galawdawg wrote: ↑Thu Aug 19, 2021 4:31 pm
The Morningstar monthly fund flows reports are incomplete and exclude any fund families that haven't reported fund flows by Morningstar's editorial deadline.
In July 2021, Vanguard had net new assets of about $36.4 billion, Schwab had net new assets of about $44.3 billion. In June 2021, Vanguard had net new assets of about $25.2 billion, during that same month Schwab had net new assets of about $43.4 billion.
For the first half of this year, Vanguard had net new assets of about $220.19 billion.
And Schwab for the same period.....about $242.6 billion.
As of the end of June 2021, Schwab held about $7.67 trillion in client assets. Vanguard was at $7.2 trillion on January 31, 2021, and adding their net inflows reported from February 1, 2021 through June 30, 2021, Vanguard should be at about $7.38 trillion as of the end of June 2021.
In summary, unless my math calculations are incorrect (and they were checked twice):
Schwab's net inflows for 2021 have outpaced net inflows at Vanguard.
Schwab now has more AUM than Vanguard.
Morningstar releases their reports on inflow only for those funds that generally report net assets on or before the 12th (give or take a day) of each month. It appears that Schwab generally reports their figures after that deadline. Perhaps that is why Schwab is not included in those Morningstar monthly fund inflow articles. However, anyone can look at Schwab's SEC filings and see the reported fund inflows and assets under management. It just takes a little bit of effort.
What is the source of you data on Schwab and Vanguard here? Can we reproduce your analysis for other brokerages to see if we can level the playing field?
The report I published to start this discussion only focused on Asset Manager Funds (ETFs and Open Ended Mutual Funds) operated by the entity regardless of brokerage holding the accounts. The reports mention Schwab ETFs and the number are different than your data.
Also note, that iShares is listed and BlackRock is not due to the iShares being the only significant Mutual Fund / ETF provider in the BlackRock complex.
Schwab did not show up in the top ten as their ETF/Funds are not within the ten largest (according to the report).
It is pretty clear that these numbers do not include total assets including 3rd party funds being managed. But, if you look at the US News article, Fidelity has a much larger total client assets management including 3rd party funds at over $10T, but BlackRock is missing! All this shows that the industry does not particularly provide any transparency here. Everyone seems to have different definitions and reporting parameters.
The Schwab number of $7.67T almost assuredly includes client assets invested in 3rd party funds.
So bottom line, just what is included and counted here?
For example are FDIC deposits included? I have no idea. UBS, Schwab and others have large presences there.
How are retirement plan administration funds regulated by Department of Labor factored into these funds? BlackRock, Fidelity and Vanguard all have pretty different presences and approaches and some Insurance Companies are big here too, who counts what for the various annuity and CIT arrangements?
What about institutional customers vs. retail customers? That is a whole other can of worms.
That may be why BlackRock is all over the place in the various report. I have no idea how they are rolled up in reports like the
World's Top Asset Management Firms Page as compared to Fidelity. Something seems way off here.