Many may not be following these details. But using the formula in Treasury LINK provided by @msf, I was able to verify the data for the recent 52-wk Auction.
In the recent 52-week Auction example in the OP, TR = 5.392% (calculated) and i = 5.351%, d = 363 (Treasury data).
So, 1 + 0.01*TR = (1 + 0.05351/2)*[1 + 0.05351*(363 - 365/2)/365],
or, TR = 5.3925%, and that is close enough to 5.392%.
LINK2

I wrote "Looking Ahead With Vanguard" last month describing their Personal Advisory Services and concerns that I have about customer service.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2023/08/looking-ahead-with-vanguard/
As part of this process, I had several phone calls and appointments with Vanguard. My first phone call took Vanguard representatives around 45 minutes to answer which was disheartening. A second phone call took about fifteen minutes. One lesson learned is to call earlier in the day rather than at the end of the day when they probably have a surge in calls, especially on a Friday.
Once I went with their Advisory Services, I received a couple phone calls from the Advisor and when I returned his call, it was answered immediately by the Team of Advisors if not the Advisor. I now have access to schedule appointments with the Advisor, and additional web tools that I will explore.
I made a request through the Advisor and received a follow up email from Technical Support. When I called that number, it was answered immediately.
I especially like the quote by someone on the Bogleheads website, "I will never understand the willingness of some of my fellow Bogleheads to put all their life savings in just one basket, i.e., brokerage firm. It seems like a sucker bet. So, yes, I still favor Vanguard as well as Fidelity, Schwab, and…"
I have reduced brokerage firms and continue to consolidate accounts through Roth Conversions. At this point, I am satisfied with my choices at Vanguard. I will monitor the performance of advisory services at Fidelity and Vanguard.

I was groggy. I'll fix the dates at the end. Aston/Fasciano (which became AMG Aston Fasciano was in operation for about 12 months. MF was underwriting operations to the tune of about 150K per year and didn't see that changing within a reasonable time frame.
Fasciano Associates, today, doesn't have a website and I couldn't find a Form ADV for it. Mike has a LinkedIn but has never posted. The regulatory filings place the HQ at his home in Lake Forest. From that, I'm assuming he's now a "private investor" which sort of looks like being retired.
David

Thanks so much for the extensive work on Vanguard. It is interesting that they really do not lower their fees the more money you have ( the first $5 million pays the same 0.03% as $5000 ) but I wonder what that gets you. It certainly would make using MFO superfluous, as it looks like they take complete control over all your assets, at least for larger accounts.
The CFA, tax planning and income projections might be very helpful, but is there a way to get the planning without committing to their assuming control of all the investments?
Anybody know why down at the bottom of the list there are felony and misdemeanor convictions on Vanguard's track record ( but none at Fidelity, which has a higher star rating)?
https://investor.com/rias/vanguard-advisers-106715

Unfortunately, bond ladders also have a duration. A 10-yr bond ladder may have a duration around 4-5 years.
So, the ETF PLW has duration 10.80 (M* Portfolio tab below) and SD 9.07 (M* Risk tab) - plenty volatile!
https://www.morningstar.com/etfs/xnas/plw/portfolio
But if you had a private/DIY ladder, you would let each bond in the ladder mature at par, so the duration effect will be only if you have to liquidate ladder prematurely, not otherwise.
Just because a fund uses the term "ladder" doesn't mean that it will act as private/DIY ladder. Some DIY stuff you really have to do yourself and cannot farm it out to funds.

I have never invested directly in a treasury fund because this category has a high correlation to rates and rates are unpredictable short term. PLW did poorly YTD. See a YTD chart of VGIT(inter Gov/treasury) + DODIX(good generic higher rated bond fund) + PLW(has a longer duration > 10 years). (https://schrts.co/AEsZUCwD)
You can see that DODIX has the best performance + the lowest volatility. PLW has the worse performance + the highest volatility of 7.5+%.(peak to trough).

@msf, thanks for Treasury and CFR links. I will go over them.
Interesting that calculations are different for < 6 months (an approximation) and 6-12 months (exact calculations).
There are 4 examples presented in the Treasury link. The first two (#1, #2) use 360-day year for price and discount rate calculations, the other two (#3, #4) use 365/366 days for coupon-equivalent yield.
In examples #3 and #4, the first full 6-month period is defined as 365/2 =182.5 or 366/2 = 183. So, it is possible that Treasury just defaults to 360-day year convention in the approximation used for less than 6 months rather than using "odd" 182.5 or 183 days.
I was also solving quadratic equation for interest rate in my notes (and shown in this BB LINK), but I didn't present those details elsewhere as the results weren't matching anyway with the Treasury calculations. But I see that Treasury is using 2 unequal compounding periods while I was using 2 identical periods for compounding (and the same as you did in your plain English bond example.
Lot of food for thought.

According to several web sources, Treasury simply uses this formula for Coupon-Equivalent Yield of T-Bills,
Coupon-Equivalent Yield = 100*[(Par Value - Purchase Price)/Purchase Price]* 360/d, where d = days to maturity.

Which just goes to show that you can't believe everything you read on the web. (In all fairness, the second post in the Bogleheads thread correctly says that 365 days are used and references the same Treasury sources I'm relying on below. Except it misses an added complication for T-bills maturing in more than six months.)
According to the Treasury (the authoritative source), the above formula is not what is used for Coupon Equivalent Yield of T-bills. It is almost correct for T-bills maturing in six months or less, except that the correct formula uses 365 or 366 day years. For T-bills with longer maturities (still under a year), a quadratic equation must be solved.
Some people may not be clear about what Coupon Equivalent Yield represents.

The Coupon Equivalent, also called the Bond Equivalent, or the Investment Yield, is the bill's yield based on the purchase price, discount, and a 365- or 366-day year. The Coupon Equivalent can be used to compare the yield on a discount bill to the yield on a nominal coupon security that pays semiannual interest with the same maturity date.

https://home.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/interest-rates/TextView?type=daily_treasury_bill_rates&field_tdr_date_value_month=202209
In plain English, if you have a bond with a 4% coupon purchased at par ($100), then every six months it pays $2. To compute the annualized rate of return one assumes that the coupons are reinvested at the original rate. So after one year, one would have:
$100 x (1 + 2%) x (1 + 2%) = $100 x 1.0404 = $104.04. That's an annual yield of 4.04%.
T-bills don't have coupons, but if they did, this particular T-bill would pay coupons at an annual rate of 5.351%. That is, a six month coupon would pay half of that, or 2.6755%.
When one applies the same compounding as above (though reducing the second coupon by 2 days simple interest), one finds that the government figures are correct:

Rate (i)		5.351%
Price per $100		$94.883778
Days in 2024 (y)	366
1/2 year coupon		2.6755%		(1/2 X 5.351%)
Total days to maturity	364
2nd half frac of year	0.494535519	(364 - 366/2) / 366
2nd half coupon		2.6463%		(0.494... x 5.351%)

Compounding the coupons as before (except the second coupon isn't for a complete half year):
(1 + 2.6755%) x (1 + 2.6463%) = 105.3926%.
As in the OP, 5.392% is the actual total return. It is higher than the six month (coupon equivalent) yield, because coupons compound.
This is important. New issue T-bills have APYs greater than their coupon equivalent yields.
If a new six month T-bill has a 5.0% "coupon equivalent yield" it will pay 2.5% (half of 5%) after six months by definition. That would compound to 5.06¼% APY if reinvested at the same rate for another six months. That beats a six month CD with a 5.0% APY, paying just 2.47% at its six month maturity.
Treasury page with coupon equivalent yield formulae, examples
Treasury Regulation (Code of Federal Regulations) rules on calculating T-bill discount rates.
Note that the 360 day calendar is used when calculating the bank discount rate, but a 365 or 366 day calendar is used when calculating the "true discount" rate.

August 12,2023 Episode:

Investing can be simple and accessible to the average person, says financial thought leader and economist Burton Malkiel. Malkiel, author of the investment classic “A Random Walk Down Wall Street,” has 50 years of research to back up his claim.

@rforno : Not a shocker here. Thursday purchased cd at BMO for apy 5.15% 13 month cd. 3-4-6 month cds paying less than 1% .01 &.05 apy !!!! I really got a GREAT Deal.

more data
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1690047183909752832.html

I bought 26 and 52-week T-bills this week. I had a lot of cash from liquidating my muni funds. I’ve also got a number of CDs and T-bills that will be maturing between now and December, as part of ladders. Hopefully, there will still be some good options at that time. If interest rates finally stabilize, then I’ll start putting some of this cash back in bond funds.

I get it, yes.
It has always struck me that many people (and I'm not saying you) are far more worried about the absolute safety of their money than they are about the absolute safety of their own lives. If they were half as worried about their own safety as they are about the safety of their money, they would never ride in a car.

+1. Totally agree and envious you can get 5.59% in your money market fund. Along the point you are trying to make. It amazes me how worried many are about the safety of their money vs. the safety of their health. They don’t seem to worry about what they eat, their weight, their blood pressure, or their sugar and cholesterol/triglycerides levels. Yet their fret about every little minute detail of their finances as if they all expect to live to be 100.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/926678/000119312523208784/d538281d497.htm
497 1 d538281d497.htm 497
BRANDES INVESTMENT TRUST
Brandes U.S. Value Fund
Supplement dated August 10, 2023
to the Fund’s Summary Prospectus and Prospectus dated January 28, 2023
and the Statement of Additional Information dated January 28, 2023
Brandes Investment Partners, L.P., the Advisor to the Brandes U.S. Value Fund (the “Fund”), has recommended, and the Board of Trustees of Brandes Investment Trust has approved, the liquidation and termination of the Fund. The Advisor’s recommendation was primarily based on the fact that the Fund is not economically viable at its present size, and the Advisor did not anticipate that the Fund would experience meaningful growth in the foreseeable future. The liquidation is expected to occur after the close of business on September 28, 2023. Pending liquidation of the Fund, investors will continue to be able to reinvest dividends received in the Fund.
Effective August 17, 2023, the Fund will no longer accept purchases of new shares. Beginning September 25, 2023, the Fund’s assets will be converted into cash and cash equivalents, as a result the Fund will no longer pursue its stated investment objective and policies effective September 25, 2023. Shareholders of the Fund may redeem their investments as described in the Fund’s Prospectus. Accounts not redeemed by September 20, 2023, will automatically be closed and liquidating distributions, less any required tax withholdings, will be sent to the address of record.
If you hold your shares in an IRA account directly with Northern Trust Company, you have 60 days from the date you receive your proceeds to reinvest your proceeds into another IRA account and maintain their tax-deferred status. You must notify the Fund or your financial advisor prior to September 28, 2023 of your intent to reinvest your IRA account to avoid withholding deductions from your proceeds.
Please contact the Fund at (800) 395-3807 or your financial advisor if you have questions or need assistance.
This Supplement should be retained for future reference.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/277751/000119312523209466/d476338d497.htm
497 1 d476338d497.htm 497
Janus Investment Fund
Janus Henderson Sustainable Multi-Asset Allocation Fund
Supplement dated August 11, 2023
to Currently Effective Prospectuses
and Statement of Additional Information
At a meeting of the Board of Trustees (the “Trustees”) of Janus Investment Fund on August 10, 2023, the Trustees approved a plan to liquidate and terminate Janus Henderson Sustainable Multi-Asset Allocation Fund (the “Fund”), with such liquidation effective on or about October 19, 2023, or at such other time as may be authorized by the Trustees (the “Liquidation Date”). The termination of the Fund is expected to occur as soon as practicable following the Liquidation Date.
Effective on or about August 11, 2023, the Fund will no longer accept investments by new shareholders. It is expected that the Fund will be required to make a distribution of any income and/or capital gains of the Fund in connection with its liquidation.
Shareholders of the Fund may redeem their shares or exchange their shares for shares of another Janus Henderson fund for which they are eligible to purchase at any time prior to the Liquidation Date. If a shareholder has not redeemed their shares as of the Liquidation Date, the shareholder’s account will generally be automatically redeemed and proceeds will be sent to the shareholder of record. For shareholders investing through a tax-deferred account, shares will be exchanged for shares of Janus Henderson Government Money Market Fund as soon as practicable following the Liquidation Date.
To prepare for the closing and liquidation of the Fund, portfolio management expects to increase the Fund’s assets held in cash and similar instruments in order to pay for Fund expenses and meet redemption requests. As a result, the Fund will likely deviate from its stated investment strategies and policies and accordingly cease being managed to meet its investment objective during its liquidation.
Additionally, any asset reductions and increases in cash and similar instruments could adversely affect the Fund’s short-term performance prior to the Liquidation Date. The Fund will incur transaction costs, such as brokerage commissions, when selling portfolio securities as a result of its plan to liquidate and terminate. These transaction costs may adversely affect performance.
Furthermore, Janus Henderson Investors US LLC has contractually agreed to waive its advisory fee, effective August 11, 2023 through the Liquidation Date.
Unless shares of the Fund are held in a tax-deferred account, the liquidation of shares held by a shareholder will generally be considered a taxable event. A shareholder should consult their personal tax adviser concerning their particular tax situation.
Shareholders may obtain additional information by contacting a Janus Henderson representative at 1-800-525-3713.

Lowering from $50k to $5k is indeed very good news for retail investors. CrossBridge funds are on transaction fee fund platform at many brokerages. Fidelity customers can use their automatic investment features for additional purchases for $5; no fee for selling. Other brokerages charge fee on both ends of transaction.

Hi dryflower, I do take higher risks but I want to make a lot more than an extra 0.2-0.3% annually. This is why I trade bond funds for weeks-months and back to MM.
Regardless, making 5+% for SOME of the money is great for most.

The money market I am in at Wells Fargo is WMPXX. Its 7 day effective yield is now 5.59%. I see no reason to buy a CD with this money right now.
https://www.allspringglobal.com/investments/mutual-funds/fund-profile/overview/?accountingId=WBC7&shareClass=Prm&ecid=a2b2c5d4e1&gclid=CjwKCAjww7KmBhAyEiwA5-PUSmoIKzpnpEo0qG8Sjvx3LonlVIMh1tkFzCrOPvePv2zmMfGYEdUeaBoCQlsQAvD_BwE

Excellent yield, but generally I don't trust Wells and/or Allspring. I prefer Vanguard, Fidelity, and Schwab.
Issues with the above fund, see quotes from 2 sites(the above site + https://www.wellsfargo.wallst.com/EBrokerageDesktop/Public/Mf/Profile?symbol=96641854)
1) Money Market Funds may impose a fee upon sale of your shares or may temporarily suspend your ability to sell shares if the fund’s liquidity falls below required minimums because of market conditions or other factors.
2) Offers potentially higher yields than a money market portfolio limited to Treasury-or government-related issues and mitigates risk by investing in a broadly diversified portfolio of securities across a range of eligible money market investments that may include, but are not limited to, bank obligations such as time deposits and certificates of deposit; commercial paper; asset-backed securities; corporate and medium-term notes; adjustable-rate securities; repurchase agreements; and government-related debt.
Basically, this fund takes more risk by venturing into less "safe" holdings + may have gates/fees in stressful times. Since 2022, I switched our Schwab SNAXX with now 5.37% yield with possible gates(as the fund above) to SCOXX at 5.21% and no gates/fees. The extra yield isn't worth for me if I want to trade at any moment and I can't sell the fund.

Short-term rates are peaking, but it would still be hard to call the absolute top. It is now? Or, 1-2 +25 bps hikes? But that should be it.
Long-term rates are now a puzzle. When people were expecting a recession, they were calling for long-rates to drop to 2-3%. But now, with recession off the table, and soft landing at best, and inflation not tamed yet, there are concerns that long-rate may shoot up to 6%+. The Fed has little control over the long-term rates and it is in the QT mode now (QE did bring down or held or suppressed long-rates).
Sticking with short/intermediate-term seems wise now.

MOVEit Data Transfer Breach
MOVEit data transfer is used institutionally & they found that it had a hackable access/trap door that some bad people used to access data being transferred. This breach has affected many firms - banks, brokers, several government organizations (including Social Security), but I haven't heard anything from anyone else EXCEPT from PBI on behalf of TIAA.
We got letters from PBI (with ID numbers) about the TIAA breach & we both signed up with Kroll for 2 years of free credit monitoring. Signup requires providing DOB, Social Security number, etc & answering a short Q&A based on some personal credit history - the most common answer was N/A but not for all.
Kroll is the old Duff & Phelps. The old Duff & Phelps bought Kroll & renamed the whole thing Kroll. So, it is a very old company that you may not have heard of (1932- ).
Has anyone gotten info/letters on this breach from other institutions?
Those with access to M* or Facebook may also follow details there.
Edit/Add. From MFO Search, I found this for TD Ameritrade/Schwab, https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/165831/#Comment_165831
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_MOVEit_data_breach
https://securityintelligence.com/news/the-moveit-breach-impact-and-fallout-how-can-you-respond/
https://www.pionline.com/courts/retired-teacher-sues-tiaa-over-moveit-data-breach
https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/612K-Medicare-beneficiaries-affected-MoveIt-data-breach/689346/