarantee up to $100,000. Of the five commercial banks I tried, four turned me away outright because I didn't have an account, the fifth said they could, but their limit was $250,000. I came home unsuccessful after spending the entire afternoon in the rain.
I called T. Rowe Price, and got to speak to a very sympathetic Jenna Johnson. I explained my anger and frustration over the situation. I said I was able to retitle accounts worth $2,000,000 at Vanguard, online and on the phone, in less than an hour, without even a notary. Jenna put me on hold for a short time, then came back to say Price would waive the Medallion Guarantee and accept a notarized signature. She gave me a case number to write on the form.
Why does T. Rowe Price still ask for a Medallion Signature Guarantee in an era when many people bank at CU's, or online entirely, and can't qualify for one? It's an archaic form of identification in the 21st century. If Vanguard can do business without it, why can't Price?"
It's been a week, and I haven't received an acknowledgement, let alone a response.

Thanks @Fred495. Am I wrong to think then that the smoothest ride, least variability, would be to own all 3 funds so that there is a continuous monthly purchase of 3-month options? Almost like maintaining a CD ladder. As you stated, the risk return profiles should all be the same over time, non-dependent of 3 month-sequence the options are purchased, so over time it probably doesn't mater which fund you are in.

Not sure that's a good comparison, but there is a ton to read here about possible issuers' defaults:
https://doc.morningstar.com/docdetail.aspx?clientid=schwab&key=84b36f1bf3830e07&cusip=258620822
vs
https://www.finra.org/investors/alerts/exchange-traded-notes-avoid-unpleasant-surprises
and maybe the fund does have risk 'advantages'.

Also JHDAX and JHTAX remain open, but I have no idea how they compare with JHDAX .

carew, I assume you meant to say: "how they compare with JHQAX."
Hopefully, the excerpt below from the M* Fund Analysis report of 9/2/2021 by Erol Alitovsky will be helpful:
JHDAX and JHTAX "have the same objective of providing smoother returns by tempering downside and upside returns via a systematically implemented options strategy. The newer funds follow the same approach of the original Hedged Equity strategy, however, instead of purchasing options on the last business day of the quarter, Hedged Equity Fund 2 purchases three-month options on the last business day in January, April, July, and October, and Fund 3 trades its options on the last business day of February, May, August, and November.
The team purchases put options 5% below the S&P 500's value. To offset the cost of the put option, the team first sells put options 20% out-of-the-money. This structure should generally protect the fund from thre-month losses in the 5-20% range; if markets fall less than 5%, the fund should fall in line with the market, and if the market falls more than 20%, the fund should incur the same incremental losses beyond negative 5%. The team also sells call options to generate enough option premium income to cover the remaining cost of the hedges. [...]
Over the short term, the return profile of Fund 2 and 3 may vary from the original Hedged Equity fund depending on the price path of the S&P 500, but over the long run all three funds should have very similar risk/reward characteristics. Investors looking to make an allocation to this strategy would be wise to pair both Hedged Equity Fund 2 and 3 as this lowers market price path dependency, or the investment's sensitivity to short periods of market volatility.
Reasonable fees coupled with JPMorgan's transparent process make these funds an interesting option."
Good luck,
Fred

What a surprise. (NOT.) Microsoft is buggy and deficient. Microsoft has pretty much always been buggy and deficient.
For all of Oahu, the bus system and the handicap service, the HandiVan, is still not 100%, after a cyberattack last week. Service is running, but the fare-card readers still don't work. Criminal suck-holes. Find them. Execute them.
https://www.kitv.com/news/crime/cyber-attack-shuts-down-servers-at-thehandi-van-thebus/article_5ed63970-5920-11ec-ab97-675ae372cdca.html

Giroux was interviewed in Barron podcast this July.
https://www.barrons.com/podcasts/barrons-live/stocks-to-watch-investing-with-t-rowe-price-david-giroux/97b452aa-8887-4cde-84fb-06aa9bb07880?page=1

Howdy @hank
Just fiddl'in here. I compared a few of the previously mentioned funds; being JHQAX , SPY (baseline), TMSRX and ABRZX.
Each chart is a 6 month before and after using SPY as the benchmark; at its low price during the period.
Chart 1 compare (July 2, 2018-July 3, 2019) is for the Xmas eve market melt in 2018. The SPY high in this period was about Oct. 3, 2018 and time frame low was on Dec. 24.
For SPY, the high to low was -19.2%.
CHART 1
Chart 2 is the Covid melt period, being from Sept. 20, 2019-Sept. 20, 2020. The SPY high in this period was about Feb. 19, 2020 and time frame low was on March 23, 2020.
For SPY, the high to low was -33.7%.
CHART 2
Following the charts to the right edge, one may view the recovery price date area and to the far right edge; performance for 6 months after the low price for each entry.
Pillow time here.
Remain curious,
Catch

Brokerages do not seem to designate Rolledover Roths as such. All the brokerages I know just have Roth IRA but no Rollover Roth IRA and Roth 401(k) funds are rolled over to a Roth IRA account. Why is there this distinction between Traditional vs Roth at brokerage level? Do rolledover Roth 401(k) funds not receive the same protection as rolledover 401(k) funds?

Why no rollover Roth IRAs? Likely because of the sequence of changes in the law.

Sometimes called a “rollover IRA,” a conduit IRA holds only retirement plan rollover assets. These Traditional IRAs were established to temporarily hold retirement plan rollover assets, such as savings in a 401(k) or profit sharing plan. By segregating the assets, the individual can later move the savings back to another retirement plan and retain certain tax benefits. If the individual makes other types of IRA contributions, such as regular IRA contributions, the IRA loses its conduit status.

https://www.cuinsight.com/value-conduit-ira.html
This is supported by old Pub 590s. See, e.g. the 2000 version, p. 17.
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/p590--2000.pdf
So originally there was a need for "pure" (untainted) conduit IRAs, and brokerages tagged IRAs as such. The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA) did away with this need. It allows employer plans to accept transfers from IRAs regardless of whether the assets originated in other employer plans.
Here's the current IRS chart of permitted transfers: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/rollover_chart.pdf
EGTRRA also created Roth 401(k)s; before this they did not exist. (They didn't come into existence until even later, in 2006.) So by the time Roth 401(k)s were created, there was no longer a need for conduit IRAs. Thus no need for brokerages to tag Roth IRAs as rollovers.
As to unlimited BAPCPA bankruptcy protection, that is something that applies to assets that originate in employer plans. There's no distinction between between Roth assets and traditional assets. This may be inferred from the absence of "Roth" in the text of BAPCPA.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-109publ8/html/PLAW-109publ8.htm