Sell Me on Fidelity rather than Vanguard

[Backdraft57]

Forgot to mention it was "concierge" "service". I did say I still wanted it moved but screw doing anything else. That was the first of December and haven't heard a word. Lousy service IMHO.

 

[bUU]

Gotta love these repeated Fido vs. VG threads, the answers are always the same - both have pros/cons and reports of good/bad CS so there's very little new here.

I disagree. My aforementioned surprise is because the tilt has changed from similar discussions a number of years ago.

 

[ziggy29]

I disagree. My aforementioned surprise is because the tilt has changed from similar discussions a number of years ago.

The main changes now are that Schwab and Fidelity have a LOT of very low-fee index funds and ETFs available and Vanguard has lost much of its cost advantage. And Schwab commissioned trades are only $4.95 (ain't competition grand) -- and many ETFs are zero-commission. My largest IRA is with Schwab (been a Schwab client since 1989 and they haven't given me reason to leave) and I rebalance with commission-free ETF trades once a year.

To me the main takeaway isn't whether Fido, Schwab et al have caught up to Vanguard, but that a rising tide is lifting all boats for fee-conscious investors.

(I actually have accounts with all three, VG, Fido and Schwab.)

 

[bUU]

To me the main takeaway isn't whether Fido, Schwab et al have caught up to Vanguard, but that a rising tide is lifting all boats for fee-conscious investors.

Hmmmm I can understand how what Vanguard was in the 1990s and 2000s served as a "rising tide" that lifted Fidelity's and Schwab's "boats" in the 2010s, but what is Vanguard's "rising tide" during the 2010s that Fidelity and Schwab will have to catch up with?

 

[Helen]

The main changes now are that Schwab and Fidelity have a LOT of very low-fee index funds and ETFs available and Vanguard has lost much of its cost advantage. And Schwab commissioned trades are only $4.95 (ain't competition grand) -- and many ETFs are zero-commission. My largest IRA is with Schwab (been a Schwab client since 1989 and they haven't given me reason to leave) and I rebalance with commission-free ETF trades once a year.

To me the main takeaway isn't whether Fido, Schwab et al have caught up to Vanguard, but that a rising tide is lifting all boats for fee-conscious investors.

(I actually have accounts with all three, VG, Fido and Schwab.)

I think that's part of it, but Vanguard hasn't improved their administrative procedures or improved their website. It all feels very antiquated. After jumping through numerous hoops to link a checking account to Vanguard that I easily linked to Fidelity I threw in the towel and moved everything to Fidelity.

If Vanguard ever streamlines their procedures and improves their web interface I will be back in a heartbeat.

 

[VanWinkle]

I agree if you need hand holding, trust services or your ego stroked, Vanguard would not be the first choice. They are more of a no nonsense, treat all peeps the same kind of company for the simpleton, like me!

If you are trading on margin, calls and options, lots of individual stock exchanges, Vanguard would not be a good first choice.

I do all of my business with them on line and they have been helpful when I called them. I am also considering opening an account at Fido for a 2nd taxable account, but not because I am unhappy with Vanguard.

 

[splitwdw]

Have any of you looked at some of the Vanguard vs. Fidelity online comparisons? Found this one on Nerdwallet.

https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/investing/vanguard-vs-fidelity/

VanWinkle, Vanguard would have had to return my calls/emails to do any hand holding.

 

[mathjak107]

I agree if you need hand holding, trust services or your ego stroked, Vanguard would not be the first choice. They are more of a no nonsense, treat all peeps the same kind of company for the simpleton, like me!

If you are trading on margin, calls and options, lots of individual stock exchanges, Vanguard would not be a good first choice.

I do all of my business with them on line and they have been helpful when I called them. I am also considering opening an account at Fido for a 2nd taxable account, but not because I am unhappy with Vanguard.

i find it amusing that vanguard the grand pappy of do it yourself investing , releases studies that show how do it yourself investing generally leaves investors as a group short of what managed money can add in value by having an adviser .

they then promote their money mgmt and robo services .

then they drop beneficiaries allowed on joint accounts . tell you it is because of the virtues of using a trust -then they promote their trust dept .

hmmmmmmm , anyone see a pattern ?

 

[DEC-1982]

Look at the money flows coming into or out of Vanguard and Fidelity over 2017, 2016, 2015 ... , then make a decision.

 

[Another Reader]

Look at the money flows coming into or out of Vanguard and Fidelity over 2017, 2016, 2015 ... , then make a decision.

What the herd does is of no interest to me. I draw my own conclusions based on my experiences.

Vanguard no longer has the edge on cost. Service is inferior. I have investments in multiple locations, and I only use Vanguard because of the admiral versions of the W funds and some legacy ETFs from when they were the only provider of low cost, commission free ETFs.

 

[mathjak107]

Look at the money flows coming into or out of Vanguard and Fidelity over 2017, 2016, 2015 ... , then make a decision.

i have to say the same thing , the herd may just not have hit a point where they are not happy or they are brand new . many boomers are retiring moving 401k money so they just move to where others tell them

 

[big-papa]

I'm in both. My first 401K was at Fidelity. Since I was already there at the time, I bought mutual funds for my taxable account. Time went by, I left that job and rolled my 401K over to an IRA at Fidelity because it was super-easy to do. Next job - in fact all of my next jobs until my current one also used Fidelity. So rinse-and-repeat with rollovers. Regular deposits into my taxable account there.

Time went by, we had a kid. I decided to open up a separate account at Vanguard to deposit a bonus to try them out. Time continues to go by and I make deposits into either Fidelity or Vanguard. My latest job has the 401K at Vanguard. When the time comes, it will be rolled over to Fidelity to join the IRA I already have there. We'll see how difficult it will be to do that between those two institutions.

I'm completely in Index funds in my 401K and rollover IRA. 100% index funds at Vanguard (401K and taxable account) and mostly index funds at Fidelity (100% index in rollover IRA and mostly index in taxable).

Fidelity:
IRA has mutual funds and ETFs
Taxable accounts including mutual funds and ETFs

Vanguard:
401K and taxable accounts include only mutual funds.

Overall view after having accounts in both? Meh - Yeah, they're different, but that's just it - they're different. I have seldom needed any help from anybody at either institution. For mutual funds I have, the e/r's are similar. The ETFs I use at Fidelity are all ishares which cost a little more and are a bit of a pain when buying/selling and moving back and forth to mutual funds. But that doesn't happen very often.

Overall they both have things I like and don't like. But neither come close to hitting the bar to make me change anything.

 

[Backdraft57]

VanWinkle, Vanguard would have had to return my calls/emails to do any hand holding.

Ha!! I started to type the same reply but then saw yours. Amen. I guess my ego expects people to do their job and do what they say they will do.

 

[MRG]

Ha!! I started to type the same reply but then saw yours. Amen. I guess my ego expects people to do their job and do what they say they will do.

Took me over a month to get Fidelity to return my phone call. I called three times and finally used the F word(fiduciary) on Facebook to get them to call.

 

[GTFan]

I disagree. My aforementioned surprise is because the tilt has changed from similar discussions a number of years ago.

Cost-wise sure, others have caught up. And Fido definitely has a better website. But that doesn't change my response that both of them have pros/cons (as seen in this thread, same as all the other threads), so unless you have a bad experience with one of them there's not much different here than any other discussion. Certainly not enough for me to move money around.

If I were starting out fresh then sure, pick Fido for the better tech. If you like their website and support better, roll the 401k there.

 

[GTFan]

I think that's part of it, but Vanguard hasn't improved their administrative procedures or improved their website. It all feels very antiquated. After jumping through numerous hoops to link a checking account to Vanguard that I easily linked to Fidelity I threw in the towel and moved everything to Fidelity.

Funny you mentioned that, I was easily able to add a CU checking account recently at VG but at Fido it bombed out at the end, and a chat confirmed I would have do it with the old fashioned send-in-a-form routine.

 

[frayne]

As an addendum, I use FIDO as they were my original 401K vehicle, that was rolled into an IRA after I retired. It is all pre-tax and my Vgd account is all after tax investments. Just seemed to make sense for me at the time.

 

[RetiredAt55.5]

i find it amusing that vanguard the grand pappy of do it yourself investing , releases studies that show how do it yourself investing generally leaves investors as a group short of what managed money can add in value by having an adviser .

they then promote their money mgmt and robo services .
...

Well, to be fair, your average investor (ie not sophisticated) will probably make mistakes like buying and selling too frequently, panicking during a downturn and selling, etc, etc.

So I don't see anything shady here. Vanguard has historically promoted the do it yourself investor model, but that works best if the investor is willing to devote their time to learning. Notice that Vanguard has no brick and mortar sites for clients.

The advisor offering is an attempt and acknowledgement that Vanguard had to provide something to address this need.

 

[mathjak107]

i agree , but vanguards entire marketing strategy was based on anyone can beat the pro's .

 

[Backdraft57]

Took me over a month to get Fidelity to return my phone call. I called three times and finally used the F word(fiduciary) on Facebook to get them to call.

Interesting. Guess it's all about the luck of the draw with both companies on who you happen to deal with. Sad really that one person can ruin your opinion of an entire company.

 

[MRG]

i agree , but vanguards entire marketing strategy was based on anyone can beat the pro's .

Now they are providing value added guidance to those investors who still want handholding. They're doing it for .3% not the industry standard 1%. Of course with index funds the entire fee structure is cheaper than say a Jones.

I know your a big Fidelity guy and use the same newsletter my DF did. At the end of his life he was paying those folks 1.5% plus the active fund fees to manage his money. They were really nice to him. Vanguard's PAS would have been a better solution.

Not sure why you think expanding their products to reach another group of investors is a bad thing. These folks appear to want an advisor. After all Jones has a billion under management. That's a lot of folks who could save substantial dollars with a cheaper, better option.

 

[Helen]

i agree , but vanguards entire marketing strategy was based on anyone can beat the pro's .

I don't think they've strayed from this. By beating the pros I think they meant index funds can beat the pros. Their PAS services use index funds.

Their .3%. AUM is still quite low comparatively and gives people who don't want to manage their money a low cost option.

I think Jack Bogle is a man of high integrity, he certainly stands out in the world of finance. I hope Vanguard will address the customer concerns. I would love to move our money back to Vanguard someday.

 

[VanWinkle]

Ha!! I started to type the same reply but then saw yours. Amen. I guess my ego expects people to do their job and do what they say they will do.

Hand holding is not a bad thing and is required by many people. It just might be better for those people to get a brokerage that maintains offices for that type of service. I have found that an ego will sometimes get in the way of reasonable choices, including in my own life.

 

[bUU]

But that doesn't change my response that both of them have pros/cons (as seen in this thread, same as all the other threads), so unless you have a bad experience with one of them there's not much different here than any other discussion.

I understood you saying that the first time but it is still a logical fallacy.

Just because two things both "have" pros and cons does not mean that there isn't much difference between them.

What's important is the relative amount of positive versus negative.

What I see people saying in this thread is that the situation has changed. Something that had more positive and less negative before now has more negative and less positive and something else that had more negative and less positive before now has more positive and less negative. Like I said I was surprised to hear this. But that is indeed what people are saying.

 

[VanWinkle]

I understood you saying that the first time but it is still a logical fallacy.

Just because two things both "have" pros and cons does not mean that there isn't much difference between them.

What's important is the relative amount of positive versus negative.

What I see people saying in this thread is that the situation has changed. Something that had more positive and less negative before now has more negative and less positive and something else that had more negative and less positive before now has more positive and less negative. Like I said I was surprised to hear this. But that is indeed what people are saying.

Could you repeat that?