Thanks, David, for pointing out REMIX / BLNDX in the NOVEMBER Commentary. I used to have it on my watchlist, but apparently it had fallen off. Held up real nice in March 2020 (MAX DD of -9.3%).
Managed futures (50% of the fund) are usually a bit of a black hole in my mind, but at least "The positions can be in stocks and fixed income, as well as currencies and commodities."
If REMIX can provide annual returns somewhat similar to FMSDX, but with better downside protection, then it could be a find.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2021/11/standpoint-multi-asset-fund-forcing-me-to-reconsider/

For example PRPFX which appears to have closed up .68% at $50.59. M* last check had it at Friday’s lower close. Just a heads-up.

I've looked into this fund as a domestic micro-cap growth fund as I don't need another small-cap growth fund.
http://portfolios.morningstar.com/fund/summary?t=NESGX&region=usa&culture=en-US
M* has given it five stars. It has been a top quarterly performer in the WSJ at least on one occasion that I can remember (one was the April 5, 2020 edition, "Hanging In: Stock Funds’ No. 1 Manager Gained 12.8%." There may have been a couple of other occasions, but I can neither find nor remember.
If you don't have a small cap growth fund, this may be a good option as it has been a good performer for the last several years.
From Needham:
https://www.needhamfunds.com/commentary-insight/in-the-news/?news-category=all&news-topic=all&news-year=all
https://www.needhamfunds.com/mutual-funds/small-cap-growth-fund/
Another article:
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210311005645/en/Needham-Small-Cap-Growth-Fund-Wins-Two-2021-Refinitiv-Lipper-Fund-Awards

Last year the SEC temporarily suspended trading of Zoom Technologies (ZOOM) partly because investors were confusing it with Zoom Video (ZM). Zoom Technologies also had not publicly disclosed any financial information since 2015.

From Saturday’s WSJ - Meta Who? :)
“A Canadian company’s stock surged recently. Investors apparently confused it for the rebranded Facebook. Shares of Meta Materials Inc., a material-science company with the ticker symbol MMAT, rose 8% over the past two days. While Meta Materials appears to have little relation to Facebook Inc., it soon will have a similar corporate name.”
https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/meta-shares-surge-no-not-facebooks-meta-11635516376

Wonder what others’ thoughts are on this fund which is classified by Lipper as Small-Cap Core and is a Great Owl over 3/5/10 years?
It has a five-year upside capture ratio of 112.86, downside capture ratio of 63.68, and max drawdown of 16.24%.
Max drawdown over its lifetime (since May 2002) is 35.75%.
The investor class NESGX is a bit pricey with an ER of 1.89 plus 12b-1 of .25 but its institutional class with ER of 1.22 is available at Schwab with a minimum of $2,500/$1,000 (IRA) and the usual TF.

This topic came up in a different thread. There seems to be a lot of confusion and controversy over these businesses. Solid information is very hard to come by. (I’ve searched for hours.) Apparently, when you access your account at a bank, mutual fund company, brokerage, etc. it’s likely that the actual functionality of that site is being provided by some third party under contract with the firm. Yodlee is one of the largest and a subject of much scrutiny.
One Story
Brief excerpt from above:
Charles Schwab & Co. and Fidelity Investments have finally taken action against "screen scrapers" largely by piping them better data that obviates the need to siphon it intrusively. For the first time, the San Francisco and Boston RIA custodians and retail brokerage giants will openly share data with aggregators -- and competitors like Envestnet-owned Yodlee--as well as each other.
In a nutshell - even if “anonymous” our data is valuable to others like marketers and investment houses who want to know things about how we invest, how much our holdings are worth and whether we’re buying bonds, stocks - or maybe opening a short position. A group of Democratic lawmakers called on the FTC in 2020 to investigate Yodlee for allegedly selling confidential investor information. The FTC took up the case, but I can’t find whether or not anything was ever resolved. I’ve read that a former Trump attorney is suing Yoldee - so they must have antagonized both sides of the political spectrum. FTC Case
Other links / citations welcome.

Have you heard about the "commodities super cycle" we may be living in right now? .....The topic sentence from this Institutional Investor article sums it up quite nicely, “Commodity super cycles are decade-long periods in which commodities trade above their long-term price trend.”
....in the short run the green movement could well be an inflationary force
I would argue that COVID and nationalism, (and I should add dysfunction in social media and tech itself, i.e. hacking for instance), are inflationary and serve as mitigating forces against rational technology’s deflationary sway. Does nature and irrational human behavior always win out over the better aspects of technology and rational human behavior? Not always, but the wild side, the animal spirits, are ever-present and always set to rise.

commodities super cycle

My TDA accounts are grandfathered for a commission rate of just $15 to purchase non-NTF mutual funds such as Dodge and Cox or Vanguard. I'm waiting to see if Schwab honors that rate. (I suspect that I would lose that benefit if I transferred my TDA accounts to Schwab before the integration.)

May be call Schwab and ask the question. If they agree to honor, then transfer now to lock in; otherwise, enjoy the benefit for another 2 years. They may honor now not to lose you to a competitor who may offer large incentives to get your accounts.

Better than Bitcoin ….. From this week’s Barron’s (11/1)
“Bitcoin investors are probably thrilled with the coin's 50% gains over the past few weeks. But that's nothing compared with the Squid Game token that popped up this past week. Pegged to an online game inspired by the hit Netflix series, the “play to earn” coin rocketed nearly 5,000% over three days, going from 12 cents to $6. It's now worth $475 million, according to CoinMarketCap.”

We did an IRA transfer from Fidelity to Vanguard a year ago that went via ACAT, just as Observant1 described. When I spoke with Vanguard I was told that the medallion guarantee requirement originates with the sending brokerage. If they don't require the guarantee everything can be done electronically. Vanguard specifically commented that they have a good working relationship with Fidelity.
Regarding the hoops Level5 jumped through, the rules are different for employer-sponsored plans. With those plans, the withdrawal must be initiated on the 401k/403(b)/457 side. The assets usually have to be converted to cash. The only exception I have seen, and this is with multiple financial institutions, is that if you're transferring assets between an employer plan and an IRA run by the same institution, e.g. TRP, Fidelity, etc., then the transfer can be in-kind.
Many if not most of these plans today still send the cash only via paper check. The only way I've found around this problem is to use the exception above: transfer assets electronically from plan to a temporary IRA managed by the same institution if possible. Then have your target IRA do a customary electronic pull from the temporary IRA.

Full Episode Oct 30, 2021:

My TDA accounts are grandfathered for a commission rate of just $15 to purchase non-NTF mutual funds such as Dodge and Cox or Vanguard. I'm waiting to see if Schwab honors that rate. (I suspect that I would lose that benefit if I transferred my TDA accounts to Schwab before the integration.)

To move funds from a NY State Deferred Compensation 457 account to an IRA at Vanguard, I had to have the 457 account mail me a check first. Then to expedite the process, I scanned the check and submitted it online to Vanguard. It was then entered into a money market account where I was able to allocate it. A bit clunky from both entities, but it eventually worked out. Still, you would think that the entire process could’ve been done online.

From the article:
"The tables show the stock market as a whole did best when rates were steady, as contrasted with what you might expect, with an average annualized return of 26.73% during four such periods. Surprisingly, it did the worst when rates were falling with an average annualized return of -3.72, and with an average annualized return of 10.89 when rates were rising!"
Equal's - by the time the Fed reacts, raising or lowering, the results have already been generally cooked in.
Implications for Investors
"Right now, even though the Fed is highly likely to quite soon begin phasing out its bond purchases, called quantitative easing, that is not the same as actually raising rates. Since the Fed Chairman has repeatedly stated the Fed is not expected to raise rates until those purchases have ended sometime later next year, we can assume that rates will remain stable until then, as they have been since the last series of cuts ended on March 15, 2020. Given this data and the fact that the overall market has shown to perform best when rates are stable, it appears likely that stocks can do considerably well until then."

reserving the right to reject orders exceeding ...
You were given imprecise information. Fidelity, like most fund sponsors, puts in boilerplate allowing them to reject any purchase, including a purchase via an exchange if they feel it would disrupt the fund. But not sell orders. If they did, the funds would no longer be classified as OEFs.

An open-end fund is required by law to redeem its securities on demand

https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2015/33-9922.pdf
Based on the purchase dollar limit you were given for FCNTX, and the limit that I actually hit on a very new and very small Fidelity fund, it looks like Fidelity sets its fund limits at 0.1% of AUM. (M* shows FCNTX as having $139.5B, or roughly 1,000x the purchase limit.)
Regarding redemption in-kind, Fidelity (or any fund company) would distribute securities owned by the fund. Obviously if the fund were to sell some securities just to purchase other ones to hand you, it might as well hand you the cash since that would be no more disruptive.
As it constitutes 10.65% of the fund's portfolio, I'd expect you to get a ton of FB.
According to the latest semiannual statement, Fidelity Contra redeemed 293,065 FCNKX shares in kind, worth $5,071.454. It does happen.

It remains interesting. Turns out the prospectus, like most, has, or is officially reported to have, vague language about reserving the right to reject orders exceeding yada yada ...
without any figure given, said the rep.
He added that the current limit for FCNTX is $138M or something. (Coincidence that you mentioned it.)
This from the 'back desk', he said.
I was attempting 1/276 of that.
Minor irony is that on yet another day of a rising market, if I had put in my FMSDX order for a dollar under the half-mil, it would have gone through fine even as the actual sale amount would turn out to have been nontrivially >$0.5M.
Now, I am willing to believe that if you were an FAIRX or CGMFX (cheapshot examples) shareholder and sold several millions it might well take some time to settle to you.
I love the line about in-kind --- Fido are going to put a ton of VGIT or BSV into your account in lieu of cash ?
The rep did suggest next time (go, bull, next week!) to call them directly or use chat.fidelity.com ....

I don't believe that funds can outright reject redemption orders (though they can postpone orders as was done in Sept 2001 when the markets were shut down). However, funds can place restrictions that might trigger on large orders. It is easy to imagine that such atypical transactions could not be processed online.
From the prospectus of FCNTX:

payment of redemption proceeds may take longer than the time a fund typically expects and may take up to seven days from the date of receipt of the redemption order as permitted by applicable law.
...
a fund reserves the right to pay part or all of your redemption proceeds in readily marketable securities instead of cash (redemption in-kind). Redemption in-kind proceeds will typically be made by delivering the selected securities to the redeeming shareholder within seven days after the receipt of the redemption order in proper form by a fund.

It would be interesting to know what the stumbling block was.