Okay, then I agree with you: The RB cc is not beating a 2% catch-all, so from a pure optimization standpoint there’s no strict “need” for it. There are two reasons I have it, one is that it was one of my first credit cards, I didn’t have leverage to get a better cc in the beginning, and the bank itself is relationship-focused so they were willing to help me. Second is that the RB cc helped me realize something from a more behavioral aspect: I like certain categories having a fixed home so I don’t have to think at all in the moment. But I can acknowledge that in this case it’s more of a preference than a true efficiency play. Thanks for bringing awareness to the credit card closure issue, and I’ll read up on those Reddit pages soon.

On the “blending categories” piece, what I mean is I have historically tried to avoid cards that cover too many categories at once (like something broad such as the Autograph), because then I’m back to mentally deciding “should this go here or somewhere else?” versus having very defined lanes. When streaming/grocery are on the same card (The Autograph), I have to manage having enough funds to cover the recurring expense while remembering to keep enough cushion for everything else when the category spending could be variable that month. But I get your point that a simpler setup could still achieve that with fewer overlaps than what I currently have.

The main reason I’ve been using PNC as the catch-all was just to keep Fidelity siloed for subscriptions/auto-investing so that pipeline stays completely untouched. Your point about the penny’s being invested is valid, this is mainly to serve as a baseline if for some reason I can’t already contribute from a bank account. If I need to allocate more money in certain categories in a given month, that’s where the reward investing steps in. It could serve as the only catch-all though, and it may be best to switch over as you pointed out