r****r
发帖数: 1693 | 1 就是根据你的预定退休年,2040,2050之类，自动调整投资组合的基金，看起来非常
diversify,expense ratio一般在0.6%左右，这类基金怎么样？可以全放里面么？ |
l*u
发帖数: 2090 | 2 Vanguard 2045 还凑合
Fidelity类似的基金 烂得像屎
【在 r****r 的大作中提到】
: 就是根据你的预定退休年,2040,2050之类，自动调整投资组合的基金，看起来非常
: diversify,expense ratio一般在0.6%左右，这类基金怎么样？可以全放里面么？
|
r****r
发帖数: 1693 | 3 请问怎么判断这类target date fund的好坏？看return也还不错，就是er挺高，0.6%。
看具体portfolio里组合非常多，没有个股，全是其他fund，有点像fund of fund。
【在 l*u 的大作中提到】
: Vanguard 2045 还凑合
: Fidelity类似的基金 烂得像屎
|
s*********0
发帖数: 2045 | 4 Like this:
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t0/Investment/31270305.html
【在 r****r 的大作中提到】
: 请问怎么判断这类target date fund的好坏？看return也还不错，就是er挺高，0.6%。
: 看具体portfolio里组合非常多，没有个股，全是其他fund，有点像fund of fund。
|
p**h
发帖数: 1105 | 5 如果某人是个投资方面的小白， 又没有兴趣自学成才， 整天在这里问pick， 这类目
标基金就最适合他/她了。。
【在 r****r 的大作中提到】
: 就是根据你的预定退休年,2040,2050之类，自动调整投资组合的基金，看起来非常
: diversify,expense ratio一般在0.6%左右，这类基金怎么样？可以全放里面么？
|
y****i
发帖数: 778 | 6 I don't like these fund of fund at all. Their stock ratio is too high, and
the bond fund is also weak because most are treasury bond or agency bond.
They can make money just by doing nothing.
【在 p**h 的大作中提到】
: 如果某人是个投资方面的小白， 又没有兴趣自学成才， 整天在这里问pick， 这类目
: 标基金就最适合他/她了。。
|
q**y
发帖数: 135 | 7 同感，买这个还不如直接买大盘指数。
【在 y****i 的大作中提到】
: I don't like these fund of fund at all. Their stock ratio is too high, and
: the bond fund is also weak because most are treasury bond or agency bond.
: They can make money just by doing nothing.
|
p**h
发帖数: 1105 | 8 偶也从来不买这类fund。 但对于某些对投资毫无知识和兴趣， 但又有运气找到有401K
的东家的人来说， 这些funds 就可以起到作用。
【在 y****i 的大作中提到】
: I don't like these fund of fund at all. Their stock ratio is too high, and
: the bond fund is also weak because most are treasury bond or agency bond.
: They can make money just by doing nothing.
|
w***n
发帖数: 1519 | 9 I'm not a fan of these target funds either, but you can pick those target
2035/2025/2015 funds to reduce the composition of stocks, if composition is
your major complaint. You don't have to choose the one that matches your age.
【在 y****i 的大作中提到】
: I don't like these fund of fund at all. Their stock ratio is too high, and
: the bond fund is also weak because most are treasury bond or agency bond.
: They can make money just by doing nothing.
|
y****i
发帖数: 778 | 10 https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/snapshot?FundId=0303&FundIntExt=INT
Even 2015 fund has 55% in equities and only 45% in bond. If you want to
retire or need money in 2008, you will in trouble for sure. For retirement,
almost 100% asset should be based on fixed income. You need cash flow every
month to cover your everyday expense, and still positive after inflation.
Your principal should always go up even after the retirement.
is
age.
【在 w***n 的大作中提到】
: I'm not a fan of these target funds either, but you can pick those target
: 2035/2025/2015 funds to reduce the composition of stocks, if composition is
: your major complaint. You don't have to choose the one that matches your age.
|
|
|
w***n
发帖数: 1519 | 11 I think the reason that Vanguard targets a high stock composition even for
near-retirement funds is based on the idea that people now live much longer
lives, without the growth part that stocks provide, your fund can dry up
long before you pass away.
I can't find the exact document, but I have read their research report
somewhere. I would say that, although I do not 100% agree with their
solution, they made a fair point on the problem and didn't exaggerate it.
,
every
【在 y****i 的大作中提到】
: https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/snapshot?FundId=0303&FundIntExt=INT
: Even 2015 fund has 55% in equities and only 45% in bond. If you want to
: retire or need money in 2008, you will in trouble for sure. For retirement,
: almost 100% asset should be based on fixed income. You need cash flow every
: month to cover your everyday expense, and still positive after inflation.
: Your principal should always go up even after the retirement.
:
: is
: age.
|
w***n
发帖数: 1519 | 12 The reason they choose treasury bond as a major source for the bond
component is not to seek for return from bond. They are after stability/
protection. When they take on extra risk for return, they take it from
stocks.
It's quite a matter of personal style and risk appetite. I know you prefer
individual bonds over stocks. I get your point and am not trying to convince
you. It's just that those junk bonds have high risks of default while the
returns are very limited. To me, it's not quite worthwhile. I generally
prefer Vanguard's style, except that I'm more aggressive. If I want high
return, I take risks on stocks, especially the growth ones. The risks are
arguably higher, but the upside potential is unlimited.
【在 y****i 的大作中提到】
: I don't like these fund of fund at all. Their stock ratio is too high, and
: the bond fund is also weak because most are treasury bond or agency bond.
: They can make money just by doing nothing.
|
n******h
发帖数: 2544 | 13 个人最近也在研究这个，不是专家啊。
我的理解是：
1. target date funds就是funds of funds.
2. 你仔细看他家Fidelity的target date，费用其实很高，因为它还要去付买的基金管
理费。双重收费哈。
3. 价值在哪里呢？什么配置都是joke，因为都是可以自己在401K操作的。但是有一个
关键点，就是他买的基金都是你买不到的，都是比较优质的Institutional级别的基金
，费率比你自己在etrade买的investor class低不少。
我觉得第三点是这类基金存在的唯一价值和原因。
【在 r****r 的大作中提到】
: 就是根据你的预定退休年,2040,2050之类，自动调整投资组合的基金，看起来非常
: diversify,expense ratio一般在0.6%左右，这类基金怎么样？可以全放里面么？
|
S**C
发帖数: 2964 | 14 No, there is no double fee in Fid or VG's, or pretty much any target funds.
【在 n******h 的大作中提到】
: 个人最近也在研究这个，不是专家啊。
: 我的理解是：
: 1. target date funds就是funds of funds.
: 2. 你仔细看他家Fidelity的target date，费用其实很高，因为它还要去付买的基金管
: 理费。双重收费哈。
: 3. 价值在哪里呢？什么配置都是joke，因为都是可以自己在401K操作的。但是有一个
: 关键点，就是他买的基金都是你买不到的，都是比较优质的Institutional级别的基金
: ，费率比你自己在etrade买的investor class低不少。
: 我觉得第三点是这类基金存在的唯一价值和原因。
|
n******h
发帖数: 2544 | 15 you mean date targeted funds don't need to pay fund management fee to those
funds they hold?
【在 S**C 的大作中提到】
: No, there is no double fee in Fid or VG's, or pretty much any target funds.
|
