Active Mgmt vs. Passive - Net of fees

or Register to post new content in the forum

14 RepliesJump to last post

 

Comments

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Apr 11, 2006 10:05 pm

Do you guys ever get wholesalers for ETFs or Powershares citing studies
that have "proven" that passive funds outperform active, net of
management fees?  Is this actually true??     

Apr 11, 2006 10:09 pm

OOOOOOHHHHH.  I love this post.

Apr 11, 2006 10:42 pm

YES.  I bet you could have a study done that "proved" monkeys have very stimulating converstations.

Apr 11, 2006 10:43 pm

Define "passive"

Apr 11, 2006 10:46 pm

Is Poweshares Passive or Active, or...........something else.

Apr 12, 2006 6:04 am

Heh supposedly Powershares are "the best of both worlds".....somewhere
in the middle.  I would categorize them as passive, relatively
speaking. 

Apr 12, 2006 12:30 pm

Powershares are active in my mind...if you take a "dumb" (cap weighted) index and try to screen for certain characteristics, I say that's activity.  Therefore, it's active.  Not as active as a fund w/100%+ turnover, but it's still requires action to be different from a passive approach.....it's low turnover, but so are lots of managers. 


Conceptually it makes a lot more sense to me than just buying a cap-weighted index, but who knows if it'll work better in the long run.  Backtesting doesn't count--my life (or yours) would be a lot better off if I knew what the "past" would look like 10 years from now...


I thought the monkey study was ongoing in bank lobbies w/brokers (and their conversations) there.


OK, that wasn't very nice, but it struck me as clever.

Apr 12, 2006 1:36 pm

Clever...no.  I heard better cutdowns on the playground in 3rd grade.


If you are gonna try to be a douche bag and make a snide remark for no reason, at least make it worth me reading.


At least then you'd be a clever douche bag.   

Apr 12, 2006 4:01 pm

OK, this calls for a vote:  clever comment or no?


BankFC:  I bet you could have a study done that "proved" monkeys have very stimulating converstations.


Me:  I thought the monkey study was ongoing in bank lobbies w/brokers (and their conversations) there.

Apr 12, 2006 10:37 pm

Ok, so no one actually knows....just more wholesaler propaganda I guess...

Apr 13, 2006 1:41 am
Cowboy93:

OK, this calls for a vote:  clever comment or no?


BankFC:  I bet you could have a study done that "proved" monkeys have very stimulating converstations.


Me:  I thought the monkey study was ongoing in bank lobbies w/brokers (and their conversations) there.



I thought it was clever you douche bag....


Apr 13, 2006 10:35 am

LOL

Apr 13, 2006 10:47 am

In the future, that will be a capital D capital B when using my title D Bag please.  Perhaps I should change my handle; somehow I see the moderator types taking issue with that.  Oh well, I've been called worse, usually at home!


OK...1 clever, 0 not clever votes.  Let's close the polls!


By the way, FC's comment that you can "prove" anything is wise:  backtesting is the lazy mind's way of "proving" something as he shows using his monkey example.

Apr 13, 2006 11:27 am
Cowboy93:

In the future, that will be a capital D capital B when using my title D Bag please.  Perhaps I should change my handle; somehow I see the moderator types taking issue with that.  Oh well, I've been called worse, usually at home!


OK...1 clever, 0 not clever votes.  Let's close the polls!


By the way, FC's comment that you can "prove" anything is wise:  backtesting is the lazy mind's way of "proving" something as he shows using his monkey example.



I double-dare ya to try to change your forum name and see if it goes through.....