What site did you own and sell?

Exactly. It's a loss leader.

Do you recommend fzrox and fnilx for a Roth ira?

@@23janneter Absolutely. But the FNILX is performing substantially better than FZROX the last few years. Large cap is outperforming the total market, basically.

Distributions don’t matter. NAV decreases proportionally to the distribution.

You need to educate yourself better. You lack knowledge of just how dividends and cap gains work.

@@nickv4073 Though stock dividends do not result in any actual increase in value for investors at the time of issuance, they affect stock price similar to that of cash dividends. After the declaration of a stock dividend, the stock's price often increases. However, because a stock dividend increases the number of shares outstanding while the value of the company remains stable, it dilutes the book value per common share, and the stock price is reduced accordingly.

@@nickv4073 the difference of divided frequency between fskax and fzrox is not the determining factor of out performance. Educate yourself.

@@nickv4073 For example:You own 500 shares at $11 per share at year-end, for a total worth of $5,500. There is a $1 per share dividend. Therefore, net of accumulated dividends in the fund, your fund is worth $10 per share. Assuming dividends are reinvested, you'll get $500 ($1 x 500 shares) reinvested in the fund. $500 / $10 per share = 50 additional shares. Now you own 550 shares at $10 each, which equals your original $5,500.

Me too. I have FXNAX in my taxable account.

Don't do it. Actively managed funds are a scam and a great disservice to the investor public. The evidence is clear and overwhelming. Over the LONG term, actively managed funds rarely beat APPROPRIATE index funds. We need to get Congress to make a law that requires that 401Ks ONLY offer index funds. If an employee insists on being in actively managed funds, then they can roll their money into an actively managed IRA. Actively managed funds are a giant SKIMMING OPERATION, that are making the world's investors worse off. Jack Bogle figured this out decades ago. At any point in time, an actively managed fund will beat index funds, but this is irrelevant. As investors, the only thing we care about is our LONG term return. And lastly and most importantly, actively managed funds publish FAKE growth of $10,000 charts. Don't rely upon them. Use Morningstar growth of $10,000 charts that use APPROPRIATE comparison index returns. The actively managed growth of $10,000 charts use INAPPROPRIATE index comparison funds, which of course, they beat out.

This - the money you gain from compounding your dividend payments quarterly rather than annually more than pays for the expense ratio. I think that this is really where Fidelity is making the money on these funds. They're collecting the dividend payments throughout the year from the index companies, and investing them on an essentially interest free loan from the fund holders until they have to pay out at the end of the year.

@@richardm123 Can they really do that? Ideally the dividend money from the held companies that the fund holds should go to the NAV of the fund. In which case it doesn't matter how often they pay (not counting tax implications), since the dividends over time just go to NAV and increase your unit price, until the fund pays a distribution and NAV/unit price go down by the same amount.

Mutual funds may pay out dividends at various times. There is no industry standard. The dividend rule is based on SEC regulations defining "mutual fund." You, the shareholder, are responsible for taxes on dividends, NOT the mutual fund.

What a nothing burger.

Maybe Fidelity chose to only declare dividends once a year, for their ZERO funds, to control their expenses.

Dividends don’t matter whether quarterly, annually, or never. Dividends cause a decrease in the NAV

@@justinm7621 if div gets reinvested it maters

@@inout804 TheCoppergoat was stating Zero funds pay dividends once a year and their traditional funds pay bi-annually. I am saying this has no impact on performance because yes the dividends will be reinvested at the lower NAV. Net asset value decreases by the exact same amount as the dividend. If there is no dividend there is no decrease in NAV. Dividends either annually versus bi-annually will not cause one to perform better than the other was my point.

For example:You own 500 shares at $11 per share at year-end, for a total worth of $5,500. There is a $1 per share dividend. Therefore, net of accumulated dividends in the fund, your fund is worth $10 per share. Assuming dividends are reinvested, you'll get $500 ($1 x 500 shares) reinvested in the fund. $500 / $10 per share = 50 additional shares. Now you own 550 shares at $10 each, which equals your original $5,500.

Yes. The fidelity zero funds can only be held in fidelity account

@@alexanderb4465 I've seen this criticism. But couldn't you just exchange the Zero fund for a fund that can be transferred? FNILX becomes FXAIX with a simple exchange.

Fidelity is garbage

Standard and Poors are idiots to have waited as long as they did to add TSLA to the index, I think it was like top 20 on the list before they added it, effectively buying the top, and missing all the mad gains along the way. The WHOLE point of indexing is that you passively get the returns of the stock market, but if they wait until the new and dynamic companies reach peak speculation before buying in, then you really are not getting the benefit of indexing you were expecting. Fidelities funds also have this problem, because they only buy and sell once a year. The trick is to get in early enough to get the big move, preferably before it cracks the top 400, which should probably have at least 2 buys and sells a year, so you can get on the rocket early enough.

@@merrymerkin That's what I've assumed. Thanks!

All the performance shown are after expenses.

LOL. The sarcasm is strong with this one.

@@davegiddings2545 He no Jedi.

You can find transaction fees in the Statement of Additional Information. That said, I'm guessing thy view the cost as a marketing expense. And because the track their own proprietary indexes, costs are minimal.

They don't

Make money from interest free loan from shareholders who get dividends once a year instead of four times. They can invest the borrowed money to make interest before distributing back to shareholders.

These funds are loss leaders. Fidelity makes money by obtaining you as a customer, and hopefully by selling other products to you later on.

It's so close that the difference in performance truly doesn't matter.

In a taxable account, paying taxes on dividends once is better than four times.

@@geoffgordon9569 You still pay taxes once either way, on the next year's Apr 15. How many dividend payments you receive makes no difference, because the four quarterly payments will equal the one annual payment, the only difference is you get some of the payments earlier with the pay fund.

@@sprinkle61 thanks for the info.

Dividend yields are different for each fund as percentage share to each company is not the same.

No, free is the better option.

Just add to new fund. I would wait till I have at least $1,000 in old fund that I will keep. Then add to new one. Diversified portfolio lowers risk.

iT IS NOT THE SAME COMPANY .I DID IT .NO WASH SALE.

No.

I really hope you didn't panic sell FNILX because of this video

Yes.

No

Yes. Vanguard has a patent where their index funds are identical to ETFs in any meaningful way. So they're more tax efficient than index funds from other companies. Other than that, no.

@@SKITTLELA what are your recommended investments to put in a stndard brokerage account and tax advantaged account (IRA)?

I don't have $3,000 to open a Vanguard account. You can open with $1 at Fidelity.

Doesn’t make a difference. Fskax pays out semiannually compared to its zero counterpart, not quarterly. And ftihx also pays out annually just like its zero fee counterpart.

They don't. It's a marketing tactic. But, by pulling in more customers they can sell some of their other services. I suspect it is a smart strategy. I know I have told friends about these ZERO funds.

It is hard to move them in a taxable account without triggering capital gains. So that keeps people from moving to Schwab. In a tax-advantaged account, it is an ideal fund to own.

What does Rob’s reply mean?

@@tonygrantham3213 I assume it is a fake reply. It's somebody (or computer program) that is pretending to be Rob. If you call the number, then someone will probably try to sell you something.

They don't

Which index funds so you recommend?

@@23janneter S&P or Total Stock Market and Total International Fund. That should get you well diversified to lower risk.

Why though?

@@gmagogsfm I wanted to use ETFS at M1 Finance, and I liked Vanguard's Philosophy.

Portfolio visualizer allows to compare with and without dividends reinvested, so, yes.

Yes.

Have another look at these funds. FNILX is outperforming it. Substantially.

My bad 0.015%*

You will be able to purchase US S&P funds soon. Keep checking in Zerodha App or whoever is your broker.

@@yeraori okk sir.. is motilal oswal fof sndp are not good

Loss leaders. They hope to sell you other products down the line.

Only if you like to rebalance yourself. Otherwise let the fund managers do it for you.

@@geoffgordon9569 well I have the actively managed Fidelity Freedom FXIFX. The rate of return will never be as good as the FXAIX even if you have it set for aggressive growth. That's because it's 40 percent bonds/25 percent international. There's no rebalancing with an S&P 500 Index. Stocks within it are tweaked based on how well they do.

They get u into their ecosystem.

What was the catch? I didn’t see one.

@@cameronpoole174 Receive dividends only once a year instead of quarterly or semi-annually.

Costs. There's always a premium for foreign investment. Doesn't matter what your native country is.

What are the initial investment requirements?

Down Jones....

Honest question - how is this better than investing in a single total market fund?

The expense ratios are going to add up and will lower your profit expectations. You might want to consolidate some funds.

21? 🤯

Yes, I agree, there is now just about 5 years or data. How about also comparing the ZEROs to some of their Vanguard counterparts as well as some comparable ETFs?