Whatever else, must protect cash position from the 60-day STT fee. Maintaining the cash allocation in their cash management account would work, as they exempt money markets from that fee. BTW - Is there a ticker symbol for the cash fund at Fido (where my liquidated assets from TRP should land)?
The .44 YTD loss would be least of my worries. Essentially, it attempts to track an index. Might be that it’s avoiding the overvalued TIPS market.

If your concern is to be able to withdraw cash quickly, be aware that ETFs have two-day settlement periods, during which time the cash value must stay in the account. (A margin account could float the money for a day if that's really critical.)
Cash in your core account or in another Fidelity MMF is available for withdrawal "immediately" (don't recall whether that's literal or end of day since even MMF shares must be sold). Cash pulled from an internet bank is usually available within a day, though you're advised it could take longer.
I mention internet banks again because the shorter the trigger, the more important low volatility/preservation of capital becomes.
"Track an index" IMHO doesn't say much without examining the index. This index is untested, dynamic, and proprietary. Its objective is to improve "both returns and risk ... relative to traditional U.S. IG floating rate note indices." It invests in a mix of "U.S. corporate floating rate notes with less than 5 years maturity and U.S. Treasury Notes with 7 to 10 years maturity." From its statutory prospectus. It's not avoiding TIPS because they're overvalued but because it can't invest in them.
It's hard to find a reason to prefer FLDR to JPST. The latter has lower volatility (std dev 0.80 vs. 1.13 over the past year) resulting in better Sharpe ratio (2.54 vs. 1.61 over past year), smaller bid/ask spread (0.02% vs 0.06% median over past 30 days), longer history, similar ER (0.18% vs 0.15%). The smoother curve in the graph below is JPST.

You can invest in MMFs in any Fidelity brokerage account, it doesn't have to be the CMA account. The only advantage I can find to the CMA account is that it provides unlimited US ATM rebates on its debit card. AFAIK, all its other features are available in any brokerage account.
EDIT:CMA accounts use a bank sweep as their core account. This is not available in other some other brokerage accounts.
https://www.fidelity.com/bin-public/060_www_fidelity_com/documents/fdic.pdf
The "ticker" for Fidelity Cash is FCASH. It is kept as a general obligation of Fidelity; in essence you are lending the cash to Fidelity, which can use it for general business purposes. It is one of three choices you have for your "core" (transaction/checking) account inside a taxable brokerage account. Catch gave the tickers for the other options.
https://www.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/fidelity-funds/money-market-funds-fcash

On another note, I hadn’t realized that a TIK “insulates” your fund’s value during the process so that the holding neither gains nor looses value. Dug that up this morning. Casts a different light on everything.

You can think of "transfer in kind" as picking up the fund shares (electronically) at one institution and transporting them to the other. So you can gain or lose value in transit, since you always retain "real" ownership of your shares.

"she was in touch with her Fido advisor ... He mentioned dollar cost averaging, Fido’s wealth management service and separately managed accounts, outside advisors Fido works with, and tax-loss harvesting. It was all very generic ..."
There's a popular perception that people you talk with for free are "advisors". Even with a large amount of assets at an institution, that's rarely the case. The people one talks with, e.g. "Private Client Advisors", are sales people. They're there to match you with for-pay services, and to give you warm fuzzy feelings about keeping your money with them. As you observed, it is all very generic.
On Fidelity's site I can no longer readily find the phrase "Private Client Advisor" or much of anything that suggests one's free investment "team" or lead provides advice.
For the most part the only place you'll find "advisor" mentioned is in the context of pay for service. See this Fidelity page on "How we can work together". No mention of advisor under DIY or its pure robo offering (Fidelity Go).
When you get to the next fee level (Fidelity® Personalized Planning & Advice), you find "1-on-1 financial coaching calls with Fidelity advisors". Wealth Management, the next fee level up, brings you "a dedicated Fidelity advisor". And finally for those with over $2M at Fidelity and willing to pay for the services, there's Private Wealth Management, with "a dedicated Wealth Management Advisor and team of specialists".
"Am I expecting too much...?"
Yes.
Years ago, Vanguard would provide customers with enough AUM a free financial plan prepared by a CFP. That's been gone for years. These days, TANSTAAFL.

I considered PIMIX a few years ago but didn't invest in the fund.
For many years, Pimco Income Fund delivered excellent returns with muted volatility.
The fund's managers made shrewd investments in legacy, non-agency residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) after the Global Financial Crisis.
Trailing 5 Yr. and 10 Yr. returns for PIMIX were in the top 1% of the Multisector Bond category as of 10/31/17.
The total AUM dedicated to vehicles using the same strategy, $124 B as of March 2017, gave me pause.
It would be difficult for Pimco Income Fund to maintain meaningful exposure to legacy, non-agency RMBS while the supply of these securities was decreasing in the future.
I also did not appreciate that Pimco has never closed a fund (to my knowledge) due to excessive AUM.
This is not a very shareholder-friendly stance in my opinion.
Having said that, Dan Ivascyn and Alfred Murata are renowned and talented managers.
Pimco is widely respected and it is a very well-resourced firm.
I still believe PIMIX is a decent fund but doubt the stellar performance of the past will be replicated.

Just wanted to get this learned community’s input on our situation.
A couple years ago, due to a number of fortuitous events, Mrs. Ruffles acquired a significant amount of cash that she parked at Fido for convenience’s sake. Due to the overheated markets, she’s been reluctant to invest it for fear of incurring a substantial loss. A much more significant amount of funds is fully invested in her retirement accounts here and elsewhere. Her salary more than covers her annual expenses.
When she first acquired her cash, she was in touch with her Fido advisor but decided it was better to do nothing than rush into something. The advisor recently reached out to her so we had a teleconference with him. We thought he might have some ideas but he kept expecting us to drive the conversation.
I mentioned that it wasn’t imperative to invest all the cash right away due to her other investments and that, if she were to invest, our concerns included downside protection and tax minimization. He mentioned dollar cost averaging, Fido’s wealth management service and separately managed accounts, outside advisors Fido works with, and tax-loss harvesting.
It was all very generic so I asked that he forward us more details on some of the strategies he mentioned. In response, he emailed us links to the website pages on wealth management services, managed accounts, and planning services - nothing I hadn’t seen before. To say the least, we were both underwhelmed.
I responded asking for more details (performance, risk, costs, etc.) on the strategies he mentioned so that we could make some informed decisions. After two days, crickets - not even a simple acknowledgement.
Am I expecting too much or should this be in the advisor’s wheelhouse? What have others experienced in working with advisors at Fido and other brokers?

*************
Somehow, over the years, I'd already half-way expected the kind of "service" you've received. A ONE-TIME in-person visit to a brick-and-mortar office with a BofA-Merrill Lynch guy was very helpful to me in evaluating my holdings at the time, many yeas ago. Since my friend was this guy's client, my friend asked if the fellow couldn't find time to see me for an hour. He did it for me at no charge. He was attentive, sharp, listened a good deal. But my pot was not very big. He offered to take on the job of managing my investments via one of his associates in the office. But only if I could get it up to $100k. I was not far away from that figure, back then. He offered to follow up with fund recommendations, and he did, via email. He wanted to run them past me, and I could see that they would have been fitting, but not my choices..... I guess I just needed to keep the control. I use some personal filters that others just would never bother with. So, the meeting was valuable, confirming that I had not already run my money off a cliff into oblivion, and so staying the course was in order. I was very grateful to him for his time, and told him so. .....I DO think that not rushing to do something, anything--- is a GREAT idea. And yes, I'd have expected more. But then, always and immediately, I must remind myself these days that wherever I turn, substantive communication is never the goal. Otherwise, we'd not always hear a RECORDING telling us our call is important. And people who are supposed to be of service to us would actually be able to think and communicate, not just send hyperlinks to webpages. .....Just this morning, I played my part, attempting to get in touch with those for whom actual communication is not a priority. But of course, what can you expect from their end? They've shown their hand already. I don't really matter to them. No one does, unless you happen to get lucky and catch the call at THEIR convenience.

This is such a tough question to answer given the gracious but limited info provided. There are so many variables to consider. It's interesting that Mrs. acquired a significant amount recently but is afraid to "risk" this even though a more significant amount is already invested in retirement accounts. One would think that if it was a large amount but an amount much less than already invested - one would be less fearful on the risk part. The bigger question IMHO is what is happening in the next 5-10 years. Is there an expectation to draw from the retirement accounts? When you say "parked" - do you mean in a money market or an S&P 500 Index account? If you explained that tax minimization and downside protection was most important to you (curious) - then it makes sense that tax loss harvesting and dca would be entertained.
All that said, your advisor should consider your entire portfolio and make recommendations on this new $ given the whole strategy/plan. They should provide you with an in depth "education" of WHY... so that you may make an informed decision. They should educate you so that you are well informed to decide. They should not tell you what you should do. I have had very positive experiences with Fid advisors over the years. But, like Dentists and Doctors, all have a different manner... you just have to find the right one that is a partner and explains and is patient. If someone sends you web links without a thoughtful conversation/explanation etc. - then you must move on to another advisor. IMHO. Hope this is helpful.

I set up a separate account (tax deferred) for withdrawals. It has 3-4 years needed income. It contains low risk mutual funds and ETFs including 1 year of income in the Schwab MM. My plan is to keep replenishing it with my main IRA account in good times and waiting up to 3-4 years if the markets go south. I haven't had to use it yet because I still work part time. Just getting prepared. But I haven't given enough thought to your question.
Your question is a good one since I will run into the same dilemma when replenishing the withdrawal bucket. I guess that makes it all the more imperative to keep the number of investments in the main IRA account, funds or ETFs, at minimum. That certainly would help in re-balancing. Looks like you have 10 funds to keep balanced which is a reasonable portfolio #.
One consideration for me, my IRA money is split 50/50 between the Schwab Intelligent Portfolio and what I call my self-managed account. Withdrawals from the IP get re-balanced automatically. That would be the easy option for me.
Hope more people respond with what they do so I can learn along with you.

Reading @Catch22’s post above …
I assume the owner of the account (you or I) makes the final decision as to when to take the RMD (in compliance with the governing law). Fido may indeed calculate an amount and send reminders.
Actually, my read of the law is that RMDs do not have to come evenly from various fiduciaries. You are allowed to pick and choose where to take it. I’ve no problem taking distributions from their cash account when / if I decide to do it. Now only 25-30% in Traditional IRAs. Pull more out most years than the calculation calls for. Prefer to pay taxes on distributions now and let the Roth grow as a % of invested assets.
Took my RMD early this year for rather complex reasons related to rebalancing. Essentially, through a “merry-go-round”, the proceeds ended up in PRHYX as part of my portfolio’s bond component. (But it’s complicated.)
One further note: We’ve discussed Michigan’s mandatory withholding here before (the “pension tax” as it’s called). ISTM Catch did once report having filed the Michigan W 4-P with one or more of his custodians years ago. And, likely it remains in effect until he changes it. (Obviously, my recollection might be wrong). I’ve always thought TRP was being overly restrictive on that issue.
I’ve read before (but don’t have time to research it) that the state even withholds tax from Roth distributions w/o the W 4P being on file. Completely illogical. Of course you’d get the money back at tax time.

In case people read quickly and see a conflict between my post and catch's regarding mandatory withholding, note that the rules are different for different types of accounts. Withholding rules on IRA distributions tend to be more flexible than withholding rules on pension and 401(k) distributions.
Also, though Fidelity (and many institutions) will calculate your RMD automatically, still check it yourself. Even Fidelity can get it wrong, as it did one year on my Roth RMD. Fidelity put in an amount that was about 4x the correct amount - easy to catch.
If you have an inherited IRA, pay particular attention to the RMD calculation in 2022. The tables are changing, and the change for these RMDs is not as simple as looking up the updated life expectancy in the new tables. One has to look up the updated life expectancy for your age when the RMDs started, then subtract the number of years from then until to 2022. That's the updated divisor to use for the RMD calculation. It's not all that complicated, but it opens the possibility of miscalculation.

Just wanted to get this learned community’s input on our situation.
A couple years ago, due to a number of fortuitous events, Mrs. Ruffles acquired a significant amount of cash that she parked at Fido for convenience’s sake. Due to the overheated markets, she’s been reluctant to invest it for fear of incurring a substantial loss. A much more significant amount of funds is fully invested in her retirement accounts here and elsewhere. Her salary more than covers her annual expenses.
When she first acquired her cash, she was in touch with her Fido advisor but decided it was better to do nothing than rush into something. The advisor recently reached out to her so we had a teleconference with him. We thought he might have some ideas but he kept expecting us to drive the conversation.
I mentioned that it wasn’t imperative to invest all the cash right away due to her other investments and that, if she were to invest, our concerns included downside protection and tax minimization. He mentioned dollar cost averaging, Fido’s wealth management service and separately managed accounts, outside advisors Fido works with, and tax-loss harvesting.
It was all very generic so I asked that he forward us more details on some of the strategies he mentioned. In response, he emailed us links to the website pages on wealth management services, managed accounts, and planning services - nothing I hadn’t seen before. To say the least, we were both underwhelmed.
I responded asking for more details (performance, risk, costs, etc.) on the strategies he mentioned so that we could make some informed decisions. After two days, crickets - not even a simple acknowledgement.
Am I expecting too much or should this be in the advisor’s wheelhouse? What have others experienced in working with advisors at Fido and other brokers?

Thanks a lot Bee for commenting and correcting me.
Initial withdrawal - 4% annually
Will claim SS at the age of 70 (corrected)
PV - overlooked - based on the historical analysis - value of portfolio increased with 4% withdrawal in the last 5 years. So 1st option is simplest and manageable. Thanks for the backstop provided by Central Banks.

Congratulations.
That's too bad about T. Rowe Price. Over the years I've found them extremely helpful, whether it was in setting up my individual 401(k) or with issues in managing it, or in navigating their closed fund rules, or with steps to distribute assets from an estate.
(OTOH, it took me six months to get a correction distribution out of a rollover IRA that came from a 401(k). There had been an excess contribution in the 401(k) that needed to be undone. No institution is perfect.)
As I recall, you have some D&C funds directly with the family. If you want to consolidate them at Fidelity, you may be able to do that without increasing your costs too much. D&C funds are transaction fee funds, but once you have positions in the funds at Fidelity (via transfer in kind), it may be possible to add more shares for a $5 fee and sell with no fees.
You first have to check whether Fidelity allows automatic investments for these funds. It does for most, but not all. To add to your position, you set up a series of automatic investments, then after the first one executes you cancel the rest. This gives you control and costs you $5/buy. Selling is done as usual, by placing a same-day sell order.
Whether it's worth the nominal fee and small lag time in making purchases (automated investments are not supposed to be set up as same-day purchases) is a matter of personal preference.

Quite a few column inches devoted to one particular type of bank account, TD Bank's "Preferred Chequing". It talks about one customer who's had the account for 25 years.
What isn't mentioned is that the reason such a long time customer was used as an example is that all customers of this account have had it for at least two decades. Preferred Chequing was discontinued in 2001 except for grandfathered customers.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/investing/personal-finance/household-finances/article-was-this-big-bank-too-nice-in-giving-some-clients-a-break-on-fees/
The disproportionate coverage of this one particular account type to the exclusion of all others suggests that this is a corner case and not necessarily representative.
The customer is quoted as asking: "In an environment where people have lost their jobs, they're on furlough, they're trying to get CERB payments, who's going to be able to keep $5,000 in their bank account to not get service fees?"
The article could have responded to this by noting that since 2003, low-cost accounts (with minimum requirements set by the government) have been available at many banks, including TD Bank.
https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/banking/bank-accounts/low-cost-no-cost.html
Or that TD Bank is not raising monthly maintenance fees or min balance requirements on its current offerings, and is eliminating the paper statement fee on its Student Chequing Account. Though it is converting Youth Accounts to Student Chequing Accounts, resulting in a new cap of 25 transactions/mo w/o fees.
https://www.tdcanadatrust.com/document/PDF/accounts/513796.pdf
Or that CERB shut down before these fee hikes. If the point is that many people are dealing with reduced cash flows (notably, lower income), that's whom low cost accounts are designed for.
Certainly some Canadian bank fees are going up, and while the government is doing something to help, it could always do more. But this article does not present the typical account nor does it present a broad picture of banking fees in Canada.
It's a little dated (2014), but here's a Canadian government study of banking fees.
https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/canada/financial-consumer-agency/migration/eng/resources/researchsurveys/documents/bankingfees-fraisbancaires-eng.pdf

I'm a big fan. Or rather, I was. The profitability of those "Big 5" banks is the closest thing to a sure bet in investing I've ever seen.
CM
TD
RY
BMO
BNS
But I cannot any longer ignore the unethical way that these banks treat their customers. It's been going on for years. Tonight on CBC's The National, I saw a news story that "broke the camel's back." And their customers = 90% of all money on deposit in Canada. Now, despite MAKING A PROFIT during the Covid ordeal, they are raising minimums in order for customers to avoid paying fees, and raising the fees, as well. And add to this, the fact that in-person service has been cut back to a bare-bones level. On this basis, I will not be buying. Until there is a sea-change, somehow.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bank-fee-increases-1.6032824

Hank, yes; I noted about mis-pricing during some time periods for muni bonds vs taxable bonds. I considered several years ago an investment in NHMRX, but other sector investments were performing nicely and the transaction didn't happen. All of my accounts are either T or Roth IRA's, and the online buy (muni fund) wouldn't have been processed.
Below, is the current message returned when attempting to buy a muni fund for a T or Roth IRA at Fidelity. All online buys require a "preview the trade" before being processed. As @msf noted, the message doesn't prevent the transaction in total, but not via electronic channels.
----- (010386) The security you are attempting to trade is a tax-free mutual fund. Retirement accounts are prevented from buying or exchanging into tax-free mutual funds through the electronic channels. For more information, contact a Fidelity representative at 800-544-6666. -----
@Crash. It is not stated in this thread that you can not have a muni investment in an IRA; but that you can not process the transaction electronically.

I’ve never had a trade “disallowed” by any firm (unless it violated some 30-day block). But at TRP and anywhere else I’ve been at their website alerts you prior to trying to execute such a trade that it’s not allowable along with the reason.
Re munis - there have been rare occasions over the years where it actually made sense to own them in a tax sheltered account due to mispricing between taxable and non taxable securities. Doesn’t happen often, but it does occassionally occur, as I think @msf has inferred.
I’m confident TRP would (with due diligence) allow one to buy munis within a tax sheltered account - though I’ve never tried. Generally, TRP is very supportive of investors and easy to work with on those kinds of matters. It’s the “nuts-and-bolts” account servicing (things like changing a a preferred email or phone contact or how statements are delivered ) that seems to have become more error prone lately.
Here’s a typical example: Several years ago I needed to call them from a hotel while traveling. When the agent requested a “call back number” in case we got cut off, I gave him the number for the cheap prepaid tracfone I carried back than only when traveling. I was emphatic that this was a temporary phone number and not to be used for anything other than this one time need. A month or so later I noticed when logged in to my account that they had changed my phone number of record from what it had been for many years to that of the temporary tracpone number. Explicitly against my request. It’s things like that that drive me up a tree.

“ISTR that Fidelity doesn't allow the purchase of municipal bond funds in traditional or roth iras. In fact, my purchase of FSTFX for both my ira accounts was just denied by Fidelity !”

Don’t like the sound of that last sentence (though I practice denial all the time). :)
“TOD” (Transfer on Death) is the code TRP uses for non-retirement accounts. I wondered about that myself years ago when I began making deposits from my bank account into one of their cash equivalent funds. Some of the money in the TOD account more recently came from RMD money that wasn’t needed at the time. I like PRIHX (despite rather low ratings) and have been building the balance in that TOD account as an adjunct to other retirement savings.

Lots of semi-random comments:
Hank's The [Fidelity] 30-day limitation for in-house funds is perfectly reasonable - roughly what TRP insists on.
This reflects each fund house's excessive trading policy - something similar to but different from short term redemption fees. A key difference is that redemption fees are "just" money. Excessive trading rules can lock you out of trading. No Fidelity fund has a short term fee, and I believe the same is true for TRP funds.
TRP's policy can be found in each fund's statutory prospectus. It bars you from buying shares in a fund account if you sold shares from that account within 30 days. Notice the time constraint is on sell followed by purchase. All you need are two transactions (sell followed by buy) to trigger a restriction. Vanguard has a similar policy.
Fidelity's policy is more complex. It defines a short term round trip as a buy followed by a sell within 30 days. The policy begins to take effect only if you execute two round trips within 90 days of each other.
This seems somewhat less restrictive: you're allowed to buy/sell/buy in any time frame with no consequences. It's only the second short term (30 day) sell that triggers a freeze. But if triggered, it lasts longer than at TRP; at Fidelity the bar against purchases lasts 85 days and you're placed on a watch list.
Fidelity's Excessive Trading Policy and 2020 Update
In Mona's boglehead's link, the OP writes: HSA w/ company which im maxing out and investing it in Vanguard Real Estate Fund.
There's no response to this part of the post, but Fidelity offers the cheapest, broadest HSA around (it's a regular brokerage account). Many employer HSAs have fees or restrictions attached. What one can do is contribute to the employer's HSA (to get added employee tax benefits and match) and then transfer the money to an external (Fidelity) HSA. One can even buy a share class of Vanguard Real Estate Fund VNQ with no commission in a Fidelity HSA.
I agree with much of what sma3 wrote (also having had accounts at Vanguard, Fidelity, and Schwab for years). Though here are some items that reasonable people can view differently:
Vanguard is clunky
Likely true for many operations; I find it easy to use for the only thing I care about there: buying and selling mutual funds
Fidelity has ... an easy website
Yes, but the more they change it to look like their small screen ap, the worse it gets. Fidelity recently changed its bill payment interface so now I have to go through multiple screens to accomplish what used to be easier. And I can no longer give it a list of payees to display by default; it always starts with every one I've left in the system.
Vanguard is ... putting up more and more restrictions on nonV funds
It doesn't let you buy or sell leveraged/inverse ETFs. OTOH, to buy aggressive funds like PQTAX, Fidelity requires you to sign an agreement and set your account investment objective to most aggressive, while Vanguard just puts up a dialog box informing you that you should be aware of the risks.
A few years ago, Schwab stopped selling load funds (unless they were sold load-waived). I believe Vanguard has a similar policy. Fidelity still sells funds with loads. The way this may play out is that, e.g. for NMFAX, Fidelity will sell the A shares with a load, Schwab will have arranged for them to be sold NTF, and Vanguard won't sell them.

I am glad to hear of the TRP issues as I was thinking of moving some of their funds I own at Fidelity to TRP directly.
I have had accounts at Schwab, Fidelity and Vanguard for years and can offer the following
Vanguard is clunky, irritating and putting up more and more restrictions on nonV funds. Major advantage is only place I know of to get Admiral funds. Best used for only Vanguard funds. No dedicated personal rep, rather now a "team", unless you pay for advisor. Occasionally there are funds here I can't get anywhere else. Still have my wife's money in mutual fund account, rather than brokerage. Lot's of complaints in Vanguard Advisor news letter about back office service, mistakes in accounting etc.
Schwab has good list of most funds, lots of Load funds without load, but $25 more expensive as noted than Fido for fees. Good customer service, can get a single rep if you want who will call you occasionally to see if he/she "can help". Web site not as easy to navigate as FIDO
Fido has better graphs and data on positions and an easiest website. Very easy transfers from other brokerages, all done electronically. Have never used their personal reps, although they pester us all the time to "sign up".
I don't like to have all my assets in one basket, but if I had to pick one would go with Fido, with Schwab close second.
I was always a little leery about having to use a private firm ( Fidelity) that did not have to report their finances to the public. I am not sure if this is still a big issue, as Fido has massive amounts of retirement accounts and these folks probably watch things pretty carefully. However, you will not be told if there are problems, if you do not participate in a massive 401k ( My wife got stuck in a busted 401k years ago). Vanguard is just as opaque, as their mantra of " the fund investors own the firm" is window dressing only as fund investors do not get to elect the board or vote on salaries etc.

*** Glad folks have been able to expand the thread to address other needs or concerns.
Personally, TRP was always the “old reliable” safe haven I could move money to when somebody else failed to meet expectations. So, my initial question is one I never expected to even ask. Waiting with baited breath for TRP to resolve any remaining account problems before taking any drastic steps.
@MikeM - Wow. What a coherent well written testimony. to your faith in Schwab.
Some rambling thoughts …
- With advancing age comes a move more toward income funds and other less risky (less profitable) investments. Thus, ER becomes increasingly important. A 1-2% ER might not hurt you too much in an equity fund capable of posting double-digit years. But in a GNMA or short term bond fund anything north of 0.5% is a severe hit to your return. While TRP isn’t best in class, fees have been coming down. When you throw in their exemplary research capability you might even argue many of their fees are a bargain.
- I’ve never liked moving significant amounts of money between custodians. If it’s going from / to cash or moderate income funds … no foul. But moving money that’s committed to more volatile investments entails the risk of a drastic market move while the money is being transmitted. Envision being essentially in cash as your money makes its way from the old to the new custodian … and the asset class your moving jumps 5-10% over the few days it’s in transit. In that case you end up buying in at a premium and missing out on the gain. If you like roulette wheels, maybe it’s not bothersome to you because there’s a roughly “even” chance the market will drop during that time and you’ll come out a winner. (I don’t like roulette wheels.)
- Admittedly, you can try to pre-position assets so most of the transfers end up being in cash. But, it’s a hassle involving numerous transfers at both custodians if you’re moving a diversified portfolio of funds.
- The early redemption fees at Schwab and Fido bother me. I suppose folks might criticize me for sometimes buying and selling a fund within 60 days … but I’m not here to defend my approach or teach others how they should invest. Different strokes … The 30-day limitation for in-house funds is perfectly reasonable - roughly what TRP insists on. Picking up new investments (ie Fido funds) entails a learning curve, making some mistakes in the process. I think I can say with confidence that 3 of 4 current TRP funds did not exist when I signed on with them in 1995. So I’ve had a chance to become familiar with most of their offerings one or two at a time. Rather daunting is the thought of having to learn about an entirely new stable of funds (assuming one wants to avoid the early redemption issue involving NTF purchased funds).

With comparable returns (both funds returned the identical 43.21% over the past year ending 5/21/21, and were within 1 basis point annualized over the past three and five years), I'd prefer the one that didn't impose a tax drag on my returns.
Sure Schwab's TTM yield is higher. The fund recognizes and distributes capital gains. This is a good thing?
SWPPX has been continually distributing capital gains, sometimes even short term gains, year after year after year. Though it did manage to break its streak last year.
2015: 32.45¢ LTG
2016: 18.05¢ LTG + 1.13¢ STG
2017: 1.66¢ STG
2018: 6.97¢ LTG + 0.87¢ STG
2019, 8.91¢ LTG
VFIAX hasn't had a cap gains distribution this century. Admittedly it has an advantage because the fund has an ETF share class that enables the fund to spin off cap gains. But isn't that the point, that it has an advantage?
As article after article has stated, there's more to "best" or even "cheapest" than stated ER.
In terms of raw performance, there's a MUTUAL FUND that SWPPX has been unable to beat in even a single calendar year over the past decade. Even though that fund has "a cost factor DOUBLE schwab 0.04%". It's VINIX. A Vanguard fund.
M* ratings are a measure of risk adjusted performance within a category of funds. SWPPX gets four stars. Rarely do index funds get five stars, so that rating isn't surprising. But it does make one wonder about whether it really is "the best". Especially since there are other index funds in its category that have five star ratings, like VFIAX and VINIX.
Schwab is a boutique fund house. It's got a slew of target date funds and index funds, but sizeable holes elsewhere. No government bond funds, no mortgage funds, no core plus, no taxable high yield. On the equity side, no growth funds, foreign or domestic, aside from a pair of domestic large cap growth funds. This is just the basic stuff, the minimum one would expect to find at a one-stop shop.
Schwab is a great brokerage. And I'll continue to laud it. But as a fund house, it's far from top tier. Some of us still remember its Yield Plus fund. Maybe that's why it no longer offers an ultrashort term bond fund.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/lessons-from-schwabs-yieldplus-debacle/