# Should I switch to TD Waterhouse?



## bds (Aug 13, 2013)

I have been reading the forum for a while and noticed that many people trade with TD Waterhouse. I am currently with Questrade and I bank with TD. I am happy with Questrade but am considering switching over to TD for my investments as well. I like the simplicity of having everything in one place and have good things about TDW.

-If I switch I will have over 50,000 with them so I believe I am eligible for the cheaper commission fee ($9.99)
-I make <10 trades/month
-I have a TFSA, RRSP and non-reg account with Questrade

Has anyone used both?
What do you like about each?
Is it worth the slightly higher commission?

Thanks.


----------



## Potato (Apr 3, 2009)

I like TD, and I generally recommend them... however, that's because I feel their interface and support team are more newbie-friendly (plus e-series). But if you're already over the Questrade learning curve and you're happy with them I don't see a compelling reason to switch. It's up to you if the benefit of having everything in one place is worth the higher commissions.


----------



## slacker (Mar 8, 2010)

I used to be with TDWH. But two things drove me away to Questrade.

1. No native support for USD in RRSP
2. USD dividends in RRSP will silently suffer TD's steep 1.5% foreign conversion fee.


----------



## SpendLessEarnMore (Aug 7, 2013)

slacker said:


> I used to be with TDWH. But two things drove me away to Questrade.
> 
> 1. No native support for USD in RRSP
> 2. USD dividends in RRSP will silently suffer TD's steep 1.5% foreign conversion fee.


I'm currently with TDWH and extremely happy with their service. I'll still keep my TDWH brokerage account but still going to open a Questrade account just for adding U.S. stocks to my RRSP portfolio.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

There was a time when I would have recommended TDWH but no more. Their service has gone downhill markedly in recent years. You have to do a little work but you get rewarded for it. When you get to the stage that the extra work is not worth the savings then consolidate.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

yes, i think they do a very good job
i don't trade very much though
if i traded a lot i might look elsewhere
but they have generally been very good

i do have issues with their site though
they need to do a better job of offering tools to help you track and manage your investments


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

I have accounts with both TDW and CIBC Investor Edge and not planning to swittch all either way...just trying to take advantage of the best features of every dis. brokerage


----------



## wendi1 (Oct 2, 2013)

All my stuff was with TDW, but I switched when they made a big mess of my husband's accounts.

They were in limbo (no trading possible) for over a year, and everyone we spoke to there said there was nothing wrong. I lost my temper with their telephone support, and moved everything to BMO. Which has USD accounts.


----------



## uptoolate (Oct 9, 2011)

slacker said:


> I used to be with TDWH. But two things drove me away to Questrade.
> 
> 1. No native support for USD in RRSP
> 2. USD dividends in RRSP will silently suffer TD's steep 1.5% foreign conversion fee.


+1

I'm with TDW and am not entirely unhappy. Somethings can be a bit trying in terms of getting accounts set up and making transfers but I have no reason to expect that any other service would be better. If I was starting again though and I knew where I would be now, I wouldn't go with TD because of the lack of USD support for RRSP and the result penalty on US dividends. On the other hand, in the beginning, it was great to have access to their e-series mutual funds.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

bds if you were to divide your accounts so that rrsp would stay with Questrade in order to keep the USD dual-currency capability, while all other accounts would transfer to TDDI ... would you be above the 50k threshhold at tddi that permits $9.99 commissions?

also on the subject of USD dividends in tddi rrsp:

1) they are reforming, i am convinced of that, albeit at the snail's pace one might expect of a bureaucracy. TDDI has said that a new patch scheduled to start 31 dec/13 will wash USD DRIP dividends in rrsp, ie FX fees on those dividends will cease. We shall have to see what we shall see, though.

2) the big green has also said that regular USD dividends in rrsp - ie those coming from US stocks or USD etfs - will *not* be altered at the present time. In other words, these dividends will still be subject to FX fees.

3) this is the exact point where i would like to see the big green pushed. If they can patch DRIP dividends to wash with no FX fee, why aren't they patching all USD dividends to wash with no FX fee? land's sakes, the clients are wildly unhappy with what's going on. Why don't the big nobs at TDDI pull themselves together after all these years & start doing the Right Thing?


----------



## slacker (Mar 8, 2010)

The way I see it. Questrade is commonly seen as the underdog of discount brokerages. Bad reputation, horrible service, etc.

But how can the underdog do better than the big green on such basic offering as supporting USD in RRSP and TFSA?

This whole, "we don't support USD in RRSP" is archaic, and stems from the bad old days, when there were lots of restrictions on RRSP. That was a long long time ago, please get with the present, and offer native support for USD investments.

No washing.

No hacks.

No having to call TD after a trade or else will be charged on ridiculous currency conversion fee.

No silent 1.5% currency conversion charge on dividends, drips.

Please just make it work as well as Questrade. Not asking a lot here.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

slacker i've written a lot on this issue in the past but in case there is a newcomer or 2 on this thread, here we go again.

this is what i always say:

the vast majority of canadian brokers are using a legacy mainframe leased from IBM called the ISM System. This was built for US brokers during the previous century. Maybe 40-45 years ago.

ISM is why the vast majority of canadian brokers do not, cannot, will not offer USD RRSPs.

apparently ISM cannot be overwritten so that a canadian dual-currency registered platform with full USD capability can be built upon it.

the handful of canadian brokers who do offer USD rrsp (bmo, questrade, roybank etc) are using rival mainframes, for example ADP.

it's useless for people to keep on battering TDDI. More than any other broker, the big green has led in inventing workarounds to help clients in registered accounts *not* pay FX fees on equity buy/sell transactions. 

the remaining big issue is FX fees on USD dividends in tddi rrsp. Right now, the issue goes like this: How can We Encourage TDDI to Improve the Situation.

the most glaring need is for 100% of USD dividends to be converted to CAD at spot rates imho.

recently TDDI said it's creating a patch to wash USD DRIP dividends in rrsp. I for one think the _numero uno_ critical issue right now is persuading the TD to wash *all* USD dividends in rrsp, not just the DRIPs.


----------



## slacker (Mar 8, 2010)

Indeed humbie, and I thank you for sharing your knowledge. I'm not certain where else I can get this calibre of information, other than this forum.

The way that I have attempted to persuade TD to get a move on, is by moving all my money to Questrade. That was about 3 years ago.

Once TD has native support for USD, I will strongly consider moving back. I had pretty good experience with TD.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

slacker nice to hear from you. I actually think that ex-clients who have voted with their feet - ie have walked their rrsps out the big green door & over to a broker that offers USD rrsp - are sending an excellent & appropriate message.

however, very recently there have been signs that the dam is starting to break up. It might be november but a few spring-thaw-type cracks have appeared. They might have something to do with the new TDDI chief, he's from Q-trade where they already have a USD rrsp so he's lived through the storm & they say he appears to be very progressive.

i think that now is the time for every rrsp client at tddi - big client, little client, it doesn't matter - to step forward & demand an end to FX fees on all USD dividends in rrsp.

hint: probably a waste of time to argue this by phone with a licensed representative. Instead, write by email to the TDDI customer service group. First, develop a rough idea of what your annual USD dividends in rrsp amount to; perhaps add an exact example of a USD dividend that will be paid to you soon. Then ask that all these dividends be converted into CAD with no exchange fee whatsoever, now & henceforward, world without end.

ask that your message be sent to the Manager of Client Complaint Resolution. Ask that they respond to acknowledge that your message was, indeed, forwarded to this individual.

if you have access to your tddi regional call centre manager or a tddi regional vice-president, be sure to email him or her as well.

in all contacts, clients could explain how seriously they feel that the time has come to move RRSP to a broker that is not going to profit from their hard-earned retirement savings accounts by charging foreign exchange fees on some of the income.

(back to slacker again) i for one think that a message to the TD complaint resolution manager, along the lines of what you've just written above, would be highly effective, if you would have the time. Good luck with it!


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I use a couple brokers and TD Waterhouse is one of them. I agree that their service has gotten worse over the last few years (there are generally longer telephone wait times now). Their fee structure is pretty competitive I think, once you're at the $10 per trade level. Generally speaking though I'm still happy with TDW and do a lot of business with them.

You might want to keep more than one brokerage account open, assuming it's not costing you anything such as inactivity fees. One reason for two brokerages is with bond trading or trading anything else over-the-counter (eg GICs), which means it's basically you trading against the broker. Since the broker is giving you a quote and you don't have an open market, you could be getting horrible prices. OTC is typically where brokers screw clients. So it's useful to check quotes from several competing brokerages -- and make them compete against each other, telling one that their price isn't good enough.

A second reason for a second broker is for redundancy or backup in high risk trades. This is probably only a concern for short term speculators. Say you go long a stock and the next day you really need to close that position. But brokerage A web site is down or the phone systems are congested. You could simply go to brokerage B and create an offsetting (short) position resulting no zero net exposure. Later you resolve the positions by closing both.


----------



## uptoolate (Oct 9, 2011)

Thanks for the update humble. It is good to know that there may be some progress. It is too bad that they will move on stocks and not ETFs yet. I am beyond my stock trading days and just accumulate more and more in VTI, VXUS and the like. It is a pain in the butt and even moreso as I manage my mom's money at RBC and guess what - no issues - as you know. I understand that there are legacy issues but.... hopefully they get it fixed by the time I retire. I'll have much more time on my hands at that point and it will be easier to find the time and energy to move.


----------



## Jungle (Feb 17, 2010)

We switched from tdw to questrade but always had a non reg at questrade since 2007. Questrade customer service has improved 10 fold where as tdw has gotten worse. I can't bet bothered dealing with tdw anymore and so glad we switched. They even rebated one transfer fee and gave me 10 free trades that don't expire. 

Now you can buy free etfs so I see no advantage with eseries anymore. 

Plus questrade has live chat which I really like too. 

Another plus to questrade is the referral bonuses. I had $70 cash deposited for a referral which took me 2 mins. They screwed up as drip request once and gave me 25 cash as compensation. Not bad service if you ask me.

Questrade is ahead with a lot of this stuff including the free iPad I type this post on I received when I switched on promotion. Saved me $370 from buying one!


----------



## recklessrick (Jun 16, 2013)

I've only every used TDWH and am very happy. I don't bank there but I wanted them for the e-series funds. I find their phone support to be quite good and their web interface lets me do what I need to be a passive investor. I don't care about graphing my performance every week or something like that so their feature-lacking web broker interface is just fine with me. The fees suck in the RRSP accounts until you have 25k in an rrsp account, that's not too bad.

All in all, I'm happy with them.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Jungle said:


> ... Now you can buy free etfs so I see no advantage with eseries anymore ...


I can see the advantage being able to buy ETFs free and then pay one commission to sell, when comparing against buying ETFs at a different brokerage where both buy & sell costs a commission.

The last I'd seen posted - one could buy/sell the eSeries commission free for both buy & sell so assuming the comparison is a similar eSeries versus a similar ETF, I'd expect there to be a commission advantage.

... or did I miss something?


Cheers


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

the principal concern i have & have always had with privately owned discount brokerage houses is that we don't know anything about the capitalization of the firm. We don't know who their banks are & we don't know anything about their bank relationships.

a facile answer would be So-what-there's-always-the-CIPF-my-accounts-are-insured-up-to-$1,000.000.

except that in a worst case scenario, there won't be any Canadian Investors Protection Fund. It's not a fund that exists today as a separate entity. It's only the ability of the broker community to raise money by special assessment to its members.

the CIPF was designed to bail out an individual firm here or there that might go under. In a global financial collapse, even a canadian chartered bank might fail. In such a dire scenario, many minor financial houses including marginal brokers will fail. Surviving brokerages will not be able to pay any special assessments & the CIPF will become a forgotten ghost of history.

my reckoning is that a broker subsidiary of a chartered bank would likely have a better chance of survival in a global meltdown.

i do think it's fair to say that questrade service has improved. They deserve full credit for that.

i don't think it's fair or accurate to say that tddi service has diminished. Apart from the no-USD-rrsp, which has now become the poster bad child & whipping-boy for most of the canadian broker industry, what's to complain about at td? afaik they have good resources, flawless trade execution, staff are well-trained, competent, responsible.

maybe the big green could get into offering tablets & phones though :tongue-new:


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

humble_pie said:


> the principal concern i have & have always had with privately owned discount brokerage houses is that we don't know anything about the capitalization of the firm. We don't know who their banks are & we don't know anything about their bank relationships.
> 
> a facile answer would be So-what-there's-always-the-CIPF-my-accounts-are-insured-up-to-$1,000.000.
> 
> ...


great points ... cipf is really only designed for a one or two off brokerage failure ... not a systemic collapse

of course we are only only talking about the cash products in the account, any securities would still be owned

i have noticed some longer wait times lately at tdw but only because of the intensity of the season

i wish they would do a better job with portfolios and tools to allow to track all our investments, other than that longstanding gripe, i think they are an outstanding brokerage and have treated me very well

i don't trade often, otherwise i might consider questrade but would probably add it rather then close tdw


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

fatcat said:


> great points ... cipf is really only designed for a one or two off brokerage failure ... not a systemic collapse
> 
> of course we are only only talking about the cash products in the account, any securities would still be owned


I think people often forget that securities marked SEGRETATED in one's account are protected (held in trust) separate from the broker, and thus safe in event of brokerage collapse. What CIPF does is, as you say, provide protection for UNSEGRGATED assets like cash and protection against fraud, etc. that may occur due to, for example, the actions of a rogue broker. It is my opinion that since discount brokers are only order takers, there is little risk/possibility of rogue brokers in a discount brokerage. The full commission industry is more susceptible given their 'management' of accounts, especially when the broker also has trading rights.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

AltaRed said:


> I think people often forget that securities marked SEGRETATED in one's account are protected (held in trust) separate from the broker, and thus safe in event of brokerage collapse.


I'll have to check the latest version of the fine print ... I seem to recall a fuss more than a decade ago when the fine print was changed to allow the broker to loan out the shares in the account to make more money. That would imply that the separate holding you are mentioning does not exist.

This link seems to have a different view:
http://www.bullionbullscanada.com/b...discount-brokerages-stocks-are-not-segregated


Cheers


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

AltaRed said:


> I think people often forget that securities marked SEGRETATED in one's account are protected (held in trust) separate from the broker, and thus safe in event of brokerage collapse.



alas altaRed i do beg to differ! brokers borrow from my SEG shares all the time.

what's more rare - but more worrisome - is that they occasionally also borrow from share inventories that are already pledged to support option positions. In other words, the broker itself double-writes on my shares.

this practice is far more limited but it does happen. They only borrow such shares from a TSX top 20 or 30, ie a highly liquid stock large cap. Something like a royal bank, say. Then they only borrow a very small part of the holding. Finally, they only borrow for a very short period of time, something like 2 or 3 weeks, say.

i've always assumed that their system is able to sniff out accounts like my own when the broker's need for loan shares becomes hyper-acute. I've assumed their system can sniff out that the underlying stocks have usually been held in account for many years. Can sniff out, also, that the option structure built on top of the shares is stable, in good order & has little likelihood of assignment. Finally, their system can sniff out that there's just about zero probability that client will up & decide to close the total position during the 2 or 3 weeks that they wish to kidnap my shares. So they help themselves.

it's a bit like harvesting your neighbour's ripe tomatoes when they go away on vacation in august & ask you to water & care for their vegetable patch.

the worrisome part of any brokerage operation is always the house trades. It used to be said that TD discount broker did not conduct trades on its own account, but i have no idea what they are doing at present. I would believe that all other bank brokers are co-mingling discount & full service accounts on one infrastructure; therefore in-house trading by rbc dominion, bmo nesbitt, cibc wood gundy et al could theoretically endanger all parts of the brokerage including the discount side during a pandemic global financial collapse.

what i was referring to in a previous note was not a case of a rogue trader endangering a specific broker. It was the kind of vast tragedy that would engulf many financial firms if armageddon were to occur. No one alive in the western world has ever experienced anything like this. It's the kind of global collapse we narrowly skirted in 2008/09.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

AltaRed said:


> I think people often forget that securities marked SEGRETATED in one's account are protected (held in trust) separate from the broker, and thus safe in event of brokerage collapse.


Don't take "segregated" too seriously

MF Global in 2011 for instance was supposed to segregate client assets, but didn't, and lost nearly $1 billion in client funds. The CEO, Jon Corzine, wasn't even convicted of a crime. In fact he's totally unapologetic and says he couldn't be expected to keep track of the various poorly operating divisions and their questionable practices
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...in-how-he-ran-mf-global-into-bankruptcy-.html

What this demonstrates... through lack of prosecution... is that violating segregation practices isn't a big deal. Even big brokers, like MF Global, can be a big mess internally. They may not actually be segregating your assets. Either way the executives won't be found responsible and without that accountability it means that you, as a customer, should not have faith that your assets are protected and segregated.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I guess I need to do more reading wrt specifics on SEGREGATED and perhaps time to ask each specific broker. It was my understanding that was the main reason SEGREGATED securities were put in trust to begin with (via back office operations). That said, a good reason to keep holdings with any one discount brokerage to under $1million.


----------



## CanadianCapitalist (Mar 31, 2009)

It is illegal for TD Direct or any other discount broker to use client securities held in cash accounts and registered accounts in the course of their business. TD Direct brokerage statements explicitly mention this:



> All securities that you've paid for in full, and margin securities above the legal minimum, cannot be used by us in the conduct
> of our business. If you have a credit balance in your TD Waterhouse account, it is payable on demand. We'll record it on
> our books, but it is not segregated and we may use it in the conduct of our business.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

CanadianCapitalist, I agree that it's illegal, but I'm pointing out that it's hard to trust the regulatory framework when the justice system does not enforce these laws or accountability in the executive chain.

I realize I'm talking about an American example though (MF Global). However I have heard it said that in general, the USA is tougher on financial crime than Canada is.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

CanadianCapitalist said:


> It is illegal for TD Direct or any other discount broker to use client securities held in cash accounts and registered accounts in the course of their business. TD Direct brokerage statements explicitly mention this:





> [CanadianCapitalist quotes from TDDI statement] All securities that you've paid for in full, and margin securities above the legal minimum, cannot be used by us in the conduct of our business



CC i sincerely hope u are not preaching at me. I assure you that what i've posted is true. The accounts to which i'm referring - from which the brokers occasionally borrow a few stocks even though all such stocks already have short option positions written against them - are fully paid-for stocks in margin accounts that maintain excess margin positions in favour of myself. I don't buy stocks on margin, the margin account is only due to the presence of option contracts. Such accounts are always lightyears above any "legal minimum" in margin securities.

yet the brokers do borrow. I have a backup broker & they also borrow occasionally. As i've said, not much. Out of a thousand shares already pledged to cover short options, they might borrow 80 shares, say (i've always assumed the brokers sniff at many such accounts, scooping out a few shares from each.)

the brokers only ever double-write on top TSX 30 or 60 stocks. Canadian chartered bank shares - the big 5 - are typical shares that they like to snifter.

in addition, the brokers always return such sniftered borrowings in 2-3 weeks. 

is it illegal? maybe it is illegal! the problem is that i'm already actively involved in trying to improve the high-foreign-exchange-fees-on-USD-dividends issue, so i just don't have time to take up any other kind of issue.


----------



## habsfan59 (Oct 23, 2012)

2 years ago I moved non-registered accounts from TD to TDWH. Very easy setup and very efficient. Last month I moved RRSP (GIC Matured) from normal TD to TDWH and what a messy outcome....! Too long to list all the issues I had to dealt with, but just to say that it took 33 days to see the funds in my TDWH account (and I had to phoned 5 times). Definitely their customer service is not what it was two years ago....!


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I had my parents open a non-margin TDW account. I figure that any margin account is more prone to securities borrowing, and am hoping that a non-margin account provides a little extra protection on the segregation issue.

The other way investors can get bitten by this issue is by holding mutual funds and ETFs. Virtually all of them engage in 'securities lending', which means that the fund loans out some of its assets to another party. This exposes investors to counter party risk and it happens with practically every mutual fund. Yes the borrower of those securities provides collateral, but the quality of that collateral is often questionable (for instance collateral used to involve things like Fannie Mae paper) and you still have the problem that your assets are missing.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

humble_pie said:


> yet the brokers do borrow. I have a backup broker & they also borrow occasionally.


humble_pie can you tell me, how do you know your assets have been borrowed out of your account?

Do you get statements from TDWH that fail to have the 'segregated' symbol marked beside the # of shares?


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

it's possible that borrowing against equity held by mutual funds & etfs is more toxic than the small sniftering i was describing above.

to look at the sniftering in a realistic way, it will only be toxic if a global meltdown occurs. IE the broker goes under. This is the principal reason why i don't have accounts at privately-owned brokers. Because we know nothing about their capitalization, nothing about their banking relationships. At least the bank-owned brokers have some publicly announced figures, although often the banks are opaque about their brokerage divisions.

back to the sniftering, if the world ends in a financial collapse, the fact that the broker has sniftered away 80 shares out of a 1000 or 2000 share holding is not going to make any material difference; everybody is going to be in such ghastly trouble anyhow ...


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

OK but how do you know the shares were pilfered, is there some sign I can watch for in my account?

Yeah I do worry about the mutual fund/ETF securities lending. They lend out a lot of the assets, very large % of the NAV. Not good.


----------



## P_I (Dec 2, 2011)

On the point of securities being indicated as SEGREGATED, from the Canadian Investor Protection Fund (CIPF) website, FAQ: Segregation


> 1. *My account statement shows that my securities are segregated. What does that mean?*
> 
> Segregated securities are held apart from the assets of the Member and cannot be used by the Member. CIPF Members are required to segregate all fully paid securities. Conversely, if any of your securities are not fully paid, the Member is lending you money to purchase those securities and is entitled to use them as collateral. (i.e. they do not have to be held in segregation.)


The first two sentences are key. I've always understood this to mean that the broker cannot legally lend out shares from your account if there are marked as SEGREGATED.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

james4beach said:


> humble_pie can you tell me, how do you know your assets have been borrowed out of your account?
> 
> Do you get statements from TDWH that fail to have the 'segregated' symbol marked beside the # of shares?


any & all shares with options written against them never have SEG marked beside them. However the full inventory of shares appears on statements, of course.

now that you ask, it has been a few years since i last paid attention to this issue. At that time i was pursuing what SEG meant, etc.

i just quickly checked all trading accounts. All inventories are intact as of end october. In the past, when i'd occasionally noticed the broker borrowing from already-optioned stock holdings, i would see the inventory of shares actually diminish on the statement. It would be this detail - and this detail alone - that would tell me that the broker had been nibbling at my shares.

for example, suppose i held 2000 ABC. Suddenly on a statement i'd see that the account now held only 1920 shares. No explanation. The following month, the statement would show the inventory back up to 2000 shares.

this never happened very often. Perhaps once every couple of years, in each account. As i mentioned, the number of shares borrowed was always surprisingly small, always less than 100 shares. 

now that you mention it, i don't recall noticing any incidents of this in very recent years. It might be an ill-advised former practice that the brokers quietly ended after some body like the IIROC told them to cut it out.

in general, my impression is that the broker community does not want word to get out about its lucrative stock borrowing & short-lending platforms.


----------



## CanadianCapitalist (Mar 31, 2009)

humble_pie said:


> CC i sincerely hope u are not preaching at me. I assure you that what i've posted is true.


I was responding to j4b's statement not to take segregated too seriously. I don't doubt at all that you've seen this. I've never had a margin account, so I've never ever seen any shares borrowed. That still doesn't mean much because one never knows for sure what goes on behind the scenes but if ever there is even a whiff that a broker is playing fast and loose with strict segregation, I would be moving out of there as fast as possible.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Generally speaking I trust TD when they say they've segregated my shares but I have nagging doubt about all of it, especially because of MF Global (which was a very large broker by the way)

humble_pie: that's very interesting about what you saw in the past, with # of shares.

I've never noticed such a discrepancy on my statements.


----------

