想买基金的朋友们

[digging]

想买基金的朋友们, 请看以下一段温哥华太阳报的报导. (节录)



…… most of them (managed mutual funds) under perform market indices, and that investors would be better off putting their money into passive funds.

意思是: 大多数基金(非指数的)的表现比大市指数差, 投资者把钱投放在指数基金(例如ETF)上回报更高.



…… most funds charge too much …… managed mutual funds are dangerous to your financial health. Most investors would be better off buying index funds or exchange-traded funds ……

意思是: 大多数非指数基金收费太高, …… 非指数基金危害你的财政健康. 大多数投资者如果把钱投放在指数基金上, 会得到更高回报.



…… they typically skim off two to three per cent of your money each year to pay their expenses, including "trailer fees" paid to mutual fund salesmen for as long as you remain invested.

意思是: 非指数基金公司每年抽取2%至3%的管理费, 这管理费包括基金推销员的佣金.



Over time, buyers of managed mutual funds can lose more than half of their earnings to annual fees……

意思是: 长久来说, 非指数基金的投资者可能因管理费而失去一半利润.



Of the total return, you get about 43 per cent.

意思是: 你大概得到你应得利润的百分之四十叁 (其余大概百分之五十七的应得利润化为乌有).



So you put up all the money, you take all the risk, and you get less than half of the return, while the fund company gets paid in good times and bad. That's a pretty lousy deal.

意思是: 你花钱投资, 你承担所有风险, 你得到小于一半的利润. 而基金公司(和基金推销员)不论基金价格升跌都一律(每年)收取管理费. 这不是一项好的交易.



They've got you handcuffed which suits them because, year-in and year-out, most advisers also receive trailer fees which are typically one half to one per cent of what you invest.

意思是: 他们(基金公司)会将你套着(罚款), 因为大部份的基金销售人每年收到0.5%至1%的佣金.



Fee-only financial planner Lynne Triffon, chair of the Institute of Advance Financial laceName>PlannerslaceName> (says), …… "There are a number of good, low-cost or no-load mutual funds out there. The problem is finding an adviser who will sell them," she says.

意思是: 高级财政计划人学院主席Lynne Triffon (一位只向投资者收顾问费, 不收基金公司佣金的财政计划人)说: 市场上是有一些好的, 低管理费的, 或不收管理费的非指数基金, 只是没有人愿意去推销.



原文: http://members.vfgcorp.com/news/Vanc...al%20Funds.pdf

[digging]

摘要


大多数基金(非指数的)的表现比大市指数差, 投资者把钱投放在指数基金(例如ETF)上回报更高.


大多数非指数基金收费太高, …… 非指数基金危害你的财政健康. 大多数投资者如果把钱投放在指数基金上, 会得到更高回报.


非指数基金公司每年抽取2%至3%的管理费, 这管理费包括基金推销员的佣金.


长久来说, 非指数基金的投资者可能因管理费而失去一半利润.


你大概得到你应得利润的百分之四十叁 (其余大概百分之五十七的应得利润化为乌有).


你花钱投资, 你承担所有风险, 你得到小于一半的利润. 而基金公司(和基金推销员)不论基金价格升跌都一律(每年)收取管理费. 这不是一项好的交易.


他们(基金公司)会将你套着(罚款), 因为大部份的基金销售人每年收到0.5%至1%的佣金.


高级财政计划人学院主席Lynne Triffon (一位只向投资者收顾问费, 不向基金公司收佣金的财政计划人)说: 市场上是有一些好的, 低管理费的, 或不收管理费的非指数基金, 只是没有人愿意去推销.

[digging]

本人与财务机构没有任何利益关系, 没有推广或贬低任何投资工具的意图, 发贴只是要让网友们得到资讯, 作出正确投资抉择.


这样做有叁个目的,

1. 投资者能得到更高利润.

2. 学生于上大学的时候有多一点钱交学费, 买书, 和住宿. 家长的担子可以减轻一点. (RESP)

3. 退休人士多拿一点退休金, 晚年生活过得好些. (RRSP)


本人学术水平不高, 没有接受过正统翻译训练, 如有错漏, 请各位高手作出补充.




谢谢赐教.

(请手下留情,一切从寛)

[digging]

Managed mutual funds may be dangerous to your financial health!

Michael Kane
Vancouver Sun
July 12, 2004

CREDIT: Mark Van Manen, Vancouver Sun
Mutual funds require savvy buyers, says Lynne Triffon of the Canadian Association of
Financial Planning.

Canadians are flocking back to mutual funds as markets recover and memories of financial scandals fade. Do we really know what we are doing?

Do our advisers really have our best interests at heart, or are they just living well to the detriment of our savings?

Do we really believe mutual fund companies exist for any purpose but to make money for themselves?

It has been suggested that active fund managers tend to believe in what they do because they have to -- their livelihood depends on the notion that they can find investing opportunities that the rest of the market has overlooked.

They ignore the fact that most of them under perform market indices, and that investors would be better off putting their money into passive funds.

It is not difficult to defend actively managed funds as a seemingly inexpensive way for the small investor to access professional management and achieve diversification by spreading their risk across a broad range of stocks and other asset classes.

Unfortunately, most funds charge too much for what they deliver. It is increasingly difficult to avoid the conclusion that managed mutual funds are dangerous to your financial health. Most investors would be better off buying index funds or exchange-traded funds that passively mirror the market at far lower cost.

Yet the industry is geared to manage mutual funds. We poured an estimated $350 million of new money into the sector in June, according to the Investment Funds Institute of Canada, the industry trade association. With improving returns, industry assets are nudging $475 billion, up from $390 billion a year ago.

At this pace, mutual funds could eventually represent as much of the national nest egg as pension plans, but without offering the same level of financial security to the millions who buy them.

It bears repeating that the problem with managed mutual funds is that they typically skim off two to three per cent of your money each year to pay their expenses, including "trailer fees" paid to mutual fund salesmen for as long as you remain invested.

Over time, buyers of managed mutual funds can lose more than half of their earnings to annual fees when you factor in the compounding those lost earnings would have generated, says Howard Atkinson, of Barclays Global Investors Canada, which dominates exchange-traded funds in Canada.

He gives the example of a typical mutual fund management expense ratio of 2.75 per cent that will eat up about 24 per cent of an eight-per-cent average return over 25 years.

Deducting those fees also reduces the compounding benefit, costing approximately one-third of the potential return from the investment.

Of the total return, you get about 43 per cent.

So you put up all the money, you take all the risk, and you get less than half of the return, while the fund company gets paid in good times and bad. That's a pretty lousy deal.

Fund managers will say they believe they can add value through active management. Some will trot out figures to show that some of their funds have beaten benchmark indices.

The question then is whether the funds are truly representative of the benchmark, or whether they are hybrids like most Canadian equity funds that are allowed up to 30 per cent foreign content.

Investors might say it doesn't matter how the fund company invests their money if they appear to generate a higher return, but it should. If your goals and risk tolerance call for 70 per cent of your savings to be invested in Canada and 30 per cent in the U.S., where most of us have our foreign content, you can do it more cheaply and keep more of your gains by buying the indexes of those two countries.

If your fund company claims to have beaten the S&P/TSX Canadian index, remember Nortel Networks which came to represent more than 30 per cent of the index during the high-tech bubble. A better comparison and a safer investment is the S&P/TSX 60 Capped Total Return Index that is subject to the same 10-per-cent maximum investment in any one company as managed mutual funds.

If we look at five-year returns to Dec. 31, 2003, the capped index came in at 10.9 per cent while the average mutual fund returned 6.8 per cent. Based on these numbers, the capped
index, which you can buy as an exchange-traded fund, would have beaten 50 per cent of mutual funds by four percentage points -- a 60-per-cent higher return.

It is unlikely that even 10 per cent of funds beat the capped index and even more unlikely that they can do so for another five years because returns tend to revert to the mean over time and fund managers will always be at a disadvantage because of their fee structure.

The real shame, however, is that half the managers left four per cent per year or more on the table which they could have earned by simply using a proper balanced passive strategy.

Which brings us back to the question of whether our advisers really know what they are doing. Why do they insist on selling us managed mutual funds when there are cheaper and better alternatives?

In the wake of corporate scandals, there has been a growing need to show demonstrable evidence that advisers are putting their clients first, says John De Goey, author of The Professional Financial Advisor.

"Unfortunately, most advisers want to cut the costs involved with running their practice, but aren't doing anything to reduce client expenses," De Goey says.

"There is great opportunity for advisers to add value by doing what they have always done, but at a lower total cost to clients. They should recommend cheaper mutual funds, particularly if they are superior."

Instead, about half of all advisers are peddling funds on a deferred sales charge basis that means they get paid up front -- typically five per cent of what you invest -- while you face stiff penalties if you try to get your money out within six years.

They've got you handcuffed which suits them because, year-in and year-out, most advisers also receive trailer fees which are typically one half to one per cent of what you invest. That may not sound like much but it adds up to between $200,000 and $400,000 a year for the adviser who can build a book of 200 well-heeled clients with $200,000 or more to invest.

If you have less, don't be too surprised if you are not invited to join your adviser on the golf course.

Fund companies and advisers defend deferred sales charges with the argument that the threat of declining penalties discourages premature redemptions and investors don't pay any sales fee if they stay the course.

Paternalism aside, that argument ignores high management expense ratios, the two to three per cent skimmed off the top each year to ensure everybody involved in selling the fund is well rewarded regardless of the fund's investment performance.

It is hardly in the interest of the fund companies or their advisers to point you in the direction of low-cost index funds or exchange-traded funds, or even relatively low-cost no-load (no sales fee) funds which would allow you to keep more of your investment earnings and, perhaps, reach your financial goals.

Fee-only financial planner Lynne Triffon, chair of the Institute of Advance Financial Planners, maintains there is a case to be made for actively managed funds versus index investing, but it means choosing your mutual funds carefully.

"There are a number of good, low-cost or no-load mutual funds out there. The problem is finding an adviser who will sell them," she says.

Consumers need to become as savvy when shopping for financial advisers as they are when they buy a new car or digital camera, says Triffon, vice-president of Vancouver's T.E. Financial.

"Many people are intimidated by the financial world but with a little time and effort, and the help of a good adviser, almost everyone is capable of understanding the fundamentals of investing and making prudent choices."

原文: http://members.vfgcorp.com/news/Vanc...al%20Funds.pdf

[species5618w]

因为全球大多数股票是通过基金买卖(我的假设, 不一定成立), INDEX就是基金经理的平均回报率. "平均"的定义就是只有50%的经理能比市场好. 但是, 经理要2%的费用, 所以70%-80%的经理不可能比市场好.

ETF肯定比基金合算. 但ETF有买入卖出commission, 对每月投资的人并不适合. 银行的INDEX FUND往往是个好的折衷. 但这种东西得rebalance和做风险评估. 所以基金对一般老百姓还是有用的. 而且, 如果所有人都买INDEX了, INDEX就不是基金经理的平均回报率了. 不过我估计那种情况短期是不可能的.

[dishnut]

作者: species5618w

因为全球大多数股票是通过基金买卖(我的假设, 不一定成立), INDEX就是基金经理的平均回报率. "平均"的定义就是只有50%的经理能比市场好. 但是, 经理要2%的费用, 所以70%-80%的经理不可能比市场好.

ETF肯定比基金合算. 但ETF有买入卖出commis...

What is 银行的INDEX FUND? Thanks for the education.

[species5618w]

作者: dishnut

What is 银行的INDEX FUND? Thanks for the education.

Mutual fund分很多种. 有一种叫INDEX FUND, 就是银行每天根据市场变化调整, 所以变动跟某个INDEX(比如DOW, S&P500, TSE, Bond)是一样的. 这种FUND银行不用雇高级管理人员分析市场, 就跟着INDEX买就完了, 所以MER(管理费)很低. 这种mutual fund一般叫什么什么index. 比如 Canadian Index, US Index, Dow INDEX. Canadian bond index.

ETF其实也是这种东西(当然还有很多别的ETF), 但ETF没有银行这个中间人(客户服务, 网上banking, 等等), 所以便宜一点. 但银行把他们当股票看, 每买卖一次要给银行commission.

[digging]

每月投资不是好方法, 因一年内有高有低, 有些买得便宜, 有些买得贵, 不化算.

我的方法是平时把钱储起来, 等大跌市时一次或分二次买进, 用这方法买进回报比每月买进高, 因全部都是便宜货. 大市一般每8至15个月大跌一次 500至1,500点 (05年4月, 05年11月, 06年7月, 07年8月和11月), 一般6至9个月就復原. 復原时回报可能超过10%. (要把握买进时机也不困难, 每天吃晚饭时听听新闻, 听到报告员说什么什么大跌市, 什么什么1年低位2年低位, 这就是买进的时机.)

关于index fund方面, 基金公司收的管理费很高, 有研究报告指出加拿大基金公司的管理费平均2.68% ( http://randsco.com/_img/blog/0702/fees.pdf 第40页, TER Total Expense Ratio). 就算是index fund也不会便宜, 因除了MER外还有推销员每年抽取的佣金(0.5%至1%). 我建议买iShares 的 XIC.TO (http://www.ishares.ca/product_info/f....do?ticker=XIC ), 持有的股票跟index fund 一样, 但管理费只是0.25%. 因此XIC.TO的回报比index fund高.

关于commission方面, 可以到Questrade ( http://www.questrade.com/ ) 开户, 他们不收年费, 也没有minimum, commission 只收 $4.95 + ECN Fee (一次性收费). 一年买二次也只是十多元. 基金公司每年收的管理费也不只这个数目.

[星手]

作者: digging

每月投资不是好方法, 因一年内有高有低, 有些买得便宜, 有些买得贵, 不化算.

我的方法是平时把钱储起来, 等大跌市时一次或分二次买进, 用这方法买进回报比每月买进高, 因全部都是便宜货. 大市一般每8至15个月大跌一次 500至1,500点 (05年4月, 05年11月, 06年7月, 0...

我妈也天真的这么说：高了卖，低了买。

因为从长期看基金是不停上涨的，从长期看是不是越早买越好？



但如果你要买了，再也不跌了怎么办？ 再也不买了吗？

或者你买了还跌怎么办？

[digging]

作者: 星手

我妈也天真的这么说：高了卖，低了买。

因为从长期看基金是不停上涨的，从长期看是不是越早买越好？


但如果你要买了，再也不跌了怎么办？ 再也不买了吗？

或者你买了还跌怎么办？

我妈也天真的这么说：高了卖，低了买。

你的妈妈很精明, 一定是一位了不起的人物, 我尊敬她. 买卖就是这样, 高了卖, 低了买.
你有这么成功的妈妈是你的褔气. 令人羡慕.



因为从长期看基金是不停上涨的，从长期看是不是越早买越好？

从长期看基金是会上涨的, 但不是不停上涨的, 涨了后会跌的, 不管怎样看是不是越便宜买越好?



但如果你要买了，再也不跌了怎么办？再也不买了吗？

买了后已经没有钱, 耍再储才有, 对吗? 同时等市跌, 大市不会不跌, 你见过不跌的市吗? 一般每8至15个月跌一次, 请你找个图表看看, 好吗? 到时市跌全都是便宜货, 你也有钱. 不是很好吗?



或者你买了还跌怎么办？

如果你每月买进, 一定有一些货是在高位买进的. 为什么你不先问那些在高位买进的怎么办?



你很可爱, 我喜欢你, 我教你买股票, 想学吗?

[digging]

XIC.TO买卖很方便, 就像股票一样, 任何时间上网都可以买卖, 交易价格由自己定. 早上买, 下午卖也可以, 没有限制.


Index Fund买卖比较麻烦, 只可以按照当天收市价交易. 另外, 预见到市跌也不可以卖, 因可能有罚款. 或来不及卖, 要等收市.

[digging]

买XIC.TO比较省税.

如果有人要卖fund, fund内现金不足, 或想保留一些现金, 银行就会卖股票, 一般都会trigger capital gain, 因ACB一般都较proceed低. 其余的fund holders就因为那个卖fund的收到T-Slip. 钱没有收过, 但要交税.

现在加拿大baby boomers都相继退休, 卖fund的会多, 其余的fund holders收到T-Slip较多, 交税也较多.

XIC.TO就不同, 卖到市场去, 不会有capital gain, 不会有T-Slip, 不会要交税.

同样是index, XIC.TO比较省税. 投资成本 / 费用较轻.

[digging]

作者: 星手

我妈也天真的这么说：高了卖，低了买。

因为从长期看基金是不停上涨的，从长期看是不是越早买越好？



但如果你要买了，再也不跌了怎么办？ 再也不买了吗？

或者你买了还跌怎么办？

等了你很久,不答我就走.

[星手]

作者: digging

等了你很久,不答我就走.

我妈比你强，我要学当然跟我妈学。

[星手]

作者: digging

我妈也天真的这么说：高了卖，低了买。

你的妈妈很精明, 一定是一位了不起的人物, 我尊敬她. 买卖就是这样, 高了卖, 低了买.
你有这么成功的妈妈是你的褔气. 令人羡慕.



因为从长期看基金是不停上涨的，从长期看是不是越早买越好？

从长期看基金是会上涨的, 但不是不...

谁基金整天买来卖去的？
你很天真，“高了卖, 低了买”你的理论家庭妇女都懂

大市是会跌，但你知道什么时候跌？而且总体是上涨的，以后你能买到比2006年价格低的基金吗？这概率很低
今天的东西比以后便宜的概率大50%，这个道理只要不是傻瓜都知道。

[digging]

作者: 星手

我妈比你强，我要学当然跟我妈学。

对不起呵, 原谅我吧.

你真的很可爱, 我们做个网上朋友, 好吗? 不会见面, 不通电话.

暂时.

[digging]

作者: 星手

我妈比你强，我要学当然跟我妈学。

你的妈妈当然比我强, 我不久前才会高了卖,低了买. 她一早已经懂了.
你跟她学的确比较好.

[digging]

作者: 星手

谁基金整天买来卖去的？
你很天真，“高了卖, 低了买”你的理论家庭妇女都懂

大市是会跌，但你知道什么时候跌？而且总体是上涨的，以后你能买到比2006年价格低的基金吗？这概率很低
今天的东西比以后便宜的概率大50%，这个道理只要不是傻瓜都知道。

是, 是, 是, 是我错. 你全对.

你可以原谅我吧.

我们做朋友, 好吗?

[species5618w]

作者: digging

每月投资不是好方法, 因一年内有高有低, 有些买得便宜, 有些买得贵, 不化算.

我的方法是平时把钱储起来, 等大跌市时一次或分二次买进, 用这方法买进回报比每月买进高, 因全部都是便宜货. 大市一般每8至15个月大跌一次 500至1,500点 (05年4月, 05年11月, 06年7月, 0...

我想外国人的评语是"Never try to catch a falling knife". 除非你是干这行的，不然最好别time the market。有很多高手可以高卖低买，但是正想你自己报道所说的，80%的经理没法beat市场，那可是多年老手，手下无数，资金超多的主。反正我是不敢说我比他们强. 再说除非你总买了再卖，从长远上说你买便宜了买贵了没太大区别.

[星手]

作者: species5618w

我想外国人的评语是"Never try to catch a falling knife". 除非你是干这行的，不然最好别time the market。有很多高手可以高卖低买，但是正想你自己报道所说的，80%的经理没法beat市场，那可是多年老手，手下无数，资金超多的主。反正我...

听说过10个将军9个没头。中国第一代的股民现在如何？股市不好时跳楼的几个不是多年老手？
所以大多数人买基金，买基金就是考虑长期的，稳定的收益。