logo
Welcome to Foothills Financial Planning, Inc.
  • Subscribe via RSS

  • 401k
  • 529 Plans
  • Annuities
  • Banking
  • Berkshire Hathaway
  • Camelback Fund
  • College Savings
  • Credit
  • Debt
  • Dividends
  • Emergency Fund
  • Estate Planning
  • Fiduciary Standard
  • General
  • General Personal Finance
  • Health Savings Accounts
  • Insurance
  • Investing
  • Real Estate
  • Retirement Planning
  • Spending
  • Stocks
  • Taxes
  • Twins and Triplets
  • 2012
    • March (1)
    • January (2)
  • 2011
    • December (2)
    • November (1)
    • October (3)
    • September (6)
    • August (8)
    • July (1)
    • June (3)
    • May (4)
    • April (2)
    • March (1)
    • February (4)
    • January (4)
  • 2010
    • December (5)
    • November (7)
    • October (5)
    • September (2)
    • August (3)
    • July (2)
    • June (3)
    • May (3)
    • April (2)
    • March (5)
    • February (4)
    • January (3)
  • 2009
    • December (1)
    • November (4)
    • October (2)
    • September (6)
    • August (2)
    • July (2)
    • June (2)
    • May (3)
    • April (3)
    • March (5)
    • February (4)
    • January (1)
  • 2008
    • December (2)
    • November (1)
    • September (1)
  • 2007
    • September (1)
    • February (2)
  • 2006
    • November (1)
    • September (1)
    • August (1)
    • January (1)
  • 2005
    • December (2)

Must-read for mutual fund investors

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Cale Smith, godfather of the Spoke Fund and portfolio manager at Islamorada Investment Management, maintains a blog that I highly recommend that goes by the moniker of Cale in the Keys.  Whether or not you choose to take me up on that recommendation, if you own actively-managed mutual funds I implore you to at least review a recent post on the topic of closet indexing.  In it, Cale plainly articulates the reality of most actively-managed mutual funds today:  they have way too many holdings to know a lot about each of them, and even if they do have precise knowledge of each and every one, it doesn't matter.  That is because the sheer number of holdings ensures that the fund will approximate the index that it most closely resembles, while charging significantly more in expenses than the average index fund.  In other words, it will likely underperform the index, especially when fees are considered.  (Side rant: not all index funds are cheap.  Check out the B shares of State Farm's S&P 500 index fund - SNPBX:  1.5% expense ratio plus a deferred load of up to 5%.  Ouch!)

Check it out.

 

 

Tags: mutual fund fees, closet indexing

Investing

E-mail | del.icio.us
 

HOME | SERVICES | ABOUT US | FAQ | CLIENT FORMS | NEWS | DISCLOSURES | BLOG © 2008 FOOTHILLS FINANCIAL PLANNING, INC WEBSITE DESIGN AND PRODUCTION BY GLENDALE DESIGNS