BTW, its 2/17/25, and I'm still waiting to receive my year-end distribuition notifications for the funds I hold in my Vanguard Roth account.
Just trying to understand here. You seem to be saying that you're expecting a notification for each fund. That's something I might look for if I held the funds on Vanguard's legacy mutual fund platform. If that's what's going on, then that may also be the explanation - Vanguard providing virtually no support for this platform.
Are you talking about 1099-Rs? I ask because those don't report distributions from individual funds. They just report the aggregate distribution from the account as a whole.
In any case, and this is purely anecdotal, I've seen someone's 1099-R from a Roth that was posted online on Jan 12. And my 1099 (taxable account, closed in 2024) was posted on Jan 27th.
Three possibilities: we were lucky, you were unlucky, or there's something different about the type of information you were expecting. Again, just trying to understand.
Regarding opening a new account (aside from the rhetorical question: why?):
Would this page work: https://personal.vanguard.com/us/investnow/si/oaoverview
I vaguely recall having issues opening an account online because I wanted to fund it with an ACAT transfer and they system wanted cash. Not sure anymore though.

@Junkster,
Appreciate you visiting and posting in this forum.
@rforno,
I have given much thought to your question. US default (even a tactical default) does not rank in the top 10 problems that would precede why our investments (other than US treasuries) might take a hit. I think Junkster gave a good lead. He always does.

Oh I would not be selling stocks in such a scenario -- if they swoon in sympathy, I would be buying.

A little story about Vanguard friendliness. Several weeks ago, I mailed in an application for a taxable account. I had actually called Vanguard sometime back to get a mail-in application, because I couldn't find one online. I received the application, but never got around to submitting it.
So, after a hiatus, I filled out the snail-mail application and sent in a check via USPS. I got a call from Vanguard saying that my account form was invalid, because it was an old form. No suprirse I guess for any member of this forum - I actually deal with mutual fund companies all the time and nothing about the application struck me as odd; it was all the usual stuff, everything that you'd expect to see on a new account application, and everything you've seen dozens and dozens of times before.
Puzzled, I asked: "Okay...can you tell me what field is missing in the old form?". The customer service agent told me he did not know. So, I said, "please send me a new form and I'll fill it out and mail it back in". The agent told me that he'd have to get approval to send me a mail-in form; it could take a few weeks. I replied "Wait a second...you need senior manager approval to send me a form to do business with you?" The agent said yes. I responded in a baffled tone: "...you realize I'm trying to give you business; I initiated this whole transaction. I'm trying to actually give you my money. You're giving me a disincentive to do business with you; hell, I'll pay an extra fraction of a percentage point on the ER to be able to do this via mail. And, I must say, you guys don't seem particularly easy to do business with...". The agent chuckled and said "believe me, sir, I get it; we hear this type of thing all the time, its just management policy...". The guy sounded as exasperated as I was.
The, three weeks later (maybe four) I get a dry, terse letter from Vanguard via USPS letting me know that my application to open an account has been denied. My check was returned. I said screw it, and went with another major fund family and the application was processed in a week.
BTW, its 2/17/25, and I'm still waiting to receive my year-end distribuition notifications for the funds I hold in my Vanguard Roth account. Per my request, I still get all fund notifactions via USPS.

@Junkster,
Appreciate you visiting and posting in this forum.
@rforno,
I have given much thought to your question. US default (even a tactical default) does not rank in the top 10 problems that would precede why our investments (other than US treasuries) might take a hit. I think Junkster gave a good lead. He always does.

I have followed the activities of Boaz Weinstein on social-media. I also took a flyer on his etf of CEFs CEFS. It's ER is HIGH even taking into account that the underlying CEFs have high ERs. I think he likes to pocket a lot of money himself and investors have to count on trickle down.
https://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=CEFS&p=D&yr=3&mn=0&dy=0&id=p17466725366

We've heard over and over, do not let the political environment sway your investing decisions. I'd say that used to be good advice. But we are a long way from a normal situation, in which Dems and Reps disagreed about policy. The rift started at least as far back as Reagan and Gingrich the Newt. The crack has become a gulf. And the two Parties don't even agree on bedrock starting points anymore.
The current President represents a dangerous sea change. Alliances and foes alike are getting mixed and matched. And domestically, it's a coup going on before our very eyes. The rule of Law is dead right now.
Where to invest? We have 10 gazillion possible choices in the Market. I'm not chasing anything new. I have a couple of equity holdings which offer hefty dividends. My junk bonds continue to be steady, if not growing much. (Over 7%/month with those puppies.) Money Markets were mentioned above. I'm growing ours at a snail's pace, still rather pleased with the very safe 4.18% offered.
When the spam hits the fan, I'm already a bit heavier in bonds than in stocks. Hopefully, that will provide some insulation from the conflagration. The Crisis of 2008-09 was dreadful, but for other reasons, excessive de-regulation, mostly. It's happening again, too--- an avalanche of de-regulation. Regulations will never be perfect, because the bad guys will always find a way around them. (Oliver North, yes???) And after the '09 Crisis, CLOs were simply renamed, to avoid regulatory scrutiny. (See the ending of "The Big Short.")

14 Feb, 2025:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2025-02-14/bloomberg-real-yield-02-14-2025-video
Sticky inflation, FED will not be cutting rates. Maybe 10-year at 5% this year...Powell: "we are close, but not there," with regard to inflation.
Through the week, there was a 0.20% range being traded. That's BIG in the bond market.
Big sovereign deals during the past week: UK, France. Near record orders: over 115B euros.
USA Treasury Auction:
3-yr: 4.3%
10 yr: 4.632% (highest for new issuance since 2007.)
30 yr: 4.748%
(Schwab's SWVXX MM right now: 4.18%)
Anastasia Amoroso: favorite bond market sector: hmmmmmmm. Spreads are tight, offered rates are range-bound. So, she likes private credit.
Leveraged loan vs. private credit discussion with Christina Minnis, from Goldman. Both markets are "growing, robust and strong." and there is lots of dry powder still on the sidelines. Rates will stay where they are for longer. Biggest opportunity is "probably in the the private investment grade space." the prospect of rising RATES and GEOPOLITICAL considerations are the biggest looming risks. It would be an untoward thing if the FED felt it necessary to bump-up rates.

I agree with @msf (different thread) that ”Many people find government pronouncements and actions relevant to investing.”
- There’s a thread along that line offered up by @Soupkitchen January 28 in the OT section - mostly buried now by the avalanche of anti-Trump posts & comments. Worth a second look. Where America is Heading and your Investments.
Like everyone else I’m looking for clues. From the two financial blogs / newsletters I subscribe to, here’s what I’ve gleaned …
- On February 3 Bill Fleckenstein wrote: ”Lastly, on the subject of Trump tape bombs, while we should expect them to be a feature of his term, they may become less frequent, and we may get a better handle on what they individually mean. Even so, I think they mandate carrying a little bit more cash or being slightly less aggressive than one might ordinarily be because they can literally come out of nowhere and gaming whether Trump is serious or not will be hard to do in real time.” https://www.fleckensteincapital.com/dailyrap.aspx?rapdate=02-03-2025
- James Stack (InvestTech) actually raised his recommended “Net-Long” market exposure a few percentage points from around 55% to 58% about the time Trump took office (but didn’t connect the two). Stack has been extremely cautious for a couple years. The remainder, he advises, should be in T-Bills or money market funds. https://www.investech.com/
- And Barron’s this week features several Trump related articles - not all complementary. One, titled ”11 Tariff-Proof Dividend Stocks”, mentions consumer staples, financials and energy as among the better plays on that theme. Another article, ”The Markets Trust Trump. How to Trade It”, focuses on options plays. A third article notes that there has been a sharp uptick in very wealthy investors moving wealth abroad, some out of fear of a weaker dollar, but in some cases from fear of retribution by the party they opposed.
It should go without saying that other investment ideas / suggestions are appreciated. Nobody really knows at this point. But risk is inherent in most investing. If it were safe or easy the rewards would be small.

Boaz Weinstein faced a series of defeats when executing his activist playbook against UK investment trusts.
However, the trusts' NAV discounts have narrowed since he began the campaign.
Saba Capital Management (Weinstein's firm) may still profit from the venture.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/boaz-weinstein-doomed-uk-trust-084926913.html

Value investing has generated disappointing returns for a considerable time.
Eugene Fama and Kenneth French published their landmark paper describing the value factor in 1992.
Since then, the S&P 500's intangible assets (brands, intellectual property) have increased significantly.
Utilizing free cash flow in lieu of traditional value metrics may result in superior performance.
Link

is there an ETF or mutual fund for the subject group?
XMAG is S&P 500 minus the 7. I am looking for the Nasdaq 100 equivalent.
Thanks.

Congrats.
You should be able to move positions by electronic transfer. Before you submit the request at the receiving firm, make sure each of the position you want to move can be held at the receiving firm.
Also, I would move positions by partial (not full) account transfer, though that might take more time.
Finally, make sure you are getting the best possible bonus and platform for you needs.
Personally, I like to have two brokerages (and not one). The two based on my experience I would recommend are Schwab and Fidelity. Depending on your investment needs Firstrade, IBKR, Robinhood and others may also work.

What is the rationale behind not making a full account transfer all at once?

In addition to comments from Yogi and Balu, I would add that you may have been able to buy into institutional, and other funds, through Wells they may not be available, or may be treated differently whereever you move.
When I transferred my IRA from Vanguard to Fido I was able to submit a list in advance for them to consider. Other brokerages may offer the same feature.
Fido will trade DODGX, at 100 bucks a pop, they simply won't trade VSMIX and DRGVX, for example, which feature in our accounts at Wells. So my taxable account will likely remain at Wells, as will my wife's IRA and taxable, aside from TIAA assets that will eventually be annuitized anyway..
We have never had any problems with Wells. When we started out it was Crocker Bank, which was bought by Midland Bank, which was bought by Wells, then merged into Northwest Bank where we had banked as college students. Who knows what would result to the banking industry were we to move. :)

Shosh, I'd never heard of QGLDX until your post.
A simple benchmarking of returns of QGLDX vs the oldest bullion ETF, "GLD", shows that QGLDX does effectively track the price of gold, but it tracks it with "drag" (underperformance) of about 2.5% per annum.
I guess if that is the only option in the space available, it could be used. But I'd be inclined to get my bullion exposure outside of the 401k, using a cost-effective option -- either SGOL, IAU, or buy the bullion directly.

Just posted all ratings and fund flows to MFO Premium site, using Refinitiv data drop from Friday, Valentine's Day, 14 February 2025.

2 of the accounts in question are in my and my wife's name and 2 are my mother's accounts. Those 2 have a firm specific POA document attached to them. I am wary whether the POA would transfer to a new account, and my mother is 103 and not truly competent to sign a new one. So I'll probably just leave those there.

With a little work on your part going forward (self managing) you can eliminate the advisor's 1% annual fee.
Going forward think of the 1% savings this way,
As a retiree, this 1% annual fee equates to a 25% savings of your 4% Safe Withdrawal Rate... that's significant!

They weren't hitting me with a 1% fee. otherwise I would have been gone long ago.

"The media needs something to rant about on an otherwise slow day I guess"
More than 95% of "news" from the 24/7 media is useless and redundant.

@FD1000, please explain how your post is relevant to this thread discussion so far. I have said to you before that you can have freedom of speech but you are not allowed to abuse knowingly or out of loss of sanity. Your post is abusive. If you mistakenly posted in the wrong thread, please move your post and I will delete this post.

i personally agree, but this is ultimately an investing forum.
and in such, the 2 most hackneyed phrases are :
' i am here to make money'
'i am for anyone\anything that lowers my taxes'
can you believe there exists anti-ESG funds? some people are actually against good governance in their underlying companies.
as with the above example, i simply wanted to point out free and stable societies are a sensible (evidenced) theme for making money via equity, if that happens to be an abstraction one could grasp.
many of these points flop on crypto and mkt timing investors, especially the lucky ones.
i dont see the 'trump trade' as anything more than mkt timing based on pro-autocracy, and 2016-2020 was such but to a lesser degree.

With a little work on your part going forward (self managing) you can eliminate the advisor's 1% annual fee.
Going forward think of the 1% savings this way,
As a retiree, this 1% annual fee equates to a 25% savings of your 4% Safe Withdrawal Rate... that's significant!