Started By
Message

re: Mutual fund or etf

Posted on 6/5/13 at 9:32 pm to
Posted by whodatigahbait
Uptown
Member since Oct 2007
1757 posts
Posted on 6/5/13 at 9:32 pm to
quote:

NAV = Net Asset Value, yes I'm very familiar with it, are you


Very much so. I don't buy anything with a load everything at NAV so I don't know why you bring the load up.

quote:

1.39 expense ratio then, still too high, and the only way you are getting I class shares (VAPIX) is if you're buying huge blocks of them, minimum initial investment is $100,000. And VAPIX is trailing the S&P over the last 3 years, btw. So GTFO


I'm able to get into I-shares below the minimum all the time. I buy almost all institutional shares classes. And yes the strategy will match or even trail the S and P in an up market however when they get out of financials in fall of 2007 and fully into cash by fall of 2008 their is some real value there, Fees are only an issue in the absence of value.

Cheaper does not always equal better. Indexing isn't always better than active management.
Posted by Vols&Shaft83
Throbbing Member
Member since Dec 2012
69944 posts
Posted on 6/5/13 at 9:49 pm to
quote:

so I don't know why you bring the load up.


Because you said VAPAX, which has a load, not VAPIX, which doesn't. But not a big deal, so let's move on.

quote:

they get out of financials in fall of 2007 and fully into cash by fall of 2008 their is some real value there



Can you provide a link that proves they did this?

quote:

Indexing isn't always better than active management.



I agree, a lot of my funds have beaten the Indexes for 5,10,20, 30+ years (all with lower expenses than 1.39%, except my small cap funds). I have index funds too.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram