USAA selling investment business to Victory Capital

That's just amazing to me. A couple of years ago somebody here (maybe it was you?) shared a similar story and I got a quote from Amica as a result. It was nearly double what I pay USAA. So there's a tremendous amount of variability in their pricing scheme. I've always thought it was mainly based on where you live, but there must be other factors at least as important.

I agree. Many different factors go into setting rates, including...

1. Gender and Age
2. Marital Status
3. Where You Live
4. Credit Score
5. Profession
6. Vehicle Safety Rating
7. Vehicle Size and Type
8. Vehicle Age
9. Likelihood of Theft
10. Driving History
11. Driving Activity

I've had USAA insurance for 48 years and occasionally sought quotes from other insurers - none were able to beat USAA. When ExFlyboy mentioned a couple of years ago he'd found Amica's rates better than USAA, I got a quote from them. It was several hundred dollars higher than USAA, not including the roughly $1,000 a year I get back from USAA as a combined distribution from my Suscribers Savings Account and my Senior Bonus. Add that in and Amica wasn't even close to being competitive.
 
I transferred my investments from USAA to Vanguard 3 years ago and never looked back. Fund fees were high and "advice" was poor. For a while I had a "conservative" managed stock and bond portfolio with the wealth management group that performed worse than USAA's own average performing equivalent balanced fun.

Meanwhile premium increases for homeowner's and auto insurance are rising rapidly even though I've had no claims. It is definitely time to get some competitive quotes.
 
Good Bye USAA Mutual Funds

USAA must have decided that asset management is not in it's future.
ei
ei
[FONT="Montserrat",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif, serif, EmojiFont][COLOR=#3f403f][FONT=Montserrat][B][URL="http://a.idio.co/r?a=consume&e=5679835&o=792&d=792&u=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.bizjournals.com%2F%7Er%2Fbizj_sanantonio%2F%7E3%2FQiwo3V-3LoU%2Fusaa-to-sell-investment-arm-for-850m.html&c=crains&q=9fe3e21c-5922-4345-8eda-a5cff3e45eb5&x%5Bidio%5D=5808766"]USAA to sell investment arm for $850M[/URL][/B][/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT]
ei
[FONT="PT Serif",Georgia,serif, serif, EmojiFont][COLOR=#4d4d4d][FONT=PT Serif]USAA has agreed to sell its investment arm, USAA Asset Management Co., to Cleveland-based Victory Capital Holdings Inc. The San Antonio-based financial services and insurance giant is selling the subsidiary for $850 million in a deal expected to close during second quarter 2019. The companies said that future payments may be based on "future business performance." USAA Asset Management employed about 400 workers, according to USAA; about 300 of those workers are expected to continue with Victory.[COLOR=#177aaf] [URL="http://a.idio.co/r?a=consume&e=5679835&o=792&d=792&u=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.bizjournals.com%2F%7Er%2Fbizj_sanantonio%2F%7E3%2FQiwo3V-3LoU%2Fusaa-to-sell-investment-arm-for-850m.html&c=crains&q=9fe3e21c-5922-4345-8eda-a5cff3e45eb5&x%5Bidio%5D=5808766"](San Antonio Business Journal)[/URL][/COLOR] [/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT]
ei
ei
ei
 
USAA lost their way some years ago .... they were a great, reliable small auto insurance company with a very safe driver constituent of military officers.

They are now a relatively poorly run, confused amalgam of various sorts of insurance and finance.
 
I have heard (and experienced) the polar opposite of this. The camels back was broken when I was able to get the exact same coverage from Amica and pay 1/2 as much (for car insurance) than what I was paying with USAA. In all the years I had USAA, the premium NEVER EVER went down, but that has happened TWICE now with Amica.

And the quote I got the other day from USAA for same coverage (auto/home/umbrella) I have with Amica? $318 more a year. No thanks.

Amica gets very high marks from Clark Howard. I think he says they are a mutual company. ie: member owned. And they self select only good drivers. Your first year premium is "high" but then as you age into the policy they have some history on you and your price drops

Looks like I remembered correct:
https://clark.com/insurance/best-auto-insurance-companies/

although the article rates USAA highly on the auto insurance
 
Here is a bit more info:
https://www.mysanantonio.com/busine...investment-management-company-to-13367930.php

including:
Victory will have rights to offer products and services using the USAA name.
USAA CEO Stuart Parker said in the statement the company is committed to a “smooth transition.”
“We believe Victory Capital is well-positioned to provide a broader selection of leading-edge investment solutions to our member over the long term while maintaining the high standards of service that our members expect,” Parker said.
 
That's just amazing to me. A couple of years ago somebody here (maybe it was you?) shared a similar story and I got a quote from Amica as a result. It was nearly double what I pay USAA. So there's a tremendous amount of variability in their pricing scheme. I've always thought it was mainly based on where you live, but there must be other factors at least as important.

Having read this, I went and just got a Amica homeowner insurance quote and it's twice as expensive as my USAA policy
 
I'm sure Nords will have a comment on this development in the near future.

2soon2tell,
USAA member since 1969 (auto, home, umbrella, life)
 
Last edited:
Having read this, I went and just got a Amica homeowner insurance quote and it's twice as expensive as my USAA policy


Have USAA auto so went to Amica for a quote. USAA $160 per month for 2 low mileage, full-coverage vehicles. Amica $234 for same coverage, 46% more.
 
When I first dipped my toe into investing, the USAA "Cornerstone" mutual fund was the first one I bought. Over time I learned more about fund expenses and then I moved that money to Vanguard.

IMO, USAA is a very good insurance company, a good bank (good service overall, so-so rates), and a crummy investment company. I'm disappointed that they didn't put their customers first by spinning off this line of business to a company with lower fees, even if it wasn't the highest bid. Victory appears to be "middling" in the fees/expenses department, but I'd have hoped for something better.
 
Makes you think.USAA wasn't very successful in the investment business.

I saw this last night and had the same "uh oh" reaction. I've been looking for a way to overcome inertia and convince DW to move her IRA funds out of USAA and this may do the trick.

I'm sure Nords will have a comment on this development in the near future.

2soon2tell,
USAA member since 1969 (auto, home, umbrella, life)

When I first dipped my toe into investing, the USAA "Cornerstone" mutual fund was the first one I bought. Over time I learned more about fund expenses and then I moved that money to Vanguard.

IMO, USAA is a very good insurance company, a good bank (good service overall, so-so rates), and a crummy investment company. I'm disappointed that they didn't put their customers first by spinning off this line of business to a company with lower fees, even if it wasn't the highest bid. Victory appears to be "middling" in the fees/expenses department, but I'd have hoped for something better.
Thanks, 2soon2tell!

First, the compliance folks in USAA's investment branch kept a lid on all of this until the negotiations were finished and the initial documents were signed. My friends at USAA's Communications team are professionally resigned (translation: personally highly annoyed) at the public-relations blackout. USAA has already received a ton of feedback from us members, and the investment team's communications will improve in the next few months. I've asked to interview the investment execs and I'll write a blog post about it if they decide to talk to me. I'll put it this way: the communications team wants the investment execs to talk to me, but the investment execs have heard about me.

Second, the investment execs seem to be too deep into the details to explain that all they've really done is outsource the investment business. USAA has struggled with third-party contractors (I'm lookin' at you, mortgage branch) and since Victory owns the business instead of being a contractor, they're motivated to be efficient with their capital. Additional earnouts will be based on client metrics. USAA employees will still be handling the member service while Victory will be doing everything else in the back office.

Third, nobody is making anybody buy Victory's crappy loaded funds. USAA is tacitly admitting that Victory has a more cost-effective management system and USAA expects Victory to cut USAA's expense ratios. If you hold on to your existing USAA fund shares (for whatever reason you might have) then you could see those expense ratios drop as Victory shares the savings with the clients.


Why should you invest with USAA? Well, maybe you should not.

USAA's policy is that each business line has to generate its own revenue. (Clearly the investment branch was not making the cut.) USAA does not do loss leaders, discounts for market share, or extra-risky coverage for more premium cashflow. If you're buying USAA funds then you're paying the actual expense ratio of the funds, and there are no subsidies. They're not big enough to offer Vanguard's expense ratios and they're not hiding their expenses as Fidelity's "soft-dollar compensation". Execs are compensated on member satisfaction metrics instead of revenue.

What USAA's investment branch does offer is consolidation, convenience, and trust. If those are important to you then you'll be willing to pay for it.

If low expense ratios are your priority, then go to Vanguard or Fidelity or Schwab.

USAA lost their way some years ago .... they were a great, reliable small auto insurance company with a very safe driver constituent of military officers.

They are now a relatively poorly run, confused amalgam of various sorts of insurance and finance.
Last year at my ninth USAA conference I signed a non-disclosure agreement (with about 30 other bloggers and financial planners) which gave me access to information showing that they're one of the best-run financial institutions in the country. Considering their competition, that might not be a very high bar-- but USAA's public awards and rankings confirm that their members are happier than their competitors' members.

http://the-military-guide.com/usaa-answers-insurance-financial-questions/

USAA sets their premiums & fees on their actual expenses, not subsidies. If a ZIP code has too many members in it, then USAA won't insure all of them. (They avoid risk concentration.) If a ZIP code has too many heavy-weather events, USAA stops issuing new policies and boosts the prices on existing policies. (Oahu was on their "no homeowner insurance" list for nearly a decade.) If your vehicle model/year has a crappy statistical record then you're gonna pay for your choices, not me.

My spouse and I have lived in just two ZIP codes for the last 29 years. During those years our USAA insurance rates (state requirements plus maximum limits on liability) for two vehicles have remained between $75-$80/month. Inflation alone has eaten half of that dollar value. Part of the reason our premiums are so cheap is because we buy used vehicles and we do not carry collision or comprehensive insurance. USAA's angriest members are the ones who feel that their collision repairs do not restore the vehicle to its original condition-- and their second-angriest members are the ones whose vehicles have been declared totaled because it's too expensive to restore them to original.

In our two ZIP codes, USAA homeowner's insurance has consistently been more expensive. In the early 2000s they wouldn't even insure Hawaii homeowners. (Armed Forces Insurance is cutting their premiums for market share and they have far lower capital reserves than USAA, but we have very high deductibles.) Last year, for the first time since I started comparisons in 1984, USAA homeowner's insurance finally came close to AFI's quotes. AFI might lose some of my business when I do another round of quotes in 2019.

Your "very safe driver constituent of military officers" is an urban legend. (They're also downsized & dying of old age.) Today's members (mostly Millennials) have lower accident rates, lower claims rates, lower default rates, and better credit behavior. Adding enlisted, vets, and relatives ("All who've served honorably, and their families") has spread out the fixed expenses across a larger membership. Insurance is still USAA's core business, and even over the last five years the other branches have consistently been pruned back through automation and outsourcing. Their last financial fiasco (a multi-million-dollar computer network) was over 20 years ago. They've consistently cut back on brick&mortar centers, call centers, in-person financial planning, and manual claims adjusting. They've moved so much member service to their app, their website, and their chat that they're considering cutting their phone system to a fraction of its current size. They have the industry's most automated claims service (and the lowest processing expenses per claim).

USAA still offers convenience & consolidation beyond insurance-- but at a price. If those are not your priorities then I'd take your business elsewhere. You'll only discover the competitor's quality of service by comparing their ratings-- or by filing a claim.
 
Funny, on my tablet I see a long post from Stephenson, but on another device, it is gone. Oh well.

Here is an interesting article from an industry insider on a conference call with Victory Capital.

https://www.riabiz.com/a/2018/11/7/...-funds-and-use-of-its-sweet-brand-victory-who

"The Brooklyn, Ohio roll-up firm, founded in 2013, is borrowing $1.4 billion to buy $69.2 billion in assets under management in 53 investment funds from the San Antonio, Texas insurer. Less than half the assets in USAA Asset Management Company are active equity funds. Excluded from the deal are $11 billion of "managed assets," which may be USAA's wealth manager."

No one really knows where this will end up. So we'll be prudent, cash in the taxable funds (all stepped up due to inheritance), and transfer out.
 
Part of the reason our premiums are so cheap is because we buy used vehicles and we do not carry collision or comprehensive insurance. USAA's angriest members are the ones who feel that their collision repairs do not restore the vehicle to its original condition-- and their second-angriest members are the ones whose vehicles have been declared totaled because it's too expensive to restore them to original.

This. DS settled Personal Auto physical damage (damage to the car, not bodily injury) claims for years for another company and that was his daily battle- people upside down on their car loan who were furious that the insurance proceeds weren't enough to pay off the loan. If you give away more than what the policy promised you placate the claimant but it increases the rates.

USAA still offers convenience & consolidation beyond insurance-- but at a price. If those are not your priorities then I'd take your business elsewhere. You'll only discover the competitor's quality of service by comparing their ratings-- or by filing a claim.

DS' current employer has just announced they're getting out of Private Passenger Auto insurance because people buy based only on price and they have the battles I just described above. Many of the discount companies use non-standard policy forms that have gaps in them that you don't realize till you file a claim (e.g., you rent a car and allow a friend to use it; friend allows someone else with inadequate insurance to use it and they total it, and your insurance won't cover it). I've been sticking with mainstream carriers for this reason.
 
Thanks Nords. Been a member of USAA for 40+ years and have never had an accident claim. They like me.

I find their new website difficult to navigate. Last month tried for an hour to take a vehicle off seasonal storage and add one but finally gave up and called them.

Also, passing through Phoenix I saw huge building with USAA on the side and wondering if they are expanding in this area. Another Taj Mahal?
 
Also, passing through Phoenix I saw huge building with USAA on the side and wondering if they are expanding in this area. Another Taj Mahal?

There is an enormous one in Colorado Springs too. I think they just put their presence where they have lots of customers.
 
Nords,
Thanks for the additional information.

Second, the investment execs seem to be too deep into the details to explain that all they've really done is outsource the investment business. USAA has struggled with third-party contractors (I'm lookin' at you, mortgage branch) and since Victory owns the business instead of being a contractor, they're motivated to be efficient with their capital. Additional earnouts will be based on client metrics. USAA employees will still be handling the member service while Victory will be doing everything else in the back office.
The bold (added above) portion was the part I missed. So, USAA isn't entirely jettisoning their investment customers, but they are ridding themselves of the fund management and admin, and have actually sold that function. Now they'll have no control over how the funds are managed/administered and yet they can't fire Victory if things go off the rails. No matter what happens they are the "face" of the product to their USAA customers.

If having two companies splitting the duties like this >saves< money, it does say something about the efficiency of USAA's management/administration of the funds in the past.
 
Interesting. I suspect Colorado is a losing are for them the last couple of years with our multiple hail storms and fires.
 
Thanks Nords. Been a member of USAA for 40+ years and have never had an accident claim. They like me.

I find their new website difficult to navigate. Last month tried for an hour to take a vehicle off seasonal storage and add one but finally gave up and called them.

Also, passing through Phoenix I saw huge building with USAA on the side and wondering if they are expanding in this area. Another Taj Mahal?
USAA's Innovation Lab is really trying very hard to get rid of phone service or to replace it with Siri/Alexa tech. They've come a long way on the routine member queries but something like your policy service is still beyond the AI. Even so they'd greatly prefer to handle your request by e-mail or text.

They have an entire lab of human-factors engineers who test member services (both over the phone and over the app/website) and they're constantly updating both the systems used by members as well as the tech used by the member service reps. MSRs can apply to work in the lab (for up to a year) where they do their same job as the call center, but with a bunch of additional beta-testing tools to see what's working and what can be scaled up across all the MSRs.

USAA has actually outgrown their San Antonio campus. (That building is already bigger than the Pentagon.) They're also renting space in downtown San Antonio near Riverwalk... maybe by now they've bought it.

The Phoenix building is a gigantic call center, along with some training and R&D:
https://www.azcentral.com/story/mon...-completes-expansion-phoenix-campus/75923434/

There is an enormous one in Colorado Springs too. I think they just put their presence where they have lots of customers.
And potential employees-- the company has grown to over 23,000 employees to handle the larger membership, and about 30% are veterans and military spouses. Colorado Springs used to be a huge center for CFPs and wealth management (but is taking on other tasks as well). Much of that service is being put online or automated: Skype, Zoom, Facetime, and robo-advisors.

https://www.usaa.com/inet/wc/about_usaa_corporate_overview_locations?akredirect=true

A decade ago (cheap real estate) USAA was ready to expand bricks & mortar to take the business to the military bases and veterans populations. However smartphones and tablets (and bandwidth) have completely disrupted that strategy, and the USAA app has expanded to take over many tasks. Several years ago USAA started shutting down as many member service centers as they could. I'm beginning to think that they'll never open the Oahu office near Schofield Barracks, let alone have a coffee cup there with my name on it...

Meanwhile the ratio of members to employees continues to rise. The biggest challenge is "surge service" where hundreds of member service reps (and claims adjustors, and support staff) have to work on the claims from a named hurricane or a wildfire. That surge is especially bad during the hours after the disaster but the workload continues for weeks.

Nords,
Thanks for the additional information.

The bold (added above) portion was the part I missed. So, USAA isn't entirely jettisoning their investment customers, but they are ridding themselves of the fund management and admin, and have actually sold that function. Now they'll have no control over how the funds are managed/administered and yet they can't fire Victory if things go off the rails. No matter what happens they are the "face" of the product to their USAA customers.

If having two companies splitting the duties like this >saves< money, it does say something about the efficiency of USAA's management/administration of the funds in the past.
I think it's an aspect of how much of the fund industry is in a race to the bottom. There's no way that USAA's small fund size (and assets contracted under wealth management services) can compete with the large firms. The big firms have the lowest fund expenses (despite their expensive infrastructure, it scales) and they have at least 10x-100x more assets under management.

The only reason USAA is in the fund-management business is member convenience and consolidation as well as a good brand reputation. It's a 1960s buggy whip and as the members move on to other companies (or, frankly, as their assets move on through probate) then USAA will continue to outsource it.

It's not just USAA-- it's the entire freakin' industry. Read Michael Kitces' blog "Nerd's Eye View" (https://www.kitces.com/). If you're in the financial business then it's worth listening to his podcast. People can still make money but you're either very big or very concierge or very niche.

A good friend has watched one of the Big Three fund companies outsource an entire division of their infrastructure (overseas because English-speaking service isn't a part of the job). They were laid off from that company and hired relatively quickly by a competitor to scale up more back-office infrastructure.

I think the only control that USAA will continue to have over their mutual funds will be their licensing of the letters "USAA". Otherwise they might as well spell the names of their funds "VTSAX".

USAA has tried to hire contractors for their mortgage lending process, and that's been a constant revolving door of complaints and new contractors. I've never heard anything one way or the other about whether they're staying in the mortgage business, but I would not be surprised to see that turned into some sort of white-label version of an online lender.

USAA's business checking has also been a total failure, because the service can't pay its expenses. Members (especially military spouses who are online entrepreneurs) want it but they're not willing to pay the actual costs. (Business checking is apparently a loss leader.) Last year USAA started working with a startup that was a leader in that fintech, but the startup is rumored to be unable to scale it. By the time business checking begins to work, entrepreneurs may have moved on to mobile (online) payments.

Interesting. I suspect Colorado is a losing area for them the last couple of years with our multiple hail storms and fires.
And California. We heard quite a bit about wildfires at USAA's Digital MilEx in September.

USAA is still trying to reduce the cost of claims processing, but they're pushing even harder on avoiding the damage in the first place. Out here it's building codes and hurricane tech, and in Tornado Alley it's earlier detection & faster alerts. In wildfire areas it's forestry management as well as getting more firebreaks around neighborhoods. However nobody wants to pay the costs (not even governments or home builders, let alone members) so it's a constant struggle.

Out here when USAA's hurricane concentration risk got too high, they limited their new policies to first-time buyers. USAA members could not add a home (switching from one insurance company to another) and everyone was paying more for hurricane policies. USAA also spent a lot of money on the members for disaster awareness and hurricane prep, while jacking up the premiums and encouraging higher deductibles. Price-sensitive policy holders began to raise their deductibles (as we have) or move to other companies. The net result was that USAA was able to lower their concentration risk while earning about the same amount of margin on their revenue.

I think one of the big reasons that USAA was able to insure more Hawaii homeowners in the last few years has been smartphone tech reducing the expense of the claims process.
 
Last edited:
I just finished moving all of my banking and investments to Fidelity. Not because I hate USAA but because FIDO offers so much more flexibility and access to all investment types.

So USAA is now just my insurance company much like they were when I signed up in 1984.

Life is good.
 
When I joined USAA over 40 years ago it was a low cost provider of automobile and homeowner's insurance. Its field of membership was limited to a low risk pool of military officers and dependents in the field of membership. It was an efficient organization with an intense focus on customer service.

USAA tried to become a financial services company offering banking and investment services. It also dramatically expanded its field of membership, which likely increased its insurance costs by taking on riskier customers. Its mutual fund offerings are high cost and medium to low performing. Its "wealth management" group provided cookie cutter solutions at a high cost relative to other options. When I was with the wealth management group the concept of index investing was foreign to the wealth manager. All he could offer was a portfolio of managed stocks which meant constant churn and sub index performance. Plus the wealth manager seemed focused on selling me more life insurance when I didn't need or want instead of trying to tailor an investment program to my individual needs. The company seems to have become a large, bureaucratic, high cost operation trying to control expenses by offering one size fits all solutions. Needless to say moved my investments several years ago (much better performance with index funds at Vanguard) and I'm bidding out my auto and homeowner's insurance this year.

USAA has a big office building in Tampa in addition to San Antonio and Phoenix. It makes me wonder why the high investment in technology hasn't brought the company the capability of offering more custom tailored insurance, banking and investment solutions with less headcount. If the company is backing out of investments and banking, will it aggressively take out the headcount or will it end up with fewer businesses and high overhead?

Several times I tried to have conversations with senior executives at USAA about the slipping service, high costs relative to competition, and other options in the marketplace. I came away with the conclusion inertia, not vision, is driving the business. None could articulate a vision for me. If you don't know where you are going, any road will take you there. Unfortunately when you arrive you may find yourself underwater.
 
Last edited:
Yes, Fidelity has a lot to offer. I expect that by the end of 2019, our inherited investments will be transferred to Vanguard and Schwab.

I don't see imminent problems with Victory Capital taking over. There is mention of this in proxy statement, that expenses will stay same, with VC making up any difference that occurs. That will be for a limited time, though.
 
Several times I tried to have conversations with senior executives at USAA about the slipping service, high costs relative to competition, and other options in the marketplace. I came away with the conclusion inertia, not vision, is driving the business. None could articulate a vision for me. If you don't know where you are going, any road will take you there. Unfortunately when you arrive you may find yourself underwater.
That's typical of a lot of companies, I believe. There's fear of failure when new ideas are proposed. The old model is broken, but no one person is powerful enough to bring in rapid change for the better.
 
Retired military ...

Like so many others have reported, USAA was great in the days when they were an insurance company - responsive and crisp in the days of phones AND they mitigated their risk and my costs by insuring people like me - pretty darn reliable and consistent - the officer corps of the US military.

When they started spreading into investments, I tried them for awhile, but found their performance - even in managed funds - to be lacking that compared to other managed funds - and, especially low cost index funds - so, I jumped ship.

Had several discussions, as well, with relatively senior management at industrial events and shows - all had the same corporate babblespeak that comes from getting bonuses.

Over the years, it became harder and harder to justify the additional cost of USAA insurance - and, sure we lived in areas where USAA had a large base - and sometimes high costs due to hurricanes. So, we gave up on them for everything except for auto insurance - and we are considering going elsewhere for that.

Our last serious contact with them was trying to get an umbrella policy - we spent 45 minutes on the phone with someone who simply was ill-trained to service our needs. Gave up and obtained the umbrella elsewhere.

I'd like to have them back - to where they insured my risk group only.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom