[latchkey]

Let's not forget that Vanguard has taken a strong stance against crypto [0]. Claiming to significantly invest in technology while deliberately ignoring the latest advancements in financial technology, seems contradictory. If their business was doing so well, they wouldn't have to lower fees.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42832026

[mdasen]

Vanguard funds are owned by the investors in those funds. The fees that they charge are to cover the expenses, not make profit for a private company. If they're doing so well that the fees are brining in more money than they need, they lower the fees so that their owners (the investors in the funds) don't have to pay as much in fees.

Their business is doing so well that they can lower fees.

[latchkey]

> Their business is doing so well that they can lower fees.

The counter to that is that they are not doing so well, that they need to attract more investors.

[cbg0]

Your counter assumes that it's one or the other, but there could be more reasons, such as doing well but looking to steal even more market share.

At over $10 trillion AUM, it's hard to think that they're "not doing so well".

[latchkey]

So then why reduce fees now? Why not years ago? Are they just suddenly feeling that generous?

[toast0]

Vanguard has been reducing fees on a pretty regular basis.

My assumption is that the corporate leaders go for a dip in the McDuck money pond every year, and when the level is too high that it risks overflowing, they adjust the fees down.

[wbl]

I have heard from people who were contactors that everyone brings their lunch at Vanguard. No money pond here!

[giantg2]

I doubt at that size you could attract enough new money to offset the reduced revenue from reducing fees on the existing $10T.

[thorncorona]

cynically, crypto’s greatest achievement thus far has been speed running 200 years of financial mistakes and explaining why we need financial regulation.

[latchkey]

It is so predictable to get a straw man argument like this.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26238410

[dsr_]

It's not a straw man argument when the counterargument you propose is "actually, evading regulation is the point".

[latchkey]

If a country does not have a functioning banking system, then it isn't evading regulation.

[akimbostrawman]

Forget evading regulation that has been possible with cash or gold since millennia.

Its just sad that time and time again HN of all placed refuses to even consider that, yes magical p2p internet money does indeed have its uses outside of illegal activities.

[bityard]

There is a difference between investment and speculation and lots of people learn it the hard way, eventually.

[latchkey]

Typically: Investment is long term. Speculation is short. Investment is looking for a gradual return over time. Speculation is betting on price.

I've been long on crypto since 2013, I'm not a crypto day trader, and I'm well aware of DeFi. I consider that an investment, not speculation.

Let people treat things the way they want to. All of the people who want to stick with Vanguard and their position are free to do so.

[venusenvy47]

They believe that cryptocurrency is not an investment vehicle, which I also believe (and I own a little). They have clearly stated that they invest in things with real-world value.

[ch4s3]

This is for the same reason they don't mix gold ETFs into their indexes. The point of their funds is to track companies that produce goods and services, not asserts and commodities.

[latchkey]

Twist things around however you want, but VGPMX [0] invests in the companies producing precious metals. 1/4 of the portfolio is that.

[0] https://investor.vanguard.com/investment-products/mutual-fun...

[Aloisius]

Vanguard invests in bitcoin companies. They just don't have a dedicated ETF or mutual fund.

For instance, Vanguard is one of the largest institutional investors in MSTR and MARA.

[latchkey]

MSTR is now a direct proxy for btc, and MARA definitely is. Having massive investments in those stocks while claiming "we only invest in companies, not crypto", feels super wonky to me.

[recursive]

And now I trust Vanguard just a little more.

[latchkey]

I'd rather not have to "trust" any financial institution.

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/01/17/vanguard-fined-more-than-100...

https://asic.gov.au/about-asic/news-centre/find-a-media-rele...

https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/vanguard-fined-prov...

[bluGill]

You are likely to have to trust them eventually. SPIC insurance is $500,000. If you have more than that and it turns out instead of buying the investments you think they were a ponzi scheme that sent the money to the owners when it is discovered you get up to $500,000 of your money back, while the rest is your loss. You really should have more than that by age 40 if you want a comfortable retirement (that is todays dollars, if you are 18 now when you hit 40 inflation will have made the number bigger, while if you are 80 the number when you were 40 would have been lower)

[Dylan16807]

If you use a separate broker for each $500k then you only have to worry about multiple brokers catastrophically failing at the same time. And there are multiple types of account with each type having a separate $500k limit.

[latchkey]

I'd rather not have to trust a non-profit insurance company to keep a very small portion of my funds safe. This stuff should be in-code and immutable by any one individual or corporation.

[recursive]

I'd rather not have to either. I'm going to be honest. I'm not a smart man. I don't understand the first link at all. The other two I don't care about.

However, to the extent that those things are bad, they are much less bad than my trust in myself to securely manage a crypto wallet key.

If there was some magic thing that just automatically worked and I could somehow trust it, I would be all in. That's not the case for any cryptocurrency I know of because you need to A) maintain access to your wallet key and B) prevent other people from getting it and C) don't inadvertantly click any of those links that drain your account that I've heard of (I don't understand the details)

If you can put in the research and discipline to satisfy those requirements, I'm certainly not going to try to talk you out of it, but they're way to steep for us normies.

[latchkey]

The internet was very confusing to most people before AOL came along and gave out free CD's with email addresses.

Just because the UX sucks today, doesn't mean the fundamental underlying technology isn't something worth building on.

By the way, if you think crypto UX is hard, try trading options with thinkorswim.

[recursive]

> By the way, if you think crypto UX is hard, try trading options with thinkorswim.

You've misunderstood me. I have no interest in shitty UX. A competition for the shittiest UX is like the lowest high jump. You want a shitty UX? I can get you one by 4:30, with nail polish. The fact that extremely confusing UX is easy to find in no way mitigates a merely very confusing UX.

I kind of agree with you though. Cryptocurrency is kind of a neat idea. Shame about the actual manifestation though. I'm not opposed on principle. If anyone ever figures out how to make it good, I'll check it out. But in the first 15 years, nothing reasonable has emerged. I don't have much hope for the next 15 years either.

Maybe someone will figure it out, but I don't think that's actually going to happen. So I don't think investments in cryptocurrency research or whatever is a good idea.

[latchkey]

Define "make it good", cause the way I see it today, it is extremely good. But then again, I understand the UX and I don't find it difficult at all.

I actually wonder if you've tried it... it really is just put in an address, amount (of any size), and click send.

Want to earn interest or borrow funds? Load up Morpho.org, deposit into a vault of your liking and borrow whatever you want. No need to ask anyone for permission and fully decentralized. Even the source code is public and audited. Don't trust it? There's nearly $6B in there and Coinbase built a whole product around it. It couldn't be all bad.

I think things have progressed quite a lot in the last few years. Take a look, you might be surprised.

The UX for some of my banks are way worse. For example, the limits on transfer sizes are obtuse. 25k limit? WTF, it is my money, let me move it around how I wish, I'm not a criminal.

[turnsout]

Agreed—this strengthens my feelings about the brand. And I write this as someone who also holds (a tiny amount of) crypto

[greenavocado]

Vanguard won't let you trade anything even tangentially related to crypto FYI

[greyface-]

Not true. I own a few shares of MSTR in my Vanguard brokerage account.

[greenavocado]

MSTR was not a crypto company when it was listed so this crypto backdoor trojan horse is an exception

[latchkey]

Good choice, one of my best investments ever. Get to 100 shares and sell some covered calls.

[niceice]

What happens at 100 shares?