We have three river birch trees that are central to the look of the house. I spend about $500 a year on trimming and a systemic treatment to keep them healthy. The trees are likely a quarter century old, twenty-two years old since they were planted. I would say they are close to sixty feet tall, and near the end of their lifespan. It will be a big expense, and change to the property profile once they are gone.
Nonsense. Try to find a tech ETF or mutual fund with a fee "below around .04". And forget about leveraging if limiting yourself to that low of an expense fee.
Sure, try to keep fees as low as possible, but other factors may also be considered when choosing one's investments, and they may be more important than choosing investments based simply on fees.
Nonsense. Try to find a tech ETF or mutual fund with a fee "below around .04". And forget about leveraging if limiting yourself to that low of an expense fee.
Sure, try to keep fees as low as possible, but other factors may also be considered when choosing one's investments, and they may be more important than choosing investments based simply on fees.
vanguard's VGT tech ETF fee is just 0.10%
and it has done very well obviously.
Yes, see my EDIT to my post which I was entering when you posted that, which is in agreement, but I did want to say that it is technically higher than his 0.04 threshold, at the expense of splitting hairs.
Nonsense. Try to find a tech ETF or mutual fund with a fee "below around .04". And forget about leveraging if limiting yourself to that low of an expense fee.
Sure, try to keep fees as low as possible, but other factors may also be considered when choosing one's investments, and they may be more important than choosing investments based simply on fees.
vanguard's VGT tech ETF fee is just 0.10%
and it has done very well obviously.
It seems there is no other variable besides expense fees that provide best returns.
Wow that's a short lifespan. Like the Autumn Blaze maples everybody planted here 20 years ago, many of which are now showing signs of aging, like die-back and disease.
When I was a kid my dad planted 5 Colorado Blue Spruces at various points in front of the house. As they grew, quickly, they filled out. I remember having returned from college to visit, and he had cut the lowest 8' of branches, it was terrible but he wanted some visibility and increased lawn surface.
Then maybe 15 years later I went back, and he had cut them all out--huge, beautiful, mature blue spruces, the pride of the whole block. Everybody loved them, and putting up the Christmas lights was a block tradition.
Major tree changes are always traumatic to me.
Yields a bit down across the board today, I short-term nailed it yesterday.
It seems there is no other variable besides expense fees that provide best returns.
Wow. Just Wow.
If an index fund with a 0.04 expense ratio beats almost 90% of actively managed funds, that low expense fee is driving that performance, would you not agree?
Tell me you understand the difference between a tech ETF and a Growth ETF.
Pretty much same thing. Tech stocks ARE growth stocks.
But all growth stocks are not tech. A discriminating investor understands this fundamental difference. And if it means paying a tenth of a percent higher in fee to gain that selective exposure, it could very well be a wise choice.
If an index fund with a 0.04 expense ratio beats almost 90% of actively managed funds, that low expense fee is driving that performance, would you not agree?
Pretty much same thing. Tech stocks ARE growth stocks.
But all growth stocks are not tech. A discriminating investor understands this fundamental difference. And if it means paying a tenth of a percent higher in fee to gain that selective exposure, it could very well be a wise choice.
Seattle - why would I want a higher fee from something underperforming.?
I bought some 1yr bills yesterday, tentatively pushing it out just a bit. Even by the fake government numbers, it looks like those predicting sticky inflation are so far correct, and it might even be rising. And as long as government spending continues to run amok and is counted toward GDP, that price inflation will probably continue--so I'm hesitant to go out on the curve.
But just looking at nominal yields and cash flow, that 5% for 20yrs is tempting.
As for corporates, yes retired is hot on them. Me, not so much. Living as I do in a high-tax state, it's great for the bottom line to not have to pay state tax on government instruments. I hold most treasuries now in brokerage, and when the next block matures in TD, I will transfer that to brokerage as well, to stay flexible. Even if I just want to go out on the curve a bit.
I will be fishing around for some individual corporates, and maybe get some in Roth--but they would have to be up around 8+% to make them particularly appealing. Petroleos Mexicanos, anyone?
Re: Igy's CEF's. I bought some of both EMD and FAX. Did much better on the EMD, because of when I bought in. With the FAX I had to buy a lot more at a way lower nav after having been in the red, in order to come out in the green, just. Be prepared to do some work, pick your spots, place the right orders, and pay attention if you want to continue to play them. Igy's probably got a process that is efficient for him, but for me, I have gotten lazy and can't be bothered. I would rather work out!
And to veer into gardening, so a little while ago a former colleague of my wife had a bunch of people over to create a rain and pollinator garden on his vast property, because he has advanced Parkinson's and wanted to see the project come to fruition before he dies. So we show up, with a full complement of garden tools, for the whole crew. Everyone was baffled, because we live in a condo and have no yard! WTF? lol it is all part of my apocalypse supplies, some of which I keep ready to go in one of our living rooms, much to my wife's ire. Looks like I'll have to move them back to storage now, thereby ending my halcyon days of springtime gardening :)
But all growth stocks are not tech. A discriminating investor understands this fundamental difference. And if it means paying a tenth of a percent higher in fee to gain that selective exposure, it could very well be a wise choice.
Seattle - why would I want a higher fee from something underperforming.?
As one example, and I've already listed several, exposure to a pure tech ETF will commonly involve fees higher than your 0.04% threshold. If one were to pick an investment based solely on fee alone, that would exclude exposure to probably the vast majority of ETFs and mutual funds in that category, and that may very well steer the investor out of that lucrative area.
The QQQ, for example, has an investment fee of 0.20%. It is no big deal that it exceeds your 0.04% fee, and it is no big deal that it may not be the cheapest POS on the market.
Try to keep fees low when possible, but it is not the sole criteria, and it is only one criteria in a spectrum of considerations in which to judge the suitability of an investment.
Earnings Scorecard: For Q1 2024 (with 46% of S&P 500 companies reporting actual results), 77% of S&P 500 companies have reported a positive EPS surprise and 60% of S&P 500 companies have reported a positive revenue surprise.
You are probably right, at least about me. The neighbor cut down a fifty footer this spring in their backyard. I didn’t see a reason. It gets pretty hot here in July and August, and that shade can provide some relief, and lower energy bills.
