Comments on: Best Online Banks: It’s Not Just About Rates

By: Elizabeth

Elizabeth — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 19:37:46 +0000

FYI – WTDirect (rate is 3.26%) allows users to link other high yield savings accounts to your WTD account.

By: Lee

Lee — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 02:51:42 +0000

Thanks so much for timely article, since I have been trying to find bank to put my 80k, which is currently at a bank that has zero interest. Hopefully, this can change after I read your article.

By: saladdin

saladdin — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 04:33:52 +0000

If people made every choice based only on numbers then there would be less marriages.

No person, anywhere, makes every money decision based only on numbers. It is not our nature. To suggest otherwise is just nonsense. As much as I disagree with Ramsey, the reason he is a millionaire is that he understands the human, emotional side of money and makes no qualms about it. So much of spending is emotions. And so is picking a business to give our money to. If it wasn’t then “customer service” would not exist at all in the business world.

saladdin

By: cm

cm — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:36:27 +0000

i have over 100 accounts at ing. i do this to track spending. no other bank has been so accomodating.

granted, i use other banks for savings.

By: MBL

MBL — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 12:53:28 +0000

That is a terrific point about setting up accounts at high-interest banks to link back and forth so we can ping pong our money during the times of rate cuts and increases to take advantage of the increased interest rates.

I hadn’t thought of that. Only a month ago, I realized I would be earning more interest if I moved a majority of my funds in my ING checking account into my ING savings account.

I think it is a matter of preference regarding which bank to stick with. After all, too many banking accounts can hurt your growth efforts more because of having too many eggs.

I am going to check HSBC out. Thanks for the terrific post.

By: B.B.

B.B. — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:00:49 +0000

I should note that ING says they will only link to checking accounts, but I lied and said my savings was a checking and it worked just fine.

By: B.B.

B.B. — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:59:46 +0000

I have accounts at both eTrade (3.30%) and ING (3.00%) and have successfully linked them to each other. I can send money to eTrade from ING and vice versa. They’ve made it pretty simple really, just give the necessary numbers and go through the trial deposits verification and your off. And you’re right, it’s awfully convenient.

By: jim

jim — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:20:16 +0000

For the 100% disciplined, interest rates are what matter. There’s a reason why someone like Dave Ramsey is popular with his “debt snowball” idea. We are not always rational, some less frequently than others, and sometimes the fastest way for someone to reach their goals is to do something irrational.

I’m not defending ING here, I didn’t read what you said to imply that you thought I was, but they do have some good features. They are features you can find elsewhere but you have to weigh how much each feature is worth to you and decide from there.

For me, the bottom line is what matters, the rest is merely icing. For some others, the icing is the cake. As long as you’re aware there are non-financial differences between the banks and you make an educated and active choice, I think you win out.

By: tim

tim — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:14:42 +0000

p.s. i’m not saying Jim is defending ING here, because I was making a general statement about people who stick with ING using the argument when there were .5% to 1% differences.

By: tim

tim — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:12:25 +0000

i’m sorry, but this is the kind of idiotic rationalization that people who vehemently defend ING with its lower interest rates than the competitors use all the time. Why is it that when it comes to savings interest rates for high yield savings accounts, people seem to be matter of fact and very forgiving of the interest rates, but when it comes to interest rates that you owe on debt or paying in fees or expense ratios, etc., people are very acute to the interest rates? .5% in one given year may not be anything when you break it down as you have done over only one year; however, we don’t do the same “its only a slight difference more” logic when we talk about expense ratios from one fund to another, or an interest rate that you owe on a mortgage, car, or any other consumer credit. God, if someone said that they were paying .35% expense ratio on an index fund compared to a .15% vanguard index fund expense ratio, people would be tripping over themselves with 8×10 glossy photos and graphs (arlo gutherie anyone?) calculating how much over the long term that you would be losing out on because of the higher expense ratio. and that is only a .2% difference.

or if someone is paying 6.5% mortgage, people would be going ballistic saying that you need to improve your credit so you can get a 6% mortgage. or people will be saying you should lower your credit card interest rate as much as possible so you don’t waste your money on paying interest

it’s all about scales, but let’s not forget $1 is $1 whether you are paying it or are earning it no matter how you are paying or earning it. it’s part of the whole psychologimaculation thing where $5 off or earned on $10,000 is perceived to be less than $5 off or earned on $10. It’s still $5 either way.

really, i get tired of hearing people trying to rationalize the interest rate differences between savings accounts. It is a bunch of hogwash and utter nonsense. if you stick with one bank over another for aesthetic reasons, that is fine and is your choice, but don’t couch the reason in terms of interest rate rationalization.

Stage left depart soapbox…