Utah My529 Plan Lowers Fees Again: A Consistent History of Fee Drops

Updated July 2025. My personal choice amongst all the 529 plans is the My529 (Utah) college savings plan for all three of my children. Formerly known as the Utah Educational Savings Plan (UESP). The Utah My529 plan feels like it has the highest quality of administrative ease/customer service, the widest options for DIY investors (create a custom glide path or use solid prefab options), and long-term commitment to keeping their fees low. Accordingly, they are consistently top-rated by Morningstar and other ratings systems. (I don’t live in Utah; I live in a state with no special tax benefits for 529 contributions.)

As of 2025, I have finishing consolidating all my other 529 plan balances from all my other accounts. I’ve had 529 plans with Ohio CollegeAdvantage, California Scholarshare, Nevada (“Official” Vanguard 529 College Savings Plan), Virginia (Invest529), and maybe some others I’ve since forgotten by now (I have a problem…). Those are all solid plans as well, but over time I found the time to fill out the required forms to perform a direct rollover to Utah. (It was all free but a decent amount of paperwork; I wouldn’t recommend it. Just pick a good one and focus on the contributions.)

Nearly every year, I get some announcement in their newsletter that Utah is lowering their fees. Every 529 plan charges an administrative fee on top of the expense ratios of the underlying investments like mutual funds. For example, an asset fee of 0.10% is the same as charging $10 a year for every $10,000 in assets invested.

Although Utah may not be the lowest in every option, they consistently are amongst the lowest and keep going lower. Here is a partial history, although I couldn’t dig up every historical change date.

  • July 2025: Administrative Asset Fee for Customized investment options lowered from 0.12% to 0.11% annually.
  • August 2024: Administrative Asset Fee for Target Enrollment Date and Static investment options lowered from 0.10% to 0.09%.
    Customized investment options lowered from 0.13% to 0.12%.
  • July 2023: Administrative Asset Fee for Target Enrollment Date and Static investment options lowered to 0.10%. Customized investment options lowered to 0.13%. (source)
  • […]
  • October 2020: Administrative Asset Fee for Age-Based and Static investment options lowered from 0.13% to 0.12%.
    Customized investment options lowered from 0.18% to 0.15%.
  • February 2018. Utah Educational Savings Plan (UESP) changed its name to my529, effective February 5, 2018.
  • […]
  • July 2017: Administrative Asset Fee for Age-Based and Static investment options lowered from 0.17% to 0.16%.
  • […]
  • June 2013: UESP fees dropped an average of 10% overall. Administrative asset fee was 0.15% to 0.20%, now lowered to between 0.14% and 0.18% most Age-Based and Static investment options. Customized investment option at 0.20% (make your own glide path).

Note: At some point, they changed from the “Age-Based” label to “Target Enrollment Date” but it’s basically the same idea of a glide path that changes as the student ages, in preparation for their college enrollment date.

Each individual annual change may only amount to $1 to $20 a year in savings, but I do think it shows an ongoing commitment to passing on savings as their assets under management grow.

I believe the Utah plan is now the 3rd largest direct-sold plan in the nation. This is especially impressive considering the New York plan at #1 has the benefit of a large in-state tax break (and large population) to help it grow, the Nevada plan is co-branded with Vanguard and their trillions of assets, and New Hampshire is co-branded with Fidelity and their trillions of assets. The Utah plan includes a lot of low-cost Vanguard investments, but remains independent and also includes options from other providers like DFA and PIMCO. I enjoy being able to set up my own glide path with a large menu of investment options.

Longleaf Partners Funds Shareholder Letters

unconventional180One of the early books that impacted my investing philosophy was Unconventional Success: A Fundamental Approach to Personal Investment by David Swensen. As a very successful manager of the Yale Endowment, he offered common-sense explanations of why low-costs are good and which core asset classes make the most sense to own.

In addition, he pointed out the characteristics to look for in successful active management:

  • Hold a limited number of stocks. Bet boldly on fewer companies (high “active share”), as opposed to being a “closet index fund”.
  • High rate of internal investment. The managers should have a high percentage of their own net worth in the same funds that they ask you to invest in. They should “eat their own cooking.”
  • Limit assets under management. If there is more money flowing in than they can invest efficiently, they should close the fund to avoid asset bloat. This requires them to turn down more money!
  • Reasonable management fees. Active management hash higher internal costs than a passive strategy, but you can still charge less than average.

Swensen pointed out Southeastern Asset Management as an example of a company that most clearly displayed all of these characteristics, but don’t miss the last part of the quote:

Southeastern Asset Management (sponsor of the Longleaf Partners mutual-fund family) exemplifies every fundamentally important, investor-friendly characteristic conducive to active-management success. Portfolio managers exhibit the courage to hold concentrated portfolios, to commit substantial funds side by side with shareholders, to limit assets under management, to show sensitivity to tax consequence, to set fees at reasonable levels, and to shut down funds in the face of diminished investment opportunity.

Even though all the signs point in the right direction, investors still face a host of uncertainties regarding Southeastern’s future active-management success.

Due to this recommendation, I try to keep up with the Longleaf Funds shareholder letters. (You can register for free e-mail updates, even if you don’t own their funds.)

Reading the shareholder letters helps illustrate the many difficulties of active management. Here’s how most of their shareholder letters go, along with specific commentary on individual stocks.

  • Our Partners Fund only holds these 15-25 stocks. Our performance has been [x.xx%]. We have done [better/worse] than our benchmarks.
  • We continue to believe we will generate alpha in the future because we only companies at a significant discount to our conservative appraisals.
  • We claim no ability to predict short-term market moves.
  • We believe that our bottom-up intrinsic value investing approach has positioned the Funds with less risk of permanent capital loss than the relevant indices across all of our strategies.

Their flagship Longleaf Partners Fund (LLPFX) has had attractive performance if you look from inception in 1987:

longleaf1987

However, what if you read Swensen’s book when it was popular in 2005 and thought… I should buy some of that! You would have fallen far behind a simple S&P 500 index fund.

longleaf2005

Here’s what Morningstar has to say about it:

Although Longleaf Partners’ 2016 rebound was welcome, past missteps continue to drag down its record and raise concerns about its prospects.

Longleaf again closed their flagship Longleaf Partners Fund (LLPFX) to new investors in June 2017. Their Small Cap fund has been closed to new investors since 1997. This shows that they are still holding true to the positive characteristics listed above. They could make more money by staying open, but they aren’t. Here’s a snippet from their 2017 Q2 Shareholder letter:

The eight-plus year bull market in the U.S. has made finding qualifying opportunities more difficult, particularly in larger cap companies. In addition, this year’s strong returns in most markets outside of the U.S. have made our on-deck list of prospective investments light around the world. Because we have sold and trimmed businesses whose prices have moved closer to our appraisals, our cash reserves are higher than normal. In June, we closed the Longleaf Partners Fund due to limited new investments and a high cash position.

I respect Southeastern Asset Management and I enjoy reading their shareholder letters. They might end up kicking butt in the future. However, I hold no position on any Longleaf funds because I don’t have the level of faith required to maintain my position. It’s a tough world out there, even when you are doing the “right” things. Note that LLPFX charges 0.95% of assets and multiple large-cap index funds only charge 0.05%. Consider that as of this writing, the trailing 15-year total return of LLPFX is 7.12% annualized. The trailing 15-year total return of the S&P 500 is 9.58% annualized. If you held this in a taxable account, the gap would be even wider.

Bottom line. Longleaf Partners Fund continues to be an example of promising characteristics for an investor-friendly, actively-managed mutual fund. However, their recent performance has still been questionable. They may outperform in the future, but will you stick around to see? Reading their free shareholder letters is a good way to learn about what it’s like to invest in a traditional value-oriented, actively-managed strategy.