Skip to main content
No. of Recommendations: 0
From what I have heard, the primary difference is that VALIC will charge participants 1% of total assets each and every year for the rest of the life of the plan, whereas I believe that Fidelity does not.

The next effect is that you can expect your total accumulation to be roughly 20% worse when you retire in 20-some years, than if the employer had stayed with Fidelity.

So why did they change? Quite possibly because VALIC bribed the employer (legally, in the technical sense of offering to give the employer a portion of that 1% excess surcharge, thereby making the employer's costs substantially less than if they had stayed with Fidelity).

If so, then clearly, the employer does not have the employee's best interests at heart.

You can check the veracity of the above by asking how a 100% investment in an S&P500 index fund would have done over the past few years, and compare that result with Fidelity's or Vanguard's. That would give you a comparison figure -- perhaps it will show I'm wrong (because maybe their policy is different from what I've heard).

Print the post  


The Retirement Investing Board
This is the board for all discussions related to Investing for and during retirement. To keep the board relevant and Foolish to everyone, please avoid making any posts pertaining to political partisanship. Fool on and Retire on!
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.