Obviously there are a lot of threads similar to this one but I haven't found any that ask this exact question.
I got some advice from a financial planner several years ago and am not sure how much it's BS.
(Context: I got a crash course in the differences between fee-only financial planners and ones who work on commission when I was almost convinced to sign up for full life insurance. She also recommended actively managed index funds. No, thank you, on both accounts.)
Her advice was that in terms of prioritizing which accounts you put your money in, you should absolutely contribute to your 401k up to the employer match. So far, so good. Free money is good.
But, she said, her colleagues typically didn't recommend maxing out your 401(k) because those accounts are relatively inflexible -- i.e., they have a limited selection of investment funds, and the terms (and fees) associated with them can change without you being able to do anything about it.
Does this seem legit to you or does it sound like a financial planner trying to get her clients to put money into a brokerage account where she can get commission off of it?
If it is BS, do you see any truth in it?
Personally, I've been hitting my employer match then maxing out IRAs then investing in non-tax-advantaged brokerage accounts.
And I think that having some money in brokerage accounts is a good idea, since I'm hoping to FIRE long before I can withdraw money from retirement accounts without penalties.
But I'm thinking more about this and thinking that it's stupid not to sink money into that 401(k) and reap the associated tax advantages. Especially because I might hit a point this year where I make too much money for the IRAs to do much good, tax wise.