[manaboutown]

Recently I picked up a book by Charles Schwab, 'Invested'.

To say it was an eye opener is an understatement. It starts with why and how he got into discount brokerage as one of its pioneers. It then goes on to report the ups, downs and very scary times his company went through. I had no idea!

I know many people, particularly those who trade a lot, use Schwab. Although I have kept a small account at Schwab for years I rarely used it. Then last year and earlier this year I sold a couple commercial real estate properties and deposited the proceeds into Schwab, primarily because I wanted to put it into T-bills. Schwab allows a retail investor to buy and sell them whereas the other two brokerages where I have historically kept most of my securities do not.

Then, surprise, surprise, I started getting phone calls from a Schwab 'Advisor' which I ignored for a time. Eventually I returned a call just to let him know I existed. When he discovered I was not a newbie and had other accounts he urged, just short of insisted, I transfer them to Schwab. I declined and told him I had a pretty good memory and remember Lehman Bros. and others which he seemed to grasp. I thereafter discovered Schwab at that time held some long term treasuries which were destined to go down as interest were rising so I still feel a little skittish about it all.

Anyway after reading this book to sleep at night I feel I need to continue to keep my securities distributed among several wirehouses and wonder if others feel the same.

[Nell57]

I’ve been wondering about this, too.
Hope there is some good discussion….

[retiredguy123]

I use Vanguard Investments and Fidelity Investments. Stock, bond, and money market mutual funds. No individual stocks or bonds.

[manaboutown]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

I use Vanguard Investments and Fidelity Investments. Stock, bond, and money market mutual funds. No individual stocks or bonds.

I use Vanguard, too. For both historic and recent reasons I will not use Fidelity. I use Ameriprise too because I have had several entity accounts with them going back to their 1980s days as Olde Discount. They charge a small brokerage fee but I rarely buy or sell.

The book I cited reveals how ridiculously high various fees were charged retail customers before May Day 1975 when discount brokers started to come into the picture.

[Stu from NYC]

Looking for good performing funds we use several families

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

Looking for good performing funds we use several families

Go with index funds. They are cheap and effective. Vanguard S&P 500 Stock Index fund, Vanguard Short Term Bond Index fund, and Vanguard Total Bond Market fund. I also have some money in the Vanguard High Yield Corporate Bond fund.

[Smalley]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

I use Vanguard Investments and Fidelity Investments. Stock, bond, and money market mutual funds. No individual stocks or bonds.

Fidelity and Vanguard are our companies as well.

[Pugchief]

Originally Posted by manaboutown

For both historic and recent reasons I will not use Fidelity.

Care to elaborate?

I find Fidelity superior to Vanguard in just about every metric except expense ratios on money market funds (which leads to sightly lower yields).

[Ecuadog]

We have been with Vanguard. Not too long ago. we opened some accounts at Fidelity. I was getting concerned about the SIPC insurance covering our accounts or "separate capacities" at Vanguard. I was also interested in sending international bank transfers, for which Fidelity doesn't charge.

I like Fidelity's platform much more than Vanguard's, but the sweep accounts and money market funds earn more at Vanguard. I also favor a couple of Vanguard's funds.

I don't know if it's still true, but I found that Vanguard will not let you designate beneficiaries for a joint account, while Fidelity allows it.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

I use Vanguard Investments and Fidelity Investments. Stock, bond, and money market mutual funds. No individual stocks or bonds.

Same here

[spinner1001]

Originally Posted by manaboutown

Anyway after reading this book to sleep at night I feel I need to continue to keep my securities distributed among several wirehouses and wonder if others feel the same.

Objectively, the probability of Schwab, a large NYSE listed firm, failing to make its investment account holders whole is very remote.

First, in the hierarchy of who suffers losses, stockholders loose first. Investment account holders like you loose only after stockholders.

Second, practically speaking, the U.S. government and Federal Reserve would not let the account holders loose for policy reasons because Schwab’s failure would cause a global financial crisis like we have never seen.

Third, Schwab has about $512 billion in assets as of June 30, 2023 (latest data available) and the market value of its common stock today is about $110 billion. Of the $512 billion in assets, $73 billion is cash and equivalents and $295 billion are in investments. Those investments would need to fall in value by roughly 1/3 (very unlikely) to take out the stockholders first and then get to account holders.

Psychologically, if you feel much better diversifying your assets across multiple financial institutions, then do it. If you can’t sleep at night and excessively worry over having your investments in one place, diversify.

[mdmurrell]

Originally Posted by manaboutown

Recently I picked up a book by Charles Schwab, 'Invested'.

To say it was an eye opener is an understatement. It starts with why and how he got into discount brokerage as one of its pioneers. It then goes on to report the ups, downs and very scary times his company went through. I had no idea!

I know many people, particularly those who trade a lot, use Schwab. Although I have kept a small account at Schwab for years I rarely used it. Then last year and earlier this year I sold a couple commercial real estate properties and deposited the proceeds into Schwab, primarily because I wanted to put it into T-bills. Schwab allows a retail investor to buy and sell them whereas the other two brokerages where I have historically kept most of my securities do not.

Then, surprise, surprise, I started getting phone calls from a Schwab 'Advisor' which I ignored for a time. Eventually I returned a call just to let him know I existed. When he discovered I was not a newbie and had other accounts he urged, just short of insisted, I transfer them to Schwab. I declined and told him I had a pretty good memory and remember Lehman Bros. and others which he seemed to grasp. I thereafter discovered Schwab at that time held some long term treasuries which were destined to go down as interest were rising so I still feel a little skittish about it all.

Anyway after reading this book to sleep at night I feel I need to continue to keep my securities distributed among several wirehouses and wonder if others feel the same.

I have some investments in Schwab but prefer Vanguard as my primary. I follow Dan Weiner as an investment advisor. He is smart, knows alot about Vanguard and doesn't charge much.

[Mrfriendly]

Prior to China virus I interviewed Vanguard, Trowe Price, Fidelity and American Century to discuss consolidating my accounts I had with each. Went to the Big V mostly due to their low expenses and plenty of solid funds both Bonds and Stocks. Now holding on for a new US administration and market upturn

[itsanne]

I have just been transferred to Schwab from TD Ameritrade as of September 1st. So, no experience with them yet. I will keep roughly 50/50 between them and Fidelity. No institution is big enough not to fail as we have seen in the past.

[Blackbird45]

My view has always been that even though it is good to get advice from others, when it come to your finances, no one is going to track your money as well as you will. The only advice I would give is to sit down and decide what type of return you want from your investments.