I've asked before about the differences between using a brokeridge for a coustodian or contributing directly to a fund family. I've read replies and read other posts on the subject but am still wondering which to use, as I don't quite understand what the differences would be. I know it depends on my situation but is the main diff that using a fund family limits you to that family only, unless you choose a different family for custodian, whereas using a brokeridge for custodian lets you have a variety of fund families in your Roth, if you choose to do so. I do understand that fees would vary depending on which family or broker I use.
I have accounts at Scottrade and Edward Jones and am thinking of using Scott for custodian, I'm 55 and would like to get a Roth opened before April 15 so that my holding period will start in 2004. Any advice or good/bad experiences with custodians will be appreciated.

Thanks A Lot,

mrcharols

Choose a brokerage and you can look at perhaps 2000+ mutual funds. Choose a mutual fund family and you choose from 20-80 funds. Since you only need 1 or perhaps two funds, does this not suggest you may have too much choice. Besides, down the road you can always shift from one custodian to another..... don't get hung up over the fund vs brokerage.

I don't think that anecdotal experience with custodians will be much help. Every financial institution has a very low level of mistakes/problems. Don't expect perfection and watch your statements to confirm transactions are correct and you should be fine.

You ask about differences - there really are not many, they are subtle and often may have no impact on you. Millions choose one path, millions choose to other.

Why not continue your relationship with Scottrade and it may help you get a fee waiver. I don't know their rules, but an existing relationship should help.

April 15 is pressing.... every IRA/Roth counter is busy. Don't wait for the last minute.