PRESENTED BY PALAPPLE

ADVERTISE WITH US

Posted by iPhoto.org - Feb 26, 2009

Advertise here in this prominent space for only $100 per month, your advertisement will appear in all of the post pages available across this website.
Check out the link about for more advertisement options provided, get your message across!

Advertise with Us

SNAPSHOCK IS COMING TO TOWN

Posted by iPhoto.org On Feb 26, 2009

You better watch out,
You better bookmark,
You better ready your pics, cos I'm tell you why...

Snapshock is coming to town!!

Snapshock

THE BEST PLACE FOR DRY SEAFOOD

Posted by StarryGift On Mar 20, 2009

全香港其中一間最具規模的海味網上專門店。專營零售燕窩、鮑魚、海參、魚翅、花膠、元貝、冬蟲草,極具食療價值。此外亦提供各項中藥海味烹調方法,以導出各食品的固本培元及補生之效。

客戶服務熱線:3158 1276
傳真熱線:3158 1416
電郵查詢:info@starrygift.com

海味軒 | 香港燕窩海味網上專門店


Saturday, February 20, 2010

'Low Cost' ETFs Actually Cost Investors More Than Some Hedge Funds

Devil Fire Costume

ETFs bill themselves as low-cost alternatives to standard mutual funds or even hedge funds. The idea is that their management fees are lower and trading costs are low since you can simply buy and sell them easily through a discount online broker.


But here's the problem --  it's only true if ETFs are actually tracking their benchmarks effectively. Unfortunately they aren't.


WSJ:


In 2009, ETFs missed their targets by an average of 1.25 percentage points, a gap more than twice as wide as the 0.52-percentage-point average they posted in 2008, according to a study of ETF returns released this week by Morgan Stanley.


Part of this so-called tracking error stems from the recent proliferation of ETFs targeting exotic investments or areas where trading is less frequent, such as emerging-market stocks and junk bonds.


Last year, 54 ETFs showed tracking errors of more than three percentage points, up from just four funds the prior year. And a handful of the 54 missed by more than 10 percentage points.


1.25% is more than the management expense of some actively managed funds, or some hedge funds even (before performance fees).


We think ETFs are great for tracking broad, liquid benchmarks such as the S&P 500 where they are likely to be worthwhile in terms of cost and trading ease. But ETF products for niche investments are highly suspect. The more illiquid investments the worse off ETF investors will be, especially since savvy traders will likely be able to line up and pick-off trades ahead of the ETF. 


For anything niche, investors are probably better off with old fashioned mutual funds once all of their real expenses are factored in.


Yet we're fully aware of the fact that expenses of an ETF such as the above are near-invisible, especially if someone is been trading in and out of an ETF. So we'll expect investors to keep lapping these products up. In investment management, products with the least visible expenses, and best ability to avoid blame, win.


(Tip via Abnormal Returns)

Join the conversation about this story »

See Also:






Full story at http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/businessinsider/~3/WgID4gx_r80/low-cost-etfs-have-secret-costs-more-than-some-hedge-funds-2010-2

No comments:

Post a Comment



Advertise with Us