w*****a
发帖数: 166 | 1 我不大明白,这个index类的有什么好不好的?
比方说,买sp500的话,哪家不一样么?只要是对应sp500的index,都差不多吧.
唯一的区别就是expense
比方说,ivv, vfinx好了,都是sp500,就是total expense is 0.09% or 0.18%, right? | n******n
发帖数: 12088 | 2 i don't know if the expense ratio include dividends or not.
if it does, then yes.
【在 w*****a 的大作中提到】
: 我不大明白,这个index类的有什么好不好的?
: 比方说,买sp500的话,哪家不一样么?只要是对应sp500的index,都差不多吧.
: 唯一的区别就是expense
: 比方说,ivv, vfinx好了,都是sp500,就是total expense is 0.09% or 0.18%, right?
| s**********d
发帖数: 36899 | 3 稍有区别。因为不是100%每天都严格按index trade的，那样
cost太高。 | w*****a
发帖数: 166 | | l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 5 for highly liquid equity indices (SP500, etc), not much differences.
for less liquid indices (emerging markets, commodities, HY, etc), watch out for
tracking errors (how far the fund can deviate from the index by design). | t*m
发帖数: 4414 | 6 tracking errors will bias towards higher return or lower return?
out for
【在 l**********t 的大作中提到】
: for highly liquid equity indices (SP500, etc), not much differences.
: for less liquid indices (emerging markets, commodities, HY, etc), watch out for
: tracking errors (how far the fund can deviate from the index by design).
| X****r
发帖数: 3557 | 7 Can be in either way.
【在 t*m 的大作中提到】
: tracking errors will bias towards higher return or lower return?
:
: out for
| l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 8 indexer managers have a design decision to make -- lower tracking errors at
higher cost (thus lower expected return), or higher TE with lower cost(thus
higher expected return). so there is a trade-off between TE & expected
return.
For example, typical indexes follow mechanic membership/rebalancing rules
known to everyone. Active managers front run passive indexers based on these
rules, and benefit at the cost of the passive, faithful indexers (these are
some of the hidden costs of passive investing). To mitigate the lost, a
indexer may decide not to follow the index membership/rebalancing rule
closely -- which will lead to a higher tracking error but hopefully lower
cost.
【在 t*m 的大作中提到】
: tracking errors will bias towards higher return or lower return?
:
: out for
| t*m
发帖数: 4414 | 9 so we are better off picking those cheaper ones with larger TE?
at
thus
these
are
【在 l**********t 的大作中提到】
: indexer managers have a design decision to make -- lower tracking errors at
: higher cost (thus lower expected return), or higher TE with lower cost(thus
: higher expected return). so there is a trade-off between TE & expected
: return.
: For example, typical indexes follow mechanic membership/rebalancing rules
: known to everyone. Active managers front run passive indexers based on these
: rules, and benefit at the cost of the passive, faithful indexers (these are
: some of the hidden costs of passive investing). To mitigate the lost, a
: indexer may decide not to follow the index membership/rebalancing rule
: closely -- which will lead to a higher tracking error but hopefully lower
| l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 10 NO. large TE means higher risk of deviating from the prescribed index and
your strategic asset allocation. So even with indexing, you have to make
active decisions on the return/risk trade offs (as anything else in
investing)--- "passive" investing peddled by Vanguard is an oxymoron.
【在 t*m 的大作中提到】
: so we are better off picking those cheaper ones with larger TE?
:
: at
: thus
: these
: are
| t*m
发帖数: 4414 | 11 so, in the long run, the return should be the same for idx funds with
differnt tracking error?
【在 X****r 的大作中提到】
: Can be in either way.
|
|
