So, "never" for Vanguard is so soon? Of course, there is a new leader who came, looked around, studied & acted.
https://dailycoin.com/vanguard-caves-listing-xrp-select-other-crypto-etfs/
https://www.barrons.com/articles/vanguard-crypto-etfs-funds-bitcoin-investing-5c69c14c
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/vanguard-now-allow-crypto-etfs-211500405.html

Treasury announcement came less than 10 min ago. You may have to wait until afternoon to enter orders at brokerages.
Unless there is some other issue...
https://www.treasurydirect.gov/instit/annceresult/press/preanre/2025/A_20251202_2.pdf

My point is that you are outraged about Trump from the smallest things to everything while you are silent about your side.
California scandals are known.
Homelessness Spending Mystery: $24B allocated under Gov. Newsom yielded a 40% rise in homelessness; no clear accounting, fueling deficit ($46B) and exodus debates.
$100M in LA wildfire aid is being doled out to fund pet clinics, DEI projects and fungus planting— but not a dime directly to victims.
https://nypost.com/2025/09/10/us-news/fire-victims-baffled-at-how-100m-in-charity-concert-money-was-spent-its-a-s-tshow/
MN VP Candidate, Walz: How DEI leads to theft.
Fraud Swamped Minnesota’s Social Services System on Tim Walz’s Watch
Prosecutors say members of the Somali diaspora, a group with growing political power, were largely responsible.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/29/us/fraud-minnesota-somali.html
Where is the outrage?

Interesting Article on a unique approach by North Carolina's State Insurer "of last resort" regarding the use of CAT Bonds for disaster preparedness for individual NC property owners.

As the Trump administration stalls federal funding for projects intended to make states more resilient to climate change and private insurers decline to cover properties in high-risk zones, North Carolina just proved there’s another way to fund disaster preparedness: a $600 million catastrophe bond that rewards homeowners and their insurer for installing “super roofs.”

the-game-changing-cat-bond-incentivizing-adaptation?srnd=homepage-americas
Related Articles:
How 'Super Roofs' Reward Insurers, Cat Bond Investors and Homeowners
NC Expands FORTIFIED Roof Grant Program With Another $20 Million

It can be challenging to manufacture products in America nowadays.
A rocket scientist asked "Is it possible to make something in America and be competitive in the marketplace?"
He conducted an experiment to manufacture a product with every single part made in the United States.
https://youtu.be/2T8M7Gxc590?t=2693

My own owned ETF is an iShares beast connected to BlackRock. I'm wondering what will happen to my stake in EWS. Paying a fee to buy, sell or add shares is a no-go for me.

Fidelity and iShares have a partnership deal that goes back around 15 years, before Fidelity created its own ETFs (aside from ONEQ), before brokerages started selling stocks and ETFs commission-free.
Part of that partnership is to offer iShares NTF. Even if every broker starts charging fees to trade ETFs, the big ETF players will still be cutting deals like this. This tends to support yogi's speculation that only the boutique firms will be subject to ETF fees by brokerages.
https://www.etftrends.com/2013/03/fidelity-ishares-expand-etf-partnership-what-does-it-mean/ (2013)
Another part of the Fidelity/iShares deal is that Fidelity will push iShares. You can see the favored status that Fidelity gives iShares on its ETF research page. It highlights Fidelity and iShares ETF only.
https://digital.fidelity.com/prgw/digital/research/etf
I figure this is something like the deal that Schwab has with marketing T. Rowe Price funds.
https://riabiz.com/a/2022/4/19/t-rowe-price-gains-house-brand-status-on-schwabs-active-fund-platform-and-will-pay-up-to-10-million-yearly-for-the-honor-but-the-deal-is-not-without-potential-conflicts-of-interest

Finally had time to dig up Schwab's disclosure statement:

Most NTF funds pay Schwab's standard OneSource/NTF fund fee of 0.40% per year; however, the annual fee can range up to 0.45% of the fund assets held at Schwab. ...
Fees on new institutional class shares acquired or held at Schwab, are typically 0.17% per year but can range up to 0.19%. ...
Most TF funds pay Schwab an annual asset-based fee, typically 0.10% annually of the average fund assets held at Schwab, although the fee can range up to 0.25% ...

https://www.schwab.com/legal/financial-and-other-relationships
Yes it is quite high. When Schwab started OneSource, I believe it was 0.25%.

How do these etf fees compare to OEF fees charged for brokerage platform availability?
The rack rate for shelf space at brokerages like Fidelity and Schwab is 40 basis points for NTF and a lot lower (10-15 basis points?) for TF funds. Some families get discounts. The brokerages have disclosure statements if you want the exact figures. Funds that refuse to pay to play, like Vanguard are sold with high ($75-$100) transaction fees at these brokerages.

In my experience, Schwab is very willing to waive the $75 fee for purchasing Vanguard funds on their platform.

How do these etf fees compare to OEF fees charged for brokerage platform availability?
The rack rate for shelf space at brokerages like Fidelity and Schwab is 40 basis points for NTF and a lot lower (10-15 basis points?) for TF funds. Some families get discounts. The brokerages have disclosure statements if you want the exact figures. Funds that refuse to pay to play, like Vanguard are sold with high ($75-$100) transaction fees at these brokerages.

long IAV article hit these points. fee drop was unrelated to attracting index crowd and i doubt that it ever will ever be for non closet-indexer funds.
"...At the end of 2018, the six PRIMECAP-run funds held a combined $114b. Since then, investors have pulled more money out than they’ve put in every single month but two—a cumulative $105b in net outflows. Yet, thanks to market gains, the funds now hold roughly $130b in assets.
...
First, persistent outflows likely contributed to the team trimming winners too early. ...
Second, the outflows help explain why the PRIMECAP-run funds routinely distribute sizable capital gains...
Third, while I described PRIMECAP Management as resilient, outflows do take a toll...."
odds favor longtermers w/low basis. less clear for new $ in taxable accts.

Reuters reports the ISM survey, and other sources:

U.S. manufacturing contracted for the ninth straight month in November, with factories facing slumping orders and higher prices for inputs as the drag from import tariffs persisted.
The Institute for Supply Management survey on Monday also showed some manufacturers in the transportation equipment industry linking layoffs to President Donald Trump's sweeping duties, saying they were "starting to institute more permanent changes due to the tariff environment." They added "this includes reduction of staff, new guidance to shareholders and development of additional offshore manufacturing that would have otherwise been for U.S. export."
/snip
Despite subdued orders for factory goods, manufacturers paid more for inputs last month, a sign that inflation could remain above the Fed's 2% target for a while. The survey's prices-paid measure increased to 58.5 from 58.0 in the prior month.

Sure, the Fed can cut rates, but it will be like pushing string.
This isn't politics as usual in the Old D. C. One man is responsible for these tariffs.

From Markets A.M. newsletter by Spencer Jakab.
On this day in 1853, the Panic of 1853 was in full-swing.
Leading blue-chip stocks like the Delaware & Hudson Canal, the Panama Railway
and the Sixth Avenue Railroad had dropped as far as 31% below their levels at the beginning of the year;
more speculative “fancy” issues, like Parker Vein Coal, lost 89% of their value.

nice. monthly flows tool still just through october. but here's spym on flow tool through last friday ... how to attract $56B in just three years.

It's also interesting to see FLOWS for original giant SPY and newer lower-ER SPYM (renamed from SPLG).

i'm going to take a much easier approach to this. If i remember correctly these funds were closed for some time. they opened them mid 2024. more flows out than in has transpired at a pretty significant clip.
per the N-Port filing 2 months after reopening, there was 78B AUM in VPMAX. the AUM of the fund if nothing changed, no new investments, no new w/d, would be 97 billion dollars. However today there is 76B in AUM.
over 1/5 of the could be value of this fund is gone through new money not making up for redemptions.
My FIL was a long time VPMAX investor. over 30 years. When we talked about it i just spitballed that Vanguard is a index company now. the redemptions are people like my FIL who are retired and moving that money around. When he retired he hired a new advisor beause his was also retiring. they all basically use model portfolios now so he had to sell out of his VPMAX that was long held in a 401k then moved to IRA.
Opening it attracted no new money because people go to vanguard to invest in index funds. So IMO these funds are probably doomed regardless of performance. Had they opened sooner (and opened ETF versions), I think there would be a generation of people who would have started investing in them and continued. But I think we are passed that. dropping ER's 2bps is not going to save them.

According to the article, Schwab will apply fees similar to those that Fidelity uses —
15% of what etf issuers get or a $100 transaction fee.
Assume an investor made a $10,000 etf purchase and the etf's expense ratio was 1.00%.
The investor would incur a $100 cost to hold the etf for one year (excluding trading costs, etc.).
Would Schwab "earn" a $15 cut associated with the initial purchase?
How do these etf fees compare to OEF fees charged for brokerage platform availability?

Just posted all ratings to MFO Premium site using Refinitiv data drop through Friday, 28 November 2025. Was able to use month-to-date numbers to get head start on full data drop, which comes next Saturday.
Despite all the bubble talk, buying the dip this year has been a pretty good strategy, looks like, including in November.

The piece says that Fidelity makes "15% of what ETF issuers get or a $100 transaction fee charged to investors." It links to another page on the same site that clarifies(?): "ETF issuers are required to share 15% of their revenue with Fidelity for access to its customers, or face a stiff $100 levy on orders."
Stock trading remains free. What is the difference? Brokerages can make money on stocks by lending them out, but ETFs can be lent out as well. Or at least they could in 2017 when this brochure was written.
The main difference I see is that ETFs, like other funds, have a revenue source from investors (expense ratio) that brokerages can tap into. Many ETFs already have 12b-1 fees in their filings, though they are currently set at 0.00%. This suggests that the industry has expected for years to be charged shelf space, and can turn these fees on quickly.
For example, from the SAI for several of Fidelity's ETFs:

The Trustees have approved Distribution and Service Plans with respect to shares of each fund (the Plans) pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act (the Rule).
The Rule provides in substance that a fund may not engage directly or indirectly in financing any activity that is primarily intended to result in the sale of shares of the fund except pursuant to a plan approved on behalf of the fund under the Rule.
The Plans, as approved by the Trustees, allow shares of the funds and/or FMR to incur certain expenses that might be considered to constitute indirect payment by the funds of distribution expenses.

Howdy folks,
Couple of things. First, here's a FB post by my friend Pat Heller who founded Liberty Coin here in Lansing. It explains things much better than I, but please understand that he is a gold bug. That said, I've dealt with him for over 40 years and trust him explicitly.
"In early trading in Asian markets Monday December 1, silver has jumped above $57.
If Liberty Coin Service were open, here were the bid and ask spot prices as of a couple minutes ago at which we would be buying and selling physical precious metals:
Gold: bid spot price $4,219.25/ask spot price $4,225.75
Silver: $56.75/$57.25
Platinum: $1,661.00/$1,693.00
Palladium: $1,453.00/$1,495.00
There are huge orders totaling more than 36 million ounces called for immediate delivery of physical silver (representing 4-5% of annual worldwide silver mine output). We are not sure whether this is in the Shanghai or COMEX markets right now. A larger quantity was called for delivery in April, but exchanges had more physical silver available for delivery then. There is a heightened risk that there could be a default in silver derivative contracts if short sellers are unable to find enough physical silver to meet their delivery commitments.
Should there be defaults in the silver derivative contracts, that increases the risk this could happen with gold derivatives next, then every other kind of derivative contracts.
Derivative contracts were established in the 1970s as a means to manipulate markets and hold down gold and silver prices without the need to have physical metal to back up the manipulation. I don't mean to be alarmist, but widespread defaults on derivative contracts could ultimately lead to the collapse of the US dollar and many other world currencies.
Now is the time to make sure you own physical gold and silver in your direct custody or in segregated vault storage under your own name.
If you think you own gold or silver because you own shares of gold or silver exchange traded funds or stored in vaults with unallocated storage, you are at risk of not owning anything. As fast as you can, you should look into taking delivery of metals in unallocated storage in vaults or selling off your gold or silver ETF shares and replacing with physical metals is your direct custody or in segregated storage in precious metals vaults that are not affiliated with banks.
Remember, under current US laws, banks that suffer major losses from derivative contracts they hold are allowed to seize and keep customer cash balances. If you have accounts at banks that trade derivative contracts (which includes virtually all major banks), you should investigate transferring such accounts to credit unions or to smaller banks that don't trade derivatives for their own account.
Liberty Coin Service will open for trading Monday, December 1 at 9:30 AM Eastern."
Here also is a story from regular news
https://finance.yahoo.com/m/0cc223e6-1c4e-3385-b1a4-e78ce1d6a2f3/silver-hits-record-high-on.html
Just for the record, I am STILL scaling into my momentum play.
BTW, sorry for the faux pas posting. Sometimes, I revert to a loaded and loose Marine Sergeant on R&R in Bangkok back in '69.
and so it goes,
peace,
rono