/biz/ - Business & Finance

Anyone who tells you they have no risk is an idiot. They're recommended because they match market returns with low fees and trying to beat the market is substantially more difficult.

a few people actually have said that... morons.

You're retarded then. Index funds beat most analysts. Don't buy actively managed funds. They might beat an index one or two years, but rarely more than that.

>>615776
This. OP, the 8% returns you can reasonably expect from index funds isn't great. It's not exciting, you won't be turning and burning a 100% p.a return, constantly stressing and watching the markets.

What it is is reliable and easy. The market goes up and the market goes down, but in the long run, it will always grow.

>>615780
>Don't buy actively managed funds.
Personally, I think an allocation to actively managed funds is not only acceptable but likely accretive to an overall low-cost fund strategy.

The sectors where I believe active management can add value include: (a) tax-managed funds, (b) international small caps, (c) domestic micro caps, (d) emerging markets, (f) new technology sectors, and (g) alternative investments.

There are also some actively managed large-cap funds, such as the PRIMECAP family and Wellington fund, that offer outstanding value. Vanguard's Heath Care Fund has consistently stayed near the top in the U.S. News report fund rankings (http://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/rankings/health?int=af9256)) and it has lower fees (by 100 to 200%) than the funds it competes with.

My point is that not all actively managed funds are the same. In the right sectors, with the right fee structure, and in the right allocation size ... even a diehard Boglehead can happily embrace them.

>>615813
Very interesting. I'll check those out. Thanks.