M********r
发帖数: 278 | 1 cab be summarized in one equation:
Active Fund = Index Fund +/- Skill - Expense Difference - Tax Difference
now do your own math
http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=725246 |
g****d
发帖数: 3461 | 2
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014240527487037350045745722939
"The simulations tell us that for the vast majority of actively managed
funds, true [abnormal expected return] is probably negative; that is, the
fund managers do not have enough skill to produce risk-adjusted expected
returns that cover their costs,"
【在 M********r 的大作中提到】
: cab be summarized in one equation:
: Active Fund = Index Fund +/- Skill - Expense Difference - Tax Difference
: now do your own math
: http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=725246
|
m*********t
发帖数: 1250 | 3 Thx for sharing the article.
Good points. Most of the time is not about finding an active fund manager wh
o can beat the index but the total return after the expense and tax diff.
【在 M********r 的大作中提到】
: cab be summarized in one equation:
: Active Fund = Index Fund +/- Skill - Expense Difference - Tax Difference
: now do your own math
: http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=725246
|
r****m
发帖数: 1204 | 4 Here is Fidelity's statement on actively managed funds beating benchmarks (
pretty good records) -
https://www.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/investing-ideas/beat-the-benchmark
"At Fidelity, we have a number of funds beating their benchmark by at least
1% annually over their managers tenure of at least 5 years. In fact, 81% of
Fidelity equity funds managed by the same portfolio manager for at least 5
years are beating their benchmark over the manager's tenure." |
