I opened an account in the early 2010s, for access to TGBAX when it was still a solid fund. It filled a small hole in my portfolio (foreign bonds). Firstrade was the only game in town where one could access the cheaper Advisor class shares with a small min. Firstrade charged $9.95/trade back then.
Like much of the rest of the investing world, I abandoned TGBAX a few years later. No reason at the time to keep an empty account with Firstrade. Though I did like being able to walk into their office.
Firstrade didn't go transaction fee free until 2018, after I'd left.
https://www.firstrade.com/press/pr180824

Today I received a UPS package with about 5 pounds of forms - EVERY MONTHLY AND QUARTERLY STATEMENT SINCE 2013 - BUT NOT A SINGLE 1099-DIV!
When they say "Invest with Confidence" they must mean with someone else!

+1 / Somewhat similar to the issue I struggled with for about 3 months before parting company. Secure, pre-announced, accurate and confirmed delivery of financial documents to a pre-authorized destination (either online or thru paper mailings) would seem a rather basic service. Not rocket science.
And think of the trees cut needlessly for all that unwanted paper. :(

I posted a week ago complaining that TRP would not let me view my trust account statements online because the SS# I opened the account with is different than the trust(s) TIN#. I spoke with the TRP rep who said it couldn't be done. I told her I only needed the annual 1099-DIV tax forms for my records. She said she could mail them.
Today I received a UPS package with about 5 pounds of forms - EVERY MONTHLY AND QUARTERLY STATEMENT SINCE 2013 - BUT NOT A SINGLE 1099-DIV!
When they say "Invest with Confidence" they must mean with someone else!

I hear you, and I can FEEL that right along with you.
A different industry entirely, but the same incompetence going on: We still have no INSURANCE CARDS for the current year policy on the car. Liberty Mutual took our money. The policy is paid for. We are covered. But when, in desperation, I searched for and found our LOCAL agent's phone, I called--- after previously using the L.M. published customer Rage and Aggravation phone number. And I was told that Liberty Mutual was using an old address.
The next logical question to be asked is: Why the f*** do they have the correct, current address when they want to TAKE MY MONEY, but when they have to do what's required for me, there's a snafu?" .....Ya, there is no good answer. The LOCAL woman updated the address and once AGAIN requested the stupid insurance cards for us. Supposed to get here by the end of the month. Ya, THAT'S timely, eh? (Shit.)
@bilvihur. Keep us posted.
As I've said many times elsewhere: Customer SERVICE has been dead. Dead as a doornail, for DECADES. Phone agents you will never meet make promises. Phone agents with fake names make promises. Phone agents who know feces about feces tell you they're getting it done for you... Ya. Pardon me, while I contemptuously LAUGH IN YOUR FACE.

I posted a week ago complaining that TRP would not let me view my trust account statements online because the SS# I opened the account with is different than the trust(s) TIN#. I spoke with the TRP rep who said it couldn't be done. I told her I only needed the annual 1099-DIV tax forms for my records. She said she could mail them.
Today I received a UPS package with about 5 pounds of forms - EVERY MONTHLY AND QUARTERLY STATEMENT SINCE 2013 - BUT NOT A SINGLE 1099-DIV!
When they say "Invest with Confidence" they must mean with someone else!

~35% in u.s. gov bonds, maybe less in feb as AUM @ 2.5X since new
via vanguard :
----------------------------
Month end 10 largest holdings-12/31/2023
Rank Holdings % of fund
1 United States Treasury Notes 4.5% 17.13%
2 T. Rowe Price Gov. Reserve 17.09%

FWIW, my account was an IRA (good guess!). I closed it several years ago but the Firstrade still lets me log in though not trade, obviously. So I can pull up some info like this but cannot do things like test trades to see what happens.
Brokerages are often free to set their own mins. It's pretty well known that one can get institutional class shares with lower mins at many brokerages (typically with a TF). It works the other way, too. Sometimes brokerages set mins above the prospectus min. For example, many brokerages set a $100K min for RPHIX even though the prospectus requires only $50K.
Firstrade is just following the propsectus for MRFOX. $10K min for regular accounts, $1K for IRAs.
https://doc.morningstar.com/docdetail.aspx?ticker=MRFOX
The issue I have with Schwab's fee is that it applies to every purchase. I'm willing to pay the 49.95 basis point charge ($49.95 on $10K) one time to get access to an institutional share class of some fund that saves me 25 basis points per year with its lower ER. I'm a long term investor.
But I don't want to do that repeatedly with incremental investments. Fidelity's $5 "side door" - adding smaller amounts via auto-invest - makes the initial fee tolerable. (OTOH, Schwab offers funds with lower mins and seems to have a wider assortment.)

Thanks. May I ask why you closed Firstrade? Antiquated system but does offer a number of mutual funds institutional class without charge.

Vanguard gives 25 free trades/year at the Flagship level. Likely you need that much ($1M) at Schwab before they'll give you a break.
Otherwise, Vanguard charges $3/auto-invest, but with a min of two investments. If you're DCA'ing, that is of no import - you're doing periodic investments already. Under those circumstances, Vanguard is cheaper than Fidelity. And I'll gladly pay $3, or even $5, to save 25 basis points per year (institutional shares vs. retail shares). The break even point is a year with a $2K addition (@Fidelity), and just $1200 at Vanguard.
Vanguard, like Fidelity and Schwab, has its list of NTF funds. It charges TFs on only some funds outside of its own.
A difference of note is that Vanguard, like Merrill, T. Rowe Price, and others charges TFs for sales as well as for purchases, while Fidelity and Schwab charge only for purchases. Not important for DCA'ing, but important in the drawdown phase.
https://investor.vanguard.com/client-benefits/brokerage-fees-commissions
https://www.merrilledge.com/pricing
https://www.troweprice.com/personal-investing/accounts/brokerage/commissions-and-fees.html

FMILX - one manager, 1.3 yrs tenure, $100-500K invested
FDSVX - two managers, 17 & 7 years tenure, both > $1 million invested

Speaking of Schwab, this greeting me just now...

I've had similar things happen, and just reloaded and the page came right up. It may or may not for you. But things are never down for long there, in my experience.

Speaking of Schwab, this greeting me just now...

@msf : " The issue I have with Schwab's fee is that it applies to every purchase. I'm willing to pay the 49.95 basis point charge ($49.95 on $10K) one time to get access to an institutional share class of some fund that saves me 25 basis points per year with its lower ER. I'm a long term investor."
Check with FD1000. He reports that they give him free trades or something to that reasoning. Talk to a rep & see if they'll give you a break.
No DCA into a fund with that $ fee !! I don't like that "deal" either. I think Vanguard is the same with purchases outside their own funds .
Enough said, Derf

Near lowest in 25 years.
Please list best suggestions on how to play Nat Gas.

FWIW, my account was an IRA (good guess!). I closed it several years ago but the Firstrade still lets me log in though not trade, obviously. So I can pull up some info like this but cannot do things like test trades to see what happens.
Brokerages are often free to set their own mins. It's pretty well known that one can get institutional class shares with lower mins at many brokerages (typically with a TF). It works the other way, too. Sometimes brokerages set mins above the prospectus min. For example, many brokerages set a $100K min for RPHIX even though the prospectus requires only $50K.
Firstrade is just following the propsectus for MRFOX. $10K min for regular accounts, $1K for IRAs.
https://doc.morningstar.com/docdetail.aspx?ticker=MRFOX
The issue I have with Schwab's fee is that it applies to every purchase. I'm willing to pay the 49.95 basis point charge ($49.95 on $10K) one time to get access to an institutional share class of some fund that saves me 25 basis points per year with its lower ER. I'm a long term investor.
But I don't want to do that repeatedly with incremental investments. Fidelity's $5 "side door" - adding smaller amounts via auto-invest - makes the initial fee tolerable. (OTOH, Schwab offers funds with lower mins and seems to have a wider assortment.)

Firstrade - $1K min, $100 additional.

Fund Symbol: MRFOX View Prospectus
Fund Type: No Load Open for Investment: Yes Settlement Period: 1 day
NAV*: $29.65 Initial Minimum Amount: $1,000.00 Cut-Off Time: 4:00 PM
NAV Change: -$0.04 Subsequent Amount: $100.00

So, what's crazy is I've been a Firstrade customer for decades with a decent balance and here is what I see:
Fund Name: MARSHFIELD CONCENTRATED OPPTY FD
Fund Symbol: MRFOX View Prospectus I have read the Prospectus
Fund Type: No Load Open for Investment: Yes Settlement Period: 1 day
NAV*: $29.71 Initial Minimum Amount: $10,000.00 Cut-Off Time: 4:00 PM
NAV Change: +$0.18 Subsequent Amount: $100.00 Redemption Fee: see prospectus
How can they have different minimums for the same account type (mine is regular, not IRA)? I also checked this some time ago and the minimum was also $10K. (Sidenote, the $49.95 at Schwab used to really bother me, but its noise in the grand scheme for a $10K or more purchase).

Well said, @yogibearbull.
On M* classifications, FMILX is surely a funny one. I recently carved into it while researching a possible replacement for an existing LCV holding.
Here are FMILX's Top Holdings as of 01/31/24.
Not quite your classic LCV fund!
Top 10 Holdings
29.95% of Total Portfolio
152 holdings as of 01/31/2024
MSFT 7.49%
AAPL 4.24%
NVDA 3.94%
AMZN 3.21%
META 2.60%
GOOGL 1.93%
LLY 1.88%
V 1.82%
UNH 1.42%
SPACE EXPLORATION TECH CORP PP 1.42%

AAII Sentiment Survey, 2/14/24
BULLISH remained the top sentiment (42.2%; above average) & bearish remained the bottom sentiment (26.8%, below average); neutral remained the middle sentiment (31.1%, average); Bull-Bear Spread was +15.4% (above average). Investor concerns: Elections, budget, inflation, economy, the Fed, dollar, Russia-Ukraine (103+ weeks), Israel-Hamas (18+ weeks), geopolitical. For the Survey week (Th-Wed), stocks were mixed (growth up, cyclicals down), bonds down, oil up, gold down, dollar up. With good economic data & stock market, the Fed won't rush to cut. Japan is in technical recession. #AAII #Sentiment #Markets
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1357/thread

@Crash- I'll tell you what- when you find the perfect broker who meets each and every one of your non-negotiable demands, and has a record of perfect service for at least ten years, please let the rest of us know.

Ain’t that the truth? 90% success / satisfaction over time is pretty good in the business world. I’ve been with probably 15 different fund houses over 50 + years. Only two became so atrocious in service that I fled on account of it: Strong Funds and T.Rowe Price. Works out to about 87% success rate. And no one else has ever even come close to sharing in the dubois distinction possessed by the two afore mentioned.

#6. Holcim/HCMLY is a giant Swiss producer of construction aggregates (concrete, gravel, etc) that is spinning off its Holcim-US (Chicago-based) operations. It has been in the list recommended by Meryl Witmer. It's probably as far as one could get from the current Magnificent 7.
"Meryl WITMER/Eagle Capital: BXSL (BDC), EEFT, DFIN, DLTR, Holcim/HCMLY, SLVM (Barron's Roundtable Part 3)"
https://fortune.com/2024/01/28/cement-giant-holcim-to-spin-off-north-america-unit-construction-boom/
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/switzerlands-holcim-spin-off-north-112826250.html

In trying to look for clear & concise explanation of "Y" and "F" shares, I found this:
"If the ticker ends with the letter "Y", this means that it is not an F share, but a Y share."
OK, cannot argue with that at all (-:). But seriously, from the same link (from a legal outfit),
"Y shares designate American Depositary Receipts (ADR) that are being traded in the US market. Banks or other depositary institutions will hold foreign shares and issue receipts for them. This is called an ADR. The ADR will be denominated in a ratio of one ADR to X-number of foreign shares."
"While (F share) trades are executed in US dollars by US broker-dealers, the shares are settled, cleared and custodised in your local market.
An F share is created in the US when a broker-dealer files a Form 211 with FINRA (the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority) to create a US ticker symbol in order to report trades in the US in your company’s shares. This is not a new share. It is a reference to your existing shares via a newly created ticker symbol in the United States for reporting and trading purposes."
My story: from YEARS ago, I had a Canadian "F" share fund. Commission/fee was high - I don't remember if it was $50, but was much higher than $6.95. It had almost 3-day turnaround for trade confirmations (not for settlement!). When I complained, I was told that those don't really trade in the US. Some US aggregator/dealer trades them in Canada when he felt like it, and my broker could confirm only when he reported back. From that time on, I have avoided tickers ending in "F". Tickers ending in "Y" do trade within the US.
https://www.carstedrosenberg.com/post/what-are-f-shares

Why should we always have to settle? Why shouldn't systems work FOR us?

While this model was created to describe goods, it also applies to services.
You want good service? You'll either pay more for it (not cheap), or you'll have to wait for it (slow service, understaffed).
You want fast service? You'll either pay more for it (sufficient, well-trained staff) or get lower quality/limited service.
You want cheap service? You'll have to give up quality (lower paid, less trained providers) or speed (understaffed).
It's just economics. Some places do better than others (e.g. economies of scale, better training methods, more productive technology, etc.), but they are all subject to the same tradeoffs.