Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Fidelity vs Vanguard vs Schwab vs...


KSpan

Recommended Posts

Long story short is that I have a couple of retirement accounts that need to be rolled together and I'm currently undergoing 'paralysis of the analysis' - a number of solid options and no clear differentiation for my admittedly-basic situation.

I'm not looking for anything fancy with these investments - mutual funds and ETFs with a buy-and-hold outlook. At this point I feel like Fidelity is the direction i want to go; any clear reason not to? I like their platform better than Vanguard and the fees have pulled very close, if not cheaper at Fidelity in some cases. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to work for Vanguard here in Charlotte, so I can only speak to them.  They really do have the lowest overall fees - not just with the funds themselves, but no account management fees either if you sign up for e-delivery.  They do a good job at not nickel and diming people with hidden fees.  But in a sense you get what you pay for.  Vanguard's website and app are outdated, but if you're not going to be doing much trading that doesn't really matter.  

If you call customer service you can expect a VERY long wait.  20 minutes is considered a short wait honestly.  Everyone who works there is miserable and processing simple paperwork can sometimes take months with how backed up everything is.

I left Vanguard a few months ago, but still have my money invested there.  Vanguard is known for the buy and hold strategy - just leave your money in and let it do its thing, so if that's your philosophy they'll be a good fit.  I would skip out on their advice service.  It only costs 0.3%, but it's just a glammed up robo advisor, it doesn't do anything you can't do on your own.

Happy to answer any specific questions you have about Vanguard!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would advise you to not be so fast to move into an investment such as mutual funds or etf s.  They all cost you money and it has been proven again and again that by and large they do NOT outperform the general stock market indexes.  Personally I invest in dividend paying companies which have been consistently been paying good dividends over a long period of time.  Companies such as Johnson and Johnson, Exxon, PepsiCo, and etc.  I would also be very leery to invest any new money at this time in any funds or stocks - valuations are very high and we are overdue for a large pull back.  What will precipitate it, could happen at any time given the state of the world and our current administration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People were also terrified to invest in 2010 and its pretty much done nothing but go up since then.  No one knows when a crash will come. This bull market could go on for 5 more years or could end tomorrow, you can't time the market. Just put it in and don't panic when there's a downturn. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read this page about the Schiller P/E ratio, take a look at it 's current number of 28 and tell me it is a good time to invest in the stock market.  If you are dollar cost averaging a set amount of money every month for years, maybe.  If,  like the op suggests you want to dump a wad of cash ( roll over) into an investment today, it is my opinion that you are making a big mistake.  If I were you I would open an account  in an insured money market type vehicle and dollar cost average it into the market over time -  don't be fooled into believing that the market is " different this time " and what goes up is going to keep doing so.  It is not and we are only one major crisis away from a free fall.

 

http://www.gurufocus.com/shiller-PE.php

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • No, it will be a raw 6'7" 17-year-old European who just played basketball for the first time in March and who the idiot GM "had first on our board." He'll play the whole G-League season, get in 42 games for the Hornets and average 1.1 ppg on 35% shooting. Been there, seen that.
    • We missed on Burns at his peak value. That’s the problem with trading for picks 2-3 years away (which people were convinced the Rams would suck by now and these would be higher picks btw). Each year away the pick is the further in value it drops. Fitt was clearly hired based on turning us around quickly. It’s one of the many reasons tanking isn’t really a thing as our player JJ is telling you in this original article. It would take the whole organization from the owners down admitting they aren’t winning soon with Burns and picks 2-3 years away having more value because that’s when we are still rebuilding. It would only make sense if Fitt had a longer leash and would more than likely be the ones making these picks anyway which you wouldn’t want. The question is would you rather have those Rams picks with the strong possibility of Fitt still being here or would you rather Fitt try to “win now” like he did and expedite his firing? Altering the timeline would affect more than just the Rams picks. 
    • I dont buy the idea that it would create more competitive games Given this: Seed Current Format Record Proposed Open Seeding Record 1 Lions 15–2 Lions 15–2 2 Eagles 14–3 Eagles 14–3 3 Buccaneers 10–7 Vikings 14–3 4 Rams 10–7 Commanders 12–5 5 Vikings 14–3 Rams 10–7 6 Commanders 12–5 Buccaneers 10–7 7 Packers 11–6 Packers 11–6 That would mean Wild Card round would have been Eagles (14/3) v  Pack(11/6) Vikings(14/3) v Bucs(10/7) Commanders(12/5) v Rams(10/7) Instead of Eagles (14/3) v  Pack(11/6) Bucs(10/7) v Commanders(12/5) Rams(10/7) v Vikings(14/3) Then with the reseed it would mean that highest remaining seed would always draw the lowest remaining team.
×
×
  • Create New...