1/3/5 years or since inception? (Stocks/Mutual)

Messages
970
Location
Virginia Bch. VA
When you all are looking at a mutual fund or ETF's performance where do your eyes go first? Mine usually go for the 5yr performance results, then to the since inception results. Naturally I also look at P/E ratio and most importantly fee structure. I've been looking at the Vanguard funds and ETF's lately. In all my years I've heard great things about their founder, their company, their trust, and solid structure.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Messages
1,841
Location
Southwest
I look at fees first. Just took a look at the non vanguard fund I bought for my new baby 21 years ago. 8.4% compounded after fees. Not horrible, but the difference between 0.25% fees and 1% fees is more than it looks.
 
Messages
838
Location
One Step Beyond
Check out: www.bogleheads.org John Bogle was the Founder of Vanguard. Great web-site for people who believe in sensible investing and matching the market. Low cost investing and being well diversified. Check the different Forums/Questions I check it every day and learn a lot. Just like this web-site.
 
Messages
13,083
Location
North Carolina
When i was younger , i looked at the major companies it held, i looked for a newer inception date, and a decent nav price. I figured a newer fund that held good stocks had more room to grow over time. If you are young, you really don't want the fund to go up in value too fast , as you are trying to accumulate it first. I had coworkers that invested in fidelity magellan, and it was a huge expensive fund. It had good numbers but at the nav price they were not accumulating much with each pay period pretax deduction.
 
Last edited:

Astro14

$100 Site Donor
Staff member
Messages
13,097
Location
Virginia Beach
For ETFs and other index funds, the only place your eyes need go is to the expense ratio. For actively managed, you should look at the period of performance of the current management team...
 
Messages
2,408
Location
CA
For ETFs, You need to look at market cap and volume. Otherwise whatever difference you think you're saving via expense ratio is going to get eaten up in your transactions.
 
Last edited:
Messages
3,043
Vanguard has some of, if not the lowest fees in the game. I look to fees first. Then I like to see a fund that has been around for long time. I've done well, over 15yr plus timeperiod, with Wellington and WIndsor II.
 
Messages
3,947
Location
Ohio
Originally Posted By: bustednutz
1 yr, 3 yr, 5yr or since inception?
Well Inception came out in 2010 so it couldn't be 5 years as of the time this post is made. We have to go deeper.
 
Messages
22,188
Location
Colorado Springs
Originally Posted By: Astro14
For ETFs and other index funds, the only place your eyes need go is to the expense ratio. For actively managed, you should look at the period of performance of the current management team...
Agreed. ETF or mutual fund past performance is no predictor of future performance unless you do some serious research, both fundamental and technical, of what stocks are in the fund. I follow the best actively managed mutual funds closely and without fail, the cream of the crop funds usually fall off a cliff at some point. And that is with the same fund managers. Darlings like the Fairholme fund come to mind. One of the best funds for 10 years in all metrics and for the last several years, can't beat the SP500. Over 90% of actively managed funds can not beat the SP500 and those that do only do it for a short period of time.
 
Messages
14,505
Location
Top of Virginia
Originally Posted By: Astro14
For ETFs and other index funds, the only place your eyes need go is to the expense ratio.
Bingo. Once you pick the market niche or asset allocation that you're looking for in a fund, your preference among the different fund choices should place a PREMIUM on low expense ratios. I'd agree with Astro14 that it should be THE determining factor. Vanguard's are consistently among the lowest in the industry. The highest expense ratio I have with Vanguard is 0.10%, and the lowest is 0.05%. That's about as free as it gets.
 
Messages
14,505
Location
Top of Virginia
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Over 90% of actively managed funds can not beat the SP500 and those that do only do it for a short period of time.
It's so easy to beat most other investors out there, isn't it? If you simply own the market, you beat 90% of "the other guys". It's like Vegas. They'll always say how they're up so much in this or that. They never tell you where they're down, or where they missed a huge opportunity cost by being in one thing instead of another. Just own the market. It's really that simple.
 
Messages
22,188
Location
Colorado Springs
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Over 90% of actively managed funds can not beat the SP500 and those that do only do it for a short period of time.
It's so easy to beat most other investors out there, isn't it? If you simply own the market, you beat 90% of "the other guys". It's like Vegas. They'll always say how they're up so much in this or that. They never tell you where they're down, or where they missed a huge opportunity cost by being in one thing instead of another. Just own the market. It's really that simple.
The good thing about the SP500 index in particular is, it's very diversified and they add and drop stocks from it routinely so the most "current", mature companies that are doing well are represented in the index. It performs slightly better than total market indexes that have higher beta exposure. Really, if you want 1 set and forget ETF, you'd be hard pressed to find something better than SPY.
 
Messages
3,043
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Over 90% of actively managed funds can not beat the SP500 and those that do only do it for a short period of time.
It's so easy to beat most other investors out there, isn't it? If you simply own the market, you beat 90% of "the other guys". It's like Vegas. They'll always say how they're up so much in this or that. They never tell you where they're down, or where they missed a huge opportunity cost by being in one thing instead of another. Just own the market. It's really that simple.
If you have that long term investment mindset it can be fruitful. Short term, a whole different ballgame.
 
Messages
14,505
Location
Top of Virginia
Originally Posted By: BISCUT
If you have that long term investment mindset it can be fruitful. Short term, a whole different ballgame.
I've personally found, among my camp of investing friends, that those taking a short term approach to investing are really in it for the long term. If you truly need your money out in, say, 5 years, then sure, you won't want it all piled into a market index fund.
 
Messages
1,841
Location
Southwest
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Over 90% of actively managed funds can not beat the SP500 and those that do only do it for a short period of time.
It's so easy to beat most other investors out there, isn't it? If you simply own the market, you beat 90% of "the other guys". It's like Vegas. They'll always say how they're up so much in this or that. They never tell you where they're down, or where they missed a huge opportunity cost by being in one thing instead of another. Just own the market. It's really that simple.
Like Vegas? I guess. The difference is you are betting with the house. You can still make sucker bets though. Next to getting the money together in the first place, the hardest thing is to pony up the dough in the years where the market sold off 35% and you feel foolish and poor. That's not easy for anyone.
 
Top