@msf, thanks, you always provide practical, wise, and helpful info.
In my case, I'm trying to make all new investments in a solo 401K that has a different tax ID than my personal SS, so the process you describe might not work. They're no load / no fee at Schwab, where I have my solo 401K, so a $100 stake makes sense for me.

Mr. Seed is able to provide interesting data and thoughts.
With his knowledge of the bond world, he indeed should be a very wealthy man.
'Course, this statement:
"Summary: Don’t Listen to Bloomberg, Treasuries Aren’t for Everyone, at Least at These Rates."
He does note the money that can be made during falling yields, but IMHO; he could have dedicated a few more words regarding this.
I'm reminded of the period of falling yields after the melt in 2008. At the time, I also watched some CNBC tv. The commentators would mention falling Treasury yields and a fairly standard verbal statement would be, "you're not going to get much for your money with those." These folks, I presume; have enough financial wisdom to know what happens to bond pricing when the yields are falling. I watched numerous times expecting one of them to say that when yields are falling you may make good money from the price increases. Nope !!!
And from where do folks think a lot of the price appreciation arrives for the more plain vanilla balanced funds, be they moderate or conservative, during these past decades. Sure........the bonds.
Two and one half years chart of BAGIX v AGG v SPY . I used this time period, as 2018 had several bumps for equity, not counting the big bump on Christmas eve of 2018. So, if one held a decent bond fund or even the etf AGG, your holdings on those clunky bonds provided, eh? The point for the etf, is that these can provide, too; although I prefer a proven active managed bond fund at this time. Using sector etf's in bondland will allow one to build whatever mix you choose. Choices for a mixer are vast, as never before.
Lastly, we've traveled this bond turf many times. If you feel that yields may continue to move lower, you'll make money with quality bonds. If the hot equity market is going to melt, you'll likely do well with Treasury issues. If you are sure yields are going to move higher, then time to assess whatever bonds you're invested. If one finds an alternate, long/short or other magic box fund that is of interest, compare its life span to say a, FBALX or even VWINX to discover the ability of the fund to provide for profits.
Some of the investment grade bond funds have been flat for a few weeks (too much money after equity, I suspect). This week has found more positive moves (price). Perhaps the bond folks are buying on the cheap, or hedging that equity is a bit too hot.
I don't know.
The ultimate consideration for one's portfolio is capital preservation and that you are comfortable with your choices. More now, than ever before; one has every which way to customize a portfolio.
Take care,
Catch

msf said, FDRXX: 0.01% (-0.10% without fee reduction) Wow. We’ve now arrived at negative interest rates (at least without fee waivers). I suppose it’s happened before with mm funds. But still a startling proposition.

0.09% for the Schwab MM SWVXX.
@Rbrt, as of today I see FDRXX at 0.01 and FZDXX at 0.07. Even down from msf's info dated 6/30. Crazy low yields all over for MMs.

I'm not disagreeing with you regarding the "ESG managers" part, but with the author's assertion that "Their environmental and social concerns less clearly reflect self-interest." I fundamentally disagree. The average employee age is irrelevant unless you believe this current generation is the last to invest in 401ks. The future of 401k investors is on the line. Actually, I am disagreeing with you somewhat because using a phrase like "ESG managers maintain..." casts doubt on the reality of the business risks climate change poses. The verb "maintain" suggests a weak lawyerly defensive argument by ESG managers as opposed to the scientific facts of the risks, which in 2020 are more couched in reality than any finance theory currently treated as gospel. The equivalent phrasing would be "Bill Cosby maintains his innocence."

Money market funds, not bond funds (short term or otherwise). Now offering yields, not what they paid the trailing twelve months.
This piece likewise extrapolated on past performance. It gave current (SEC??) yields, but did not comment on them. Rather, it looked at 4 month performance and simply multiplied by 3. It didn't even bother to compound the return. ("if the above funds rise at the same rate over the next 8 mos.", and if pigs could fly ...)
The 0.09% figure could be high, since "average" wasn't defined, nor data source identified. Does it include institutional funds or just retail funds? Is it dollar weighted? I suspect the figure is in the right ballpark give or take a factor of 4 (or 1/4), depending on how it is computed.
7 day yields for Fidelity MM funds:
FZDXX: 0.10% (0.04% without fee reduction)
FDRXX: 0.01% (-0.10% without fee reduction)
SPAXX: 0.01% (no fee reduction)

One of us is misreading this. "ESG managers maintain that environmental and social concerns pose material risks." To invest without consideration of environmental and social impacts is to ignore business risks. (The DOD has declared climate change a security risk and is required to plan accordingly.) Companies and fund managers who ignore material risks are effectively breaching their fiduciary duty.
I will take issue with your 22 year old employee example. A good sound bite, but not representative of investors in a company's 401k plan. The dollar weighted average age of 401k investors is much higher than that. (I say this with confidence without having checked the figures.)
Generalize this to workers who are concerned about their beneficiaries as well as their own futures and that would make a stronger case.

Why own T-bills when one can own no-penalty CDs, similar maturity, 1% APY, federally insured, fully liquid, and guaranteed not to lose value unlike a T-bill or a corporate bond?
Longer term bonds are another matter. Though as pointed out in the article, T-Notes aren't yielding that much either: "0.74% on June 17th for 10-Year Treasury Notes"
Nice piece. I appreciate his pointing out that

when isolating the US Long-Term Government returns to simple price performance in periods of crisis, the insurance provided by treasuries only pays out a bit over 50% of the time. In the aggregate, due to a few larger negative periods of treasury performance overlapping with sharp stock market drawdowns, the overall Crisis Alpha of treasuries is negative! What type of insurance policy makes holders pay nearly half the time when they most need it!?!

I would have expected something similar but not quite the same, that is: while still far from certain, a higher probability of long term Treasuries paying off. Though the negative alpha is not surprising since these can lose big if they don't hold up. I'll have to look more closely at the figures.

@MSF From the M* article:

For example, ESG investors obviously expect the third part of their acronym, governance, to improve their portfolios’ performance. Their environmental and social concerns less clearly reflect self-interest, but ESG managers maintain that environmental and social concerns pose material risks that investors must consider, and that companies that manage such risks well will make their businesses more sustainable.

To which I reply horses--t. A livable planet is in everybody's self-interest, rightwing political propaganda notwithstanding. Climate change is real and it's coming for our portfolios--and our lives. Ostensibly retirement plans are supposed to be the ultimate long-term investors, investing for the entirety of their employees' careers. A 22-year old employee today can look for being in 401ks of various companies for some 43 years from today, during which climate change will have a significant impact on his/her portfolio. Saying otherwise is sticking one's head in the sand.

El Gran Jefe's boys at the DOL don't want funds in your 401k plan excluding oil companies from their portfolios or supporting climate change disclosure or labor-related shareholder proposals:
https://investmentnews.com/dol-esg-401ks-difficult-undo-194467
https://barrons.com/articles/new-labor-department-guidance-takes-aim-at-esg-investing-51593018560

Fidelity has me in 3 different MM funds: FDZXX which has a 1 yr return Of 1.37%.
FDRXX 1.12%
SPAXX 1.07%
Certainly not a way to make real returns but they are stable.

"Corporate bonds are now very liquid and may stay that way given the likelihood the Fed will again provide a buffer during the next crisis."
So, why own T-Bills paying less than 1%?, asks Jon Seed, in another thoughtful piece.
https://alphaarchitect.com/2020/07/09/do-treasuries-have-a-place-in-a-modern-portfolio/

“The average money market fund is now offering dividends of about 0.09%.”
That doesn’t sound right. I don’t invest in money market funds, so have no idea what the better ones return. I just checked my cash substitute, TRBUX. At the end of June Fidelity is showing a 30-day yield of 2.31% with an average weighted maturity of only 1.3 years and a duration of just 1 year. YTD it’s up about 2% - but provided a wild ride during the March / April period.
TRBUX

Just added link to Andrew Miller's study mentioned in road trip piece ... quite good:
https://alphaarchitect.com/2016/06/07/will-bonds-deliver-crisis-alpha-in-the-next-crisis/

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/806633/000119312520190194/d943802d497.htm
Core Growth Fund, International Opportunities Fund and Small Cap Growth Fund
From Wasatch:
https://wasatchglobal.com/wasatch-core-growth-and-small-cap-growth-funds-to-close-to-new-investors/

Hi Sir Old_Skeet, you are exactly right.
In my experiences, the first 100K 'balance' in our portfolio is so hard to get with all the market gains/401K div-redisbributions. The 2nd, 3rd 100K gained are easier than the first 100K [after 5-7 yrs or so].... So are the subsequent gained monies. You may have same feelings once reaching 1M [then 2M].. We did have a great bull run since 2009 when I first started investion. Think the rules for 7.5 years for doubling your total assets work well here [unless we have a massive recession/depression - contractions which we are facing right now]
Couch potatoes and picking mutual funds that you like work well too if you have no time to fiddle around. Hard to time the market these days; we have to trust the managers that we hired to run our Mutual Funds or ETFs. Although stocks may appear cheap still these days. We may have Dows @ 35K by next few years - [12 months]; we did have NASDAQ at records highs recently [yesterday]
fwiw
regards

In depth 72 page slideshow updates the Market's as of June 30, 2020:
https://am.jpmorgan.com/blob-gim/1383407651970/83456/MI-GTM_3Q20.pdf

https://www.morningstar.com/articles/989371/were-forecasting-a-strong-long-run-economic-recovery
We're Forecasting a Strong Long-Run Economic Recovery
We don't think the market's engaging in irrational exuberance.
Preston Caldwell
Jun 30, 2020
The Morningstar US Market Index has come thundering back since its late March nadir and is now down merely 7% year to date, even as the coronavirus pandemic persists. While many investors are wondering if the market is exhibiting irrational exuberance, we think the rebound has been broadly warranted, as we forecast a strong long-run recovery in the U.S. economy. We expect U.S. GDP to drop 5.1% in 2020 but surge back in 2021 and experience further catch-up growth in following years. By 2024, we think U.S. GDP will recover to just 1% below our expectations before the pandemic.

Disregard.........I should have continued reading your earlier reply before posting my question.
Hi @msf
You noted:IMHO where TRP shines is in it broad offering of fine mutual funds. Essentially what @rforno said. In addition, it offers a free individual 401(k) plan with Roth option, as does Vanguard. Schwab doesn't allow Roths, nor does Fidelity. Merrill doesn't offer a free individual 401k.
I don't follow the meaning of the bold above regarding Roths at Fidelity.
Thank you.
Catch