We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Managed or Tracker fund, which is best?
Comments
-
Others have pointed out that the data is not as appropriate (accurate???) for a UK investor as a US investor but you 'appear' unwilling to take that aspect on board. In response to that point you mention that the UK is only 6% and therefore is not as big an impact. That was not the point, the point was more around the tax structure for the various different investment vehicles/products and in relation to it reflecting a US investor where they live in a country which is more than 50% of the world market. I am not dismissing the data simply, I do not read it as verbatim because its relevance is slightly reduced due to me being a UK investor. If Vanguard were to fund a similar article from a UK perspective this would have far more relevance.Hey currently I am undecided - I come with NO preconceived ideas here - except maybe I don't like to pay fees for nothing generally. At the moment I have a mix of fund types but that is NOT really relevant to the point of this thread.
you say "But that is the point, they are based on human engagement. " - is that basically saying you were using this data in your link to prove a point (that you say all analysis is based on the preconceived views of the analyst perhaps? ) rather than it being useful in the discussion?
Anyway, I'm comfortable, you're comfortable.Personal Responsibility - Sad but True
Sometimes.... I am like a dog with a bone0 -
greatkingrat wrote: »A passive fund doesn't "over-invest" or "under-invest" in anything - the whole point of passive investing is that it invests in every company within the sector in proportion to its market cap.
In my book investing in a .com company that had yet to make a profit yet nearly reached the FSE100 in market capitalisation is over investing. Putting 60% of your wealth in one country is over investing. It is far too high a risk for me.No doubt some active funds managed to sell banks before the crash, but by definition, for every active investor who sold just before the crash, there must be another active investor who bought just before the crash.
During the Great Crash the average UK Equity Index fund dropped 40%, much the same as the FSE100. The IUKD tracker dropped around 60%. With dividends reinvested it only recovered in 2014. The average UK equity income fund had recovered some 2-3 years earlier.0 -
Others have pointed out that the data is not as appropriate (accurate???) for a UK investor as a US investor but you 'appear' unwilling to take that aspect on board. In response to that point you mention that the UK is only 6% and therefore is not as big an impact. That was not the point, the point was more around the tax structure for the various different investment vehicles/products and in relation to it reflecting a US investor where they live in a country which is more than 50% of the world market. I am not dismissing the data simply, I do not read it as verbatim because its relevance is slightly reduced due to me being a UK investor. If Vanguard were to fund a similar article from a UK perspective this would have far more relevance.
Anyway, I'm comfortable, you're comfortable.
I have not dismissed this, just asked for data - any data to show that UK managed funds are better than US ones. or even data that shows fees are lower.
(Agree it would be great to see a UK-centric vanguard paper on this!)
(it was not me that mentioned the 6% btw)0 -
This is the problem with these active vs passive 'debates', they invariably descend into bunfights with zealots on either side. Dressing the argument up as a data willy waving engagement is just a variation on the theme and is likely to generate more heat than light. As ever with investing you should establish your objectives and then find the best vehicle(s) to achieve them, the mechanism is a secondary concern. Horses for courses, right tools for the job and all that good stuff0
-
This is the problem with these active vs passive 'debates', they invariably descend into bunfights with zealots on either side. Dressing the argument up as a data willy waving engagement is just a variation on the theme and is likely to generate more heat than light. As ever with investing you should establish your objectives and then find the best vehicle(s) to achieve them, the mechanism is a secondary concern. Horses for courses, right tools for the job and all that good stuff
I am trying to stop that happening - trying hard!
There is data on every fund out there - I have only found data analysis as per the thread first post. I am asking for data that shows the opposite, the same or confuses the issue - any data study to compare and review. So far I have mostly had just people's views and people telling me not to bother as its a waste of time.
Note to future posters on this thread. Please read the thread first post and add to the discussion in light of that if possible.
Really looking for analysis into the data.
For me, this will help me decide my own strategy. I hope for some other people too.0 -
Unfortunately you would need to trawl through the participants posts to identify.cloud_dog - please can you on your gsheet add which exact funds these are? it is hard to research the funds you listed here without knowing which is which?
Great British Invest off or Passive V Active UpdatesPersonal Responsibility - Sad but True
Sometimes.... I am like a dog with a bone0 -
Ah OK, thanks. that is interesting I will take a look.Unfortunately you would need to trawl through the participants posts to identify.
Great British Invest off or Passive V Active Updates
So the managed funds are not actually available as a fund - they are related to portfolios by MSE posters here!0 -
The tax issue is a red herring. Vanguard’s White Paper and all the studies conduct comparative analysis on performance before taxes.
In taxable accounts cap-weighted passive funds have additional advantages, which are country specific (not covered in Vanguard’s White paper).0 -
There is nothing special about any developed market. Here: https://www.ft.com/content/c6183f2f-f58a-3569-a6ac-9d2b44adfe28
Emerging markets... Perhaps a stronger argument for “active” could be made. Frankly, I would buy any active fund managed by the Communist Party of China. Normal investors have no chance when playing against a bunch of thieves.0 -
Yes, they are a portfolio of active or passive funds.Ah OK, thanks. that is interesting I will take a look.
So the managed funds are not actually available as a fund - they are related to portfolios by MSE posters here!Personal Responsibility - Sad but True
Sometimes.... I am like a dog with a bone0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards