T-Bill Coupon-Equivalent Yield
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.
So, Coupon-Equivalent Yield = Total Return * 360/d.
d must be counted properly taking into account specific T-Bill issue and maturity dates. Just because their name says 13-wk, 26-wk, 52-wk, that doesn't mean 13*7, 26*7, 52*7 days.
Don't ask my why the Treasury wants to put all T-Bills on 360 day standard.
The 52-wk T-Bill today (8/8/23) will be issued on 8/10/23 but will mature on 8/8/24, so that is 2-3 days less than a full year (or, 362-363 days). It seems that Treasury used d = 362.76.
Price was 94.883778, so TR = (100 - 94.883778)/94.883778 = 5.392%.
So, Coupon-Equivalent Yield = 5.392*360/362.76 = 5.351%. That is what Treasury provides, but I don't like this at all. It doesn't related to any realistic TR or YTM that one may calculate.
To me, if the TR is 5.392% for 362.76 days (implied by Treasury), I would annualize it as 5.392*365/362.76 = 5.425% annualized.
52-Wk T-Bill Auction on 8/8/23 https://www.treasurydirect.gov/instit/annceresult/press/preanre/2023/R_20230808_2.pdf
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/couponequivalentrate.asp
https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=248337

".....During the second quarter and through August 2, 2023, the Company issued 780,222 shares of common stock through its at-the-market equity offering program for total gross proceeds of approximately $11.7 million at a weighted average price per share of $15.03...."
DILUTION.
https://www.morningstar.com/stocks/XNYS/PSTL/quote
David Sherman warned of this.
So, they authorized a scheduled dividend, but water-down its value. Stinky poopies.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/722885/000110465923088681/tm2322079d13_497.htm
497 1 tm2322079d13_497.htm 497
PEAR TREE FUNDS
PEAR TREE AXIOM EMERGING MARKETS WORLD EQUITY FUND
Ordinary Shares: QFFOX Institutional Shares: QEMAX R6 Shares: QFFRX
Supplement dated August 7, 2023
To Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information
dated August 1, 2023
At the request of Pear Tree Advisors, Inc. (the “Manager”), the investment manager to each of the separate series of Pear Tree Funds (the “Trust”), the Trustees (the “Trustees”) of the Trust have reviewed information relating to the Manager’s request to reorganize Pear Tree Axiom Emerging Markets World Equity Fund (the “Target Fund”) into Pear Tree Polaris International Opportunities Fund (the “Acquiring Fund”) in a transaction (the “Reorganization”) pursuant to a plan of reorganization (the “Plan”). Each of the Target Fund and the Acquiring Fund is a separate series of the Trust. Completion the Reorganization is subject to a number of conditions, including the receipt of approval by the shareholders of the Target Fund. No shareholder action, however, is necessary or being requested at this time.
Shareholders as of the record date (August 7, 2023) will receive a prospectus/proxy statement that contains important information about the Plan, the Reorganization and the Acquiring Fund, including comparative information with the Target Fund about investment strategies and risks, fees and expenses. The Plan generally provides for an exchange of shares of each issued and outstanding class of the Target Fund for shares of the corresponding class of the Acquiring Fund, which would then be distributed pro rata by the Target Fund to the holders of the shares of such class in complete liquidation of the Target Fund, and the Acquiring Fund’s assumption of all stated liabilities of the Target Fund. Shareholders of the Target Fund will receive shares of the Acquiring Fund equal in value to their shares of the Target Fund held prior to the Reorganization. The Reorganization is intended to qualify as a tax-free reorganization for U.S. federal income tax purposes. More detailed information about the Reorganization and the changes that will result from the Reorganization will be provided in a prospectus/proxy statement, which is expected to be sent to Target Fund shareholders in the coming weeks.
Prior to the Reorganization, Target Fund shareholders may continue to purchase, redeem and exchange their shares subject to the limitations described in the Target Fund’s prospectus.
The foregoing is not an offer to sell, nor a solicitation of an offer to buy, shares of the Target Fund or the Acquiring Fund, nor is it a solicitation of any proxy. When it is available, please read the prospectus/proxy statement carefully before making any decision to invest or when considering the Reorganization. The prospectus/proxy statement also will be available for free on the SEC’s website (www.sec.gov).
* * *
Please retain this Supplement with your Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and SAI.

Exited tiny position in TLH (10-20 year Treasuries) initiated a week ago. Good learning experience. Small gain. Proceeds used to establish a toe-hold in a domestic food stock I’ve owned before. Would add on weakness. Added a bit to CCOR where I’ve built a small position recently. May have bottomed sometime last week. Just “playing around the edges”. No changes to long term static allocation (80%), Cash position nominal at 10.5%.

Weekly 13-wk and 26-wk Auction was on Monday/YESTERDAY.
Once a month 52-wk Auction is TODAY. I have an order in.
Save/bookmark Auction schedule, https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/221/Tentative-Auction-Schedule.pdf

Regional bank KRE is showing some damage in the pre-market (-2.7%). It has been rebounding from the May lows.
https://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=KRE&p=D&yr=1&mn=0&dy=0&id=p21145977994

@rforno: what I really covet is a 2004-5-6 Acura NSX, but I have no business contemplating such a bauble.

I'm with dtconroe.
Clarification: But 5 figures, not 6. :(

Just purchased a 6 figure CD for my IRA, paying 5.2%, over an 18 month term--my first CD with a Maturity Date in 2025. I have 3 more CDs maturing in 2023, and 9 CDs maturing in 2024. When these remaining CDs mature, I will seriously consider buying replacement CDs, if they are paying 5+%. If CD rates start tanking before my remaining CDs mature, I will have to carefully evaluate my options at that point in time. "Making a lot more money in bonds than CDs" is not very important to me, as long as CDs pay a rate I consider attractive. Low risk and low stress are very important to me in retirement, but I do prefer at least a 4% to 6% TR, to replace RMD distributions, and I will look for the lowest risk investment options to meet that objective.

Anyone have two cents, or more, about elderly switching from VONE to JQUA-RWL 50-50? Chiefly for lower UI with similar performance. Longterm.
(I am aware there is high correlation among all.)

So my question is: why would you prefer to own bond funds to a longer term CD when rates are falling?

You changed what we are talking about. We were discussing shorter-term CD that matures in 3-6-12 months. I already posted that 3-5 years CD makes more sense because rates will fall in months to come, and the 3-5 years CDs will pay more months after that. Why would you sell these longer-term CDs? Usually, CD holders hold to the end + they pay a penalty if they sell early.
MM and Mutual funds give me a lot more flexibility. Investors who bought CD months ago are paid less than MM today. But again, the difference is peanuts in performance.
When rates start going down, my longer term funds will make more money in weeks-months.
Basically for me, when CD pays close to MM, I would never go with CD because CD has more constraints.
If rates are stabilized my bond funds will definitely make more money. Sure, bond funds are riskier, but I can make a lot more too. When markets turn around, you can make several % in funds within weeks. I call it the big money.
Example: look at a chart of 10 years treasury (https://schrts.co/YZrChyJi)
Now look at ORNAX(https://schrts.co/RarenBFS). See how nicely ORNAX made on 11/2022, 01/2023, 03/2023.
But, if someone just wants to make 5%, then CDs are OK, but inflation is still high. I want to make 3% above inflation. It's all correlated. Inflation is lower, CD pays lower.
CDs can't compensate you enough after inflation and why 3-5 years CDS may be a better choice if inflation goes to 3%.

Champlain used to be fine funds. CIPSX and CIPMX still have M* Gold, but have dropped to four stars. MFO Premium correctly rates their last 5 and 3 year performances as a “3.” They attracted a lot of money, closed the SCG and MCG (maybe too late?), and now want investors to support a new concentrated fund. I pass.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/754915/000174177323002524/c497k.htm
497K 1 c497k.htm
T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund
T. Rowe Price Institutional High Yield Fund
Supplement to Prospectuses and Summary Prospectuses dated October 1, 2022
T. Rowe Price International Discovery Fund
Supplement to Prospectus and Summary Prospectus dated March 1, 2023
Effective September 1, 2023, the funds will resume accepting new accounts and purchases from most investors who invest directly with T. Rowe Price.
Accordingly, effective September 1, 2023, the first sentence under “Purchase and Sale of Fund Shares” in each summary prospectus and section 1 of each prospectus is deleted in its entirety. In addition, the section entitled “Closed to New Investors” in Section 2 of the prospectus is deleted in its entirety.
The date of this supplement is August 7, 2023.
G49-041 8/7/23
Recent email I received:
T. Rowe Price Log in to your account T. Rowe Price
Fund Name Ticker CUSIP
T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund — Investor Class PRHYX 741481105
T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund — I Class PRHIX 741481303
T. Rowe Price International Discovery Fund — Investor Class PRIDX 77956H302
T. Rowe Price International Discovery Fund — I Class TIDDX 77956H377
Dear Client,
We’re writing to inform you that effective September 1, 2023, the purchase restrictions on the T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund and the T. Rowe Price International Discovery Fund will be removed. As a result of this change, investors who trade directly with T. Rowe Price can open new accounts in the funds.
The fund(s) had previously been restricted for all investors over concerns that significant cash flows could make it difficult to identify securities that fit our investment process. In addition to this, market conditions have changed, and following a thorough review of net inflows and other factors related to the strategy, we believe that we can accommodate controlled asset growth over time.
Thank you for investing with T. Rowe Price. If you have any questions about these changes, please contact us.
For more information, please download a prospectus for the T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund and T. Rowe Price International Discovery Fund.
All funds are subject to market risk including possible loss of principal.
This communication does not undertake to give investment advice in a fiduciary capacity. T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc., and/or its affiliates receive revenue from T. Rowe Price investment products and services.
This email may be considered advertising under federal law.

@wabac,
You raised good points. A portfolio can have several goals. Performance is always important. But, I also think that risk-adjusted performance is more important, at least for me, and that can be measured by the Sharpe ratio.
The following are several simple measurements I set for myself
1) My stock portion must beat the easiest most common index VOO/VTI. If I don't beat it, my stock portion must have a better risk-adjusted performance.
2) My bond portion should beat good bond funds, starting with BND and DODIX.
3) If I have 50/50, must beat W+W (Wellington, Wellesley)
4) For a conservative portfolio, must beat Wellesley.
The above is just a start, a minimum. I also know about great funds over the years, such as PRWCX and PIMIX.
I'm very critical of my own portfolio. It's all data-driven. No excuses are allowed. It doesn't matter if you use 3 or 10-15 funds, or how you do it.
Suppose I want to set up an easy buy and hold portfolio for a retiree, see below 2 real-life examples.
1) In order to make my wife's investment decisions easier, I set up a written plan for her to invest in only 3 funds. I only trust 2 choices indexes + Vanguard funds managed by Wellington. Wellington Management is the oldest, it's conservative, team style, and not one dominant manager, with a very cheap expense ratio. Since our money isn't with Vanguard, we would have to own the more expensive funds(not Admiral), but it's still cheap.
For a younger age, until age 70-75 and still having a taxable account...45% VWINX...25% VWAHX(HY Muni)...30% VSMGX. Because of HY Muni bonds which are hybrid, this portfolio is more like 40/60
Older than 70-75 or taxable account is gone: 40% VWINX(40/60)...30% VWEHX(HY Corp)...30% VSMGX(60/40). Because of HY Corp bonds which are hybrid, this portfolio is more like 45/55.
2) An older relative retired around 2002 and told me he saw several financial advisors and they want to charge him 1% and he really doesn't trust any of them. Markets are volatile and he wants a stable LT simple portfolio and all his money is at Vanguard. Based on the amount of money he had, he needed about 3.5% yearly withdrawal and wants a conservative portfolio. I told him he can be in just 35-40% stocks and the rest bond and to invest in just 2 funds VWIAX+VCCGX. If he needs more money, just sell shares from both funds at equal amount of money. Just keep several thousands in the bank, use your SS and distributions from these 2 funds and if you require more just sell shares from both at 70/30 (VWIAX+VCCGX).
In the first 10-15 years, this guy called me every 2-3 years and thanked me how I saved him so much money and how it works well.
Below are the results(link)including 3.5% annual withdrawal, and they show that KISS investing and spending worked very well. This portfolio was able to support the 3.5% and grow at 6% (including the 3.5% withdrawal).

Not too long ago we were all talking in a thread about "the market" going sideways for a decade, or more.
Now we're being told that we should all invest in the 500, like Buffet "advises" his wife to do when he dies. Which sort of misses the point that she is likely to inherit a crap-ton of Berkshire shares, and heaven knows what else. Who is going to tell her to sell all that so she can plunk it all down on the 500?
Well. I don't have those resources. Sometimes the goal of investing is not to "beat the market" but to preserve capital that can be put to work to sustain a certain level of comfort in retirement.
As the man said after he fell from the roof:

All part of the fund's restructuring as reported nearly a year ago by TheShadow here at MFO (except for Hong leaving):
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/59968/vanguard-high-yield-corporate-fund-restructuring-investment-advisory-team

Diversification doesn't guarantee better performance or better risk/SD or better risk-adjusted performance. Being in 10 funds isn't necessarily better than 2 funds. I could be wrong but I can't find any research that proves that more funds are a better choice, no matter the age and goals.
Having 10 accounts isn't an excuse to own more funds than 5 accounts, because I use the same funds in different accounts.
There are many ways to Rome. I have learned and changed over the years. I never believed in a static style no matter what.
I also learned and love the exceptions to many rules and used some of these funds over the years. These funds are unique and scarce. 2 easy ones have been PRWCX+PIMIX. Many don't comfortable investing a big % in one fund, I'm not one of them.
But, many investors can benefit by using a simple portfolio with just several funds and hardly doing anything and avoiding common mistakes. Here are several examples: https://www.marketwatch.com/lazyportfolio%20

I’ve heard it said, and agree, that diversification is a risk management strategy— not a way to achieve high performance. Face it, nobody really knows which markets or sectors will perform better or worse in the future. By diversifying, you are covering more bases. So, you’ll avoid being over exposed in poor performing area while capturing the better performing ones.
Almost certainly, you can achieve better performance by focusing on only a few areas — if you are skilled or lucky enough to pick the right ones. Not many investors are successful at this approach, which is why most investment advisers will tell people to diversify, diversify, diversify. Another key to this approach is to buy and hold your investments long term. If you are forever chasing winners and selling losers, you stand a good chance of hurting your overall performance. Of course, some investors are better at picking winners and selling losers, and others have a penchant for picking losers and selling winners.
Buffet’s advice about the S&P is sound, but certainly looks better after the past 15 years. However, there have been periods (eg, 2000-2010) when the S&P did not perform well and you would have greatly improved your overall performance by owning other asset classes, such as foreign stocks, small caps, REITs, etc. For that reason, I prefer total market index funds.