Message has been deleted.

I would stick with USAA if they have lower and better options.

I disagree. USAA is hard to beat as a bank but when it comes to mutual funds offered, I found that their expense ratios were higher than those at Vanguard. I'd consolidate the Roth IRAs under Vanguard.

To the OP: why do you have stocks under Vanguard and not mutual funds? And your diversity is determined by your overall asset allocation. Take a look at your total balance between your 457b and Roth IRAs. Determine how much of your total portfolio is in stocks (including stock mutual funds), bonds and cash. When you're done, combine the IRAs, dump the stocks and buy indexed mutual funds that will bring your total asset allocation to what's appropriate for your age and risk tolerance.

Agree with Vintek. It's almost always (I'd guesstimate about 90+% of the time) advantageous to combine your personal retirement accounts at one financial institution.

Too many people talk about management fees, but forget the breakpoints. Aggregating accounts makes it easier to hit the higher breakpoints. All FI's offer customized services, lower fees, and ability to buy at NAV for larger accounts.

And unless you're a genius at picking stocks, low expense non-load funds or ETFs will probably earn a better return over the long haul.

Or just stick with no-load mutual funds with very low management fees that are always sold at NAV to everyone from places like Vanguard and you'll be set.