There we go, the government is doing it differently this time.
It announced that in lieu of checks some people would be getting debit cards. Same as last time. Who? Why? Who knows? The IRS writes:

For those who don’t receive a direct deposit by early January, they should watch their mail for either a paper check or a debit card. To speed delivery of the payments to reach as many people as soon as possible, the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, part of the Treasury Department, will be sending a limited number of payments out by debit card. Please note that the form of payment for the second mailed EIP may be different than for the first mailed EIP. Some people who received a paper check last time might receive a debit card this time, and some people who received a debit card last time may receive a paper check.

Last year I received direct deposit. I gave the same bank account on my 2018 and 2019 returns, but this year I'm getting something in the mail. I don't know what yet (check or card). All I know is that it was supposedly mailed on the 6th and it hasn't arrived yet.
There's something else the government is doing differently - it slowed down the USPS.
("The Postal Service delivered only 70.6 percent of first-class mail items on time during the week of Dec. 12, the most recent data available, compared with better than 95 percent during the same period last year." WaPo Jan, 5)
To check the status of your Economic Impact Payment (EIP), click on the blue Get My Payment button near the top of this page:
https://www.irs.gov/coronavirus/get-my-payment

By now TRP should able fully geared to work from home. Customer support can be done with broadband connection. That how IT support is being done.
I performed asset transfer online at Fidelity last week and it was completed in 5 days. As I recall, TRP requires signed paper forms several years ago. If that is the case, it is likely sitting in their Maryland office.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/935015/000119312521006862/d880577d497.htm
Excerpt:
4. All other references to James C. Kieffer and any related information in the prospectus and SAI will be hereby removed.

Note that in private discussion with another poster who inquired about PLBBX I stated that it is on my 50%-70% alternate list. Mighty fine fund over both the ST and LT that just never made its way to an actual holding of mine.

Here are a couple of more stock market bubble articles, the first one short and second one with a fair amount of detailed background info:

First Article: Warren Buffett's favorite market indicator hits 13-year high, signaling global stocks are most overvalued since the financial crisis
The gauge climbed past 121% last weekend, Bloomberg data shows, marking its highest reading since October 2007. Welt market analyst Holger Zschaepitz flagged the worrying milestone in a tweet.
"Buffett indicator sounds the alarm," he said. "Global stock mkt cap has now topped 120% of global GDP, and thus the same level as before the crash in 2008."

Second Article: Yes, Virginia. There Is A Stock Market Bubble. Lance Roberts
We see that the claims on the economy should, quite intuitively, track the economy itself. Excesses occur whenever the economy’s claims, the so-called financial assets (stocks, bonds, and derivatives), get too far ahead of the economy itself.
The increase in speculative risks, combined with excess leverage, leave the markets vulnerable to a sizable future correction. The only missing ingredient for such a reversion is the catalyst to bring “fear” into an overly complacent marketplace.
It is all reminiscent of the market peak of 1929 when Dr. Irving Fisher uttered his now-famous words: “Stocks have now reached a permanently high plateau.”

Congratulations to them. They're in good company, especially starting out.
Warren Buffett called an S&P 500 index fund “the best thing” for most people who want to invest.

As part of his remarks offering some broader advice about investing at his company’s first-ever virtual annual meeting on May 2 [2020], Buffett said, “In my view, for most people, the best thing to do is to own the S&P 500 index fund,” which would track the S&P 500.

Some months ago, I asked for suggestions for a fund for my 21-year-old grandson, who wanted to open a Roth IRA. Many people gave me advice and suggestions, which I so appreciated. After talking with my grandson and passing along suggestions, he decided on FXAIX, Fidelity 500 Index Fund. And, my 25-year-old granddaughter (his sister) decided to open a Roth also, and into the same fund. I helped them open their accounts over the weekend. I wanted to come back and say thank you again, and let you know what he (and now she) decided.

FSEAX compared to the others mentioned: VAESX, WAEMX, GPEOX - looks very promising. MEASX ... too much of a slump... I may have to look further into FSEAX. Up 5.50 ytd BTW.

Hi Jon, I would look at expense ratio. You can buy the NASDAQ 100 cheaper than RYOCX. Turnover on the Fidelity fund is higher than I like. Are they that smart?
I would also look at the structure of the fund family. I lean against publicly traded companies. I would look at how much the managers are putting into the fund. And then I would look at the over-all success rate of the family. Is the particular fund a one-off? Is it out of their typical area of expertise?
I'm assuming you have read their documentation. So you have a solid grip on their investing thesis. And it makes sense to you at the moment.
Not all of those factors can be determined from MFO premium.
Good luck

I hope I'm posting this question in the right discussion. Here goes...
Using Quick Search criteria:
Category – Large-Cap Growth
MFO Rating – 4-5 Above Average
Display Period – 10 years
I picked 3 random funds in the top APR
FBGRX = 4 MFO Risk, 4 MFO Rating, 4.8 Ulcer, 3.91 Martin, -17.2 MAXDD, ER .79
RYOCX = 4 MFO Risk, 5 MFO Rating, 4.1 Ulcer, 4.54 Martin, -17.4 MAXDD, ER 1.38
LCGFX = 4 MFO Risk, 5 MFOR Rating, 4.0 Ulcer, 4.24 Martin, -17.6 MAXDD, ER .65
All 3 of these funds apr is between 17.9 and 19.4. The criteria I listed above is very close to one another except perhaps for the ER in RYOCX. So, how would you go about using MFO to pick the best 1 of the 3. What other criteria is absolutely critical to you within MFO Premium to select the best fund in the category?
Notice that I chose Large Cap Growth on purpose. I’m just trying to understand how I will use MFO premium and what criteria you all use from it. @Sven just pointed out that the Asset Correlation is important as I'm trying to refine my portfolio to be balanced and diversified. Asset correlation is contained in premium per sven.

@Crash I feel your pain on this but allow me to offer a slightly different viewpoint. I use a password manager that is solid. One master password is all I have to remember. It keeps 100's of other passwords for me (I have more than 500) and they are all generated by the manager. I only have to remember one. HOWEVER... all of my banking and brokerages - I use 2 Factor authentication. So, if I log in to a bank or brokerage... I WANT a text verifying that it's me. This gives me the best of both worlds. I have the password manager to login to most of the sites that I use that require a login but my financial ones... I'm protected by the 2 factor authentication. Edit: And I use BRAVE as a browser. It's an ad blocker built in etc. So I know what you are trying to accomplish there.

Marketwatch story on the volatility of Bitcoin. The story was interesting (especially the table comparing bitcoin to gold and stocks etc). However, the first comment to the article by Larry Horowitz was also interesting and repeats what @bee said above about Fidelity creating a digital asset platform.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/bitcoin-sees-bear-market-skid-living-up-to-its-reputation-for-seismic-price-swings-11610391398?mod=home-page
I confess - I don't own any bitcoin... but it doesnt stop me from being curious. I mean Michael Saylor of Microstrategies took $500M of cash from his companies balance sheet and invested it in Bitcoin because with inflation... it was costing him too much money by leaving it in the bank.

I hope I'm posting this question in the right discussion. Here goes...
Using Quick Search criteria:
Category – Large-Cap Growth
MFO Rating – 4-5 Above Average
Display Period – 10 years
I picked 3 random funds in the top APR
FBGRX = 4 MFO Risk, 4 MFO Rating, 4.8 Ulcer, 3.91 Martin, -17.2 MAXDD, ER .79
RYOCX = 4 MFO Risk, 5 MFO Rating, 4.1 Ulcer, 4.54 Martin, -17.4 MAXDD, ER 1.38
LCGFX = 4 MFO Risk, 5 MFOR Rating, 4.0 Ulcer, 4.24 Martin, -17.6 MAXDD, ER .65
All 3 of these funds apr is between 17.9 and 19.4. The criteria I listed above is very close to one another except perhaps for the ER in RYOCX. So, how would you go about using MFO to pick the best 1 of the 3. What other criteria is absolutely critical to you within MFO Premium to select the best fund in the category?
Notice that I chose Large Cap Growth on purpose. I’m just trying to understand how I will use MFO premium and what criteria you all use from it. @Sven just pointed out that the Asset Correlation is important as I'm trying to refine my portfolio to be balanced and diversified. Asset correlation is contained in premium per sven.

Stillers, have you had occasion to look at the variants of AIGPX (available at Wells with low minimum)?

Yes, used to own it and it sits just below VWIAX and FMSDX on my 30%-50% list. Its 2020 blowout year jumped it to the top TR performer of the three. It is however largely a LC/MC Growth fund on the stock side. I prefer to get that exposure through the higher stock allocation AA funds and dedicated Growth funds. That said, if I added another 30%-50% AA fund, this would likely be it.

Many financial advisors will help you to draw up a balanced and diversified investment portfolio. Ideally, funds chosen will have negative asset correlation to each other. High quality bonds and equities are the classic examples. While in drawdown situations, the bonds will advanced when the equities fall. The net result is to have a reduced level of loss and the portfolio will recover in a shorter timeframe. More importantly, this helps the investors psychologically and they are more likely to stay the course rather than sell at the bottom.
If you read January's article from Lynn Bolin, a plot showing Vanguard Wellington fund (65/35 stocks/bonds allocation) versus S&P 500 index achieved the same level of gain over a prolong period. This is achieved with less ups and down. Wellesley Income fund (35/65) was also included on the plot.
Asset correlation can be found in MFO Premium.

@Sven thanks for a great explanation. Makes complete sense. It's interesting because for the Buy and Hold investor that invests in let's say just Index Funds or the S&P 500 with a 10 year or more horizon... they can lose sleep too. If they jump off the roller coaster, they lock in their loss as you say. So, basically what you are saying and others at MFO ... the goal is to invest in funds with more consistent returns over longer periods of time? A lower drawdown number would certainly be part of that volatility equation.
That is my ultimate goal anyway: Find funds that consistently beat the S&P 500 over long periods of time with the less volatility, same or a tad more. This is a difficult task. Of course, by choosing "longer periods of time"... I miss out on the Grandeur Peak Global's that may be terrific over the short term (and it looks like they are) but I just need a bit more history. Does this make sense?
@Crash I think you are absolutely right re: juicing the economy. So, if you follow that logic - don't you think 2021 will be even juicier? I can't see Yellen and team providing less stimulus and monkeying with rates too much. Grantham BTW says "“This bubble will burst in due time, no matter how hard the Fed tries to support it, with consequent damaging effects on the economy and on portfolios,” in his book.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000139834421000510/fp0061082_497.htm
497 1 fp0061082_497.htm
FINANCIAL INVESTORS TRUST
Emerald Small Cap Value Fund
(the “Fund”)
Supplement dated January 11, 2021
to the Fund’s
Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information
dated August 31, 2020, as supplemented
As previously disclosed, on December 8, 2020, the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of Financial Investors Trust (the “Trust”), based upon the recommendation of Emerald Mutual Fund Advisers Trust (the “Adviser”), the investment adviser to the Fund, a series of the Trust, determined to close and liquidate the Fund on or about January 11, 2021. The date for such liquidation is now expected to be on or about January 29, 2021 (the “Liquidation Date”).
If the Fund has not received your redemption request or other instruction prior to the close of business on the Liquidation Date, your shares will be redeemed, and you will receive proceeds representing your proportionate interest in the net assets of the Fund as of the Liquidation Date, subject to any required withholdings. As is the case with any redemption of fund shares, these liquidation proceeds will generally be subject to federal and, as applicable, state and local income taxes if the redeemed shares are held in a taxable account and the liquidation proceeds exceed your adjusted basis in the shares redeemed. If the redeemed shares are held in a qualified retirement account such as an IRA, the liquidation proceeds may not be subject to current income taxation under certain conditions. You should consult with your tax adviser for further information regarding the federal, state and/or local income tax consequences of this liquidation that are relevant to your specific situation.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

It is interesting to observe balanced funds during this phase in the business cycle. Within the M* 50-70% equity category the risk level an investor assumes can vary widely. It tips the hand of the fund's perception of risk vs reward. M* produces data showing 2016-2020 Historical Equity trends. Some Balanced funds have assumed more equity exposure at stock market highs after a decade + long bull market. These funds sit at 66% up to 70%+ equities. Others funds have reduced equities from 2016-2020 protecting investors from a possible downturn (less than 60% equity). Totally opposite viewpoints of the same market. Extreme examples of two within 50-70 are BRUFX and BALFX. This wide descrepancy is obviously going to produce much different CAGR, SD and MDraw going forward. To each his own.

@JonGaltIII,
Drawdown has considerable impact on future returns. Let me try to explain this with some calculation.
Let say you lost 10% in fund A in 2020. An amount of $100 investment is reduced to $90.
100 X (1-0.1) = 90
In order to regain the $10 lost, you must gain 11% in 2021 (not merely 10%).
100 = (1+X)*90 (original 2020 value) and solve for X. X is the percentage gain required for 2021.
X = 0.11 or 11%
Therefore the deeper the "hole" or drawdown is, the larger % gain is required and often longer duration to fully recover the loss. Case in point, S&P 500 index lost 40+% in 2008, and it took 53 months to fully recover and many investors can't handle the pain or patience to wait it out. Many cut their loss and sell near the bottom which is the worst outcome as the investors now lock-in the loss permanently. Therefore the magnitude of drawdown has a significant psychological effect that often lead to panic selling. The key here is minimize the drawdown while balancing a reasonable return. Thus a well balanced portfolio with the right asset allocation will likely to have a much smaller drawdown in a down market. This would allow the investors to sleep well.
There are many very useful tools in MFO Premium site that allow one to compare fund candidates with respective to their drawdown %, recovery period, and annual return for various market cycles. And I am barely scratching the surface of Premium capabilities.

... can understand where you are coming from. If I panicked in March 2020, I would have missed out on a huge finish to 2020. I know we can't time the market ...

I did not panic, I trust, and was not trying to time, in the usual sense. By May 11 all of our equity fund holdings were back to breakeven or abovewater (except for FRIFX, not a huge portion). I projected that this plague was going to be much worse and longer-lived than most were saying, which has turned out to be the case. (I'd lost to covid at end March my oldest college friend, of 55y nonstop acquaintance, healthy etc. --- a jarring, sudden-enough death.) I believed the economic impact was going to be much worse than predicted, including crippled consumer spending. Turned out to be only partly the case; certainly the latter did not occur. All this thinking of mine was informed by extensive reading and some crude numbercrunching. I thought if we could avoid a >20% monthslong / yearslong drop in this early stage of our retirement we would be better off. So as with so much in life I regret it only in hindsight.
I can however guarantee that right after I get back in the really big broad market drops will occur, without fail.

None, none, none.
This perplexing scenario to witness I have discussed in the briefest of ways w the august LBraham and JWaggoner, meaning exchanging a few rueful wtf words, and they list the usual suspects, chiefly fomo w tina (per the ongoing likely course of interest rates, mentioned above, plus new and ongoing disaster relief payments).
Plus a certain amount of rich-millennial behaviors (robinhood etc.).
But these ain't insights, really, nor is saying that this time some of it 'really is different' (permanent shift in p/e).
Also, these handful of factors many people have been pointing out for a long time.
I have been out of equities 100% since May 11, when nobody saw a 30% rise still ahead, of course.
Now. A real and significant dip takes us back to only say 28k Dow, a defined bear market back to only ~25k. It was not long ago at all that more than one big investment house were saying Well, okay, when we slump into the 26k area or whatever, it will be time to buy aggressively.
Anyway, greed stamina, and fundamentals, being what they are, that ain't happening. There has been a lasting shift upward, and no 2000 or 2009 ahead. CWood at Ark and others like her have started to write about the chronic underestimation of technology.
So ... upon dips I intend (he said) to put lots into VONV (p/e ~27) and CAPE and then sit tight (he said) for a few years. At ages 72 and 74 soon, we have enough years of cash for us to manage, looks like.
All very vexing, and if I had stayed the course in May we could be sending out so many more donations!