Posted:
#1
is a 1 % fee resonable for a broker to handle a retirement account? WSC what do you think? and others? thanks
Fees for Brokers?
Views: 148
Posts: 12
Posted:
#2
Yeah that is in line with normal fees, but what kind of actions are they going to perform?
If they are getting 1% for putting you in funds and checking in every so often that is pretty lame. If they are actively involved with a strategy and plan and there is some involvement then it would be warranted.
Also see what other fees are involved and if there are funds, products what fees you are paying. The 1% is the brokers fee on TOP of other mutual fund loads normally.
If they are getting 1% for putting you in funds and checking in every so often that is pretty lame. If they are actively involved with a strategy and plan and there is some involvement then it would be warranted.
Also see what other fees are involved and if there are funds, products what fees you are paying. The 1% is the brokers fee on TOP of other mutual fund loads normally.
Posted:
#4
I closed a defined benefit pension plan at work when we bought a partner out and have kept the money on the sidelines because what is going on but I think it might be a good time to put the money in the game ..I would like to be a little aggresive with this money for its not money I need for retirement income. any thoughts would be helpfull?
Posted:
#6
How old are you out of curiousity?
If it is in a 401k-ish plan then you are probably limited to funds which your firm has contracted through the defined benefit firm right?
If you closed that plan and you dont have a ton of choices, roll that sucker over to an IRA if it qualifies and manage it yourself, unless the ammt is big and you arent interested.
If it is in a 401k-ish plan then you are probably limited to funds which your firm has contracted through the defined benefit firm right?
If you closed that plan and you dont have a ton of choices, roll that sucker over to an IRA if it qualifies and manage it yourself, unless the ammt is big and you arent interested.
Posted:
#7
I am the speed limit ( 55 ) Thats what I did right now, I put it in a money market IRA account at WAMU for the past few months cause I think I had 60 days to put it in another form of retirement account, I was thinking of putting it into an Ameritrade account and buying a few no load funds myself or I might be better off letting a broker do it for the 1 %
Posted:
#9
WSC here is some advise that someone gave me, what do you think?
i really have to caution that one needs to be very careful in this enviorment. i would recommend that you dollar cost average into funds - i.e invest over a 2-3 month cycle so to avoids peaks and valleys. i also have oriented my recommendations towards conservative funds -which means that they won't go up as much in a rally but are better in a down market.
Hybrid: Janus Balanced
Vanguard Wellington
Large Blend
CGM Focus
Taxable Bonds
PIMCO Total Return
Vanguard Intermediate Bond
I'd also consider ETFs - probably a small allocation (under 10%) to an "other" category like real estate or international.
Hybrid: Janus Balanced
Vanguard Wellington
Large Blend
CGM Focus
Taxable Bonds
PIMCO Total Return
Vanguard Intermediate Bond
I'd also consider ETFs - probably a small allocation (under 10%) to an "other" category like real estate or international.
ken heebner
Posted:
#11
Koaj,
Heebner has been taking his lumps lately as has everyone but that given his returns have been good longer term.
brooklyn, for a bond fund you really dont need a high profile fund unless its expense ratios and loads are low because for the most part if a bond fund is highly rated, a little higher return but with higher loads and 12b1 fees, it wont make up for it and since bond funds (unless they are high yield) arent for appreciation, the marginal difference isnt that great to merit a load.
I am not big on Janus..their records since the tech crash hasnt been good, now I havent followed them in a while but they were always known for high loads and high yearly fees (12b1). I also think Vanguard funds are VERY highly overrated..people love them but if you can find an equivalent ETF I would probably go with a more liquid ETF. That means in the case of the Vanguard Wellington that you read the prospectus and see if it is trying to mirror some index because for the most part Vanguard funds are NOT actively managed, they are known for trying to mirror another fund or index..so say that the Wellington is trying to mirror the Wilshire 5000, just find an ETF that does the same thing.
I also would consider Scottrade if they have a local office because with Ameritrade you have no local office and their fees are going to be higher for trades than Scottrade.
Heebner has been taking his lumps lately as has everyone but that given his returns have been good longer term.
brooklyn, for a bond fund you really dont need a high profile fund unless its expense ratios and loads are low because for the most part if a bond fund is highly rated, a little higher return but with higher loads and 12b1 fees, it wont make up for it and since bond funds (unless they are high yield) arent for appreciation, the marginal difference isnt that great to merit a load.
I am not big on Janus..their records since the tech crash hasnt been good, now I havent followed them in a while but they were always known for high loads and high yearly fees (12b1). I also think Vanguard funds are VERY highly overrated..people love them but if you can find an equivalent ETF I would probably go with a more liquid ETF. That means in the case of the Vanguard Wellington that you read the prospectus and see if it is trying to mirror some index because for the most part Vanguard funds are NOT actively managed, they are known for trying to mirror another fund or index..so say that the Wellington is trying to mirror the Wilshire 5000, just find an ETF that does the same thing.
I also would consider Scottrade if they have a local office because with Ameritrade you have no local office and their fees are going to be higher for trades than Scottrade.
Hot Forum Topics
