• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Vanguard initial minimum investment

Yes, but after you put in the first $200 million, you can add more shares $100 at a time.

It's the top fund in my portfolio.
 
Looking at the returns, there's no reason to buy it. Might as well just buy SPY, this fund's return just track the S&P. Seems to me it's just a shortcut for institutions to not be holding millions of shares.

Product summary

Seeks to track the performance of the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, which measures the investment return of large-capitalization stocks.
Follows a passively managed, full-replication approach.
Provides a convenient way to match the performance of a substantial portion of the nation’s largest stocks.
 
Looks like an account setup for Hedge Fund managers although I don't think Hedge Fund managers are smart enough to use it. You take other peoples money, charge them 2% for managing it, then invest it in a fund that has an expense ratio of 0.02%. That 1.98% is your profit.

Not even Social Security has an expense ratio that low. I think I found how to save Social Security!

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/admin.html
 
Looking at the returns, there's no reason to buy it. Might as well just buy SPY, this fund's return just track the S&P. Seems to me it's just a shortcut for institutions to not be holding millions of shares.

SPY's expense ratio is 0.09%. VIIIX is 0.02%.

Institutional shares are meant for large companies. Especially their retirement portfolios.

I wish my 401k offered VIIIX as an option.
 
Last edited:
SPY's expense ratio is 0.09%. VIIIX is 0.02%.

Institutional shares are meant for large companies. Especially their retirement portfolios.

I wish my 401k offer VIIIX as an option.

Bingo. These are for pension plans. I just looked out of curiosity and we have a couple of plans using it.
 
Looking at the returns, there's no reason to buy it. Might as well just buy SPY, this fund's return just track the S&P.

😵

no you dont get it

VIIIX is just like SPY, but with a lower ER

thus you will end up with more money with VIIIX than with SPY
 
For institutional funds, yes, that's normal.


For individuals, you can start with ETFs (cheap), or if you want to get their funds, start at either $1000 or $3000, depending on what you're after.
 
For institutional funds, yes, that's normal.

Well, I don't know if normal is the word. I've never seen another mutual fund with an expense ratio that low or a minimum investment that high. But $20 - $50 million minimum investments aren't that rare for institutional funds.
 
For institutional funds, yes, that's normal.


For individuals, you can start with ETFs (cheap), or if you want to get their funds, start at either $1000 or $3000, depending on what you're after.

There are better ones to with higher buy ins. I bought into one at $10k. The performance was excellent. Sadly it was part of my divorce settlement. There was a higher performer (with lower costs too), but that jump up required $50k.

Edit: it was VTSAX. Something like a $4k return in around a year. It's still way up with a nearly 30% YTD
 
Last edited:
Well, I don't know if normal is the word. I've never seen another mutual fund with an expense ratio that low or a minimum investment that high. But $20 - $50 million minimum investments aren't that rare for institutional funds.
"Normal" for a Vanguard institutional fund, I guess.



I guess they're not thought of as such, but 401k plans are pension plans.
My understanding is that they are being used as retirement plans, but that's not what they were intended for. Someone happened to figure out that that was one possible use for them, and since then, that section of the IRS code has been forcibly pushed into that kind of service, with the financial services industry drooling at the thought of millions of people entering their marketplace, knowing absolutely nothing about finance, or even what a "mutual fund" really is.
 
except that a defined benefit plan gives you guarantees, whereas 401k does not

"Normal" for a Vanguard institutional fund, I guess.



My understanding is that they are being used as retirement plans, but that's not what they were intended for. Someone happened to figure out that that was one possible use for them, and since then, that section of the IRS code has been forcibly pushed into that kind of service, with the financial services industry drooling at the thought of millions of people entering their marketplace, knowing absolutely nothing about finance, or even what a "mutual fund" really is.

A 401k is not a pension.

"A 401(k) plan is the common name in the USA for the tax-qualified, defined-contribution pension account defined in subsection 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Taxation Code"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/401k

I don't know the history of 401k plans, so Jeff may be right.
 
"A 401(k) plan is the common name in the USA for the tax-qualified, defined-contribution pension account defined in subsection 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Taxation Code"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/401k

I don't know the history of 401k plans, so Jeff may be right.

If you clicked on that wiki under your own bolded word, you'd find this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pension

A 401K has become our 'pensions' for most of us, but it is not a true pension at all.

In fact, a whole new definition that wiki shows was created to perpetuate this nonsense.
 
Back
Top