I doubt 1%+ expense ratio funds across the board is the average case, but I could be wrong. Perhaps if you let your 401k provider manage your money. In my 401k

I doubt 1%+ expense ratio funds across the board is the average case, but I could be wrong. Perhaps if you let your 401k provider manage your money. In my 401k, I pay 1.5 bps/yr on 80% of my portfolio, a Fidelity S&P 500 fund (FXAIX), or $0.15 per $1,000 per year. My other two funds are a Fidelity Small-Cap and Fidelity Mid-Cap funds (FSSNX and FSMDX), I pay 2.5 bps/yr on the other 20% between these two funds, or $0.25 per $1,000 per year. If my balance was $100,000 right now, I would pay 80x0.15+20x0.25, or about $17/year for each $100k. $170 per million, and so on. These 401k mutual funds have better expense ratios than my Roth IRA holding, VTI (Total Market ETF), which is at 3 bps/yr, and the mutual fund couterpart of VTI, VTSAX is 4 bps. There is absolutely no possible way for a high-yield savings acct that yields (Fed Funds rate minus 15-25 bps) in interest (Goldman's marcus.com pays 2.23% APY, for instance, fed funds is ~2.40%) will ever approach my portfolio after 40 years of returns, barring total societal collapse.