[LAshby50]

About ready to roll over my 401K from JP Morgan. I am considering Fidelity, who my wife has for hers and Vanguard. Have my first meeting with Fidelity in TV office Thursday. Not sure what to expect. My research shows a slightly lower management fee structure for Vanguard. I also have a pretty good idea as to what I want to invest in.

Interested in any feedback from either. What should I expect or not expect from both. Have to start distributions in March or April.

Thanks in advance for your input.

[TF Hutch]

I have been very happy with Vanguard as they are owned by thier investors, results in lower fees.

[JPatrick99]

Vanguard is my set and forget index fund provider.
I use Fidelity for sector funds, ETFs, and most mutual funds other than the aforementioned index funds.
If you just want bond and index funds, Vanguard will take care of you at the lowest cost, but if you go beyond that my nod goes to FIDO.

[jojo]

I have not used Fidelity so cannot compare but have been very pleased with Vanguard. The customer service is excellent - prompt, courteous, and competent. I've also learned much from the Boglehead forum.

[Chi-Town]

I use Fidelity to buy Vanguard funds. Morgan Stanley Smith Barney is my primary broker, but Fidelity is so good in certain areas that I cannot move their portion of business to MSSB.

[l2ridehd]

I have used Fidelity, Vanguard and Schwab. They each have good things to recommend. However it really is all about fee's. And for low cost which equals higher returns, Vanguard is the best. I even own Fidelity funds in my Vanguard account. (selling them would cause capital gains I don't want right now) I like Schwab for individual stocks because of the fast settlement time, but for the majority of mutual funds, index funds, ETF's, and customer service go with Vanguard. Fidelity has a slightly better web site then Vanguard. I keep the majority of my investments in a simple global model of 6 highly diversified index funds that have proven to beat the market over time. For that type of investing low fees mean higher returns. That is where Vanguard wins every time.

[KayakerNC]

If, as they say, "Costs Matter", then it is Vanguard for most funds.
The Oblivious Investor has a nice review.

Vanguard Review: Why I Invest with Vanguard

[BostonCelt]

Originally Posted by LAshby50

About ready to roll over my 401K from JP Morgan. I am considering Fidelity, who my wife has for hers and Vanguard. Have my first meeting with Fidelity in TV office Thursday. Not sure what to expect. My research shows a slightly lower management fee structure for Vanguard. I also have a pretty good idea as to what I want to invest in.

Interested in any feedback from either. What should I expect or not expect from both. Have to start distributions in March or April.

Thanks in advance for your input.

You say you "have a pretty good idea as to what I want to invest in."

I'm not sure what that means so I'll assume it means you've taken charge of your financial decisions and have done (and are doing) your homework.

That being said.....you might be better off at Fidelity because they probably have more options for you to do what you want, again, assuming you know what you want to invest in. They're both good companies and I use them both...non-IRA mutual funds and grandkids' 529s at Vanguard; IRA and non-IRAs, 529s, brokerage at Fidelity. As stated, Vanguard has lower fees because they're mostly index which is another way of saying "average" or "going with the flow". In a down market you won't get hurt as bad; in an up market you won't do as well. So, obviously, with a little homework you can find returns that more than make up for higher fees. That's why non-load funds aren't automatically better than load funds. It's all about the bottom line.

Personally, I don't bother with ETFs. They're just a bundling together of funds (translation: more fees) that you can buy yourself individually (less fees). Also, at Fidelity they'll probably try to direct you into their PAS accounts....managed accounts...which is just another way of them taking money out of your pocket and putting it in theirs. Again, check it out but I don't think you'll find PAS accounts doing any better than you can do selecting funds yourself although they (PAS) should do better in view of the extra Management Fees they charge....IMHO

Good luck. Enjoy!

[l2ridehd]

Boston Celt, I strongly disagree with this statement.

As stated, Vanguard has lower fees because they're mostly index which is another way of saying "average" or "going with the flow".

A diversified portfolio of index funds covering the global markets has beaten 92% of every managed portfolio when measured over any 20 year period in the past 100 years. And "any" means take 1941 to 1961, 1942 to 1962, 1943 to 1963 etc. And if you go to 30 years the percentage is higher.

I will take that average every time and win.

[BostonCelt]

Originally Posted by l2ridehd

Boston Celt, I strongly disagree with this statement.

As stated, Vanguard has lower fees because they're mostly index which is another way of saying "average" or "going with the flow".

A diversified portfolio of index funds covering the global markets has beaten 92% of every managed portfolio when measured over any 20 year period in the past 100 years. And "any" means take 1941 to 1961, 1942 to 1962, 1943 to 1963 etc. And if you go to 30 years the percentage is higher.

I will take that average every time and win.

Don't you agree the global market is a horse of a different color? Especially over the last 10-15 years? And that it shouldn't make up the majority of anyone's diversified portfolio under any circumstances?

Globally/internationally, I've had several of Vanguard's index funds but that's it (well, plus their Health Care fund). Like I said, a horse of a different color. Domestically, I'll go with individual funds, and diversify. And never more than about 10%-15% international but always something....

[aljetmet]

I rolled over my 401K in 1993 to Fidielity. It's a brokerage account and I have several Vanguard ETFs. I also have a non-retirement brokerage account where some of my future TV down payment resides.

I managed my father in laws accounts at Schwab, Vanguard and Citi and found that Fideity's online website to be superior.

FYI I pay $7.95 per trade and Fidelity now has no fees to purchase 30 diffferent ETFs.

On some non Fidelity mutual funds you can pay $75 per trade so you need to do your homework and decide if it's worth it.

[l2ridehd]

No, I don't agree. There are issues in Europe, however unless something has changed and the market is not efficient which would be a first, that is already in the price of stocks. And a diversified portfolio that maps to the global market would include 27% of international stocks. No more then 30%.

[BostonCelt]

Originally Posted by aljetmet

I rolled over my 401K in 1993 to Fidielity. It's a brokerage account and I have several Vanguard ETFs. I also have a non-retirement brokerage account where some of my future TV down payment resides.

I managed my father in laws accounts at Schwab, Vanguard and Citi and found that Fideity's online website to be superior.

FYI I pay $7.95 per trade and Fidelity now has no fees to purchase 30 diffferent ETFs.

On some non Fidelity mutual funds you can pay $75 per trade so you need to do your homework and decide if it's worth it.

You don't pay fees to buy ETFs but there are add'l fees within the system that affect your returns. That's also why 529s have lagged...there's a layering of fees. Nonetheless, still pretty much the best for college savings because of the tax benefits....

Why do you buy ETFs vs individual funds?

[Hal :-)]

I segregated a portion I won't need for years, hopefully ever, and put it with Vanguard. As someone said, set it and forget it. I used Fund Advice sample portfolio for get good diversification.

Then I put the rest with Schwab and concentrate on their ETFs (commission-free). Works well for me. I also use Schwab for banking, checking, bill pay etc. One nice thing is they refund all ATM charges, even traveling overseas. It makes things simple having everything consolidated in one place.

[BostonCelt]

Originally Posted by l2ridehd

No, I don't agree. There are issues in Europe, however unless something has changed and the market is not efficient which would be a first, that is already in the price of stocks. And a diversified portfolio that maps to the global market would include 27% of international stocks. No more then 30%.

You're certainly more aggressive than I!! And I've never been called conservative, financially speaking. Globally, I'd say there are issues in more than just Europe.

One's diversification is, of course, personal and even then subject to change depending on current goals, priorities, life changes, etc. Going with the standard 1/3 in Growth, 1/3 Income, 1/3 Balanced Funds....with 20% of the Growth in International...., well, 27%-30% of the whole portfolio in International is, to me, closer to gambling than investing. Is that what you're saying? I mean, I can show you great stats on Gold too, but it's a commodity and, thus, a gamble and not for me. I'll gamble my lunch money, maybe, but not my future....