Looking for some help. My new employer is giving me a 403b and there are 4 options of companies from which to choose from. I'll list them in a bit. What I want to know is what experience do you have with any of the listed companies and recommendations you have. I'm 32, have IPERS ongoing, and contribute to ROTH IRA. Options are: Horace Mann, Mass Mutual, VALIC, and Voya. Each one has a similar number of fund categories.
403b Advice
- Thread starter heyguy85
- Start date
My girlfriend has VALIC. She says the financial advisors are bad, and she self describes herself as knowing very little about retirement planning.
I don’t have any personal experience with those companies. I’d just look through their available funds to see which company has the types of funds you are looking for with the type of track record you are looking for.
My wife also works for the state and we chose VALIC. I don't honestly recall why we picked them, but in looking at the literature now they have a good selection of Vanguard funds at good expense ratios, so that was probably why. I know we didn't anticipate needing extra advisory services so that would not have been a factor.
And VALIC has been fine. I have neither glowing praise nor any criticism.
And VALIC has been fine. I have neither glowing praise nor any criticism.
They are all well-established names in the industry. I think the wise thing to do is to compare the investments of each and what they charge in expense/fees for their funds.
If you're going to be an index investor, then see who's index funds are the least expensive. Performance history should not really matter as long as you are comparing like index funds of different fund families.
If you think you're going to use some type of target fund (i.e....fund targets either your risk tolerance or your estimated retirement date), then compare both the fees and the past performance history of each that offer target funds.
If you think you might be all over the place in types of funds you choose, then again, get a feel for overall expenses/per funds to get a feel for where you best deal might lie.
All that said, as long as you are not making emotional transfers and and out of investments and trying to time the market, you should be fine with any of these choices, IMHO.
If you're going to be an index investor, then see who's index funds are the least expensive. Performance history should not really matter as long as you are comparing like index funds of different fund families.
If you think you're going to use some type of target fund (i.e....fund targets either your risk tolerance or your estimated retirement date), then compare both the fees and the past performance history of each that offer target funds.
If you think you might be all over the place in types of funds you choose, then again, get a feel for overall expenses/per funds to get a feel for where you best deal might lie.
All that said, as long as you are not making emotional transfers and and out of investments and trying to time the market, you should be fine with any of these choices, IMHO.
MassMutual has had a reputation for good customer service in the past, but I've not heard anything about that in about 10 years, so not sure how current that is.
I generally look at historical net returns. If a fund charges 2% and over 10-20 years has returned 10%, I prefer that to the fund charging 0.5% and paying out 9% over that period. They gained 1 1/2% and I am 1% better.
First off, are there really comparable funds (e.g...having the same investment strategy) that would have that different amt. of expense ratios? I'm not saying you can't find them looking at the whole universe of funds, but the OP is only considering from this rather small group of pretty respected companies.
I think there is value it looking at past returns, but I think one has to use caution. We've all heard and seen the disclosure...which is very true: "past returns do not predict future results. "
On the other hand, expenses are predictable because they must be disclosed beforehand.