Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Retirement Planning


Whether you are close to federal employee retirement or just starting out in your career, this is the place to share ideas with your federal colleagues on creating a secure financial foundation.


To read today's top news stories on federal employee related news visit FederalDaily.com.

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
LSA  
#1 Posted : Saturday, September 15, 2012 1:30:45 AM(UTC)
LSA

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/29/2004(UTC)
Posts: 996

Have you had any success with investing in Actively Managed Mutual Funds (e.g. holdings in an IRA or non tax deferred accounts) as compared to Passively Managed Index Funds (e.g TSP).

What are the factors that you consider would make an Actively Managed Mutual Fund approach more advantageous than the Passively Managed approach to Mutual Fund Holdings?



LSA2012-09-15 09:36:25
Fed1969  
#2 Posted : Saturday, September 15, 2012 2:02:35 AM(UTC)
Fed1969

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/28/2010(UTC)
Posts: 3,333

The key to me is the income history of the actively managed funds vs passive TSP or IRA.  Unless the manager is making you big bucks, year after year, as compared to the passive account, I think I would stick with the TSP. The management fees are lots higher than TSP.
nextpage2  
#3 Posted : Saturday, September 15, 2012 5:30:54 AM(UTC)
nextpage2

Rank: Rookie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 9/8/2012(UTC)
Posts: 28

I agree the low fees of the TSP are a big plus(2.5 basis pts.=25cents for every 1k invested),plus with passively manage funds your referring to Indexingi.e. Cfund tracks S&P 500;S fund the Russell 2000 or small caps.For me personally,I'm retired I've been fortuate with the TSP since it's inception,now I'm going to a more capital preservation mode unless the conditions warrant an inrterfund transfer.I reallocated wed. into the C fund,hit theQ3 announcement by Ben,now I,ll probably lock the gains in and wait till next month to buy a dip.
crs1  
#4 Posted : Saturday, September 15, 2012 12:56:00 PM(UTC)
crs1

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 12/9/2007(UTC)
Posts: 226

LSA wrote:
What are the factors that you consider would make an Actively Managed Mutual Fund approach more advantageous than the Passively Managed approach to Mutual Fund Holdings?


 
I find none. The purity of passive for asset allocation (I know what I own always) along with low cost make the case compelling.
 
crs1

The HalfBreed  
#5 Posted : Sunday, September 16, 2012 9:37:26 AM(UTC)
The HalfBreed

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/30/2008(UTC)
Posts: 2,501

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
"According to Vanguard, for the 10 years leading up to 2007, the majority
of actively-managed U.S. stock funds underperformed the index they were
seeking to outperform. For instance, 84% of actively-managed U.S. large
blend funds underperformed their index, and 68% of actively-managed
U.S. small value funds underperformed, as well. The case is even worse
for actively-managed bond funds. In that case, almost 95% of
actively-managed bond funds underperformed their indexes for the 10 years leading up to 2007"

http://mutualfunds.about.com/od/activevspassivefunds/a/indexvsactive.htm





I'm mainly 100% C fund (until recently) and now 100% G fund. (getting nervous, taking some off the table)

Vanguard for the ROTH (Wellesley), then Dodge & Cox International + Harbor Bond Hi-Yield.

I Have a mix of both, but, 60-65% Indexed (C Fund). I favor Index funds, but, you can't and shouldn't discount actively managed funds altogether. 







RETIRED 12/19/2012 !!! Good Bye Tension !!! Hello Pension !!!
Rss Feed  Atom Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.


This page was generated in 0.435 seconds.