Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-14-2013, 04:28 PM   #41
gone traveling
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
ETFs Rule,

While I would in most cases agree with your caution on "free" financial planning, Vanguard is a bit different from the rest IMO in that they are not shareholder owned - they are owned by their fund shareholders similar to a mutual bank or cooperative. In my experience their recommendation are sensible and are not as "sales" oriented as those of a for-profit commercial funds. In fact, in my 3 planning sessions over the years, I can't recall the word annuity being mentioned once even though I know Vanguard offers annuities through relationships with certain insurers.
I love Vanguard ETF's and Vanguard annuities (for the purpose of doing a 1035 exchange from another annuity). My understanding is that Vanguard also sells "actively managed" mutual funds. Are they recommending those to clients? That is a conflict of interest right there. Never lose sight of the fact that a non-fiduciary does not legally work for you.
__________________

__________________
ETFs_Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 11-14-2013, 05:33 PM   #42
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Midpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 11,963
Quote:
Originally Posted by ETFs_Rule View Post
I love Vanguard ETF's and Vanguard annuities (for the purpose of doing a 1035 exchange from another annuity). My understanding is that Vanguard also sells "actively managed" mutual funds. Are they recommending those to clients? That is a conflict of interest right there. Never lose sight of the fact that a non-fiduciary does not legally work for you.
It might be more meaningful to provide actual/specific examples/evidence where Vanguard/VFP has not put the interests of an account holder first (fiduciary responsibility) instead of posting open ended (false IME) speculation and generic answers. I'd certainly be interested in whatever specific actual concerns you're aware of. Otherwise you're just telling us we could get killed crossing the street...
__________________

__________________
No one agrees with other people's opinions; they merely agree with their own opinions -- expressed by somebody else. Sydney Tremayne
Retired Jun 2011 at age 57

Target AA: 60% equity funds / 35% bond funds / 5% cash
Target WR: Approx 2.5% Approx 20% SI (secure income, SS only)
Midpack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2013, 06:04 PM   #43
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vermont & Sarasota, FL
Posts: 16,403
Quote:
Originally Posted by ETFs_Rule View Post
I love Vanguard ETF's and Vanguard annuities (for the purpose of doing a 1035 exchange from another annuity). My understanding is that Vanguard also sells "actively managed" mutual funds. Are they recommending those to clients? That is a conflict of interest right there. Never lose sight of the fact that a non-fiduciary does not legally work for you.
You seem to be suggesting that if Vanguard recommends any of their actively managed funds in their financial planning that it is a conflict of interest? Silly.

To the best of my recollection, the funds they have recommended to me were mostly index funds. But the reality is that even their actively managed funds are solid and fees are low in the spectrum of actively managed funds. You obviously have some sort of axe to grind. If your criticism was based on some actual experience you could relay, your criticisms might carry some validity.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.
pb4uski is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2013, 06:12 PM   #44
gone traveling
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
It might be more meaningful to provide actual/specific examples/evidence where Vanguard/VFP has not put the interests of an account holder first (fiduciary responsibility) instead of posting open ended (false IME) speculation and generic answers. I'd certainly be interested in whatever specific actual concerns you're aware of. Otherwise you're just telling us we could get killed crossing the street...
Google fiduciary duty VS suitability standard. There is a clear difference.

Quote:
If your criticism was based on some actual experience you could relay, your criticisms might carry some validity.
Index funds CONSISTENTLY beat actively managed mutual funds.

Another study

5 Lies About Index Funds - Forbes
__________________
ETFs_Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2013, 06:41 PM   #45
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Midpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 11,963
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
It might be more meaningful to provide actual/specific examples/evidence where Vanguard/VFP has not put the interests of an account holder first (fiduciary responsibility) instead of posting open ended (false IME) speculation and generic answers. I'd certainly be interested in whatever specific actual concerns you're aware of. Otherwise you're just telling us we could get killed crossing the street...
Quote:
Originally Posted by ETFs_Rule View Post
Google fiduciary duty VS suitability standard. There is a clear difference.
Many here are well aware of the definitions, and all are capable of Googling same, but thanks. Again, what specific concerns and evidence do you have re: VFP or Vanguard in general?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ETFs_Rule
Index funds CONSISTENTLY beat actively managed mutual funds.

Another study

5 Lies About Index Funds - Forbes
Are we still talking about Vanguard? Your links couldn't be more in their wheelhouse...
__________________
No one agrees with other people's opinions; they merely agree with their own opinions -- expressed by somebody else. Sydney Tremayne
Retired Jun 2011 at age 57

Target AA: 60% equity funds / 35% bond funds / 5% cash
Target WR: Approx 2.5% Approx 20% SI (secure income, SS only)
Midpack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2013, 06:50 PM   #46
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vermont & Sarasota, FL
Posts: 16,403
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
Many here are well aware of the definitions, and all are capable of Googling same, but thanks. Again, what specific concerns and evidence do you have re: VFP or Vanguard in general?.......
+1 Time for him to put up or shut up.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.
pb4uski is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2013, 07:12 PM   #47
gone traveling
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
Are we still talking about Vanguard?
I'm talking about anything actively managed VS passively managed, Vanguard or otherwise. I like Vanguard but I will always go with index funds. The statistical evidence is clear that ETF's consistently beat actively managed.
__________________
ETFs_Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2013, 08:25 PM   #48
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vermont & Sarasota, FL
Posts: 16,403
While I agree that index funds tend to outperform managed funds - and that is why the vast majority of my equity portfolio is in indexed funds - to jump from that fact to then assert that any adviser recommending any managed funds to a client is violating their fiduciary duty to the client is just totally stupid.

Vanguard's flagship actively managed equity index funds (Windsor and Windsor II) growth of $10,000 for 1, 3, 5 and 10 year periods are very competitive with the Total Stock Market Index fund (all Admiral shares). In fact, Windsor outperformed Total Stock for the 1, 3 and 5 year periods ended 10/31/2013 and Windsor II bested Total Stock for the 10 year period. But please, don't let facts get in the way of your arguments....
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.
pb4uski is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2013, 08:41 PM   #49
gone traveling
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
While I agree that index funds tend to outperform managed funds - and that is why the vast majority of my equity portfolio is in indexed funds - to jump from that fact to then assert that any adviser recommending any managed funds to a client is violating their fiduciary duty to the client is just totally stupid.

Vanguard's flagship actively managed equity index funds (Windsor and Windsor II) growth of $10,000 for 1, 3, 5 and 10 year periods are very competitive with the Total Stock Market Index fund (all Admiral shares). In fact, Windsor outperformed Total Stock for the 1, 3 and 5 year periods ended 10/31/2013 and Windsor II bested Total Stock for the 10 year period. But please, don't let facts get in the way of your arguments....
You're wrong. You're not doing an apples to apples comparison. VWNFX takes more risk than the total stock market and so the total stock market index is not it's comparable benchmark. If you want more risk and you want to do better than the total stock market index then simply pick a mid-cap ETF and/ or small cap ETF to supplement your VOO ETF. Simple.

I researched
Vanguard Windsor II Inv (VWNFX)

The fund invests mainly in large and mid-capitalization companies whose stocks are considered by an advisor to be undervalued. So it's benchmark is probably a mix of large cap value and mid-cap value, although Yahoo lists this fund as being mainly a large cap fund.

As I expected, since the peak of the market in 2007 VTV (large cap value) has OUTPERFORMED VWNFX.
VOE (mid cap value) has easily outperformed VWNFX.

Quote:
any adviser recommending any managed funds to a client is violating their fiduciary duty to the client is just totally stupid.
You might be a broker trying to justify your job. Anyone who is a non-fiduciary does not legally work for their client. Personalized advice is not free. Brokers make commissions when they sell actively managed mutual funds. Investors make less over time when they invest in actively managed mutual funds. The only way to totally eliminate conflict of interest is to work with a fee-only RIA. Personally I do it myself. Investing is easy.
__________________
ETFs_Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2013, 09:08 PM   #50
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vermont & Sarasota, FL
Posts: 16,403
The notion that a large cap, value fund is riskier than a total stock fund is an interesting angle that I guess we'll just need to agree to disagree on.


I would agree that VTV is a good comparison since both VTV and Windsor II are large cap value focused, but VTV does not outperform Windsor II as you suggest. The growth of $10,000 for Windsor II was higher then VTV for the 3, 5 and 10 year periods ended 10/31/13 and actually substantially higher for the 10 year period ($22,100 vs $18,900) and for the 1 year period VTV eked out a win.

And I'm not a broker, I'm a CPA.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.
pb4uski is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2013, 10:16 PM   #51
Moderator
Alan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Eee Bah Gum
Posts: 21,077
Despite all the arguments about VG CFPs recommending their managed funds, do we have any proof that they do? I've requested one, completed the preliminary work and have an appointment scheduled next month with one of their CFP's. I'll be wary about any managed funds or annuities they recommend, although they didn't do that last time I had a plan done some years ago.
__________________
Retired in Jan, 2010 at 55, moved to England in May 2016
Now it's adventure before dementia
Alan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2013, 10:17 PM   #52
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 2,946
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huston55 View Post
Although I like the services, tools, and responsiveness that Fido provides, my experience with them is that most roads lead to annuities of some kind in some quantity. That's what their website 'retirement income' tools do, and that's what the FP I met with did. Frankly, it's a little disappointing. But, that's why it's called 'advice', I don't have to take it.
++1
Recently attended 2 Fido retirement/investment seminars offered locally and it feels like a very low key annuiity pitch even though they never specifically push an annuity.......I assume that comes in the individual session. I am married to them through two 401k plans so I expect to be a client for the duration and will keep going to the seminars.
__________________
...with no reasonable expectation for ER, I'm just here auditing the AP class.Retired 8/1/15.
jazz4cash is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2013, 10:47 PM   #53
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
RunningBum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan View Post
Despite all the arguments about VG CFPs recommending their managed funds, do we have any proof that they do? I've requested one, completed the preliminary work and have an appointment scheduled next month with one of their CFP's. I'll be wary about any managed funds or annuities they recommend, although they didn't do that last time I had a plan done some years ago.
Mine was done back in 2006. They did not recommend moving anything to managed funds. At the time I held maybe 20% in individual stocks at another brokerage, and around 5-10% with another mutual fund company and they only recommended selling a couple of the individual stocks, and not the other mutual funds. No reasons given for the ones they recommended selling, btw, and I didn't ask. I also had some Wellington and they actually recommended moving that to the Total Stock Index Fund.

They did offer a "simplified alternative" of the Life Strategy Funds. This is all index funds as well, which they keep balanced, and the one they recommended to me matched my AA goal at the time. I didn't add up the expense ratios of the parts to see how they matched up.

I thought the call would end with an offer to assist with switching my portfolio around to match their recs, or to set up a call-back date to do this, but they didn't even ask. The report they provided just gave a number and offer to help do that if I wanted to. Low-to-zero sales pressure.

Overall I think for most of us it's just a sanity check on investments. For some they may find they aren't considering their AA correctly across all accounts. And for those switching from a financial adviser, I think taking advantage of this would be a good step to get guidance and learn from.

I would agree this isn't a complete financial plan since there is no discussion of things like insurance and other stuff that a recent poster listed.

I don't recall any discussion of tax efficiencies either. At the time most of my tax deferred was in my company 401K so I'm not sure if the bond funds there were considered inadequate. But I did have bonds in both my IRA and taxable funds and I don't think they suggested any changes to those.
__________________
RunningBum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2013, 11:00 PM   #54
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,614
ETFs,
Welcome to the board. You've been here two days, posted 26 times, and said about the same thing every time ("indexing is good"). Okay already.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ETFs_Rule View Post
You might be a broker trying to justify your job.
You've made similar allegations in other places. Before you start swinging, take awhile and learn the players here.
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2013, 11:00 PM   #55
gone traveling
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
The notion that a large cap, value fund is riskier than a total stock fund is an interesting angle that I guess we'll just need to agree to disagree on.


I would agree that VTV is a good comparison since both VTV and Windsor II are large cap value focused, but VTV does not outperform Windsor II as you suggest. The growth of $10,000 for Windsor II was higher then VTV for the 3, 5 and 10 year periods ended 10/31/13 and actually substantially higher for the 10 year period ($22,100 vs $18,900) and for the 1 year period VTV eked out a win.
YOU are the one who compared VWNFX to the total stock market. I'm saying that is not an apples to apples comparison. How VWNFX does compared to the total stock market says NOTHING about whether or not their managers are outperforming their RESPECTIVE benchmark indexes. The way you evaluate manager performance is by comparing the fund to their respective benchmark indexes. VWNFX may be low cost compared to other actively managed funds but it still doesn't look like the managers have outperformed their benchmarks. Most actively managed funds average about .8% worse than their respective benchmark index. Large cap stocks especially are so widely followed and highly traded that managers really CANNOT outperform their respective indexes. The efficient market hypothesis is too overwhelming.

Proof is in the pudding....


And I'm not even sure if Yahoo accounts for expense ratio and turnover. If so then VTV did EVEN BETTER than this comparable actively managed fund!
Have any others you would like for me to compare?
__________________
ETFs_Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2013, 11:08 PM   #56
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vermont & Sarasota, FL
Posts: 16,403
Looks like you are only looking at share prices and not including the value of reinvested dividends.

Anyhow, in 3 years and over 5,000 posts, I've never felt the need to add anyone to my Ignore List. Since ignorant is a derivative of ignore, I guess it is appropriate that you're the first - congratulations!
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.
pb4uski is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2013, 11:19 PM   #57
gone traveling
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 202
Quote:
Welcome to the board. You've been here two days, posted 26 times, and said about the same thing every time ("indexing is good"). Okay already.
And if you read the thread someone claimed that they had found that one actively managed diamond in the rough that did better. I proved them wrong with a Yahoo chart and they couldn't handle the truth.

And to their last point I prove them wrong again....

VTV = 2.31 yield
VWNFX = 2.08 yield
__________________
ETFs_Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2013, 11:24 PM   #58
Moderator Emeritus
Bestwifeever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 16,372
Twenty nine times.
__________________
“Would you like an adventure now, or would you like to have your tea first?” J.M. Barrie, Peter Pan
Bestwifeever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 12:10 AM   #59
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by ETFs_Rule View Post
And if you read the thread someone claimed that they had found that one actively managed diamond in the rough that did better. I proved them wrong with a Yahoo chart and they couldn't handle the truth.
And guess what--you are WRONG even about this one case.
The big problem with your Yahoo chart is something I will leave for you to discover, but it is missing important data. The right info covering the exact same time period is in the attached chart. Windsor 2 outperformed your (much flogged) ETF as well as the appropriate index (large cap value). Now, most of the time an index fund or ETF will outperform the applicable index, but your blanket statement that a manager of a large fund cannot ever outperform is just silly. Don't be such a Johnny One Note.

Stick around, cool the attitude, read more.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Windsor2V3.jpg (132.5 KB, 15 views)
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2013, 12:13 AM   #60
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
Looks like you are only looking at share prices and not including the value of reinvested dividends.
A winner!
(And you already threw on the wet blanket with that stuff about "commissions". Wait until the news about bid-ask spread hits!)
__________________

__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:06 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.