m*m
发帖数: 1185 | 1 一直是 TIAA-CREF 2040 我知道长期投资不要看很短时间。但是最近一年表现实在差劲。
TIAA-CREF 2040
Gross / Net Expense Ratio
0.73% / 0.61%
Year To Date
3.61% 最近一年才是3.61
Year To Date
3.61%
1 YR
11.20%
5 YR
11.91%
10 YR |
r****m
发帖数: 1204 | 2 这个2040 fund 的expense确实不低， 还有26年，如果风险承受力还行， 可以考虑
100% dollar cost averaging index funds for at least next 10 years, then
gradually adding bonds. |
S**C
发帖数: 2964 | 3 S&P 500 is kicking everyone's butt, just as in the late 90s. It is foolish
to invest in other stuffs isn't it?
劲。
【在 m*m 的大作中提到】
: 一直是 TIAA-CREF 2040 我知道长期投资不要看很短时间。但是最近一年表现实在差劲。
: TIAA-CREF 2040
: Gross / Net Expense Ratio
: 0.73% / 0.61%
: Year To Date
: 3.61% 最近一年才是3.61
: Year To Date
: 3.61%
: 1 YR
: 11.20%
|
m*m
发帖数: 1185 | 4 啥意思?有风险?
【在 S**C 的大作中提到】
: S&P 500 is kicking everyone's butt, just as in the late 90s. It is foolish
: to invest in other stuffs isn't it?
:
: 劲。
|
m*m
发帖数: 1185 | 5 我2040有些钱了。你建议以后10年全放index?
【在 r****m 的大作中提到】
: 这个2040 fund 的expense确实不低， 还有26年，如果风险承受力还行， 可以考虑
: 100% dollar cost averaging index funds for at least next 10 years, then
: gradually adding bonds.
|
m*m
发帖数: 1185 | 6 我发现2040随着index张跌，但是跌的幅度大，所以收益查差。
【在 S**C 的大作中提到】
: S&P 500 is kicking everyone's butt, just as in the late 90s. It is foolish
: to invest in other stuffs isn't it?
:
: 劲。
|
M********r
发帖数: 278 | 7 Expense ratio aside, this fund as well as other target date funds are
essentially index-based asset allocation models. You are not supposed to
judge them against a single equity index. The reason you pick this fund is
because it matches your risk tolerance. Once you have it, you should expect
it will for sure underperform an equity index such as S&P500 during bull
market. And that's not the reason to dump it.
However if you find its expense ratio significantly higher than other target
date funds, or if you find other allocation models (including a 100% equity
portfolio) suit you better, then you should consider changing it. |
m*m
发帖数: 1185 | 8 那还是 我说的50% 50% 的放一下。
按照你说的 牛市比不让人家长得。 熊市跌的比人家厉害。
看2008 index 500 和2040 跌的都很惨，根本没有止损。
expect
target
equity
【在 M********r 的大作中提到】
: Expense ratio aside, this fund as well as other target date funds are
: essentially index-based asset allocation models. You are not supposed to
: judge them against a single equity index. The reason you pick this fund is
: because it matches your risk tolerance. Once you have it, you should expect
: it will for sure underperform an equity index such as S&P500 during bull
: market. And that's not the reason to dump it.
: However if you find its expense ratio significantly higher than other target
: date funds, or if you find other allocation models (including a 100% equity
: portfolio) suit you better, then you should consider changing it.
|
M********r
发帖数: 278 | 9 i made a mistake to say that this fund is index-based. It's NOT. Its
holdings are all actively-managed funds. That's why its Er is higher than
some of its peers. That said, and correct me me if I am wrong, a hybrid fund
(or balanced fund howerver you want to call it) like this should only be
judged by its risk-adjusted returns. Also 2008 was very unique. People sold
everything in panic.
【在 m*m 的大作中提到】
: 那还是 我说的50% 50% 的放一下。
: 按照你说的 牛市比不让人家长得。 熊市跌的比人家厉害。
: 看2008 index 500 和2040 跌的都很惨，根本没有止损。
:
: expect
: target
: equity
|
h****g
发帖数: 259 | 10 Are you talking about TCLOX? It is not your typically target date funds
composed of plain index funds. I would use a set of index funds instead.
List all the options in your plan so we can help you figure out a plan.
However, it is important for you to know what is in your funds and why you
want to invest in such funds. |
m*m
发帖数: 1185 | 11 不是
【在 h****g 的大作中提到】
: Are you talking about TCLOX? It is not your typically target date funds
: composed of plain index funds. I would use a set of index funds instead.
: List all the options in your plan so we can help you figure out a plan.
: However, it is important for you to know what is in your funds and why you
: want to invest in such funds.
|
m*m
发帖数: 1185 | 12 我只看到过去5年，没看到risk adjusted return
fund
sold
【在 M********r 的大作中提到】
: i made a mistake to say that this fund is index-based. It's NOT. Its
: holdings are all actively-managed funds. That's why its Er is higher than
: some of its peers. That said, and correct me me if I am wrong, a hybrid fund
: (or balanced fund howerver you want to call it) like this should only be
: judged by its risk-adjusted returns. Also 2008 was very unique. People sold
: everything in panic.
|
r****m
发帖数: 1204 | 13 It should be either 100% target date fund or 0% of it, a mix of it with
other funds 使得TDF失去原来的意义了。 |
