Why might a brokerage firm stop offering a particular ETF commission free?
"Forbes has an article investigating this. Here are the key parts: On line at the bottom of the list of funds there is an entire screen   of grey-faded micro print which includes this telling disclosure: TD Ameritrade receives remuneration from certain ETFs (exchange-traded     funds) that participate in the commission-free ETF program for     shareholder, administrative and/or other services. In other words, TD Ameritrade is now enforcing a pay-to-play for their   so-called commission-free exchange-traded funds. They are willing to   forego their $6.95 trading commission in favor of remuneration   directly from the ETF vendors. Because Vanguard refuses to pay such   money to custodians, they are no longer being allowed to play. and Joseph Giannone, a TD Ameritrade spokesman, was quoted as saying,   ""With any business decision, client needs are paramount, but the   underlying economics of programs can’t be ignored. ... In line with   industry practices, certain providers pay servicing, administrative or   other fees. Vanguard elected not to be a part of the new program."" So basically it sounds like Vanguard, and presumably iShares as well, were unwilling to pay TD Ameritrade to continue offering their ETFs commission-free."
"I'm not sure which article you are referring to- if you are talking about the convergex article.... it literally describes what they did in the article.   Tradeworx and software company thesys(both founded by manoj narang) provide data to the sec and function as market makes- they are highly respected and handle over 5% of us equity by volume.   Their ""head people"" is manoj narang. I don't think he ""bailed out"". As you can read [here](https://research-doc.credit-suisse.com/docView?sourceid=em&amp;document_id=x569866&amp;serialid=lZPbU6l0cgAqB%2B1gg4uZFLk14dBwhfSb9lZ3%2BdmPHV4%3D) they are willing 53% of the trades they place everyday and have   He has stated in an interview he wants to explore options trading.   They were debunking myths because of the regulators wanted answers and at the time hft was not understood very well. Narang also testified at a senate committee[video here](https://youtu.be/NG47K41Q7KA)" The expense ratio reduces the return of the ETF; your scenario of paying 100.0015 is that of a load.  Most (all?) ETFs can be bought without paying a load (sales charge as a percent of amount invested), and some ETFs can be bought without paying a brokerage fee (fixed or variable charge for a buy transaction just like buying any other stock  through the brokerage) because the brokerage has waived it.  Your broker  might charge fees for both buying and selling shares in an ETF, but in any case, this is quite separate from the expense ratio. "What you seem to want is a dividend reinvestment plan (DRIP).  That's typically offered by the broker, not by the ETF itself.  Essentially this is a discounted purchase of new shares when you're dividend comes out.  As noted in the answer by JoeTaxpayer, you'll still need to pay tax on the dividend, but that probably won't be a big problem unless you've got a lot of dividends.  You'll pay that out of some other funds when it's due.  All DRIPs (not just for ETFs) have potential to complicate computation of your tax basis for eventual sale, so be aware of that.  It doesn't have to be a show-stopper for you, but it's something to consider before you start.  It's probably less of a problem now than it used to be since brokers now have to report your basis on the 1099-B in the year of sale, reducing your administrative burden (if you trust them to get it right). Here's a list of brokerages that were offering this from a top-of-the-search-list article that I found online: Some brokerages, including TD Ameritrade, Vanguard, Scottrade, Schwab and, to a lesser extent, Etrade, offer ETF DRIPs—no-cost dividend reinvestment programs. This is very helpful for busy clients. Other brokerages, such as Fidelity, leave ETF dividend reinvestment to their clients. Source: http://www.etf.com/sections/blog/23595-your-etf-has-drip-drag.html?nopaging=1 Presumably the list is not constant.  I almost didn't included but I thought the wide availability (at least as of the time of the article's posting) was more interesting than any specific broker on it. You'll want to do some research before you choose a broker to do this.  Compare fees for sure, but also take into account other factors like how soon after the dividend they do the purchase (is it the ex-date, the pay date, or something else?).  A quick search online should net you several decent articles with more information.  I just searched on ""ETF DRIP"" to check it out." Pretty sure the major retail brokerage firms require 25k to daytrade.    Read the top comment. You will get crushed by commissions. There are commission free ETFs, but that's not the kind of investing you seem to want to learn about. The commission is per trade, there is likely a different commission based on the type of security you're trading, stock, options, bonds, over the internet, on the phone, etc.  It's not likely that they charge an account maintenance fee, but without knowing what kind of account you have it's hard to say. What you may be referring to is a fund expense ratio.  Most (all...) mutual funds and exchange traded funds will charge some sort of expense costs to you, this is usually expressed as a percent of your holdings.  An index fund like Vanguard's S&P 500 index, ticker VOO, has a small 0.05% expense ratio. Most brokers will have a set of funds that you can trade with no commission, though there will still be an expense fee charged by the fund. Read over the E*Trade fee schedule carefully. While you are correct that no broker-dealer ever qualifies for FDIC and it could be sufficient for customers to know that general rule, for broker-dealers located at or 'networked' with a bank -- and nowadays many probably most are -- these explicit statements that non-bank investments are not guaranteed by the bank or FDIC and may lose principal (often stated as 'may lose value') are REQUIRED; see http://finra.complinet.com/en/display/display_main.html?rbid=2403&element_id=9093 . Exactly. There's not unlimited points out there. Classic innovation cycle where at the end the returns are ultimately directly correlated to capital and it is not particularly profitable for most market participants.   Incidentally, never understood why retail investors care about HFT. IF they squeeze a few basis points out of you getting in and out of a position, it's still way less than what brokers are taking you for. And if you're wearing it for years, should be basically noise relative to the overall performance. Merrill charges $500 flat fee to (I assume purchase) my untraded or worthless security. In my case, it's an OTC stock whose management used for a microcap scam, which resulted in a class action lawsuit, etc. but the company is still listed on OTC and I'm stuck with 1000s of shares. (No idea about the court decision) Where are you planning on buying this ETF?  I'm guessing it's directly through Vanguard?  If so, that's likely your first reason - the majority of brokerage accounts charge a commission per trade for ETFs (and equities) but not for mutual funds.   Another reason is that people who work in the financial industry (brokerages, mutual fund companies, etc) have to request permission for every trade before placing an order.  This applies to equities and ETFs but does not apply to mutual funds.  It's common for a request to be denied (if the brokerage has inside information due to other business lines they'll block trading, if a mutual fund company is trading the same security they'll block trading, etc) without an explanation.  This can happen for months.  For these folks it's typically easier to use mutual funds. So, if someone can open an account with Vanguard and doesn't work in the financial industry then I agree with your premise.  The Vanguard Admiral shares have a much lower expense, typically very close to their ETFs. Source:  worked for a brokerage and mutual fund company "Usually the new broker will take care of this for you. It can take a couple of weeks. If you are planning to go with Vanguard, you probably want to actually get an account at Vanguard, as Vanguard funds usually aren't ""No Transaction Fee"" funds with many brokers. If you are planning to invest in ETFs, you'll get more flexibility with a broker." What rules are being violated? What specific rule changes do you propose?   The reason I ask is, because rule changes put into effect to prevent certain activities often have unintended and unforseen consequences.   Several exchanges are enacting fees that will curb this activity. Essentially if you send over X number of quotes today, and get filled on less than Y% of them, you will be charged a fee of Z for each quote sent over X. The number of quotes X is in the six figure range, the fill rate Y is around 80%, and the fee is a mil or so.   This effectively curbs behavior like this. There usually would be a SEC investigation if this kind of behavior is noticed. One thing that bothers me about this article is that, in the midst of all the fear mongering, the author doesn't mention that quote stuffing is designed to screw over *other HFT algorithms* and doesn't have any real impact on investors. Firms doing HFT frequently report this stuff to the SEC; for all we know, Goldman already did. There is no margin call. Inverse ETFs use derivatives that would lose value in the case you describe though this doesn't force a margin call as you may be misunderstanding how these funds are constructed. "It looks like these types of companies have to disclose the health of their accounts to CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission). That is the gist I get at least from this article about the traders that lost money due to the Swiss removing the franc’s cap against the euro. The article says about the U.S. retail FOREX brokerage: Most of FXCM’s retail clients lost money in 2014, according to the company’s disclosures mandated by the CFTC. The percentage of losing accounts climbed from 67 percent in the first and second quarters to 68 percent in the third quarter and 70 percent in the fourth quarter. Side note: The Swiss National Bank abandoned the cap on the currency's value against the euro in mid-January 2015. But above paragraph provides data on FXCM’s retail clients in 2014. It could consequently be concluded that, even without ""freak events"" (such as Switzerland removing the franc cap), it is more likely for an investor to NOT make a profit on the FOREX market. This is also in line with what ""sdfasdf"" and ""Dario Fumagalli"" say in their answers." It really depends on the hedge fund, my hedge fund gives back all rebates for routes that are public knowledge back to the client. Also the rebate is based on the route, not the stock, so it may not offset all expenses on each ETFs. Most of the BATS IEX and other routes have public websites where you can get the infos on what are the rebates for each.