tyler-durden
Confused about dryer sheets
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2018
- Messages
- 7
Hi all,
So I know the active passive debate has been beaten to death but why not beat that dead horse a little more.
As that title to the thread indicates I see the Contra Fund as a prime example where active management with a small reasonable expense ratio clearly outperforms passive index funds.
Full disclosure i use both active and passive funds. Almost all passive in non retirement and a mix of passive and active funds in qualified accounts.
So doing a lot of reading here and on bogleheads it seems like passive management has almost become like a religion of sorts. People see the studies on the 2 styles and once someone's mind is made up on passive thats it, they dont want to hear about anything else. And if it was me recommending a simple 3 fund solution to a friend or relative i would suggest passive index as well as you cant really mess that up.
But back to the title - when you look at The Fidelity Contra funds performance over 1 3 5 and 10 year - vs the SP 500 why would you not be inclined to give that a go.
Someone recommended that fund to me 15 years ago and I've tracked it and invested in it ever since and have followed the fund manager. Seems like an easy decision.
Curious why the die hard passive investors would hold out using something like that? what am i missing or not considering ? again assuming for reasonable diversification into other funds etc for the rest of someones portfolio.
So I know the active passive debate has been beaten to death but why not beat that dead horse a little more.
As that title to the thread indicates I see the Contra Fund as a prime example where active management with a small reasonable expense ratio clearly outperforms passive index funds.
Full disclosure i use both active and passive funds. Almost all passive in non retirement and a mix of passive and active funds in qualified accounts.
So doing a lot of reading here and on bogleheads it seems like passive management has almost become like a religion of sorts. People see the studies on the 2 styles and once someone's mind is made up on passive thats it, they dont want to hear about anything else. And if it was me recommending a simple 3 fund solution to a friend or relative i would suggest passive index as well as you cant really mess that up.
But back to the title - when you look at The Fidelity Contra funds performance over 1 3 5 and 10 year - vs the SP 500 why would you not be inclined to give that a go.
Someone recommended that fund to me 15 years ago and I've tracked it and invested in it ever since and have followed the fund manager. Seems like an easy decision.
Curious why the die hard passive investors would hold out using something like that? what am i missing or not considering ? again assuming for reasonable diversification into other funds etc for the rest of someones portfolio.