Ah, the ramblings of the Wise!I don't have any of the numbers to give back to you. This list of points is far wider-ranging than the retirement board.From what I have read:--Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT) has found that the PRIMARY factor for returns is asset allocation--what percentage have you in cash, bonds, various classes of stock (e.g., large cap, small cap, etc.), etc.--A logical outgrowth of this is to invest in these asset classes (which have characteristic rates of return) through the lowest-cost means available. Typically, this means index funds.--Around Fooldom, other techniques have been used to define an "asset class". Instead of using a set of members defined by Morgan Stanly, Standard & Poor's, or others, research has shown other techniques which seem to have a typically large characteristic return. Thus, are born Dogs of the Dow, etc. etc.I believe most of the broker's statements can be refuted. Perhaps, for you, this person gives you advice which is worth the extra expenses. I think that he is blowing smoke on some of the points, particularly on mutual funds beating the S&P consistently.By the way, you might want to ask him why it's better to compare against bank savings rates? Perhaps because his alternatives don't compare favorably with S&P 500 returns, which Vanguard can come very to duplicating?