BLOG purpose

This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA. The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore, The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them. Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email

Suggest new topics here


Submit candidates for new topics here only. Stay on topic with National Labs' related issues. All submissions are screened first for ...

Monday, November 23, 2015


Why does UCRS not offer a simple ultra low cost SP500 index fund? It is the foremost, lowest fee, broadest, best characterized, most elementary of equity vehicles which offers the best understood risk/reward (sharpe ratio) of any equity. It is the foremost equity vehicle for equity weight in asset allocation. Yet it is absent. Why? LLNS offers it in the 401k plan.
Anonymous said...
Napolitano is too busy hawking 5000 freshman billets to Cal, UCLA and UCSD to rich foreigners to care about your investment choices. She's a big Cheese now.
Anonymous said...
Yep. President Kim Chee and Pasha Jihad kids sit from and center at UCLA, your Califonia slop smells cow paddies in Merced. Merced? Isnt that the crack capital of the central valley?


Anonymous said...

Let us begin a little history lesson. In 2007 the Lab went to LLNS and you moved into their retirement system, or froze with UC. Do you think anyone from UC is keeping an eye on the LLNS plans? UC washed their hands of retirement pay and health insurance hassle for the labbies AND got more money for their part in the LLNS debacle than they were pulling down when operating it on their own.

We only thought we were UC employees. We were actually red-headed step kids.

Anonymous said...

Of course, UC offers it's Domestic Equity fund. This is essentially a total (US) stock market fund (Russell 3000), which is somewhat more diversified than the S&P 500. But with an expense ratio of 15 basis points, it is marginally more expensive than the ~5 basis point funds offered by many S&P 500 and total stock market equivalents. For a $100K investment, the difference is an added cost of about $100/yr.

However, I think the theory is that there is no need to directly offer the lower cost index funds since there is a brokerage link option available with UC (and LLNS). The brokerage link can use it to purchase a low-cost ETF or even a Fidelity Spartan mutual fund (e.g., FUSVX is a Fidelity Spartan S&P 500 index fund with a 0.05 expense ratio).

Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days