Schwab Total Stock Market Index Fund -- SWTSX: 0.03% expense ratio (10x less than the Price version). Schwab has a very good website and local branches. Personally, I'd steer clear of actively managed funds for reasons of cost and the fact that most don't do better than the market long term.

Hi Donna!
I suggest you buy him some good books also. Seems like so many 21 year old men think they can “discover” half a dozen gems, ride them for a couple of years and retire at age 30. And of course, that’s just not realistic. My suggestion would be William Bernstein’s “If you Can”. https://etf.com/docs/IfYouCan.pdf
I may be only thinking of a data set of one (yours truly) but when I was 22 a broker called singing the praises of Data I/O and convinced me to open a margin account.

I bought some FVAC today. It seems to me that a very positive factor is the Pentagon funding -- the US doesn't want China to control the rare-earth supply.
This method of "going public" is new to me -- FVAC is a "blank check" company and MP was a privately held mining company. They join forces and voile' -- you have a public mining company. It's listed on the NYSE, so I guess some ETFs and index funds have to buy in.
But I'm watching carefully and keeping my fingers crossed that the stock has not just climbed quickly on the greater fool theory.
Thanks for the headsup.
(It closed at 14.88 today -- you're in a nice position.)
David

Generally, Fidelity funds have a $0 min. Likewise, Schwab offers 60 house funds (Schwab and Laudus) with no mins. In addition, Schwab offers nearly 3K outside funds at a $100 min, including 110 from T. Rowe Price. (All figures are for open, NTF funds)
Fidelity Screener
Schwab screener
If you like buying stocks or ETFs by the price instead of by the share, Fidelity lets you do this. Minimum purchase per security is $1. Other, smaller brokerages like Robinhood offer this as well, but with their payments for order flow, you'll likely get poorer execution. (There are additional concerns about these brokerages pushing trades because they make money based on the volume of trading.)
Two points: stick with name brand brokerages and funds, and focus on the investment and not on the minimums.
Of course this depends on your grandson, but for a first investment I might suggest a more traditional "growth and income" type of fund like a basic S&P 500 index fund (e.g. VOO or FXAIX) or an actively managed fund like PRBLX (through Schwab with a $100 min NTF).
On the one hand, a novice investor can get spooked by sizeable drops in value. On the other hand, as a long term investment, one leans toward equity. A hybrid fund like @P_F 's suggested VGSTX could also make sense if one wants to start off more conservatively.
An S&P 500 fund starts one off with a familiar name, adding (one hopes) a measure of comfort. Otherwise I'd suggest a total stock market index fund. The Parnassus fund is a fine long term actively managed vehicle, with a socially conscious bent as an added plus.

If you and he think technology and innovation will always be the future, how about an ETF like QQQ? I think 1 share is ~ $260 now.

Most (if not all) of the funds at T Rowe Price have a $1,000 minimum for an IRA (including Roths). Not the lowest expense ratio in town, but reasonable. You’d be setting him up with one of the most respected outfits out there.
First $1,000 POMIX - T. Rowe Price Total Market Index fund. That’s the one Jack Bogle always recommended as his top choice index. ER .30%
Next $1,000 PIEQX - T Rowe Price Developed Markets Ex-North America index fund. ER .45%
Thereafter - two-thirds of contributions to former and one-third to latter.
Sure, there’s a lot of great managed funds out there (of which I own some). But with a 50-year investment horizon, index is the way to go. Lower fees (not visible at first glance) and you avoid potential managerial changes and / or mistakes.
If you can find the $1,000 minimum somewhere else offering those indexes, than of course you can elect them. I’m pretty much T. Rowe so not aware of minimums at other houses. But I’d think the $1,000 minimum is going the way of the plasma TV. (rapidly disappearing). Also, T. Rowe is no-load. I think some of the ones with lower initial investments charge a front-end load, which you don’t want.

Hi @Donna,
Not a suggestion ... Just what I'm doing for my grandaughter. However, this concept might be of some help.
I have my 18 month old granddaughter in AMECX, CAIBX, ANCFX and SMCWX at American Funds, The min. for each fund is $250.00. I make quarterly gift contributions to her account splitting the money evenly. Her mutual fund distributions pay to AFAXX which is a money market fund to accumulate until they become invested into ABALX which is a balanced fund. In this way she will have an awarness of just how much interest, dividends and capital gain distributions play in the overall sucess of investing. I'm thinking over time ABALX will become larger that the first four starting funds by the time she becomes 21 (age of majority).
Even though this is invested conseratively it is up better than 8% over the past rolling year. At her age and with the many years she has ahead I feel a conserative steady as you go approach is the wise one over an agressive growth portfolio that will have, at times, some good volatility associated with it. This might lead one into trading over staying invested for the long term.
I became an investor as a teenager at age 12 (1960). I started investing with some money my great grandparents gifted to me. And, it was put into Franklin Income (FKINX). My father's broker told me that this fund will give you some exposure to income generation (put a little gingle in your pocket if you wish) and also give you exposure to both stocks and bonds as well. It will be a good fund for you to build a base from and help you to understand the facets of investing. My next fund that I ventured into was American Funds Income Fund of America (AMECX) during my early twenties as I was learning don't put all you eggs in one basket, by this time. Today, these two funds are my largest holdings within my portfolio now just short of fifty funds split among twelve investment sleeves. I went the conserative route in the beginning and branched out from there. Now stock market volatility is viewed, by me, as a buying opportunity. While some run and sell ... I am a buyer even at the age of 72. I bought during the past market swoon and now that stocks have recovered I have been selling into the now present market strength.
If you wish to view how the asset allocation, of my grandaughter's portfolio bubles, or any of the other suggestions that has been made, below is a link to Morningstar's Instant Xray analysis tool. It's a good tool to learn how to use.
https://www.morningstar.com/instant-x-ray
Just enter the ticker symbols and amount invested in each fund then press Xray and the Portfolio Xray analysis will appear. For my granddaughter, I felt it wise to mix some income generation funds on the income side with some value and growth stocks funds on the equity side. Sometimes, with the income generation that protfolios produce keeps folks invested. My late father had a saying ... "Income never goes out of style." Thus far, in my lifetime, he has been correct.
Your grandson can follow his portfolio through M*'s portfolio manager which is another tool I use.
My best wishes to you and your grandson in starting this endeavor. It is something that he can begin small and build upon through his lifetime. In the years to come he will remember ... this is something my grandmother got me started me on. And, give thanks that you did.
Old_Skeet
edited on 7/23/2020

I believe that Vanguard STAR has a $1000 aluminium.

It's not a fund per se, but Schwab has introduced "stock slices", where he could invest as little as $5 to purchase a partial share in companies such as Amazon, Google, Facebook, Netflix, McDonald's, Electronic Arts, Nike, Home Depot, Target and Apple. They advertise that you can buy a basket of all 10 for $50.

I read this board but don't post. My oldest grandson is 21, and a senior in college. He's interested in starting to invest, probably beginning with $1000, in a Roth IRA, most likely (if there are any funds with a minimum of $1000). I'd like suggestions on one good mutual fund for him. Thank you in advance.

Dear friends,
I wanted to share the sad news of passing of Dowe Bynum (1978-2020) last Friday. Dowe, half of Cook & Bynum, was diagnosed with brain cancer about three years ago. (I still remember standing in the Cedar Rapids airport one evening, and taking a call from David Hobbs who wanted to share the diagnosis with us. They knew, even then, that it was very serious.) As you might imagine, his illness deeply affected his family, his friend and partner, and their firm. I have extended our condolences, through the folks at Cook & Bynum, to Emily and their three children.
I wish them, and you, peace.
David

It opened Monday at 12, I bought in a lowball bid at $11. It's up big to 14.50 in today's aftermarket on news about its plans, plus DOD restarting funding of rare earths projects ... at first I thought it was a pump-and-dump thing by their execs, but it apparently wasn't. And there aren't many Robinhooders holding the stock, either ... yet. :)

Your speculative play has paid off -- FVAC is up to $12.40
Did you get in at the initial $10 price?
A relevant article: https://investorintel.com/sectors/technology-metals/technology-metals-intel/us-rare-earths-industry-comeback-begun-mp-materials-announces-nyse-listing-via-merger-fvac/
David

Your speculative play has paid off -- FVAC is up to $12.40
Did you get in at the initial $10 price?
A relevant article: https://investorintel.com/sectors/technology-metals/technology-metals-intel/us-rare-earths-industry-comeback-begun-mp-materials-announces-nyse-listing-via-merger-fvac/
David

Before I start sounding like a Vanguard apologist, let me say that in my experience Vanguard's human service is inferior to that of other providers including Fidelity, Schwab, and T. Rowe Price (where I've been helped not only with fund investments but with administering an individual 401k plan).
That said, how does the Vanguard brokerage platform (VBS) compare with the T. Rowe Price brokerage platform? I haven't tried the latter for a few reasons: without being a customer I cannot find what third party funds TRP offers (NTF or otherwise); and its trading costs (which I can find) are quite high.
On the other hand, at Vanguard one can buy DODFX for $20 or less (vs. $35 at TRP), and one needs only $25K to invest in PIMIX (vs. $100K at Schwab). When it comes to some third party funds, the VBS platform does have its advantages.
I really did mean that Vanguard should push people onto their VBS platform. My sense is that their mutual fund platform support is now so weak that the risk of losing customers alienated by the platform's poor support is comparable to the risk of losing customers displeased by being moved to their VBS platform. Assuming that's correct, it makes no business sense to continue expending resources in providing inferior support for the fund platform.
My last fund platform experience is informative. It involved a cash IRA transfer from an outside account to Vanguard. I filled out a paper transfer form (required by Vanguard). I directed Vanguard to invest the cash in Prime MMF. Instead, Vanguard opened a new Federal MMF on the fund platform.
ISTM it might make this blatant error if it has become so focused on the VBS platform that it has forgotten how to process fund platform transactions. Only on the VBS platform must all cash go through the Federal MMF. It didn't make any difference that the instructions were in writing on its own form. It's time for Vanguard to give up the ghost.
That's my rational observation. Subjectively, I won't move (because the features are different) until kicked off their fund platform. IMHO Vanguard's best course of action is to do that, and leave me grumbling about the lost features. What bothered me about the note I posted is that they dismissed the lost features as "minor changes" without giving people advance notice of what these changes are.

Hello @bee,
I’ve been an infrequent poster but have been snooping on MFO for some time. In 2002, after the dotcom implosion, I crafted an Excel file to keep track of our (with DW) investment accumulations. I would track the bi-weekly changes, as well as the starting totals on January 1st of each year.
As we got closer to retirement, I calculated our current expenses and projected a retirement budget for comparison. The retirement budget had/has two versions = “Frugal Lite” and “Frugal Extreme.“ With those numbers, I then calculated the taxes to add to this total number. From this number I calculated the percentage passive income we needed to offset this total expense need. I calculated a 2.5%, 3.0%, and 4.0% yearly return. I use 2.5% as my S.W.A.N. figure.
I then projected the social security we would each receive and subtracted that amount from the total expense budget. The remaining balance was the amount our portfolio would need to generate each year. When 2.5% would cover this cost, I believed that I would/had come to a place I considered - “financial independence.”
All of this data is the “Rube Goldberg” that comes down to the final number. That is, the difference between what is needed for living expenses & aspirations, and how much our portfolio generates. My concern is that this number be on the “positive” side of the ledger even with withdrawals (RMDs, etc.). If it should dip to the negative, then we would need to shift our expenses from the “frugal lite” to the “frugal extreme“ budget.
I am in my 3rd year and my DW her 6th year of retirement. So far so good.
Best to all,
Brian

To one extent or another, several of the larger fund companies started offering brokerage services a couple of decades ago or more (Fidelity, Vanguard, T. Rowe Price, American Century).
These days, people think of Fidelity not so much as a fund house with a brokerage service but as a brokerage that has an extremely wide assortment of funds (and more recently, ETFs).
Vanguard tried to support platforms in both worlds, mutual funds and brokerage services. It originally contracted Pershing to provide the clearing firm services. Many, notably @BobC held a poor view of Pershing. Bogleheads and others were pleased with the improved service when Vanguard took those services in-house (Vanguard Brokerage Services).
Over time, Vanguard has put an increasing percentage of its IT budget into its brokerage platform. Though it did drop its cash management services (checking, bill pay, etc.) from its brokerage services, Vanguard has clearly been putting effort into its brokerage platform. It doesn't make sense for them to actively support two different platforms. I have given feedback to Vanguard saying that while I might personally prefer the mutual fund platform (since I use Vanguard primarily for Vanguard funds), it makes more sense to gradually push people to migrate to their brokerage platform.
Firms like T. Rowe Price and American Century offer brokerage platforms merely as a convenience for their fund investors. AFAIK their brokerage services are limited and relatively high priced. But if you're a TRP customer and want to buy the occasional stock, this gives you an easy way to do that without going to another firm. Both T. Rowe Price and AC use Pershing as their clearing firm.

Hi @Rbrt,
Thanks for posting the article as I found it an interesting read.
Back on May 28th I purchased an opening position in BCSAX (Blackrock Commodity Strategy Fund) which holds some mining companies plus other companies that service the industry down to retail distribution in the commodity chain. Thus far, as I write, I am up 7% in this niche type fund in a little less than two months and just recently caught a little dividend payment.
I have provided a link for BCSAX for those that would like more information on the fund.
https://www.blackrock.com/us/individual/products/227413/blackrock-commodity-strategies-class-a-fund

@WABAC, hope this thread helps your headache. Your retirement income needs will come from SS, maybe a pension, maybe part time work, maybe a portion of your personal retirement accounts (RMDs or other withdrawals).
If considering an annuity run some withdrawal scenarios with a fund like VWINX which may provide a similar withdrawal rate to an annuity and still allow you to have full control over it.

Not too worried about headaches at the moment. Aside from market performance, we are saving cash every month under the current conditions. This has been an interesting stress test.
Used to spend 135$ a month filling up the cars. Now, one car, or the other, gets filled up every third month,
The little numbers might be small for what some folks here may need. But they add up quick for our situation.
While I have "enjoyed" the accumulation stage. I'm not so sure I want to manage the RMD stage. We're still 7-8 years out from that. And I don't have to sort it out today.
But it's something to think about so long as we can entertain the idea of relying on our retirement accounts, without tapping into taxable accounts.
The recent changes in the way inherited retirement accounts are treated by the IRS has influenced my thinking.

This is a good, in-depth discussion on the mining that will be necessary to meet the needs of the renewables industry from the Manhattan Institute. manhattan-institute.org — mines-minerals.pdf
Some observations:
All energy-producing machinery must be fabricated from materials extracted from the earth. No energy system, in short, is actually “renewable,” since all machines require the continual mining and processing of millions of tons of primary materials and the disposal of hardware that inevitably wears out.
He says: Compared with hydrocarbon using devices, green machines entail, on average, a 10-fold increase in the quantities of materials extracted and processed to produce the same amount of energy. But I don’t see where he includes the extraction of fossil fuels for the conventional devices. Also, no mention of nuclear power is this report.
Expansion of today’s level of green energy—currently less than 4% of the country’s total consumption (versus 56% from oil and gas)—will create an unprecedented increase in global mining for needed minerals.
Among the material realities of green energy:
Building wind turbines and solar panels to generate electricity, as well as batteries to fuel electric vehicles, requires, on average, more than 10 times the quantity of materials, compared with building machines using hydro-carbons to deliver the same amount of energy to society.
Replacing hydrocarbons with green machines will vastly increase the mining of various critical minerals around the world. For example, a single electric car battery weighing 1,000 pounds requires extracting and processing some 500,000 pounds of materials. Averaged over a battery’s life, each mile of driving an electric car “consumes” five pounds of earth. Using an internal combustion engine consumes about 0.2 pounds of liquids per mile. (note, I think “consumes” is a misnomer here, the half a ton of materials are not actually consumed. Also, this 5 lbs to 0.2 lbs talk is not an apples to apples comparison)
By 2050, with current plans, the quantity of worn-out solar panels—much of it non- recyclable—will constitute double the tonnage of all today’s global plastic waste, along with over 3 million tons per year of unrecyclable plastics from worn-out wind turbine blades. By 2030, more than 10 million tons per year of batteries will become garbage. (While a million tons seems to be a large amount, we really don’t know that it is for a country of 350 million people.)
In sum
Even without subsidies, mandates, and policies that favor green energy, the future for both America and the rest of the world will see many more wind and solar farms and many more electric cars. That will happen precisely because those technologies have matured enough to play significant roles. And given the magnitude of pent-up global demand for energy and energy-using machines and services—especially after the world struggles out of recession — the world will need “all of the above” in energy supplies.
Note this report is a follow up to a report the author wrote in early 2019. Here’s a link without discussion https://manhattan-institute.org/green-energy-revolution-near-impossible