It just strikes me strange that they're like this. I don't have my CD's and MMA's in non-FDIC insured banks, so why do I need just trust VG to be doing the right thing? Hi SF,I think the FDIC insurance at banks was first instituted to protect the 'little guys' from losing their life savings (which usually amounts to less than $100K), hence the $100K 'ceiling'.My understanding (not based on any 'facts', but just assumed) is that accounts at investment/brokerage houses are not insured. My assumption was always that those who have enough money to risk in 'investments', have enough money to assume the risk of non-insured loss.I'm not even sure that the insurance on brokerage accounts covers 'fraud', but I don't know. I do know that many years ago during the great 'salad oil swindle', investors would have lost a lot more, but American Express decided to make good on most of the investor losses, but THEY WEREN'T REQUIRED TO DO SO. I believe one or two brokerage houses went under at that time.I have heard several times in the past that this is a good reason NOT to keep all your mutual fund holdings at one brokerage house, or in one fund family. Disclosure: I currently hold mutual funds at both Fidelity and Vanguard.2old
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar<