@Baseball_Fan -
I’d never scoff at the tech people. I don’t understand it very well, but do try to draw some meaningful inferences from watching the charts. Occasionally this leads to some kind of tactical move. I thought you might enjoy a remark by Bill Fleckenstein about 2 weeks ago. I won’t bother with a link, since it’s accessible only thru subscription:
-
“On a related note, although I don't comment about it much, I've been watching a potential head-and-shoulders pattern form on Bitcoin and it looks like we may have a failed right shoulder coincidently with taking out the 50-day moving average. I don't want to make too much out of it, but to the extent that Bitcoin and weak bonds have hampered gold's progress, these developments may free it up a bit.”
- Daily Rap by Bill Fleckenstein, May 4, 2021

Wednesday & I'm seeing RED , just like last week . Is it time to sell or buy on the dipper ? Last week the last two days were up after the first three days were down. I took a peek on Saturday & decided to stay the course. Now I'm back at the same point. Time to take some profit or buy a little more value ?
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-money-investors-suggest-the-cycle-has-peaked-morning-brief-101209858.html
Derf

… Fidelity's holding period to avoid early redemption fees is 60 days, compared to Schwab's 90 days.
Thanks @carew388,
That’s an unexpected issue for me. I shuffle a fair amount of $$ around at TRP (and Invesco). Not selling entire fund - just adding or subtracting. During periods like March & April 2020 you want to be moving from less aggressive into more aggressive funds. Usually abide by a self imposed 30 day rule - in addition to TRP’s own 30-day block.
*Question: Is that early redemption fee only applied to the most recent shares bought? First in / first out perhaps? Makes a heck of a difference!
I did find this …..
“Fidelity charges a short-term trading fee each time you sell or exchange shares of a FundsNetwork NTF fund held less than 60 days. This fee does not apply to Fidelity funds, money market funds, FundsNetwork Transaction Fee funds, FundsNetwork load funds … “
That’s good news. But still trying to figure out whether first in / first out applies in the NTF cases.
Ahhh … Fidelity sounds fine (as does Schwab). Fido has a lot of good funds of its own - and there’s no short term trading fee. Used to play around with their sector funds when younger.
I’ve dealt with TRP for 25 years. Their online system is great 99% of the time. Pretty slick. But the method of switching over to electronic delivery is a bit gimped up. My talk with them today reminds me of the old line: A man said to the Universe … “Sir, I exist …”

+ 1 Mark Hank, I've been with Fidelity since 1993 and highly recommend them. Transfers between brokerages are called In-Kind/ACAT transfers. For in-kind transfers, research Fidelity to make sure that they sell the TRP mutual funds that you are transferring in. I would also choose Fidelity over Schwab for two reasons: Fidelity funds are ntf with no minimum balance, and Fidelity's holding period to avoid early redemption fees is 60 days, compared to Schwab's 90 days. The ACAT transfers are easy to set up at Fidelity and you receive the incoming assets, whether mutual funds, etfs or cash within 5-7 business days.

“Decades ago, Fidelity nudged all investors off of their mutual fund platform onto their brokerage platform. (Who remembers T-account numbers?) Vanguard is in the middle of that process now.”
Thanks. Wondered about that based on some past discussions here. And the Fido rep I spoke with today never mentioned that little detail.
There is a difference. With a fund-to-fund exchange, it goes through at that day’s closing price. That’s handy if it’s a sector or very volatile fund and you’re watching the market. But in a brokerage, as I understand it, it takes 1 extra day to clear. One reason I never got into a brokerage. Admittedly, that kind of timing’s less important to me than years ago. (Still, OPGSX jumped over 5% yesterday.)
The way around that, I guess, is to buy and sell ETFs …. if you want the latest market price … Right?

As with Vanguard, the question may be moot. AFAIK, one can't open a fund position directly in either family.
Sample prospectus boilerplate:

If you do not currently have a Fidelity ® brokerage account or a Fidelity ® mutual fund account and would like to invest in a fund, you may need to complete an application. For more information about a Fidelity ® brokerage account or a Fidelity ® mutual fund account, please visit Fidelity's web site at www.fidelity.com, call 1-800-FIDELITY, or visit a Fidelity Investor Center (call 1-800-544-9797 for the center nearest you).

But all one finds on Fidelity.com is this list of "accounts for investing":
Brokerage Accounts, Cash Management Accounts, HSA Accounts, and 529 College Savings Plans.
No mutual fund accounts.
https://www.fidelity.com/customer-service/investing
Under Forms, if one checks "open an account" one sees a plethora of account forms, but the only two forms presented to open a vanilla, individual taxable account are a CMA (brokerage) application and a "Non-Retirement Brokerage Account for Individuals, Joint" application.
https://www.fidelity.com/customer-service/forms-applications/all-forms
Decades ago, Fidelity nudged all investors off of their mutual fund platform onto their brokerage platform. (Who remembers T-account numbers?) Vanguard is in the middle of that process now.

FWIW - I have been with Fidelity for over 50 years with hardly a hiccup. Any problems (all minor) were handled promptly with less than a 10 min phone call. No hassles working through their phone menu to obtain an actual human on the other end.
What they don't have is possibly every last mutual fund you'd like to own with or without purchase fees but they have a large selection as you've already documented. A nice recent option was the incorporation of many TRP funds in their stables. Great research options across the board. I've been quite happy.

Along those lines, another thing to keep in mind is that some brokers offer a higher level of service based on the total assets you have with them. Fido’s Premium Service kicks in when your household has over $250K in its accounts. Schwab used to, but no longer, has formal service tiers based on your assets.

PSHZF is a closed end fund. There may not be a difference in how brokerages handle ETFs and CEFs, but they are different from an investment perspective. Vanguard's VERX is an example of an ETF on the London Exchange.
https://www.vanguardinvestor.co.uk/investments/vanguard-ftse-developed-europe-ex-uk-ucits-etf-eur-distributing
Fidelity provides three different ways to trade international securities: directly on a foreign exchange with foreign currency, on a foreign exchange with trades denominated in dollars, and domestically if the foreign stock is traded OTC. See pp. 3-4 of the brokerage commission and fee schedule.
https://www.fidelity.com/bin-public/060_www_fidelity_com/documents/Brokerage_Commissions_Fee_Schedule.pdf
One could purchase Pershing Square Holdings, Ltd in pounds sterling directly on the London Exchange via the ticker PSH:GB. When traded this way, there's no $50 added fee, but Fidelity does charge a £9 commission as well as a currency exchange fee.
You seem to be writing about the third method (OTC). Even there, a $50 fee is not always added. It depends on whether the DTC can process the transaction. For example, one can trade another UK CEF, Scottish Mortgage Investment Trust PLC under the ticker STMZF without incurring a $50 fee.
Here's a list of the 30 largest UK CEFs (Pershing is #6):
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/discover/news-and-insights/discover-london-listed-investment-funds-market

Fidelity will let you purchase this security, but they charge a $50 "foreign settlement fee" for each Buy.

cool!
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/18/opinion/archegos-bill-hwang-gary-gensler.html
chump banks and loopholes, man

related
bitcoin to 250k in 12 months???
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/bitcoin-at-250-000-in-a-year-this-rocket-fuel-will-help-it-get-there-says-former-goldman-sachs-alum-11621336229
to the moon we go??
or to the grave we go??
we will wait and see

If you’re happy with your TRP funds but not happy with their service, are you planning on transferring your TRP funds in-kind to a new house? Both Schwab and Fido offer most TRP funds NTF (Based on my limited data, Schwab seems to have the edge in number of NTF TRP funds.)
Trading stocks and NTF funds is free at both. No IRA maintenance fees depending the size of your account. Both offer a wide variety of load-waived funds. In general, buying TF funds costs $75 to buy at Schwab and $50 to buy at Fidelity, selling is free.
When needed I’ve had good service from both and have been able to handle most transactions (including asset and wire transfers) electronically without the need to contact a rep.

Here’s a list of the 50 largest houses. Some are load-based. Any stand out as worthy of consideration? The number on the right references total number of distinct fund offerings.
SOURCE
Retail Net Assets # of distinct funds
1 Fidelity Investments $984,173,589,258 315
2 Vanguard Group $962,331,327,507 148
3 American Funds $956,584,547,987 42
4 Franklin Templeton Investments $377,385,331,414 122
5 T. Rowe Price & Co. $345,725,591,811 110
6 Columbia Management $167,493,529,444 140
7 Dodge & Cox $126,826,526,974 5
8 OppenheimerFunds $125,473,946,434 72
9 John Hancock Funds $119,789,419,458 225
10 Pacific Investment Management Co. $118,411,876,036 73
11 Invesco Ltd. $95,323,126,745 92
12 BlackRock Inc. $90,785,119,662 116
13 Janus Capital Group $84,717,855,431 48
14 American Century Investments $71,948,919,961 86
15 MFS Investment Management $71,059,542,832 74
16 Lord Abbett & Co. $66,647,971,069 42
17 ING Retirement $58,294,891,374 150
18 Wells Fargo Advantage Funds $48,938,991,118 101
19 Putnam Investments $48,697,487,901 79
20 AllianceBernstein Inc. $48,012,344,847 74
21 Eaton Vance Corp. $45,749,419,375 91
22 DWS Investments $43,664,723,778 67
23 JPMorgan Funds $43,495,216,232 108
24 USAA $41,901,152,367 41
25 Legg Mason Inc. $40,997,886,898 87
26 Hartford Mutual Funds $39,801,202,624 81
27 Dreyfus Funds $35,223,057,365 105
28 Ivy Funds $34,953,774,009 30
29 First Eagle Funds $34,849,628,600 5
30 Northern Funds $34,626,707,067 51
31 Schwab Funds $34,218,636,841 47
32 Principal Funds $33,220,356,251 63
33 Prudential Investments $32,560,310,174 44
34 Thornburg Investment Management $30,706,861,162 16
35 Royce Funds $30,583,106,754 30
36 Russell Investments $29,943,773,637 39
37 Artisan Funds $28,990,199,955 12
38 Federated Investors $27,512,268,214 66
39 Goldman Sachs Asset Management $26,350,742,126 72
40 Pioneer Investments $24,616,061,833 37
41 Davis Funds $24,203,544,825 8
42 Natixis Funds $22,552,861,400 28
43 Oakmark Funds $22,312,816,162 7
44 Waddell & Reed Inc. $21,894,219,733 22
45 VALIC $20,406,552,997 45
46 TIAA-CREF $20,067,405,527 50
47 Nuveen Investments $19,271,984,888 106
48 Delaware Investments $18,747,941,089 64
49 Vantagepoint Funds $18,216,359,065 29
50 MainStay Funds $18,123,576,513 43
Source: Morningstar

How can this BE?
CBC news article.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/td-bank-accused-of-losing-customers-rsps-again-1.6029875

Myth #5 "This borrowing fuels the notion that the government is raiding or even stealing from Social Security and leaving it with nothing but IOUs. But the government has always made full repayment, and the interest increases Social Security's assets, to the tune of more than $80 billion in 2019 alone.
Interest payment of$80 BILLION in 2019 alone !! How much are they borrowing ???
Derf

Planning to move some $$ from TRP after dealing with poor service the past 4-6 months. My thinking is to start small - probably at Fido. Get a mm fund with check writing up and running. If happy with their service, website, etc. expand that out to some IRA transfers in. I’d like to think TRP will get their front office back in order soon. But it’s been a most frustrating 4-5 months dating back to January - if not earlier.
Some explanation.
In January I put through a change of address. Got confirmation promptly online. Double-checked with a phone call same day. Yet 3 weeks later they sent a fresh pack of blank checks to the old address. After that, out of security concerns, I switched to all-electronic delivery of statements. Worked fine for 3 months (at least I assume) until last week when a complete monthly account statement displaying Roth, Traditional and TOD account info arrived U.S. mail. Called TRP again. Was told having the existing check writing feature active on the TOD money fund would require being sent monthly paper statements on all accounts from now on. Geez - I didn’t even know they had monthly statements. So, during that call I axed the check writing feature.
Now, a few days later, another paper statement shows up in the mail - this one’s confirming a small exchange I made a week ago. Called again. Inquired as to the date the mailing of paper statements had resumed so I’d know they were all correctly delivered. They say they cannot look back in time as to whether a statement was delivered by mail or electronically. Asked to speak to tech support and was denied. And I haven’t even mentioned the lengthy phone delays often encountered.
What’s Important to me
- Decent number and variety of managed funds: Growth, value, income, allocation funds, sector funds
- Ability to move funds from old custodian to new one electronically.
- Ability to move money between funds fairly regularly without trading fees. 30 day “blocks” are OK.
- Load free with reasonable ERs
- Option to defer taxes when taking IRA distributions (probably pretty common)
- e delivery of documents
- free checkwriting
- $2500 or lower initial fund purchase

Thanks for your figures. Now I can be more specific to your particular "what if". Since I'm still making estimates, feel free to adjust the calculations as needed.
For the sake of argument, let's assume that your SS benefits are 50% taxable. (It could be as high as 85%.) Let's also assume that you're working part time until age 70 so that we don't have too many different intervals to compute.
Finally, let's assume a fed marginal tax rate of 22% and a state marginal rate of 6% for a combined 28% rate. We have to pick some figure to work with to make this concrete.
I gather from your followup that you need an extra $20K/year (after tax) over and above your part time income for your expenses until you fully retire (assumed age 70). The fact that you'd be drawing from your IRA for this money suggests no money in taxable accounts - since that's what conventional wisdom says to deplete first.
So if you defer benefits, you'll need to draw $27,778/year from the IRA. (72% of this gives $20K post tax).
OTOH, if you take benefits at age 67, you'll get to "bank" $14,028/year, assuming you bank it in that same deductible T-IRA:
$35K pre-tax SS benefits = $20K for expenses + $14,028 to IRA + $972 taxes
[ net taxes = tax on SS benefits - tax savings on deductible IRA contribution
$972 = (28% x 1/2 x $35K) - (28% x $14,028) = $4,900 - $3,928]
So from age 67 to age 70, you're either reducing your IRA by $27,778/year or growing it by $14,028. That's a difference of $41,806/year for three years. In pretax dollars. In post-tax dollars (72%), that's $30.1K.
I already explained how to account for the growth of this amount in an earlier post in this thread. So I'll just give the results here:
Expected value of $30.1K (post-tax) difference/year over three years: $104K (portfolio visualizer), $93K in real (inflation adjusted) dollars.
After age 70, if you've deferred SS, you'll be receiving 132%/108% x $35K, roughly $42.8K/year.
Compared with the $35K you'd get by starting at age 67, that's a $7.8K/year difference pre-tax, real dollars. Post tax, the difference is $7.8K - (28% x $7.8K x 1/2) = $6.7K/year.
The extra savings and growth ($93K real dollars to age 70) that you get by taking SS at age 67 can on average be expected to cover this $6.7K shortfall through age 87 (portfolio visualizer).
That's a tad under what the new RMD table1 (single life) gives as the expected lifetime (88.2) for someone now age 67.
The comment "by the way your dead at the end anyway" suggests that you're not giving much weight to the risk of loss once you're dead, since, well, you're dead anyway. OTOH, the risk of having less money while you're alive is going to matter. A risk averse person who values these two risks (dying before "breaking even", and living "too long") differently will tend to make the choice that reduces the more important risk.
In addition, the estimate that by deferring benefits one will begin pulling ahead around age 87 is a result subject to wide variations. Maybe the market will not produce 7%/year (the figure I used as input), maybe it will swoon early in your drawdown period. Maybe you'll do much better, maybe you'll do much worse.
In contrast, SS is a steady (inflation adjusted) income stream. All else being equal, the risk averse person will take the sure thing.
A final note on the numbers. The calculations above incorporate the effect of taxes and account for investment growth. Your potential shortfall by taking benefits at age 67 and living to 100 still comes out to nearly triple magnitude you hypothesized: ""$10k, 20k, 30k maybe?" Or maybe $87K (13 x $6.7K, post tax, in real dollars).

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/05/17/michael-burry-of-the-big-short-reveals-a-530-million-bet-against-tesla.html
Michael Burry of ‘The Big Short’ reveals a $530 million bet against Tesla
KEY POINTS
Michael Burry is long puts against 800,100 shares of Tesla or $534 million by the end of the first quarter, according to a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Burry was one of the first investors to call and profit from the subprime mortgage crisis.
Burry previously mentioned in a tweet, that Tesla's reliance on regulatory credits to generate profits is also an impediment to the company's long-term prospects****
No pain _no play no gain
You may need to go * all in * sometimes to win it big

+1 et91 I always try to find ntf substitutes for tf funds. Dodge & Cox has been my exception, but I'm hoping to buy DODIX ntf at Chase You Invest;unfortunately the minimum investment is $2500, but if the minimum changed to $1000, I would buy the fund today !