Alexort,

Money magazine consistently recommends Vanguard over Fidelity. If Fidelity is getting higher returns on an Index 500 fund, how are they able to do that? More risk? If Vanguard and Fidelity are investing in the same 500 companies equally, the only difference should be the management fees and we know Vanguard wins that contest.

As I've grown into this "senior mold" frankly I've gotten tired and a bit lazy. While I use to own individual stocks and keep up with the market daily, I just don't take the time or have the energy anymore. Both are fine companies and you will do well with either. I have T. Rowe Price manage my portfolio and they are also a fine company. Good Luck.

Sidenote: You can buy Fidelity funds through Vanguard.

Which one is better is determined by your Investment Policy Statement which determines what you invest in. I disagree that Fidelity is better unless you want actively managed funds. I don't and if you study results no one should. Use index funds only. Total stock market, total bond market, total international. Use a small cap tilt if you want. But if you use only total market index funds then Vanguard wins every comparison. And it is because their ER is lower. An index is an index is an index. Or should be. And if it is mapping to an index correctly the only difference is the ER. Vanguard has lower expenses on almost every index fund.

Franklin Income Fund
 

Anyone have knowledge or experience with Franklin's Income Fund (Franklin Templeton Group)?

investment cost
 

Most investors look at cost first, they should look at return first, taxes 2nd(however this being an IRA taxes are not a consideraton), and then cost. Sometimes it cost more to get a better return. Return should always reign supreme.

alexort: Your post confuses me or I confuse myself. You state that "both Fidelity and Vanguard are cheap" but then go on to say "its worth a few nickels for better performance". What do the few nickels add up to be? You also indicate that Fidelity has better performance over Vanguard. So I am interested in learning how you came to that conclusion since there are so many different measurements advanced for a fund's performance?

You guys are getting way too complicated for me. I was in mutual funds since the early 80's, usually T.Row Price, Fidelity and Vanguard. I didn't like the idea that I couldn't get the buy price I wanted. Instead I had to get the price at the end of the trading day, and selling likewise. I also didn't like the idea that I had to keep a fund for a certain time so not to violate their frequent trading policies.
I got out of mutual funds completely and into dividend stocks. I only buy mostly large cap stocks that have been paying an increasing dividend for many years. I now own 19 stocks that pay anywhere from 3.5 to 6.0 % and am reinvesting them. It's nice to watch the stock market go up and down and be getting paid while waiting. Since buying dividend stocks, I have sold 3 stocks because they went up to the point that I couldn't pass up the profit. I sold another one at a loss because it looked like a bad decision. Turned out it would have been better to keep it. All but 3 of my stocks are up since I've bought them and I am way ahead of where I would have been with mutual funds. I like to keep it simple and if I don't understand something I won't get into it. I created a watch list of stocks that look good to me, set a price where I want to get in and wait for a bad day in the market to buy. Works for me.

Using Vangard and let my guy take care of it

Shimpy. I alsohave some dividend paying stocks; albeit i trust my funds with Vanguard. However keep in mind if Obama has his way you wand I will be paying an a much higher taxes for capital gains and didviends and losingmore than 1/3 of our returns. Apparently he thinks we are in that 1%. Hmmmm

My 401K is for my income. For this reason I went with the Prudential Income For Life annuity. 5% guarantee and locks me in to my highest Daily Market Value. Fees are reasonable and I know I am not going to lose my income.

I am reading a book now ("The Buckets of Money Retirement Solution") that agrees with the use of annuities like this for at least a part of your retirement portfolio. Unfortunately, what the author fails to discuss is that in reality, as soon as you start taking the income, you begin losing money to inflation each year. Depending upon the inflation rate and the number of years, this can be a substantial reduction in purchasing power over time.

That's why the other discussion pertaing to using the annuity of Social Security (by deferring its start) makes sense. Not only is the return higher than traditional annuities, but also it has built in COLA adjustments.

Fidelity had a net outflow of more than 45 billion dollars since 2010 because of troubles pertaining to their funds. Vanguard had a 2 billion inflow.

Customers Dump Funds, Fidelity Asks Managers 'What's Going On? - US Business News - CNBC

But I'm sure you agree that past performance is no guarantee of future income.

I would use VG.

Back in the early seventies I was using Fidelity. It seemed they were splitting trades to garner more commissions. After I contacted them and dealt with a belligerent rep I moved my account elsewhere. Now I use Vanguard, Ameriprise and Schwab and am reasonably content with them all.

If you are an active investor and know what you are doing, then maybe individual funds are for you but I don’t want to spend the time on research (doing other things in the Villages) so I am a passive investor. The Vanguard VOO.IV S&P-500 Index Fund for long term in my opinion is the best bang for the buck.

Having been in financial planning for over 20 years, would only recommend Vanguard who has very low management fees with a diverse portfolio to chose from. While Fidelity is okay - Vanguard is better.
MV :ho:

There is another firm that deals exclusively in index funds for the long term, Portfolio Solutions....Low Fee Investment Manager, Low Cost Investment Advisor | Portfolio Solutions Their cost is about 1/2 that of Vanguard Asset Management..... 70 basis points vs. 34 basis points for accounts over 1 million (assuming you are looking for portfolio management). For accounts under 1 million, the fee is based on a different percentage of assets under management. They do not hold your funds... Schwab does. They also have a fiduciary responsibility.

Very similar to Vanguard, in fact 1/2 their portfolios are Vanguard products. They also use Dimensional Index Funds and Index ETFs.

Worth a look if you are seeking help with portfolio management. If not, it's hard to beat Vanguard’s cost if you are managing your own portfolio....especially if you purchase Admiral Shares.

i use vanguard exclusively. their funds follow the the funds' philosophy stated in their statements. also there is a service examining every fund and etf vanguard offers. the author is a "policeman" who tracks most of the funds and etfs. he is Dan Weiner and you can find him on the web. i believe there is a service for fidelity, although i believe his name is lowell.
i am not familiar with him but it is a point of departure.

I believe Portfolio Solutions is run by Rick Ferri who has been mentioned earlier in this thread....an excellent advisor with very low fees

.

Really exactly what funds are those?

Study after study has shown almost all mutual funds will not beat the market over time...Hence the popularity of index funds.
An index fund mirrors the market so I am confused how you portfolio can beat the market?