Why do mutual fund companies put a “minimum investment” on their funds?
Question by Matthew Smit: Why do mutual fund companies put a “minimum investment” on their funds?
I bought a few funds thru the hartford and they require a 00 minimum investment in their funds. I’d like to buy some but only have about 00. I don’t want to invest less right now and be forced into doing their automatic investment plan (which is /month). What is the reason for the minimum investment levels the mutual fund companies put in place? Would the investment firm be losing money if an individual invested less than the minimum?
Best answer:
Answer by Lighthearted
The minimum investment allows the fund company to make money. If they were to open a ton of small accounts they would have to work hard and they would not make money.
Give your answer to this question below!
It’s too expensive to service small accounts. If you don’t have the cash to meet the minimum initial investment for the fund of your choice, then just save up the cash until you do have enough.
Why go through The Hartford? Check out Vanguard – they have some excellent funds that have low initial investment amounts. Go direct to Vanguard – not through a broker.
the hartford…Really? Are you sure you aren’t buying overpriced stuff you could get much cheaper elsewhere? Spend a little time comparing at Morningstar.com and here a finance.yahoo.com.
That said, cost control is the short answer to your question.
Despite all the public relations nonsense about how financial companies just love to help the little guy, the cold hard facts are that small accounts are extremely expensive to administer and almost never profitable. In the mid term, let alone the long run, financial companies are much more profitable if they can keep their smallest accounts over $10,000 each and push their average account size above $100,000. That is where all the profits can be found.
(Cut offs for the really good stuff in the financial world usually start around the $250,000 range and really pick up steam between $500,000 and $1 million and then again over $5 million)
Energy and climate change secretary says green energy can play vital part in UK’s future energy security Chris Huhne, the energy and climate change secretary, warned last night that the threat to gas supplies from the political row between Russia and Belarus highlighted once again the desperate need for Britain to build up a low-carbon energy policy and domestic energy security through new wind farms – and possibly nuclear reactors. Huhne said it was also vital that Britain was better protected from any “big shocks” arising from huge increases in the price of oil, as companies such as BP were forced into increasingly environmentally sensitive areas. The European gas market has been repeatedly disrupted by rows between Moscow and its former Soviet neighbours, which have led to cuts in Siberian supplies reaching the continent, triggering a sudden cut in imports to Britain. Yesterday the latest dispute escalated after Moscow cut more supplies and Belarus threatened to siphon off Russian…
“Triaging: Technology in Hospital Libraries”
Love that place!! Riquisimo !!