<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Update: Active &amp; Passive Funds Comparison</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:09:54 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Vanguard and Oakmark Reopen Good Funds</title>
		<link>http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-46345</link>
		<dc:creator>Vanguard and Oakmark Reopen Good Funds</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 16:29:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/mutual-fund/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/#comment-46345</guid>
		<description>[...] Precious Metals and Mining (VGPMX): I did a comparison between the actively managed funds I own and those low-cost, index funds from Vanguard early this year, and VGPMX is one of the Vanguard fund that I compared with my Tocqueville Gold [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Precious Metals and Mining (VGPMX): I did a comparison between the actively managed funds I own and those low-cost, index funds from Vanguard early this year, and VGPMX is one of the Vanguard fund that I compared with my Tocqueville Gold [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Recently Reopened Mutual Funds: Any Interesting Ones? &#124; The Suns Financial Diary &#124; A Personal Finance Blog on Saving and Investing</title>
		<link>http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-37263</link>
		<dc:creator>Recently Reopened Mutual Funds: Any Interesting Ones? &#124; The Suns Financial Diary &#124; A Personal Finance Blog on Saving and Investing</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2008 02:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/mutual-fund/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/#comment-37263</guid>
		<description>[...] the 10 actively managed funds I own, two are closed: Dodge &amp; Cox Stock (DODGX) and Buffalo Small-Cap (BUFSX). For DODGX, the fund [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the 10 actively managed funds I own, two are closed: Dodge &amp; Cox Stock (DODGX) and Buffalo Small-Cap (BUFSX). For DODGX, the fund [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MossySF</title>
		<link>http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-36706</link>
		<dc:creator>MossySF</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jan 2008 18:26:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/mutual-fund/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/#comment-36706</guid>
		<description>One factor for your comparison is missing -- tax efficiency. You have the dividend yield part of the equation there but missing is the capital gains distribution number. For example, I hold DODGX also (luckily in my 401K). The 1.5% yield is not too far off from the comparison index but the 2007 capital gains distribution was a whopping 12%! So for somebody paying 15% LTCG + 9.3% CA tax, holding this in a taxable account effectively reduces 2007 returns by 3.3%. You do reclaim some of that by now having a higher cost basis but over the long run, you&#039;d much rather have the deferred taxes over yearly tax drag.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One factor for your comparison is missing &#8212; tax efficiency. You have the dividend yield part of the equation there but missing is the capital gains distribution number. For example, I hold DODGX also (luckily in my 401K). The 1.5% yield is not too far off from the comparison index but the 2007 capital gains distribution was a whopping 12%! So for somebody paying 15% LTCG + 9.3% CA tax, holding this in a taxable account effectively reduces 2007 returns by 3.3%. You do reclaim some of that by now having a higher cost basis but over the long run, you&#8217;d much rather have the deferred taxes over yearly tax drag.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Productivity Tips, Vested Stock Options, Mutual Fund Reviews @ The Roundup</title>
		<link>http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-36657</link>
		<dc:creator>Productivity Tips, Vested Stock Options, Mutual Fund Reviews @ The Roundup</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jan 2008 16:44:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/mutual-fund/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/#comment-36657</guid>
		<description>[...] Sun&#8217;s Financial Diary: Sun does something very interesting &#8212; he compares his actively managed funds against their passive index fund counterparts. He [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Sun&#8217;s Financial Diary: Sun does something very interesting &#8212; he compares his actively managed funds against their passive index fund counterparts. He [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: I Have Released A New Episode Of The No Credit Needed Podcast (Plus A Quick Stroll Through My Blogroll)</title>
		<link>http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-36244</link>
		<dc:creator>I Have Released A New Episode Of The No Credit Needed Podcast (Plus A Quick Stroll Through My Blogroll)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2008 21:34:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/mutual-fund/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/#comment-36244</guid>
		<description>[...] Sun compares active and passive funds. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Sun compares active and passive funds. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Friday Finance Findings For January 25th : Generation X Finance</title>
		<link>http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-36178</link>
		<dc:creator>Friday Finance Findings For January 25th : Generation X Finance</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2008 16:26:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/mutual-fund/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/#comment-36178</guid>
		<description>[...] Update on Active &amp; Passive Funds Comparison - The Sun takes a look at the active funds he owns and compares them to similar index funds. How did they perform? [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Update on Active &amp; Passive Funds Comparison &#8211; The Sun takes a look at the active funds he owns and compares them to similar index funds. How did they perform? [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Weekly Dividend Investing Roundup - January 25, 2008 &#187; The Dividend Guy Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-36155</link>
		<dc:creator>Weekly Dividend Investing Roundup - January 25, 2008 &#187; The Dividend Guy Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2008 14:58:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/mutual-fund/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/#comment-36155</guid>
		<description>[...] There is a constant debate between active and passive investing. Sun did an update on the Active &amp; Passive Funds Comparison. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] There is a constant debate between active and passive investing. Sun did an update on the Active &#38; Passive Funds Comparison. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sun</title>
		<link>http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-36022</link>
		<dc:creator>Sun</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2008 03:26:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/mutual-fund/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/#comment-36022</guid>
		<description>Jeremy: That&#039;s a good point. I used return data from Morningstar which already took into consideration the fees and reinvested dividends. So only the total returns matter in the comparison. I will update the post accordingly :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeremy: That&#8217;s a good point. I used return data from Morningstar which already took into consideration the fees and reinvested dividends. So only the total returns matter in the comparison. I will update the post accordingly <img src='http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Personal Finance Review - Market Turmoil Edition &#187; Money Smart Life</title>
		<link>http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-35933</link>
		<dc:creator>Personal Finance Review - Market Turmoil Edition &#187; Money Smart Life</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2008 15:00:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/mutual-fund/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/#comment-35933</guid>
		<description>[...] If you&#8217;re wondering which type of investments are best to have during market uncertainty, read Sun&#8217;s comparison of active &amp; Passive mutual funds. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] If you&rsquo;re wondering which type of investments are best to have during market uncertainty, read Sun&rsquo;s comparison of active &amp; Passive mutual funds. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cliff</title>
		<link>http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-35867</link>
		<dc:creator>Cliff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2008 05:39:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/mutual-fund/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/#comment-35867</guid>
		<description>The trick is finding the right fund.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The trick is finding the right fund.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy</title>
		<link>http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-35768</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 16:01:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thesunsfinancialdiary.com/investing/mutual-fund/update-active-passive-funds-comparison/#comment-35768</guid>
		<description>To be honest, when comparing apples to apples, I pay little attention to expense ratios. The returns that you see and that are reported are always net of fees anyway. So even if the fee is double compared to another fund, as long as the end result is a better return, that&#039;s what matters to your bottom line.

A fund that returned 10% with a 1.0% ER compared to a fund that earned 10% with a 0.5% ER doesn&#039;t matter, you still realized a 10% gain in the end.

But anyway, that is an interesting update, and there is certainly no reason to abandon active funds as long as they are performing in line with, or outperforming other similar investments.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To be honest, when comparing apples to apples, I pay little attention to expense ratios. The returns that you see and that are reported are always net of fees anyway. So even if the fee is double compared to another fund, as long as the end result is a better return, that&#8217;s what matters to your bottom line.</p>
<p>A fund that returned 10% with a 1.0% ER compared to a fund that earned 10% with a 0.5% ER doesn&#8217;t matter, you still realized a 10% gain in the end.</p>
<p>But anyway, that is an interesting update, and there is certainly no reason to abandon active funds as long as they are performing in line with, or outperforming other similar investments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.466 seconds -->
