Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Had a couple of dealings with them recently, and seemed very responsive and professional. Not the obvious choice, perhaps, but still wondering what people's experience have been with them.
TIAA doesn't self-clear, but does that through Pershing/BK, so that causes some delays in order processing and fund transfers. You have to deal with the rules of both TIAA and Pershing.
Fido, Schwab and Vanguard (at least for a couple of years) self-clear through their subsidiaries.
Not personal experience, but I've helped someone who used to have sizeable managed accounts (both taxable and tax-sheltered) with them. At the time the structure was that you worked with a personal advisor for planning and advice while the actual investments were managed by other "back end" people.
The personal advisor was excellent, laying out not just asset allocation but withdrawal strategies, budgeting, and so on. The back end, well ...
I don't recall various little things they did but I do recall the last straw. They tax-harvested a loss in the taxable account. All well and good. But within the wash sale window they purchased the same security in a tax-sheltered account. This is a no-no. You permanently lose the tax value of the cap loss.
TIAA's excuse: their contract clearly states that each account is managed independently of anything else going on, even if what's going on in another account is their own doing. IOW, they have no responsibility for the left hand knowing what the right hand is doing, even when both hands belong to TIAA. Talk about unclean hands!
The brokerage itself seems okay and has some interesting NTF offerings. For example, MFS institutional class funds such as BRXIX ($500 min).
@yogibearbull - I would consider Vanguard, but absolutely loath dealing with them. They have to be among the most customer unfriendly fund families out there.
They [Vanguard] have to be among the most customer unfriendly fund families out there.
I try to distinguish between customer unfriendly brokerages (for which Vanguard seems to qualify) and customer unfriendly fund families.
Some people consider Vanguard funds to be unfriendly because they close funds with no advance warning, they have stringent frequent trading rules, they enforce min balance requirements on share classes. They don't pay for shelf space. All of those are designed to improve fund performance.
Those are friendly policies for this investor (he says, referring to himself in the third person). YMMV.
I keep waffling between opening up a TIAA brokerage window account for my 403(b) but not sure I want the hassle of dealing with yet another account and clearinghouse ... but having the ability to invest in other things would be nice/helpful and possibly reassuring. (Not that I'm complaining too much, my RWMGX is still doing quite nicely on its own.)
"I try to distinguish between customer unfriendly brokerages (for which Vanguard seems to qualify) and customer unfriendly fund families."
Vanguard funds are "investor-friendly" but their brokerage leaves a lot to be desired. New Vanguard CEO Salim Ramji is focused on three broad areas to implement improvements but nevertheless my Vanguard accounts were transferred to other brokerages in 2024.
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.
The application should be readily accessible online. Requiring senior management approval (which could take several weeks) to send an application form would be a huge disincentive for me. This entire process seems ridiculous.
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.
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.
It's amazing how backwards modern organizations can still be these days. And in VG's case, what Shostakovich describes is inexcusable!
I needed to request a vital record from a NY locality and they could only mail me the form via USPS. Other localities had it on their website and/or emailed it right to me so I could print it out and get it notarized.
And last month I needed to update my state witholdings in Maryland. If I was a MD resident, I could do it online, but if you were claiming exemption from Maryland taxes, you had to download, physically sign, and return a paper copy to Annapolis.
In 2025, this kind of workflow is outdated, cumbersome, and plain embarassing.
"If I was a MD resident, I could do it online, but if you were claiming exemption from Maryland taxes, you had to download, physically sign, and return a paper copy to Annapolis."
They are trying to be pricks would be my first guess. This is the sort of stuff I would expect from companies when customers want to leave and why people buildup resentments towards government and government employees.
"aside from the rhetorical question: why?"
@Shostakovich ? You do not need to answer but I had the same question.
Probably not what you were looking for, but FWIW, NYS has vaccination records online.
My pet peeve is faxing. I don't know if it is law, custom, or a combination, but some institutions (notably medical) only accept USPS or fax; not email. And they never seem to let you upload files.
I assume the fax requirement is for the appearance of security. But since faxes can come via internet servers (no more secure than email), all this does is provide a legal fig leaf for the recipient without providing any real security.
I am not able to stop TRP from sending me paper notifications and quarterly statements, even after I checked "electronic" preference wherever I could find on their site. I have mutual fund accounts and not a brokerage with TRP. I even talked to their Rep about it but the leak still persists. Does anyone else have that problem?
I subscribe to USPS Informed Delivery. I get an email each day indicating the incoming mail. Every month, a few pieces of mail are missed but they eventually show up. I suppose those were misdelivered and if the recipient put it back for remailing, it comes to me. Our and nearby neighbor's mails often get mixed up and we can easily sort that out. I also drop all important mail at the post office. Before, I had no idea what mails I missed, but now I know which mails I am missing.
I have not mailed anything in more than a year - the last one being renewing my passport. USPS (when I sent in) was a lot better than UPS (when US Govt sent back).
@rforno and any other TIAA customers: I have been tempted to consolidate my TIAA retirement (403b mostly) with our Schwab joint brokerage account and two Roths in anticipation of the day when I could no longer manage the accounts. My wife would not be in a position to do what I do, nor is there an heir who fits the bill. I trust my TIAA Wealth Advisor, but I use him very little and I have never paid a wrap fee to any entity. However, having either Schwab or TIAA manage the whole ball of wax seems a sensible thing to do. I’m not enthusiastic about admitting that I could start declining mentally any day now. BTW, I turned 83 yesterday. Anyone who has experience with TIAA in this regard is welcome to comment. I’d also like to know what others think about using a single brokerage to handle all the family assets. FWIIW, the local Schwab rep, who is my titular contact, does not impress me much.
Comments
Fido, Schwab and Vanguard (at least for a couple of years) self-clear through their subsidiaries.
The personal advisor was excellent, laying out not just asset allocation but withdrawal strategies, budgeting, and so on. The back end, well ...
I don't recall various little things they did but I do recall the last straw. They tax-harvested a loss in the taxable account. All well and good. But within the wash sale window they purchased the same security in a tax-sheltered account. This is a no-no. You permanently lose the tax value of the cap loss.
TIAA's excuse: their contract clearly states that each account is managed independently of anything else going on, even if what's going on in another account is their own doing. IOW, they have no responsibility for the left hand knowing what the right hand is doing, even when both hands belong to TIAA. Talk about unclean hands!
The brokerage itself seems okay and has some interesting NTF offerings. For example, MFS institutional class funds such as BRXIX ($500 min).
2009 actually. I know - it seems like only yesterday
FWIW, here are a couple of lists of brokerages and their clearing houses. Large brokerages generally self-clear.
https://www.brokerage-review.com/discount-broker/brokerage-houses-clearing-firms.aspx
https://moneywise.com/investing/broker-clearing-firms
They [Vanguard] have to be among the most customer unfriendly fund families out there.
I try to distinguish between customer unfriendly brokerages (for which Vanguard seems to qualify) and customer unfriendly fund families.
Some people consider Vanguard funds to be unfriendly because they close funds with no advance warning, they have stringent frequent trading rules, they enforce min balance requirements on share classes. They don't pay for shelf space. All of those are designed to improve fund performance.
Those are friendly policies for this investor (he says, referring to himself in the third person). YMMV.
and customer unfriendly fund families."
Vanguard funds are "investor-friendly" but their brokerage leaves a lot to be desired.
New Vanguard CEO Salim Ramji is focused on three broad areas to implement improvements
but nevertheless my Vanguard accounts were transferred to other brokerages in 2024.
https://advisors.vanguard.com/insights/article/a-message-from-salim-ramji
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.
The application should be readily accessible online.
Requiring senior management approval (which could take several weeks)
to send an application form would be a huge disincentive for me.
This entire process seems ridiculous.
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.
I needed to request a vital record from a NY locality and they could only mail me the form via USPS. Other localities had it on their website and/or emailed it right to me so I could print it out and get it notarized.
And last month I needed to update my state witholdings in Maryland. If I was a MD resident, I could do it online, but if you were claiming exemption from Maryland taxes, you had to download, physically sign, and return a paper copy to Annapolis.
In 2025, this kind of workflow is outdated, cumbersome, and plain embarassing.
They are trying to be pricks would be my first guess. This is the sort of stuff I would expect from companies when customers want to leave and why people buildup resentments towards government and government employees.
"aside from the rhetorical question: why?"
@Shostakovich ? You do not need to answer but I had the same question.
My pet peeve is faxing. I don't know if it is law, custom, or a combination, but some institutions (notably medical) only accept USPS or fax; not email. And they never seem to let you upload files.
I assume the fax requirement is for the appearance of security. But since faxes can come via internet servers (no more secure than email), all this does is provide a legal fig leaf for the recipient without providing any real security.
Taxable a/c do have consolidated 1099.
I receive my regular Vanguard statements via USPS.
There is no brokerage or fund family I deal with that gives me a hassle for doing all my business via USPS; none. Except Vanguard.
Our and nearby neighbor's mails often get mixed up and we can easily sort that out.
I also drop all important mail at the post office.
Before, I had no idea what mails I missed, but now I know which mails I am missing.
I have not mailed anything in more than a year - the last one being renewing my passport. USPS (when I sent in) was a lot better than UPS (when US Govt sent back).