Yes-I'm glad I only have $1,000 invested in that fund. The 90 day clock(holding period) is running for me on this fund, unless they decide to emulate IOFIX and I have to pay the hostage fee to get out sooner !

Terminology becomes a confusing issue in these kind of threads. "Short Term Bonds" is a category of M* and permeates search functions at various brokerage houses for competing funds in that category. Short Duration/Limited Duration is often a descriptive term, in titles of various funds, and can often apply to almost any category in which duration is being emphasized. Even the term High Yield can be confusing, often describing credit status references of junk bonds, but occasionally describing the amount of yield within any category of funds. In my cash alternative account, used as an alternative to bank accounts, I often use DHEAX (from the M* category of short term bonds), but it is predominantly a securitized asset fund that is very risky for the category, but I relate to it more as a nontraditional bond oef, with short duration. I often use RPHIX/RPHYX, which M* categorizes as a High Yield bond fund, but with very short duration--one of the least volatile and smooth performing funds I own and I consider it a good alternative to the category of Short Term Bond funds which generally offers too little yield with higher investment grade bonds. (RPHIX/RPHYX has restricted/limited access) Another fund I often use for alternatives for bank accounts, is FPFIX, a short duration low risk from the nontraditional category. I prefer FPFIX over its more well known cousin, FPNIX, which is a very good and low risk short term bond category fund. (note FPNIX is in a limited access status).
With all of that said, I also use a lot of short duration bond oefs in my more risky IRA holdings, that mostly have junkier credit ratings, but often in more of a "trade" role. In 2021 I have use IOFIX, SEMMX, several FL/BR funds, etc. which often provides higher yield and higher total return. In the multisector bond category, even venerable funds like PIMIX are very short duration, along with it's PIMCO relative PEGIX. At any rate, terminology can often be confusing, so the OP may want to more specifically define what he is looking for, and what role he wants those funds to fill in his portfolio.

After LOTS of screening and test driving in these areas:
Own ST/ST HY: LALDX (thanks to another poster, and that also lead me to research and own MS LBNDX) and RPHYX, both provide consistently boring, consistently positive TRs for monies awaiting a better home. IMO, these are two of, if not the very best for the job I assigned them: inch forward and don't lose me any money. RPHYX of course now closed.
Likely the next to be added to that group with similar pedigree: PFIIX/PFIAX.
Also own HY: BGHIX (owned it a while as DHHIX), VWEHX and FAGIX.
Others in ST/ST HY cat's that may come aboard: IOFIX, BUHFX, TUHYX, RCTIX.

. Also RiverPark has RSIVX…somewhat longer duration than RPHYX, but performing relatively well this year it seems.
Honestly, if you’re ok with courting risk, IOFIX is as steady as they come ....

RSIVX is doing great this year; hadn't thought about it in a long, long time. It's been a dog for most of its life, but must be doing something right this year. Will look into it.
Agree on IOFIX too. Several other securitized OEFs have fallen off the pace lately, but it's keeping on keeping on.
JD's RCTRX suggestion looks pretty good in securitized, too - never heard of it till this thread.

OSTIX, Osterweis Strategic Income (TF at most brokerage houses)…..or ZEOIX, Zeo Short Duration Income (also TF). Also RiverPark has RSIVX…somewhat longer duration than RPHYX, but performing relatively well this year it seems.
Honestly, if you’re ok with courting risk, IOFIX is as steady as they come (the once-in-a-decade, plus, COVID crash notwithstanding….). 4-5% yield and it generally goes up or stays flat most days. I know it’s not high yield! Don’t kill me for suggesting it haha.

If you had the stomach hang on to IOFIX from 3/2020 to now it is almost back to even. But there are those 2 weeks when it lost half of it's value.
I don't understand exactly why, other than they had a lot of thinly traded bonds that before the Covid crash were being priced only "mathematically as they were almost never traded.
The lesson I took from this is to be very very cautious about funds that buy things you don't completely understand ( ie black box) , especially without a track record to see how the same strategy withstood earlier crashes. Funds with lots of below investment grade bonds will do poorly in an equity correction, as they have in the past.

@crash - it's not for everyone but
IOFIX - 1yr.: +18.29% although after last year there really wasn't much place to go but up.
YTD: +13.7%
Yield: 3.98%

IOFIX generated excellent category returns from inception (05/28/2015) through 2019.
IIRC correctly, volatility was low and the Sharpe ratio was high during this period.
The fund then delivered an unpleasant surprise when it returned -36.18% during Q1 2020.
IOFIX seemed like a safe fund for years...

@mark
I've followed more than a couple of message-threads re: IOFIX and IOFAX. Scary, the way they make it happen. I'm too chicken.

@crash - it's not for everyone but
IOFIX - 1yr.: +18.29% although after last year there really wasn't much place to go but up.
YTD: +13.7%
Yield: 3.98%

Green today:
XOM +1.05%
CVX +0.38%
XLE +0.34%
IOFIX +0.17%
TOTL +0.04%
FLOT +0.04%
Freed up some cash today via sales of bond OEFs.
ADDing to some US & Foreign stock/allocation funds tomorrow & Thursday.
Disclaimer: Not sure if I'll be a Dipper or Diplet, or both.

All equity holdings crushed today. But IOFIX and PMZIX held steady. DHEAX up 1 cent. JLS also up nicely. Otherwise, sea of red.

I am in bond funds because they offer me the best returns with the lowest risk. Their trend persistency combined with their low volatility enable me to best implement the scale up buying strategy I learned from Nicolas Darvas. My first bond trade was in junk bonds in 1991. It was January 17 one of the greatest momentum days ever in equities. That day the Dow surged some 114 points which at that time was its second best on record. As is often the case there was a lag and a few days later junk bonds went on tear and had 60 consecutive trading days without a decline. That smooth ride upward continued for the next three years until February 1994 in junk bonds as they bested the S@P over that period.
That one LUCKY trade made a lasting impression on me and the way I have traded my capital ever since. Most especially after the tech wreck in March 2000. There have been many repeat performances and exhibitions of unreal trend persistency since 2000 in various bond fund categories. Emerging market debt in the early 2000s, junk bonds 2009-12, junk munis 2014, bank loans 2016, and last but not least the securitized category since last spring - IOFIX, BDKAX, abd SEMPX. IOFIX has had something like only 8 down days since last April 2020 when many of the veteran bond traders re entered. An amazing run over a 15 month period.
Some remember me as a day trader in the stock index futures. Others as a trader in tech funds who also exploited the new fund effect as well as datelining. Yet less than 3% of my total trading profits have come from daytrading and only around 13% from tech funds, new funds, datelining. Meaning almost 85% of my nest egg has come from bond funds - my one true love in the financial arena. I have always said everyone needs a trading or investing niche and I found my niche in bond funds.

I can't see much difference from IOFIX, so I am not sure what new opportunities this fund represents.

http://portfolios.morningstar.com/fund/holdings?t=SFHYX&region=usa&culture=en-US
It has a position in IOFIX and well as some other mutual funds.
The Microstrategy position was first purchased 2/28/2021.

I don;'t own PONAX or PIMIX but I do own their CEF counter partners PCI, PDI and PTY. Why do I still own them? Because on the first of each month they politely drop $1K+ of distributions into my retirement account. To carry my lunacy even further I also hold IOFIX. Equities at current levels aren't compelling enough to me to make any switches.

Last years dog IOFIX +5.18%
And then there are some CEF bond funds - YTD returns Price/NAV all positive
PCI 8.56/2.55
PDI 5.69/1.67
PFN 4.33/0.85
PTY 1.65/2.28

After many attempts, I received an answer from AlphaCentric about dividends vs return of capital in IOFIX. It is rather unusual, so I will put it here:
The 19A document is not a tax reporting document. It is an SEC reporting requirement. It has limitations:
It is based on GAAP reporting.
It is based on book value and not tax-adjusted.
The 1099 is a tax document and follows different rules. It depends on the tax year end for the fund, the calendar year, etc.
The Fund’s tax year end is 3/31. The return of capital rules allow us to only report known return of capital for the tax year. Here is what this means.
Only verified return of capital between April 1 and March 31 can count towards return of capital (i.e., you cannot estimate return of capital for the April 1 to December 31 period). Once this is calculated, it is applied on a calendar year basis. In the case of our fund, January, February and March are the only months where we would report the known return of capital from the previous April 1 to the current 3/31.
The return of capital on the 2020 1099-DIV reflect the return of capital between April 1, 2019 and March 31, 2020 applied to the months of January to March 2020.
For the return of capital generated between 4/1/20 and 3/31/21, that will be applied to January to March 2021 on the 1099-DIV.
This is why the 1099-DIV for the fund only shows return of capital from January to March and then income the rest of the months.
When you look at the 19A’s provided from April to December of 2020, you will see that these say the fund will send a 1099-DIV for these periods in early 2020 for the calendar year 2021. This is also why in April 2020, the current month and fiscal YTD amounts of return of capital are identical because it is the first month in the new fiscal year.
Can you rely on the 19A? Yes and no. It has its limitations as discussed above. However, if you view the 19A and notice that the amount of return of capital is high and is occurring after 3/31, then it’s likely it will show up on the next year’s 1099-DIV. However, there is a limitation in that only January to March can absorb the return of capital. If we had so much return of capital that it could not be absorbed, then it would be lost. It is best to speak to a tax advisor about how to best handle this.
This means that the strange sentence in 19(a) "The Fund will send you a Form 1099-DIV in early 2022 for the 2021 calendar year" is not a typo but their method of reporting.

I wouldn't put my life savings into this fund but I do own it as a satellite position and pleased so far. Even though it's short-lived it did great in the COVID drawdown (max DD 6.33) compared with IOFIX (max DD 37.95% during the same swoon). I'd say that's pretty good for CAGR of 10.68% and Sharpe of 1.5% since inception.

My situation is very similar to Ben's. Outside of IOFIX I own nothing but PIMCO CEF's and I'm operating on the principal that if it's not broken then don't fix it.

@Baseball_Fan

I want to know what the young man who was running the fund was exactly doing? Was there malfeasance? Or did he really believe the 3rd party model was incorrect and there was a "tweaking" for good reason? He's obviously lawyered up. Who else knew and who challenged him on his actions? Wasn't there a compliance/risk officer? What was he doing/not doing/getting paid for?

Good questions. To those I would add what was it that finally did bring this to the SEC's attention?
Regarding the audit question, I was referring to the annual reports.
This is from their August 2020 annual report:

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Trustees of Trust for Advised Portfolios and the
Shareholders of Infinity Q Diversified Alpha Fund
Opinion on the Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying consolidated statement of assets and liabilities of Infinity Q Diversified Alpha Fund, a series of shares of beneficial interest in Trust for Advised Portfolios, and Subsidiary (the "Fund"), including the consolidated schedule of investments as of August 31, 2020, and the related consolidated statement of operations for the year then ended, the statements of changes in net assets for each of the years in the two-year period then ended, the statement of cash flows for the year then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the years in the three-year period then ended, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the "financial statements"). The consolidated financial highlights for the years ended August 31, 2017 and August 31, 2016 were audited by another independent registered public accounting firm whose report, dated February 1, 2018, expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial highlights. In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of the Fund as of August 31, 2020, the consolidated results of their operations for the year then ended, their cash flows for the year then ended, the changes in their net assets for each of the years in the two-year period then ended, and financial highlights for each of the years in the three-year period then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Basis for Opinion
These financial statements are the responsibility of the Fund's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Fund's financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) ("PCAOB") and are required to be independent with respect to the Fund in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Fund is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Fund's internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.
Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of August 31, 2020, by correspondence with the custodian, prime broker and third-party counterparties. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Bold emphasis my own.
To answer my own question. My interpretation is that the audit just makes sure that there are no irregularities in the numbers or accounting in the financial reports but not an assessment of the validity of how the asset values are obtained or the actual pricing of the assets themselves. But I'm no expert on financial reports.
I also think the comparison of Infinity Q and T. Rowe Price is like comparing apples & oranges, even concerning TMSRX. Especially as Infinity Q was essentially a one man operation. Anything is possible & I definitely understand the concern.
@Sma3
Regarding IOFIX, my impression was they were not disclosing to shareholders the risks involved with some of their holdings- their method of buying & valuing odd lots not widely traded which during times of stress (ie last March) might become difficult to unload.
@Derf
I have no idea what a "reasonable" amount would be but for me, in general, I tend to limit any one holding to no more than 5-7%. TMSRX is currently around 6.5%. The main exception to that is PRWCX which I started investing in back in the 1990s. It sits around 16%.