Multiple prompts for computer verification would be rather annoying!
I wonder what has changed?
I've only been a Schwab customer for ~50 days but found their reps
to be helpful in resolving issues and answering questions (via phone and email).
I've setup MFA via the VIP app for the Schwab website and don't use mobile or ToS.
I'm prompted to input the VIP code upon every login since I've set my computer to be not remembered.
After entering the VIP code once, I'm not prompted for additional verification during the current session.

If [Zelle payments do not work with Fidelity], I will have to transfer from my Fidelity to my bank to the non-family person. ...
If it works with Fidelity, the benefit of Fidelity (vs Schwab) is I do not have to transfer to a non-interest bearing account first.

Zelle seems to say that if a bank doesn't work with it just use a debit card and the Zelle app.
What if my bank or credit union doesn't offer Zelle®? - use the app.
How can I use Zelle®? - enter "a Visa® or Mastercard® debit card with a U.S. based account."
Presumably you can do that with your Fidelity account. Fidelity doesn't charge for debit card withdrawals, even on "regular" brokerage accounts. It just doesn't reimburse surcharges if you're not a Premium or better customer.
I'm confused about the "non-interest bearing account" comment. At Schwab, Zelle works with the Schwab Bank Investor Checking account. That account pays 0.45%. It ain't much, but it ain't nuttin' either.
I'm guessing that you've got a BofA checking account, because you've posted about owning a BofA CC paying 5.25%. That requires Premium Rewards which in turn requires having a BofA checking account. Even BofA has free (for Premium Rewards customers) checking accounts that pay interest. Sure, it's just 0.01%, but that counts as interest-bearing :-)

The Wayback Machine didn't archive individual posts, but it did archive several versions of the discussion board (list of posts by thread). Many of the posts were ntip (no text in posts - subject line contained the full content). Or nm (no message). So one might get a sense of the general tenor from those discussion board
Here's another sample, this one from March 17, 2008
https://web.archive.org/web/20080317021554/http://www.fundalarm.com/wwwboard/wwwboard.html
In it is this thread:

• How likely is it that tomorrow will be another Black Monday (like 1987) or worse? nm. - BWG 16:33:54 03/16/08 (5)
  • Re: How likely is it that tomorrow will be another Black Monday (like 1987) or worse? nm. - xorion 16:57:56 03/16/08 (0)
    
  • i'm very worried and tracking progress here: - mmc 16:45:59 03/16/08 (3)
    • Re: great site - looks like limit down - rono 17:12:11 03/16/08 (0)
      
    • Re: i'm very worried and tracking progress here: - earl 16:54:03 03/16/08 (0)
      
    • Thanks for the link. At this time, Japan is open and down 3%. nm. - BWG 16:48:45 03/16/08 (0)

To get to these discussion board pages you can start with this page. It has links to archived versions of the www.fundalarm.com page for 2008.
https://web.archive.org/web/20080701000000*/www.fundalarm.com
From one of these achived pages, click on the Discussion Board link under "Join In" to get to a page like the sample above.

Schwab is at the bottom of the performance rankings YTD, 1 year (the only robo with single digit returns, more than a point behind second worst), and 5 year (tie for worst). Over three years it did 0.2% better than the worst.
As a blind guess without checking, I suspect the cause is cash drag, especially since Vanguard has outperformed Schab recently by more than 3%, and by more than 1% over three and five years.
Schwab ranks in the middle of the pack overall. That seems to be due to broad financial planning tools and features like Intelligent Income (mentioned by Barron's) for managing a monthly income stream. Raw performance only counts for so much; with Barron's that's 25% of the total score.

Yep. QLTY is good, GQG is better so far. Maybe?
Since QLTY's November 2023 launch, it is up 18.2%. That leads its multi-cap core Lipper peer group by 150 bps. The S&P 500 is up 17%. The GQG Partners US Select Quality is up 27%.
But GMO has dramatically outperformed GQG over the past five months (1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 month periods) while underperforming for six months and out. Curious.

“Riding it out” works. I take it from @gman57 that he mostly sat tight without making any sales or acquisitions during the ‘07-‘09 market meltdown. However, in that case what you’re riding at the onset may be of import. Was it all in global growth? You might have been left with 35-cents on the dollar by March ‘09 - a blip on the radar screen to someone having a 40-year time horizon. Unnerving nonetheless to most of us mere mortals. Might even have had you wondering whether your 35-cents would be worth only 17 cents in another year …
I doubled down. Beginning in October ‘07 with a 60/40 mix, I gradually shifted 100% into domestic equities and then, about a year in (December 2008) I moved all that to a couple global growth funds which had fared substantially worse than domestic. Next, by a stroke of luck I converted about 40% of these badly depreciated assets into a Roth in early March ‘09 (Roth - The gift that keeps on giving). I’d just begun taking SS and the additional income covered the tax hit. The markets turned up on March 9, 2009.
Don’t know what the next step would have been. Probably would have floated a loan sometime in late ‘09 to convert the remaining IRA holdings into a Roth . Then, had the bear market continued into 2010, I’d have mortgaged the house to pour all of its equity into the most aggressive growth funds I could find (likely tech-heavy or international). Had it continued into 201l, not sure what I’d have done … (maybe start praying or simply drink more).
If you take the tack I did, it’s incumbent to back off a bit as markets rise so that you have some capital to reinvest next time things go to hell. I won’t say my way was more profitable than just riding it out. But it may have been less stressful in that you at least feel like you’re making decisions that may impact your fortunes. Stress is sometimes defined as feeling helpless to control your own fate.

Without realizing it at the time Lou of WSW is probably the reason I got interested in Mr Market. It was must watch TV every Friday for me.

Me too. Always a lot of common sense on his show.

It may also be possible to use a payment app with Fidelity accounts. Whether that app in turn lets you schedule transfers to a third party depends on the app. For example, according to this old (2018) moderator post, Paypal wants you to limit transfers to only Paypal customers.
For the most part, anything you can do with a Fidelity CMA account you can do with a "regular" account. When Fidelity first introduced CMA accounts, they struck me as a marketing gimmick. They still do.
There are only three differences I'm aware of (or at least that I care about):

• The CMA account offers the option (it used to be mandatory) of sweeping cash into FDIC-insured banks instead of higher yielding MMFs.
  
• The CMA account provides free ATM rebates for all customers; Fidelity doesn't rebate fees for customers of "regular" accounts unless they are at the Premium ($500K) or above level or are paying for "wealth management".
  
• The CMA accounts can't be used for IRA accounts.

it's easy to set up such payments online between your own accounts (trick is that one name must be common to both account titles)
Unless you're setting up payments from a joint account. Several years ago when I set up transfers from a joint account to my individual taxable account Fidelity required a guarantee (or maybe just consent?) from the joint owner. I don't recall whether I also had to sign.
I asked Fidelity why they required it, especially since they were allowing me to make IRA contributions from that joint account without any fuss. Fidelity said that it was getting too many complaints from joint owners when money was transferred, even though "joint" means either owner has access to the full account. So it wanted the redundant, explicit approval from the joint owner. Except for IRA contributions because "everybody does that" or words to that effect.

I didn't have much money allocated to equities in 1987 since I was young and "poor."
Having read a bit about investing, I thought the 1987 market crash might present a buying opportunity.
Despite this knowledge, I didn't actually take advantage of the situation.
During the dot-com bubble (circa 1995 - 2000), I was employed in the tech industry.
Many coworkers were discussing massive gains in Yahoo, Cisco, and the like.
It was very difficult to ignore this continuous chatter - FOMO is real!
Since markets appeared to be in a bubble, I resisted the siren song of the dot-coms.
I didn't panic during the subsequent crash but should have purchased more equities afterward.
The Global Financial Crisis (GFC) of 2007 - 2008 was very challenging for me.
There were many bankruptcies, multiple bailouts, bank runs on money market funds
(Reserve Primary Fund "broke the buck"), and rising unemployment.
Congress initially rejected the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008
($700B Troubled Asset Relief Program was a component) which led to a ~9% decline
in the S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite that day. The legislation was passed a few days later.
The seemingly endless onslaught of severe economic events caused significant anxiety.
To me, it felt like the US economy might suffer a precipitous decline analogous to the Great Depression.
Once again, I didn't panic but should have increased equity purchases after this major crash.
I hope to never experience a similar scenario again during my lifetime!

@Crash. …that was me. The “Psychology of Bubbles” was interesting, and that was the basis for my earlier comment regarding this book.
“One key lesson to take away is that for investors, bubbles are an incredible opportunity to make money—as long as you recognize when the sell-off is no longer a buying opportunity.”
Which is pertinent perhaps to the market of current times. I no longer feel compelled to chase the absolute highest returns, and I believe there’s a lot of risk in the S&P500 currently.
As I read on the blog”A Wealth of Common Sense”, “only an idiot gets rich twice”.

Glad you chose to stop and comment. "Only an idiot gets rich twice." LOL. Sounds almost like a Yogi Berra-ism. And yes, I specifically recall that line from the book, too--- regarding bubbles. I'm not good enough to spot that sort of thing, and then get out in time, "before the fall." So I just don't do it. It's not in my own playbook.

@Crash. …that was me. The “Psychology of Bubbles” was interesting, and that was the basis for my earlier comment regarding this book.
“One key lesson to take away is that for investors, bubbles are an incredible opportunity to make money—as long as you recognize when the sell-off is no longer a buying opportunity.”
Which is pertinent perhaps to the market of current times. I no longer feel compelled to chase the absolute highest returns, and I believe there’s a lot of risk in the S&P500 currently.
As I read on the blog”A Wealth of Common Sense”, “only an idiot gets rich twice”.

@catch22. Another MFO participant mentioned the book. It's on his to-do list, to read the thing. Seems to me, he bought his copy. I was pleasantly surprised that my public library has a copy. :). Maybe I beat him to the punch? McDonald writes a regular column which he calls "The Bear Traps Report."

Thank you @rforno. I greatly value your insights (and read all of them).
I think the buy / sell thread may create the wrong impression. Like you, my long term core holdings rarely change. Most of the portfolio consists of OEFs transferred in or acquired new 5 years ago when I left TRP and opened a brokerage account at Fido. (The newest, LCORX, was acquired a year ago.) Other than occasional rebalancing those are hands-off.
I leave 30% in easier to trade vehicles. These can be CEFs, ETFs and a stock or two. It’s that latter group where I’m willing to experiment / tinker around in pursuit of some extra return. An example would be building a 5% position recently in a stock that has bounced around between $95 and $105. Has required some buying and selling over past month or two to get the average share price down.

44% of all US dollars ever created, were created in 2020 and 2021. Ya, that was the Covid era.
44% is about right, looking at M2. Such an increase is not unique. There have been other times, other situations aside from Covid, calling for monetary expansion. LBJ's "guns and butter" economy (1964 through 1968) boosted M2 by, oddly enough, 44% also.
OTOH, the subsequent contraction in M2 (5% from April 2022 to Oct 2023) appears to be unique.
Source: FRED M2 interactive graph
"The US dollar has lost 93% of its value since the year 1900."
Both of the quotes are designed to shock (or as you colorfully expressed it, to gobsmack). Not to inform or enlighten.
A 93% decline in value in 125 years is an annualized inflation rate of 2.1%, just what the US is targeting. In comparison, a pound sterling in 1900 would have the purchasing power of just 0.6 pennies (UK) in 2024. A decline of 99.4%.
https://www.officialdata.org/uk/inflation/1900?amount=1
That's what an economy in decline looks like.

This is what the US economy looks like:

w/e August 9, 2024..... NAV's down a bit...
Bond NAV's were down through Thursday, with many having decent recovery pricing on Friday. Perhaps this is a good omen going forward. A few numbers for your viewing pleasure.
FIRST:
*** UST yields chart, 6 month - 30 year. This chart is active and will display a 6 month time frame going forward to a future date. Place/hover the mouse pointer anywhere on a line to display the date and yield for that date. The percent to the right side is the percentage change in the yield from the chart beginning date for a particular item. You may also 'right click' on the 126 days at the chart bottom to change a 'time frame' from a drop down menu. Hopefully, the line graph also lets you view the 'yield curve' in a different fashion, for the longer duration issues, at this time. Save the page to your own device for future reference. NOTE: take a peek at the right side of this graph to find the yield swings of the past week.
For the WEEK/YTD, NAV price changes, August 5 - August 9, 2024
***** This week (Friday), FZDXX, MMKT yield continues to move with Fed funds/repo/SOFR rates and ended the week at 5.15% yield. MMKT's yields moved down .01-.02% from last week. Fidelity's MMKT's continue to maintain decent yields, as is presumed with other vendors similar MMKT's.
--- AGG = -.78% / +2.46% (I-Shares Core bond), a benchmark, (AAA-BBB holdings)
--- MINT = +.04% / +3.64% (PIMCO Enhanced short maturity, AAA-BBB rated)
--- SHY = -.23% / +2.8% (UST 1-3 yr bills)
--- IEI = -.68% / +2.73% (UST 3-7 yr notes/bonds)
--- IEF = -1.04% / +2.31% (UST 7-10 yr bonds)
--- TIP = -.43% / +2.66% (UST Tips, 3-10 yrs duration, some 20+ yr duration)
--- VTIP = -.16% / +3.3% (Vanguard Short-Term Infl-Prot Secs ETF)
--- STPZ = -.17% / +3.23% (UST, short duration TIPs bonds, PIMCO)
--- LTPZ = -1.13% / +1.23% (UST, long duration TIPs bonds, PIMCO)
--- TLT = -2.08% / -.33% (I Shares 20+ Yr UST Bond
--- EDV = -2.70% / -2.24% (UST Vanguard extended duration bonds)
--- ZROZ = -2.78% / -4.1% (UST., AAA, long duration zero coupon bonds, PIMCO
--- TBT = +4.1% / +5.58% (ProShares UltraShort 20+ Year Treasury (about 23 holdings)
--- TMF = -6.4% / -12.62% (Direxion Daily 20+ Yr Trsy Bull 3X ETF (about a 2x version of EDV etf)
*** Additional important bond sectors, for reference:
--- BAGIX = -.90% / +2.81% Baird Aggregate Bond Fund (active managed, plain vanilla, high quality bond fund)
--- LQD = -.80% / +1.73% (I Shares IG, corp. bonds)
--- BKLN = +.34% / +3.87% (Invesco Senior Loan, Corp. rated BB & lower)
--- HYG = +.34% / +4.45% (high yield bonds, proxy ETF)
--- HYD = -.69%/+3.59% (VanEck HY Muni)
--- MUB = -.53% /+1.07% (I Shares, National Muni Bond)
--- EMB = -.23%/+4.54% (I Shares, USD, Emerging Markets Bond)
--- CWB = +.50% / +1.04% (SPDR Bloomberg Convertible Securities)
--- PFF = -.19% / +4.95% (I Shares, Preferred & Income Securities)
--- FZDXX = 5.15% yield (7 day), Fidelity Premium MMKT fund
*** FZDXX yield was .11%, April,2022.
Comments and corrections, please.
Remain curious,
Catch

In 2008-2009 I rode it out, in 2020 I flinched, sold and took a big loss (dumb), 2022 rode it out. Riding it out is much better in the long run and why you need assets set aside to handle/spend during drawdowns.

Correct! And having a source of income during those times doesn't hurt either even if that source is contained within your portfolio. Otherwise you'll find yourself juggling hand grenades that have had the pins removed.
If nothing else I hope that folks who might have been all-in or thought they could handle days like last Monday pause, reflect and readjust as appropriate.

Might Include
- Tactical trades
- Repositioning
- Closing out a fund or other investment
- Acquiring a new fund or other investment
- Portfolio rebalancing
What’s the purpose here? None, except to have some fun. I get the idea folks here trade a lot. My longest stretch without trading something the past 5 years is probably only a month. The core OEFs (7 or 8 funds) haven’t changed in at least a year. But I’ll rebalance a few of them every 6-12 months. It’s “around the edges” (approx. 20% of holdings) that’s held in ETFs, CEFs, individual stocks) that has gotten churned quite a bit.
Anybody out there that hasn’t traded at least once in the last 12 months?

Thanks @gman57 for clarifying.
@BaseballFan is spot-on in terms of the mood of most investors during those uncommon but spine-chilling episodes. Yes, the ‘87 flash-crash (about 25% down in a single afternoon) is emblazoned in my mind. Some of the older guys at work who were on the eve of retirement resembled pale ghosts walking the hallways the following day.
Can still remember overhearing a young guy freaking out on his cellphone at the Atlanta airport sometime in 2000 while we waited for a connecting flight. His portfolio had fallen double-digits on several consecutive days and stocks were crumbling again as he spoke. (See data on NASDAQ 2000-2002 at bottom of post.)
And in the spring of ‘08 I bumped into a long-lost HS friend (from the 60s) while shopping in a local market who appeaed sickened by having lost more than 30% of his IRA assets in the last 6-8 months. I gathered that he had been led to believe junk bonds were “safe” investments. He’d loaded up on them.
The above merely paints an image of how humans in different situations react at these times. It’s not intended to exculpate them from blame or offer any advice going forward.
*** “In 2000, the Nasdaq lost 39.28% of its value. In 2001, the Nasdaq lost 21.05% of its value. In 2002, the Nasdaq lost 31.53% of its value.” (Data from Google)

That's the mistake people make bailing after a big drawdown …

@gman57 - Could you please clarify which post or suggestion your “that” refers to? It’s likely a reference to the quotation I posted above (“The reason bear markets go down three or four times as fast …”) ?
To be clear - Neither I nor the quote’s author meant to advocate selling into / at the end of a bear market. I view the clip as simply an attempt to explain why bear markets fall at an accelerated rate compared to the rate at which the preceding bear climbed.
Here’s another unrelated thought - Nobody rings a bell at the bottom of a bear market signifying “It’s safe to come back in.”

@yogibearbull
Agree fully. Argentina is the 'poster child' of global countries, of how broke everything can become and remain over a very long time frame.
So much corruption, by so many over the years, that it has become a non-biological DNA.
And the new president's radical, suggested reforms.....
BBC article, February, 2024