Benefits of having all accts at one place?

Non-investing personal finance issues including insurance, credit, real estate, taxes, employment and legal issues such as trusts and wills
Post Reply
User avatar
Topic Author
ryuns
Posts: 3493
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:07 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Benefits of having all accts at one place?

Post by ryuns » Thu Apr 15, 2010 5:30 pm

Friends,

The girlfriend just finished paying off some CC debt she rang up during her last year of college, and she seems empowered to start optimizing her financial life. She's not in bad shape right now, but she has a generic checking account with Wells Fargo, her credit cards offer no rewards, no savings account, no IRA.

I am looking for your opinions on how beneficial you think it is to have all her accounts under one roof, especially if you weren't particularly passionate about investing. E.g., she plans to start an emergency fund and a Roth and IMO, the best option is Vanguard. But she also wants a better checking/savings account and rewards credit card, and IMO the best single place for this is Schwab (with some possible competition from Fidelity). Her current 401k is at Fidelity.

Do you think it's worth giving a tiny bit of expense ratio or fund choice in Roth, for instance, to conveniently access all the accounts at one place? If you could start from scratch, how would you do it?

Personally, I have money in a few different places. I don't mind too much, with the help of mint.com, but I do often wish it were a bit easier.

Cheers,
Ryan
An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered; an adventure is an inconvenience rightly considered. -- GK Chesterton

billern
Posts: 1079
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 4:08 pm

Post by billern » Thu Apr 15, 2010 5:39 pm

It can make sense to consolidate, especially if doing so can get you lower fees or extra services.

I moved my assets to Wells fargo since the PMA checking account and $25K of combined assets gives me 100 free trades per year per brokerage account.

This works well for me, although I won't give up keeping credit cards at different institutions (too many risks - I don't want one bank cutting me off and having no access to credit) and I still have a Fidelity checking account because of the great bill-pay.

GammaPoint
Posts: 2614
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 10:25 am
Location: Washington

Post by GammaPoint » Thu Apr 15, 2010 5:46 pm

If I could do it all over again I would probably consider having only my Ally checking account and my Wells Fargo PMA investment package.

However, the best thing about the PMA deal is the free trades, and if you're not particularly interested in investing maybe ETFs aren't that useful anyway. And if she's just starting out she may not have the $25k necessary to get the PMA account fee waiver. If she's going to use MFs it may be easier to just go direct.

I don't think it's too complicated to have one good savings/checking account (e.g., Ally) and one investing account (maybe Vanguard or Fidelity if she's already got a 401K there). It's not like she would regularly need to login to the investing account and manage things anyway. Just logon to manage her ROTH contributions each year, but she can set everything to 'reinvest' and also have $X come out of her checking account each month and directly into the fund of her choice.

I don't have experience with Schwab so I can't really say much about it.

UrbanMedic
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 3:18 pm

Re: Benefits of having all accts at one place?

Post by UrbanMedic » Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:20 pm

ryuns wrote:
I am looking for your opinions on how beneficial you think it is to have all her accounts under one roof, especially if you weren't particularly passionate about investing. E.g., she plans to start an emergency fund and a Roth and IMO, the best option is Vanguard. But she also wants a better checking/savings account and rewards credit card, and IMO the best single place for this is Schwab (with some possible competition from Fidelity). Her current 401k is at Fidelity.

Do you think it's worth giving a tiny bit of expense ratio or fund choice in Roth, for instance, to conveniently access all the accounts at one place? If you could start from scratch, how would you do it?
I use a local credit union, have a Schwab brokerage account, a Schwab Roth, the Schwab rewards card, and also some other stuff at another brokerage.

If you want a halfway decent one stop thing, I've been happy with Schwab. For investing, they have a number of decent index funds with expense ratios at least as good, in a few case better, than Vanguard. There's a good selection of Schwab ETFs with no transaction fees. They do not have a decent bond fund, however. And if you are a slice and dice type person, you won't have as many options as you would get with Vanguard.

What is a bit inconvient for me is the lack of local branches (unless you live in Reno, NV). The solution is to open a free checking account at a local institutition, cash checks or whatever there, and transfer it from the local account to the Schwab account.

The only thing that stops me from switching from the local credit union is having to change direct deposit over, and we have several loans that are set up to withdraw from that account. Plus I'm not that wealthy so why bother for a few hundred or maybe a few thousand dollars.

rec7
Posts: 2369
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 7:22 pm

Post by rec7 » Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:37 pm

I think a local credit union and Vanguard are a winning combo.
Disclaimer: You might lose money doing anything I say. Although that was not my intent. | Favorite song: Sometimes He Whispers Jay Parrack

GammaPoint
Posts: 2614
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 10:25 am
Location: Washington

Post by GammaPoint » Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:45 pm

rec7 wrote:I think a local credit union and Vanguard are a winning combo.
I sort of agree with this statement. If small differences in ER is not worth having accounts in different places (or using ETFs) then how important is having the small amount held in savings/checking earning a little bit more at an online bank?

I wouldn't consider the savings in an online bank when making a decision. Low-cost index funds held until retirement will save much more money.

User avatar
Topic Author
ryuns
Posts: 3493
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:07 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Post by ryuns » Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:47 pm

Thanks for the feedback. @billern: It will be a while before she has the requisite $25k to get the WellsFargo deal, unless we get hitched, which is the idea eventually, but I guess we could cross that bridge when we come to it. Good point about having some things at different institutions for redundancy. It's a perennial gag on lame sitcoms where someone's CC gets rejects and the woman ends up paying. If that happened to her, I guess *I'd* be the one paying.

@gammapoint: Good point about making things automatic. That's how I manage transactions between Schwab and Vanguard, and Schwab and my 3 credit cards, and it's not a huge deal for me.

@UrbanMedic: I've had really good experience with Schwab too, and that was my first thought to recommend to her. I haven't used their brokerage, but you say that they have lousy bond funds. She doesn't know much about investing and asset allocation, so my fear was that having to do asset allocation among different accounts (e.g. to find the best bond fund) might be a little tricky for her. But she can learn or I can help her or she can absorb either the extra ER or the trading cost to get in a decent ETF.

Thanks again for the responses.
Ryan
An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered; an adventure is an inconvenience rightly considered. -- GK Chesterton

User avatar
Topic Author
ryuns
Posts: 3493
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:07 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Post by ryuns » Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:57 pm

GammaPoint wrote:
rec7 wrote:I think a local credit union and Vanguard are a winning combo.
I sort of agree with this statement. If small differences in ER is not worth having accounts in different places (or using ETFs) then how important is having the small amount held in savings/checking earning a little bit more at an online bank?

I wouldn't consider the savings in an online bank when making a decision. Low-cost index funds held until retirement will save much more money.
You might be right. Right now, it doesn't matter at all, though in about 2006, I was making 4% in investor checking. Take home message is that she should be putting most of her effort into fitting the big rocks in the jar: starting an emergency fund, starting a Roth, getting her asset allocation together. I was only asking this question because I approached money like most other Bogleheads do: learning slowly, reading a book or two, and slowly figuring it out. Meanwhile, I ended up with way too many accounts at way too many places. So I was hoping with a little coaxing, the gf would do the first part, but not the second part.
An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered; an adventure is an inconvenience rightly considered. -- GK Chesterton

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 19070
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Post by VictoriaF » Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:59 pm

Hi Ryan,

Since in another thread you said that you don't mind my incessant references to Taleb, here is one more. ;)

The second edition of The Black Swan is due on 10 May 2010, but Taleb posted selected new sections on his web site for comments. One of the greatest new additions is on the value of robustness. In other words, sometimes organizations and people over-optimize their operations and cannot withstand unexpected calamities. Nature, notes Taleb, provided us with spare parts (an extra eye, an extra kidney) and some spare capacity.

Following Taleb's logic, it is better to forgo some potential gains or fee reductions by diversifying across various financial institutions.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

GammaPoint
Posts: 2614
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 10:25 am
Location: Washington

Post by GammaPoint » Thu Apr 15, 2010 7:21 pm

ryuns wrote:[
You might be right. Right now, it doesn't matter at all, though in about 2006, I was making 4% in investor checking.
Yeah 4% is great, and something most Bogleheads wouldn't go through some hassle to get. But still 4% of the, say, $5K kept at the bank is still only $200 per year. This is equivalent to a 0.2% difference in ER on a 100k portfolio (every year, regardless of what you can get in a savings account at that time). You probably know this, but just pointing out that a good ER is more important than the rate you get in savings/checking.

djw
Posts: 1456
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 9:34 pm

Post by djw » Thu Apr 15, 2010 7:29 pm

Many people here would disagree, but my wife and I are fortunate to have a significant net worth at this point in our lives and I'm working towards implementing the following rules for our assets:

Not more than 20% of our net worth with any one custodian (bank, broker, insurance co. etc.)

Not more than 10% of our net worth in any one investment (REITs, Europe, Precious Metals, TIPS, etc.)

We currently have five custodians: Genworth, Lincoln, Prudential, Vanguard, and Wells Fargo, each holding less than 20% of our net worth.

The part I'm still working on is that more than 30% of our net worth is tied up in our primary residence. We plan to downsize in the next 2 - 3 years, so that our primary residence will be 10 - 20%.

I agree with VictoriaF that diversity is more valuable than consolidating with one custodian. Stuff happens that one would never have anticipated a few days or even a few hours earlier (e.g. a nuclear detonation in Manhattan or Philadelphia?)

You never know when geographical diversity will come in handy. Genworth's HQ is in Virginia, Lincoln in PA, Prudential in NJ, Vanguard in PA, Wells Fargo in MO, our primary home in New England, our second home in FL, one bank in MA, the other in NC, primary credit card in NYC and SD.

Thoreau said "Simplify, simplify, simplify" and I agree with him, but also "Diversify, diversify, diversify"...
Last edited by djw on Thu Apr 15, 2010 7:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Love many, trust few, and always paddle your own canoe

User avatar
Taylor Larimore
Advisory Board
Posts: 28953
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:09 pm
Location: Miami FL

One fund company or more?

Post by Taylor Larimore » Thu Apr 15, 2010 7:34 pm

Hi Ryan:
I am looking for your opinions on how beneficial you think it is to have all her accounts under one roof?
In my opinion, it is a big advantage to have all investments in one good, strong, mutual fund company. The benefits are many:

1. One familiar statement.

2. Less paperwork.

3. Easier tax preparation.

5. Avoidance of low-balance and other small fees.

6. It's much easier to learn only one company's policies, fees, regulations, etc.

7. With larger holdings it becomes possible to qualify for premium services (Voyager, Admiral shares).

8. Rebalancing and exchanges are easier.

9. Eliminates 3rd party brokerage.

10. A loyal customer is appreciated and usually treated better.

11. More free time for yourself.

12. In event of death or disability, it will be much easier for others.
"Simplicity is the master key to financial success." -- Jack Bogle

GammaPoint
Posts: 2614
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 10:25 am
Location: Washington

Post by GammaPoint » Thu Apr 15, 2010 7:38 pm

I think Taylor mentions some good points. There have been a number of threads on the forums about whether it's safe to have all of your stuff at, say, Vanguard. The outcome of those threads seems to always be that's it's a pretty safe thing.

User avatar
Topic Author
ryuns
Posts: 3493
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:07 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Post by ryuns » Thu Apr 15, 2010 7:47 pm

You guys are too good to a young investor like me.

Some great opinions. I honestly haven't figured out how I feel on the whole diversity/robustness--how far to take that line of reasoning. I'm down with it to some degree, and I think of it as a reason to hold asset classes that are fundamentally uncorrelated (i.e. whose basic characteristics indicate that they'll be uncorrelated, in addition to historic "uncorrelation"). But how far do you go in planning for black swans? How much convenience, efficiency, money do you sacrifice?

Perhaps I'll have to pick up a copy of the new edition and do some cogitatin'. :)

Ryan
An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered; an adventure is an inconvenience rightly considered. -- GK Chesterton

User avatar
Socrativestor
Posts: 324
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 9:02 am
Location: Chicago

Post by Socrativestor » Thu Apr 15, 2010 8:14 pm

Personally I believe in the virtue of consolidation but not the vice of over-consolidation.

To my way of thinking I want my long-term investments (which hopefully will grow to a very large number :lol: ) but which require only infrequent transactions in one place if I can get it. Convenience. Economies of scale. So I have almost all of my investments at Vanguard. The ones that are not there either can't be helped (employer plans, HSA) or are due to unique investment opportunities not available at VG (e.g. TIAA Real Estate Account -- yup, a unique way to lose money :oops: ).

On the other hand, I want my short-term personal finances consolidated at a different institution, preferably with global presence. In my case, for historical reasons, Chase. Checking accounts, credit cards, HELOC, direct deposit, etc. I have 2 main reasons for this. 1) I don't want my day-to-day transactions to go anywhere near the big pot of money. 2) I don't want to people I do day-to-day transactions with to know that there might be a big pot of money. As far as they know, I'm just another Chase customer with a modest balance. In short, privacy and security.

Transferring between these 2 consolidations is simple but requires my personal intervention and only happens a few times a year at most.

On top of all that I use Quicken which gives me a comprehensive view and history of everything.

As Einstein said: Make everything as simple as possible -- but not simpler.

YMMV.
--Socrativestor | "Neither of us has any knowledge to boast of, but he thinks that he knows something which he does not know, whereas I am quite conscious of my ignorance."

leonard
Posts: 5993
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 11:56 am

Post by leonard » Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:00 pm

Socrativestor wrote:1) I don't want my day-to-day transactions to go anywhere near the big pot of money.
Why?
Leonard | | Market Timing: Do you seriously think you can predict the future? What else do the voices tell you? | | If employees weren't taking jobs with bad 401k's, bad 401k's wouldn't exist.

User avatar
Socrativestor
Posts: 324
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 9:02 am
Location: Chicago

Post by Socrativestor » Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:11 pm

leonard wrote:
Socrativestor wrote:1) I don't want my day-to-day transactions to go anywhere near the big pot of money.
Why?
I figure my biggest exposure to fraud / theft / horrendous error / etc. come from "visibility". What folks don't know about they can't steal / hack / lose accidentally / etc. Every time you use a check, ATM card, fill in a direct deposit slip, etc. you are revealing potential target to an unknown number of unknown persons. I'd just as soon reveal a small, poor target rather than a big, rich one.

This also seques into the second reason which is presenting a particular financial front to the world, also largely for the same reasons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_wall
--Socrativestor | "Neither of us has any knowledge to boast of, but he thinks that he knows something which he does not know, whereas I am quite conscious of my ignorance."

User avatar
tfb
Posts: 8190
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:46 pm
Contact:

Re: Benefits of having all accts at one place?

Post by tfb » Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:20 pm

ryuns wrote:I am looking for your opinions on how beneficial you think it is to have all her accounts under one roof, especially if you weren't particularly passionate about investing.
If she has to use one company for everything, I think Fidelity or Schwab comes pretty close to being able to provide everything she needs.

Fidelity: free mySmart Cash account; 2% AmEx or 1.5-2% Visa rewards card; Spartan index funds, free treasury auctions, brokered CDs.

Schwab: free Schwab bank checking and savings accounts; 2% Visa rewards card (not sure if they really stopped taking new applications after 3/31); $100-minimum index funds, free treasury auctions, brokered CDs.

Vanguard is not even close to being competitive as a one-stop shop.
Harry Sit, taking a break from the forums.

mptfan
Posts: 5722
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:58 am

Re: Benefits of having all accts at one place?

Post by mptfan » Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:42 am

tfb wrote: Schwab: free Schwab bank checking and savings accounts; 2% Visa rewards card (not sure if they really stopped taking new applications after 3/31)
I have been told they have stopped taking new applications.

UrbanMedic
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 3:18 pm

Re: Benefits of having all accts at one place?

Post by UrbanMedic » Fri Apr 16, 2010 10:06 am

mptfan wrote:
tfb wrote: Schwab: free Schwab bank checking and savings accounts; 2% Visa rewards card (not sure if they really stopped taking new applications after 3/31)
I have been told they have stopped taking new applications.
You may be correct. This link:
http://www.schwab.com/public/schwab/nn/ ... CC&SRC=WWW

It used to be the online application. It does not work any longer but did so for quite a long time.

User avatar
Topic Author
ryuns
Posts: 3493
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:07 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Post by ryuns » Fri Apr 16, 2010 11:19 am

Socrativestor wrote:
leonard wrote:
Socrativestor wrote:1) I don't want my day-to-day transactions to go anywhere near the big pot of money.
Why?
I figure my biggest exposure to fraud / theft / horrendous error / etc. come from "visibility". What folks don't know about they can't steal / hack / lose accidentally / etc. Every time you use a check, ATM card, fill in a direct deposit slip, etc. you are revealing potential target to an unknown number of unknown persons. I'd just as soon reveal a small, poor target rather than a big, rich one.

This also seques into the second reason which is presenting a particular financial front to the world, also largely for the same reasons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_wall
Interesting idea. I like it. (Chinese walls are also useful for keeping Mongolians out.)
An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered; an adventure is an inconvenience rightly considered. -- GK Chesterton

User avatar
Topic Author
ryuns
Posts: 3493
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:07 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Benefits of having all accts at one place?

Post by ryuns » Fri Apr 16, 2010 12:07 pm

UrbanMedic wrote:
mptfan wrote:
tfb wrote: Schwab: free Schwab bank checking and savings accounts; 2% Visa rewards card (not sure if they really stopped taking new applications after 3/31)
I have been told they have stopped taking new applications.
You may be correct. This link:
http://www.schwab.com/public/schwab/nn/ ... CC&SRC=WWW

It used to be the online application. It does not work any longer but did so for quite a long time.
Hmm. I see no indication of that here: http://www.schwab.com/public/schwab/ban ... 2=checking
And if you go to "Apply Now" and "Start", you get an online app in a popup window.

Seems like the only problem with Fido and Schwab is that their Vanguard copycat funds (hey, let's call a spade a spade) don't have very good bond options. Schwab, I just noticed, does offer some pretty basic bond funds thru Ridgeworth (?) with no transaction fees, 0.32% ER. Or one could just fork out the $8 and buy shares of BND or whatever.

Ryan
An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered; an adventure is an inconvenience rightly considered. -- GK Chesterton

mikep
Posts: 3700
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:27 pm

Post by mikep » Fri Apr 16, 2010 12:08 pm

I'd have everything at Vanguard (except checking at my local credit union) if they offered a MMF competitive with my online bank, if I could buy I-bonds through their brokerage, and if they offered HSA's. But they don't do any of those things, so I have accounts at a few different places.

littlebird
Posts: 1547
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:05 pm
Location: Valley of the Sun, AZ

Post by littlebird » Fri Apr 16, 2010 6:14 pm

Another consideration, although I don't know if you were contemplating doing something like this, is not to have money on deposit where you also owe money, eg. a bank that holds your car loan. The reason for this is that in case of a dispute, the institution can "set off" your funds that they're holding against your debt. At least this is true in the states whose laws I'm familiar with.

User avatar
southerndoc
Posts: 1091
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 7:07 pm
Location: Atlanta

Post by southerndoc » Fri Apr 16, 2010 6:21 pm

I wish Vanguard or Schwab offered health savings accounts.

I have my checking, savings (1 of my savings accounts), credit card, investment, and part of my Roth at Schwab. Vanguard currently houses my SEP and the vast majority of my Roth (which I recently converted, and will likely move the Schwab Roth into at the end of the year).

Would love to move my HSA from Bank of America to either Schwab or Vanguard as I'm not happy with their fees, and would prefer to have a single login.

User avatar
tfb
Posts: 8190
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:46 pm
Contact:

Re: Benefits of having all accts at one place?

Post by tfb » Fri Apr 16, 2010 11:24 pm

ryuns wrote:Hmm. I see no indication of that here: http://www.schwab.com/public/schwab/ban ... 2=checking
And if you go to "Apply Now" and "Start", you get an online app in a popup window.
They are talking about the 2% rewards card, not the checking or savings account. See also

http://bucks.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/ ... dit-cards/
Harry Sit, taking a break from the forums.

maxfax
Posts: 422
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:28 pm

Post by maxfax » Sat Apr 17, 2010 1:06 pm

Once you have enough money such that you would not forgo discounts by splitting it up, I would advise you to have at least two accounts, even if one is used only very rarely.

Surely I not the only one to get pi...ed off by financial institutions. If you cannot withdraw your money and go elsewhere easily, you lose all bargaining power. The only message they understand is moving out your money. And you need a second account to move it TO.

natureexplorer
Posts: 4192
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:52 am
Location: Houston

Post by natureexplorer » Sat Apr 17, 2010 4:20 pm

I believe having everything at one institution is of great benefit, particularly for someone not inclined to invest anyway. One wants to make it as easy as possible for them to invest with just one login to remember. Also, when they login to see their checking account and they also see their IRA, I think that's a great reminder. However, I think the investment account should dictate the institution.

If Schwab doesn't have a good bond fund, what will you do, have two investment accounts?

kimsmith07
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:47 am

Post by kimsmith07 » Sun Apr 18, 2010 7:32 am

if it is a govt. authorized financial institution then it is quite safe but if it is private concern then it is not advisable to keep every asset in one place.

User avatar
anthau
Posts: 146
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:29 pm
Location: Laramie, WY

Re: Benefits of having all accts at one place?

Post by anthau » Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:43 am

ryuns wrote:Seems like the only problem with Fido and Schwab is that their Vanguard copycat funds (hey, let's call a spade a spade) don't have very good bond options. Schwab, I just noticed, does offer some pretty basic bond funds thru Ridgeworth (?) with no transaction fees, 0.32% ER. Or one could just fork out the $8 and buy shares of BND or whatever.
If one is going to use a single fund for international, one arguable virtue of Schwab International Index Fund is that it caps its exposure to a single country at 35%, though it lacks emerging markets exposure.

Bond funds appear to be the devil of Schwab. Schwab's Total Bond Market Fund (SWLBX) and their Short-Term Bond Market Fund (SWBDX) (not index funds, despite their names) have ERs (after waivers) of 0.55%. They pigged out at the sub-prime buffet and got indigestion. Their sole virtue would seem to be their $100 minimum.

The two intermediate-term Ridgeworth funds, Total Return Bond I (SAMFX) and Intermediate Bond I (SAMIX), are the lowest ER bond mutual funds at Schwab, but their freedom to use derivatives and invest in emerging markets and junk give me pause. Madison Mosaic Institutional Bond (MIIBX) appears to be more constrained in what it may invest in, but with a $2,500 minimum and an ER of 0.49%, it's not ideal, but it may be good enough.

Schwab's commission-free treasuries may be a solution, or BND, as you mentioned.

"Enemy of a good plan, etc."
Best, | | Anth

User avatar
topper1296
Posts: 643
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:50 pm
Location: Nashville TN

Re: Benefits of having all accts at one place?

Post by topper1296 » Sun Apr 18, 2010 10:14 am

tfb wrote:
ryuns wrote:Hmm. I see no indication of that here: http://www.schwab.com/public/schwab/ban ... 2=checking
And if you go to "Apply Now" and "Start", you get an online app in a popup window.
They are talking about the 2% rewards card, not the checking or savings account. See also

http://bucks.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/ ... dit-cards/
I'm glad I applied for that card a couple months ago before they cut it off. It was this forum where I learned about the card and I was looking for a new card to replace my Amex Blue Cash since they cut their rewards and because Amex wasn't accepted at several places I shop at.

Just like with my investments, I don't believe in keeping all my eggs in one basket so I have money at US Bank, Schwab, Vanguard, and Fidelity for my checking, 401(k), IRAs, and taxable investments.

User avatar
Topic Author
ryuns
Posts: 3493
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:07 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Benefits of having all accts at one place?

Post by ryuns » Sun Apr 18, 2010 10:02 pm

tfb wrote:
ryuns wrote:Hmm. I see no indication of that here: http://www.schwab.com/public/schwab/ban ... 2=checking
And if you go to "Apply Now" and "Start", you get an online app in a popup window.
They are talking about the 2% rewards card, not the checking or savings account. See also

http://bucks.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/ ... dit-cards/
Oh I see. That's a bummer. Great deal, that card.
An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered; an adventure is an inconvenience rightly considered. -- GK Chesterton

User avatar
Topic Author
ryuns
Posts: 3493
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:07 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Benefits of having all accts at one place?

Post by ryuns » Sun Apr 18, 2010 10:05 pm

anthau wrote:
ryuns wrote:Seems like the only problem with Fido and Schwab is that their Vanguard copycat funds (hey, let's call a spade a spade) don't have very good bond options. Schwab, I just noticed, does offer some pretty basic bond funds thru Ridgeworth (?) with no transaction fees, 0.32% ER. Or one could just fork out the $8 and buy shares of BND or whatever.
If one is going to use a single fund for international, one arguable virtue of Schwab International Index Fund is that it caps its exposure to a single country at 35%, though it lacks emerging markets exposure.

Bond funds appear to be the devil of Schwab. Schwab's Total Bond Market Fund (SWLBX) and their Short-Term Bond Market Fund (SWBDX) (not index funds, despite their names) have ERs (after waivers) of 0.55%. They pigged out at the sub-prime buffet and got indigestion. Their sole virtue would seem to be their $100 minimum.

The two intermediate-term Ridgeworth funds, Total Return Bond I (SAMFX) and Intermediate Bond I (SAMIX), are the lowest ER bond mutual funds at Schwab, but their freedom to use derivatives and invest in emerging markets and junk give me pause. Madison Mosaic Institutional Bond (MIIBX) appears to be more constrained in what it may invest in, but with a $2,500 minimum and an ER of 0.49%, it's not ideal, but it may be good enough.

Schwab's commission-free treasuries may be a solution, or BND, as you mentioned.

"Enemy of a good plan, etc."
Awesome info about Schwab funds. It definitely gets complained about here pretty often (and much more eloquently, by the likes of Nisiprius), but it's unfortunate that a relatively hands-off investor like myself can't just look at a fund that's call "intermediate bond fund" and not trust that they just invest in, y'know, intermediate bonds. C'est la vie.

Ryan
An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered; an adventure is an inconvenience rightly considered. -- GK Chesterton

User avatar
Topic Author
ryuns
Posts: 3493
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:07 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Post by ryuns » Sun Apr 18, 2010 10:07 pm

Thanks everyone for the great information. I would just send a link of this thread to my gf, but I'm worried that she's savvy enough to click my user name and find all the posts from me, and then never talk to me again. So I guess I'm just going to have to summarize the lessons learned and pretend like I "just this stuff", stealing from all of the selfless contributors their proper credit. :)
An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered; an adventure is an inconvenience rightly considered. -- GK Chesterton

User avatar
anthau
Posts: 146
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:29 pm
Location: Laramie, WY

Post by anthau » Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:38 pm

Though it may be some time before they come to market, Schwab has filed to offer three US Treasury ETFs.
Best, | | Anth

User avatar
simplesimon
Posts: 3449
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 8:53 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Post by simplesimon » Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:18 pm

I see no problem with keeping all my assets at one institution. I have accounts at both Vanguard and Fidelity but if I'd prefer to hold all assets at Vanguard and would if I wouldn't have capital gains to pay to switch to Vanguard funds.

I've thought about consolidating everything to Wells Fargo and still haven't decided whether or not to do it. I don't feel like 0% checking and near 0% savings is worth it vs 1.50% checking at Alliant Credit Union.
ryuns wrote:I would just send a link of this thread to my gf, but I'm worried that she's savvy enough to click my user name and find all the posts from me, and then never talk to me again.
So true. :lol:

User avatar
Topic Author
ryuns
Posts: 3493
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:07 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Post by ryuns » Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:48 pm

simplesimon wrote:
ryuns wrote:I would just send a link of this thread to my gf, but I'm worried that she's savvy enough to click my user name and find all the posts from me, and then never talk to me again.
So true. :lol:
Fortunately, I'm not very helpful on the forums, and I certainly don't post about financial esoterica, so maybe I have a shot. Also, she does read xkcd.

Ryan
An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered; an adventure is an inconvenience rightly considered. -- GK Chesterton

Cash
Posts: 1487
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 10:52 am

Post by Cash » Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:47 am

If she can see her investment accounts every time she logs on to view her checking and savings, would she be tempted to raid the investment accounts?

When I first set up my then-girlfriend's, now wife's, investment accounts, I intentionally put them somewhere inconvenient for her to see so that she would resist the temptation to take money out. Of course, now she sees the value of investing and would not touch them, but that was not always the case. So that's another benefit of having an investment account at another institution.

That said, I find life much easier now that almost everything is consolidated in a Wells Fargo PMA account (except for checking/short-term savings).

Post Reply