If I remember this correctly, a fund that tracks the S&P 500 index, when held for a year, outperforms 75% of all managed funds, including equity-income, value, growth, bond, intl, etc. etc.
Of course outperforming 75% isn't the point for those who think in terms of risk and reward-- everybody imagines himself/herself in that top 25%-- fools and their money, you know how that goes. -----Original Message----- >From: Daniel Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Sep 10, 2007 4:47 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Hedge Fund Clones > >not as true as you think, particularly in the hedge fund world. there are >plenty of funds out there which do a really excellent job (also note that >index funds only give you equity risk and there are a lot of other things >out there which you might want to be exposed to but which don't have index >funds). Also, a lot of trackers ain't all that; unless you really know what >you're doing, the everyday rebalancing of a tracker fund can eat you alive >in commissions and slippage. The performance of some "index funds" is >nothing short of embarrassing. > >best >dd > >-----Original Message----- >From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Doug >Henwood >Sent: 10 September 2007 21:36 >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: Hedge Fund Clones > > >On Sep 10, 2007, at 4:27 PM, Daniel Davies wrote: > >> much cheaper fees basically. it's a product for people who want >> exposure to >> the kind of risk-return profile that hedge funds give you, but who >> think >> that the actual hedge funds are overcharging for what they do and >> sucking >> all the outperformance out in fees. > >Most people would be better off in an index fund. And by most people, >I mean most professional money managers too. There aren't many >Soroses, Buffets, or Swensens in this world. > >Doug
