Dream on. If 'twere only so simple.
Vanguard's fees are tiered and on both buy and sell. Fidelity's and Schwab's are buy side only, with Schwab having a (sort of) set fee for all TF funds, Fidelity charging more for some funds (e.g. Vanguard's).
Fidelity has a back door for buying additional shares one time for $5/transaction. That's by using its automatic investment system and cancelling after one buy. Vanguard has an automatic investment system too, and it charges only $3/buy, but you have to let it do at least two buys before cancelling, so it's not an effective "on demand" tool. AFAIK, Schwab only allows automatic investments on OneSource (NTF) funds.
Here's the comparison:

Transaction    Schwab            Fidelity       Vanguard 
Buy           $76 or            $49.95         $20 (online)
8.5% if less    $75 some funds   $8 ($500K+ in VG funds)
($0 for < $100 buy)  (e.g. Vanguard)  $0 (first 25 w/$1M+ in VG funds)
Sell          $0                   $0          same as buy
Automatic       -                   $5          $3 
Buy                             cancel after 1  cancel after 2

"An important factor for me is reducing minimums to get into institutional funds. For example, you can get into PIMIX with $25K at Vanguard. At Schwab, you'll need $100K."
Thank you msf ... I did not realize that.
I suspect the trading fee remains about for $50 for non-NTF funds between all three houses.
c

I'll share...
What seems to be working in my portfolio YTD:
FSUTX - strong steady Mo (momentum) since March 2018
FSMEX - Strong Mo
FSRPX - Strong Mo
POAGX - Aggressive active management
PRMTX - Keeps on impressing. A category over-achiever
VHCOX - Aggressive active management
PRNHX - a small position that has had a big year YTD (investors remorse, wish I owned more)
USNQX - Volatile, but rewarding
Steady Eddy's (have good risk-reward characteristics):
PRWCX - Love this funds goal... "achieve market returns with 2/3rd the downside risk"
VMVFX - a new fund that seems worth DCA into
FMIJX - A short lived fund (2011) that offers exposure outside the US
BRUFX - Manager continues to reduce downside risk while optimizing upside
BTBFX - I was impressed with how this fund navigated 2008
VHT - Healthcare seems to be a fund for all seasons
PRHSX - ditto HC
What seems to have faltered:
PRIDX - Struggling, but a hold for me...down 2% YTD
SFGIX - Highly correlated losses with EM losses...down 11% YTD
VWO - Strong US currencies are making EM markets less profitable...down 10% YTD
HJPSX - A country that has relied very heavily on QE for Equity-Inflation
VWINX - having a rare negative year
MINDX - Seems to catch cold when EM sneezes
PONAX - We've parted ways...small position
PARWX - A new position
Ticker YTD Perf Port WT
VHT 12.20% 0.21%
VHCOX 11.10% 5.43%
VWINX -1.04% 2.26%
PRHSX 13.72% 6.53%
PRNHX 20.11% 0.11%
PRIDX -1.96% 4.87%
PRMTX 9.70% 2.88%
PRWCX 6.19% 14.64%
BRUFX 3.46% 4.89%
POAGX 13.08% 15.53%
VWO -9.95% 1.58%
PONAX -0.39% 0.27%
SFGIX -11.26% 4.51%
FMIJX -1.27% 4.58%
MINDX -2.07% NA
USNQX 15.82% NA
FSRPX 19.47% 4.82%
FSMEX 19.62% 4.34%
VMVFX 6.28% 2.38%
BTBFX 5.67% 2.38%
FRIFX 1.84% 2.28%
HJPSX -5.11% 2.10%
FSUTX 10.25% 2.45%
PARWX New 3.96%
USAXX Cash 7%
Allocation Weights/Returns YTD

I agree that Schwab offers a broader range of products, though a choice between the two when investing beyond Vanguard is not as clear cut as it might appear:
"Schwab offers a broader range of no fee mutual funds and ETFs through its OneSource program, with hundreds of candidates compared to Vanguard’s 129 mutual funds and 56 ETFs."
Only for another week. Then Vanguard pulls ahead with its 3419 NTF funds (from its search engine) and over 1800 ETFs. Schwab's fund screener shows Schwab has 4342 funds in its OneSource (NTF) program, and Schwab offers "more than 250" ETFs through OneSource. Not that I think number of NTF funds is a particularly good metric.
Investopedia is correct that Vanguard's banking services are close to nonexistent. While its 0.25% rate (the article is out of date) on checking is better than TBTF banks', it's well below what many banks pay. Schwab uses cash accounts as a significant source of revenue.
"Vanguard has no automatic sweep into money market funds so free cash in the brokerage account won’t earn interest unless the customer buys the funds manually."
Why would you need a sweep when the VBS settlement account is VMFXX, with a current SEC yield of 1.89%, over 9x what Schwab pays?
An important factor for me is reducing minimums to get into institutional funds. For example, you can get into PIMIX with $25K at Vanguard. At Schwab, you'll need $100K.
These days, I use Schwab primarily for its worldwide, foreign-transaction-fee free, fee-rebate ATM card. In addition, a very small number of financial institutions insist on ACH transfers only from a "real" bank and not a brokerage account. Schwab Bank is a real bank.
Finally, I think Schwab has significantly better service than Vanguard; fortunately that's something I haven't had much need for with either one of them.

FYI: If you have any clients retiring today, and they’ve had money working for the past 40 years, large caps were their best bet. Ideally, large-cap growth.
With all due respect to small-cap enthusiasts, high-yield fanatics or gold bugs, large caps have dominated a rollicking good ride from the late 1970s to today. These funds powered through good times and bad: sky-high inflation, bull markets, crashes and irrational exuberance. There were low points along the way, of course. That’s why we added both the best, and worst, annual performances for each fund, in addition to the 40-year annualized average.
Spoiler alert, the worst year for each one was 2008, the year of the financial crisis. The best year for 11 of 20 of these funds was either 1979 or 1980. But before you get too envious of the days of disco, bear in mind that the 30-year mortgage rate reached 16% in 1980, according to numbers from FreddieMac.
To be sure, a lot of funds aren’t eligible for this list. Any fund launched in the past 40 years obviously won’t be here, impressive gains notwithstanding. The biggest case in point: There are no ETFs on this list because they’re too new for our time frame in this analysis. The first ETFs made their appearance on the scene in the early 1990s.
So which funds have posted the best performance for the past 40 years? Scroll through to see the top 20. All data is from Morningstar as of 12/31/2016.
Regards,
Ted
https://bic.financial-planning.com/slideshow/top-funds-for-the-past-40-years
FMAGX annual return since inception, 2/5/63, is 16.04%

I'll step forward, again, and restart the thread as we open September. Some may remember this thread was started by Scott who left the board three years ago, or so; and, I kept it going with his blessing. In the meantime the below link will take you to my last reported thinking.
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/42056/old-skeet-s-market-barometer-and-report-june-july-recaps#latest

@Junkster et al.
IOFIX, 3 year chart.
In many years of charts, I've not seen this relative to the top portion of the chart for RSI. This fund has generally maintained an above 70 RSI (daily or weekly chart) and is currently at 93.5. Above 70, for the technical aspect, is a "watch this", as this investment has entered an "overbought" area. To maintain in the 80-90 range is very unusual. Most technical folks would be yelling, sell. One may also see the price spikes near the end of calendar months as noted by @Junkster, including a most similar pattern from August of 1 year ago.
@Junkster , have you an opinion as to whether the technical aspect is worth regard.
@Tony , if you still receive notifications from MFO; take a look and please offer your technical view opinion.
This link provides a basic description of ABS, relative to some IOFIX exposure. To the right edge of the page is a list of defined aspects of ABS.
Asset backed securities
Whatever management has figured out at this time in the investment area(s) is surely working.
Regards,
Catch

Mr. Clements should have moved back another decade into the late 1970's when Fidelity was hammering upon the 5-8% loads charged by Merrill Lynch and similar organizations for active managed mutual funds.
Yes, Fido had some load funds, too; but at a lower "fee". The Fido eventually disappeared, too.
I'll call this the "K-Mart" effect. Volume, volume, volume........force the competitors to match or get out of the way, using the low margin to gain market share and still make a profit on large volume. I had a good view of this, seeing the exposure of K-Mart (Michigan corp.) in Michigan in the early days.
It is not difficult to imagine one's hard won money being invested in a fund in 1980 with a front load of (lets be generous) of 7%; versus today, where the same type of investment may be had as an index or etf with an expense ratio of .04%.
Nuff said......

This is such a great thread ... It would be nice if someone would start hosting it again. I did it for a couple of years and felt ... Well, it was time to pass it on to another ... Wonder what happened to @pudnhead?

@Old_Skeet,
Re The Pudd - Don’t know - But I like to think he got it right with one of his typical “long shots” and won a ton of money. I’d guess he’s out relaxing somewhere on the sun-deck of his 200-foot yacht mid-Atlantic and out of reach of any communications. Or, he might be reading the board somewhere and laughing at those of us still striving to make the perfect call.
Of course, anyone is free to post their recent trades at any time, regardless of the BOS thread. I’ll say I do enjoy reading your normally very thorough weekly commentaries, although my approach is far less complex - perhaps because I hold maybe a quarter the number of funds you do. Was wondering whether you posted this weekend? Perhaps I missed seeing it?
Personally, I’m in the distance out from retirement phase (I guess similar to an Apollo flight out on the far side of the moon) and so don’t take much risk. I’m also leary of this long term bull and geopolitical environment and rising rate scenario. Still sitting with a stable Core weighting just over 75%; about 19.8% in short-term near cash-equivalency funds; and a little over 5% in an equity fund. That’s not as Draconian as it sounds, since within that Core are some moderate risk funds like DODBX, RPGAX, OAKBX, PRPFX - along with a slice of mining, real estate and global infrastructure.
Last week I switched my real estate holding from Oppenheimer (OREAX) to Price (TRREX) for no good reason except that my accounts are held directly through the fund companies. While the performances are near identical, it had the effect of burning some excess cash at Price and building a bit at Oppenheimer which might be put to good use there should market valuations drop. Oppenheimer has a slightly more aggressive near cash equivalancy fund in OUSGX which might yield a percent better longer term than TRBUX which I use at Price. And the transaction gave me a chance to toss a few more dollars into my depressed gold fund, OPGSX - literally pennies, because I consider gold too volatile to speculate on - though continue to like it longer term. Except for that minor rearranging of deck chairs, nothing cooking.

So basically $100 total to buy and sell a transaction fee fund. I simply said I was paying $17 to sell and $17 to buy and then you said I was getting the short end of the stick. I couldn’t understand your logic of how I was getting the short end of the stick.

The way I misread your writing, I thought the $17 was a short term redemption fee, not the total fee. My error.
It seems like you're not merely getting grandfathered rates which would have added Scottrade's $49 short term redemption fee to the $17 TF, but the better of TDA's rates and Scottrade's rates. Not the short end of the stick at all!

Fee          Scottrade  TDA   Your rate
TF buy         $49      $17     $17
TF sell        $49      $17     $17
Short term fee  $0      $49      $0
(for TF funds)

https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/25744/scottrade-s-new-90-day-fund-fees
https://web.archive.org/web/20161011203253/https://www.scottrade.com/documents/alt/CommissionsandFees.pdf

Thank you Junkster.
I have considered DPFNX, but will look closer. I remember feeling a bit uncomfortable about the advisor in 2017, which was not helped when I saw this earlier this year ...
Deer Park SEC Probe
Here's side-by-side comparison of IOFIX and DPFNX this past year (99 peers):
Risk & Return Metrics ...

And looking back 3 years:
Period Performance ...

Batting Averages ...

Here is another news commentary on MECAX (not to hijack the thread but MECAX was mentioned above):
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/small--and-micro-cap-stocks-get-another-look-as-the-sp-500-index-stalls-2018-08-17

@Junkster, can you point toward the book and magazine articles? If you are up a mil over simple SP500 (is this only a few percent of total assets?) in this bull market (and why were you working at all??), this 71yo would like to study up. Will also send you all my moneys and beg you to take on, or guide.

A few here are aware of the book etc. it was written long ago is outdated and I don’t recommend purchase. My point was what was I to do with only $76,000 in lifetime contributions to my IRA?Invest it in an S&P index fund? Instead I had to think outside of the box if I ever wanted to have a respectable nest egg for retirement.

I'll try briefly beating a dead horse one more time :-)
TDA charges a "regular" (not grandfathered) customer $49.99 to by a TF fund, and $49.99 to sell that same fund, regardless of whether the sale is after 1 day, 180 days, or 10 years. (See, e.g. this 2012 Forbes article saying that that TDA charges fees on both buys and sells of TF funds.)
It's charging nothing extra to sell that TF fund in under 180 days. That's why I view it as charging no special short term trading fee on TF funds. You won't save money by waiting 180 days to sell.

Exactly, So basically $100 total to buy and sell a transaction fee fund. I simply said I was paying $17 to sell and $17 to buy and then you said I was getting the short end of the stick. I couldn’t understand your logic of how I was getting the short end of the stick.

@Junkster
The regular 0.40% monthly decline of IOFUX (in the last two days of each month) corresponds to the associated monthly distributions.

I understand about the price adjustment when the monthly dividends are paid. I am referring to the negative price action each quarter beginning 11/27 and 11/28. 2/26 and 2/27 and 5/25 and 5/29. If this pattern continues there should be a similar pattern near the end of this month. This is the reverse of most of last year where each quarter or so there were inexplicable daily price jumps the largest being over 2% last August. This involved the repricing of their portfolio by a reporting agency. I would just as soon not see a decline this month and maybe yesterday.’s price action is simply a return of what occurred last year each quarter.

I'll try briefly beating a dead horse one more time :-)
TDA charges a "regular" (not grandfathered) customer $49.99 to by a TF fund, and $49.99 to sell that same fund, regardless of whether the sale is after 1 day, 180 days, or 10 years. (See, e.g. this 2012 Forbes article saying that that TDA charges fees on both buys and sells of TF funds.)
It's charging nothing extra to sell that TF fund in under 180 days. That's why I view it as charging no special short term trading fee on TF funds. You won't save money by waiting 180 days to sell.

@Junkster, can you point toward the book and magazine articles? If you are up a mil over simple SP500 (is this only a few percent of total assets?) in this bull market (and why were you working at all??), this 71yo would like to study up. Will also send you all my moneys and beg you to take on, or guide.

As you can see, I edited my response while you were writing yours. I did try rereading your post until I could see what you were getting at.
I hope you'll read my last (updated) paragraph to see that one can pull off $5 round trips at Fidelity, with the proviso that one leaves a small amount in the TF fund for the next round trip. I have done this, but my round trips unlike yours last years.

I think we have different views on short term trading fees vs what you call routine trading fees. All I know is that TD will charge its regular customers 49.99 to buy a TF fund and 49.99 to sell if sold within 180 days. That is among the most onerous in the business and why I was about to transfer my account to Fidelity where they charge you 49.95 to purchase a TF fund and 0 to sell. But when I found I was only paying 17 to buy and 17 to sell on my short term trades I gladly stayed with TD.

Charles, since March of 2017 been between 40% and 100% IOFIX. Wish I could lie and say I was near 100% going into today but only 55%. Another 30% in DPFNX another bond fund that doesn’t seem to get enough respect for its steady performance. Will add to IOFIX when it has another one of those two day declines or more of where it drops a total of .40% or more. It has had a few this year. They usually appear around the last week of the month every few months or so.
Edit: Because I am a big believer in full disclosure, there were a couple periods beginning the end of December where I was completely out of IOFIX. There were better opportunities the first quarter in other bond funds. Albeit, this year it really hasn’t paid trying to outsmart IOFIX.

@Junkster, have you already written about why ST trading of mfunds is ever a good idea, rather than giving the manager(s) a year or three or four to work their approach ?

Yes I wrote about it in a book long ago as well as a couple seminars, magazine articles. My account is seven figures to the better than had I simply put it in an S&P index fund or scattered my monies among a 1001 funds for diversification purposes. Because I only worked part time, low paying minimum wage type jobs, my total lifetime contributions through 2012 to my IRA beginning in April 1993 was limited to only $76,000. My taxable account only $2200 in 1985. What kind of nest egg would those total contributions have netted this 71 year old now had I simply let it ride in an index fund or followed conventional wisdom?