Inflation-linked bonds are relatively new to the US, TIPS 1997- , I-Bonds 1998- . I read once (no link now) that in Treasury Secretary Rubin's era, Chinese were getting concerned about their large and growing US Treasury holdings and pushed for TIPS and to keep them happy (at one time the US policy was to keep China happy), TIPS came about, and a year later I-Bonds came along.
But inflation-linked bonds have longer history elsewhere. Many countries with weak finances and shaky currencies could only issue inflation-linked bonds. Examples include post-WW II France, Italy; also Chile (1956-), Brazil (1964- ), Argentina (1973-).
But then many stronger countries also started issuing them, Australia (1985-), Canada (1991-), Japan (2004-), Germany (2006-), etc.
In the US, TIPS are only 5-6% of the Government debt market, and Savings bonds (all types) only 0.5%.

May be of interest…

Imagine it’s 2000, and let’s say a shopping cart of groceries costs you $100. Today, the same number of greenbacks would get you only $58 of the items in that basket of goods from 2000. That’s 42% fewer groceries on average for the same price. If you look at the chart closely, the deterioration of the U.S. dollar has only accelerated in the months since the pandemic.

https://usfunds.com/resource/the-putin-price-hike-is-fake-news

Oh, great -- Bruce is back on top. That means we can expect to see the following:
1. Bruce showing up tirelessly on literally every money show to pimp the fund, I mean, "communicate effectively with shareholders"
2. Bruce making strange additions to his research team (hiring a head of research team, for example, with no experience in investing, working on, or managing such a team).
3. Research team turnover.
4. Fund proliferation.
>75% invested in one company -- what could possibly go wrong (SEQUX-ish) ?

At 7-9% I'd be tempted to devote a sizable allocation as a fire-and-forget position to them, sure. It'd be similar to what I've done with my crypto lending experiment currently earning 7%, albeit with more risk.
If we ever hit 1980s rates (which I doubt) I'd seriously consider shifting probably 70% of my holdings into them, though. I saw in my own family how *good* that set people up decades later.

@BaluBalu, I mentioned only 52-wk T-Bills and 5-yr TIPS for the upcoming auctions NEXT week. Also being auctioned NEXT week (but I didn't mention) are 4-wk, 8-wk, 13-wk, 26-wk T-Bills and 20-yr T-Bonds. So, you can say that among all those being auctioned NEXT week, my preference is for the two that I mentioned.
2-yr T-Note would have to bought in the secondary market now, or you can wait for its auction in NEXT-NEXT week on 4/26/22 (see Treasury auction link in the OP). In the past, I have used both Fido and Schwab platforms for buying Treasuries. I don't have Vanguard Brokerage and am resisting conversion to one - a long story told elsewhere. The quotes you mentioned are from current bid-ask and until you enter your trade, you won't know what you got. In general, if there an auction nearby, I like to buy at auction.

@Yogibearbull,
Because you included the announcement for 52 wk bills, I am presuming those are your preferred maturities at this time.
Which of the Fidelity, Schwab, Vanguard, etc. brokerages is your preferred platform for buying (and later selling) Treasuries in the secondary market?
Just an FYI - Earlier today, I had looked at the 2 yr Treasuries and for the same issue, I noticed the YTM offered at Schwab and Fidelity was (the same and) higher than that at Vanguard - 2.481% vs 2.468%. TD was 2.43%.
Any thoughts?

Good point. Next week we have three Fed officials speak, Monday - Bullard, Tuesday, and Thursday - Powell. I can not imagine much soothsaying from the Fed next week. I was hoping equities would go up today to take some recent paper profits, instead I ended up selling more of my small Muni allocation. The MUNIs I bought during 2013 taper tantrum have now dipped below zero.

A very bearish AAII Sentiment, as now, may mean 2 things: 1) Market is ready for the next bull leg (but that seems unlikely to me in the face of current news), or 2) Investors are too bearish already and the market may not go down much (and I can subscribe to that, so I am not selling much except taking good profits in some "explore" positions).

while we do not put as much emphasis on the Bullish reading, I do not remember seeing a bullish reading this low in 10+ year but again we are talking about my memory!
Is it possible that PPI is higher than CPI because of supply constraints because producers can cut back producing if demand is subdued? May be it is not all demand as the Fed currently seems to think, as implied by their aggressive stance.
We have Peak inflation means the rate of change is not going to be this high but does not mean prices are going to stay stable or come down - just a lower rate of increases. Otherwise, the Fed's posture would be misplaced.

Damodaran's notion that ESG investing is some monolith, all invested in one way, and therefore a "feel-good scam" is absurd. There are many varieties of ESG. Morningstar if you have access has done a number of pieces responding to his claims: https://morningstar.com/articles/1087153/professor-damodarans-latest-esg-takedown-overlooks-one-important-group-of-investors Moreover, what he and Morningstar both ignore is that the notion that maximizing returns at all costs regardless of what the consequences are to people and the planet should be the only goal of investing is actually a relatively recent historical notion, a libertarian invention, not a law of nature. I doubt anyone would be having this conversation in the U.S. if we were in the midst of World War II, and the same sort of efficient market folks were arguing that Mercedes Benz and IG Farben were good investments, despite their less savory activities during the war, and you'd be missing out if you left them out of your portfolio. Moreover, I haven't heard him make equally passionate arguments about active management being a scam too, although really it's the same argument as far as returns go. And if investors think there aren't equally problematic companies in the U.S. today that many investors might want to leave out of their portfolios regardless of the potential profits, read a little about this one: https://time.com/5405158/the-true-history-of-americas-private-prison-industry/

"*The Fund will not be available for purchase until the closing of the reorganization on or about July 18, 2022."
For anyone still with questions about the Mairs and Power funds' reorganization (creating shell investment companies as series in an existing trust), this is a similar reorganization. The Ballie Gifford fund (BPESX, BPEKX) is being acquired by the Vanguard shell fund. Same investment Adviser, same day-to-day management, etc. However, here Vanguard will be lowering the ER by a few basis points.
This method of reorganizing funds is commonly used.

Realizing that we've had a tremendous Bull run in US bonds and much accommodation from the Fed, its still amazing to look at a Bond index fund like VBMFX that has had 30 yrs up and only 5 years down. Going back to 1987, its worst year was -2.7%.
However, its down over -8% YTD. I would think at some point this year...in another quarter or so.... that there should be a really nice opportunity to crawl back in.

How much QT is factored into current bond yields?

QT (Quantative Tightening) -reducing the Fed's Balance Sheet- is a major market overhang issue for the rest of 2022. Tough to estimate the impact thus far to bond pricing.

Exactly!

How much QT is factored into current bond yields?

QT (Quantative Tightening) -reducing the Fed's Balance Sheet- is a major market overhang issue for the rest of 2022. Tough to estimate the impact thus far to bond pricing.

Updated:
Prospectus for Vanguard Baillie Gifford Global Positive Impact Stock Fund:
https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/889519/000168386322003009/f11843d0.htm

will re-open to new investors.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/810893/000119312522105157/d297544d497.htm
497 1 d297544d497.htm 497
PIMCO Funds
Supplement dated April 14, 2022 to the Municipal Value Funds Prospectus (the “Prospectus”), and
to the Statement of Additional Information (the “SAI”), each dated July 30, 2021, each as
supplemented from time to time
Disclosure Related to the PIMCO California Municipal Opportunistic Value Fund and PIMCO
National Municipal Opportunistic Value Fund (each a “Fund” and collectively the “Funds”)
As previously disclosed, effective March 3, 2021, the Funds were closed to initial purchases by new investors and subsequent purchases by existing shareholders.
Effective April 18, 2022, the Funds will reopen for initial purchases by new investors and subsequent purchases by existing shareholders.
PIMCO reserves the right to close the Funds again in the future. Notice will be provided regarding any future closing of a Fund (i) to initial purchases by new investors or (ii) to subsequent purchases by existing shareholders and initial purchases by new investors. The Funds and PIMCO Investments LLC, the Funds’ distributor, each continues to reserve the right, in its sole discretion, to suspend the offering of shares of the Funds or to reject any purchase order, in whole or in part, when, in the judgment of management, such suspension or rejection is in the best interests of PIMCO Funds.
Investors Should Retain This Supplement for Future Reference
PIMCO_SUPP1_041422

Announcements just came.
5-yr TIPS https://www.treasurydirect.gov/instit/annceresult/press/preanre/2022/A_20220414_2.pdf
52-Wk T-Bills https://www.treasurydirect.gov/instit/annceresult/press/preanre/2022/A_20220414_4.pdf

ET91 FWIW you may wish to look at POIVX. https://imgpfunds.com/funds/oldfield-international-value-fund/
M* https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/poivx/quote
Perhaps others can suggest appropriate passive international value choices.

@hank: 3) In the case of Roths one might invest 100% in I-Bonds without fretting over tax consequences.
That is a nonstarter. Treasury Direct doesn't allow IRAs, and electronic I-Bonds can be only held at Treasury Direct.
But I-Bonds are tax-deferred already (federal) for up to 30 years and exempt from state/local taxes. So, why wish for I-Bonds in IRAs? - a near impossibility. There are exceptions if one can find a willing IRA sponsor to buy and hold I-Bonds especially for you in custom IRA, but most won't bother.

RLSFX is not really a "market neutral" fund; be careful when dipping toes in such waters.
That is all.
R

hey all -- points taken; maybe this fund should be classified as "Beta-plus". never again.

Shakespeare said, “What’s in a name?”
Names don’t tell you much.

============================
RLSFX - RiverPark Long/Short Opportunity Fund Retail Class
Trying to NOT put salt in your wounds, BUT...
I think we should all be able to agree that no, it "is not really a market neutral fund."
You would think that the fund name alone would confirm that.
But if the name alone doesn't do it, M* has classified it as a Long/Short fund since its inception in March 2012.
Then there are its holdings that include 67% LCG and 21% MCG. No hint of "market neutral" there.
So is the "One 2022 Mutual Fund Lesson" maybe that we as investors should understand (or at least have some clue) what it is we are invested in?
If so, why would that be a "2022 Lesson"? Isn't that a lesson investors should have learned somewhere around the time of their very first investment? For me, that was 1980.
And no need to create a new "Beta-plus" category. Doesn't "long/short" in the name of the fund already imply that?