OT, chinese ETF, high risk, too high?

[echappist]

Originally Posted by saab2000

Can you elaborate? Warren Buffet has had bets with fund managers that he will beat them over a ten-year period with an S&P mutual fund vs a managed fund. He wins these bets.

S&P funds are also mutual funds and the good ones are available with fees as low as 0.03%. This price is available for the SWPPX fund from Charles Schwab and doesn't require a massive initial investment.

Are you referring to actively managed funds vs passive index funds? Over time the passive index funds normally win the race.

I think he’s referring to the actively managed funds (e.g. Peter Lynch’s fund)

Also, that Buffett bet wasnt exactly a fair bet, as the hedge fund alternative was a fund of funds, which means even more fee than 2 and 20. That said, it was good that someone took hedge funds to task for their high fees. Persnally, it’s all passive investing for me, save for a few shares of BrkB.

I think John Oliver puts it best when talking about retirement investing: it’s like going to Willy Wonka’s factory, and if you dont’t do anything stupid or highly risky you end up doing well by the virtue of being the least stupid guy/gal in the room

[joosttx]

Originally Posted by echappist

I think he’s referring to the actively managed funds (e.g. Peter Lynch’s fund)


I think John Oliver puts it best when talking about retirement investing: it’s like going to Willy Wonka’s factory, and if you dont’t do anything stupid or highly risky you end up doing well by the virtue of being the least stupid guy/gal in the room

This is truth......

[fignon's barber]

Originally Posted by echappist

I think he’s referring to the actively managed funds (e.g. Peter Lynch’s fund)

That's right. I was referring to actively managed funds, not index funds or ETF's.

[saab2000]

Originally Posted by fignon's barber

That's right. I was referring to actively managed funds, not index funds or ETF's.

Cool. I figured as much.