Author Topic: Got rid of high-fee, under-performing, over-complicated investment funds!  (Read 1773 times)

OurFirstFire

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 57
I've clung to the belief for years that there must exist some magic formulas that can reliably, massively outperform the market.  Thus I had an investment adviser with a 1.5% fee who could match me up to fund managers with another 1.5% fee and a wondrous graph of back-tested, market-crushing results.  We would then throw money at said manager where it would either grow smaller or not grow for a few years before finding a new manager with a new wondrous graph. 

Today I finally closed the last of those expensive, complicated, volatile and under-performing funds!  I've also been building up a more traditional low-fee array of investments aside of this nonsense, but about 6 months ago I go serious about a consistent asset allocation using Vanguard funds.  It feels much better to base my FIRE on a sensible, realistic strategy rather than snake oil.

What finally sparked the change was reading - don't laugh - Tony Robbins' "Money: Master the Game", where he promised to reveal an investment strategy that averaged 9% returns with only 3 down years in the last 40.  It turned out that his allocation was a little heavier in government bonds than I'd like, but it opened my eyes to the fact that asset allocation strategies really have matched most of the returns of the s&p 500 with reduced volatility (no guarantee of future performance :).  Much of Robbins' other advice is really quite sound, some of it inspirational, but overall mostly common sense.

High FIdelity

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 30
It's a good move.  I've been lazy myself to some extent in terms of under-performing funds and the expense ratios.  I finally pulled the trigger on a fun that was actually up 9% last year, but at .8 expense ratio and losing about 2% against what the market did last year, goodbye charlie.  Next up, liquidating 2-3 fund with expense ratios of .9 and higher from my rollover and rolling them back to my current 401k which has great institutional plus options with ratios of below .1...no sense paying extra for under-performance.   

Sibley

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7469
  • Location: Northwest Indiana
A friend inherited some money, and after letting it sit for years in a combination of her checking account and CDs I encouraged her to actually invest it. Her personality is fairly passive, and her parents basically raised her to be the "good little Catholic girl who lives at home until she marries a good little Catholic boy." So no financial education, no confidence she can learn it and thus no effort to learn it.

Anyway, after me bugging her to take control of her life, she finally invested it. She's paying an investment manager at a regional bank and he put her into actively managed funds. I hope at some point she wakes up, but clearly I failed.

Maybe next year I can ask her how her returns were, and what her fees were, then be surprised when I hear that she's paying so much more (% wise) than me...

Cougar

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 344


good idea, you really dont need it. some day i'll put all mine together and just open up a trade account and for $7 i could buy an s+p etf.

85% of all stocks move with the mkt, there's thousands of fund managers; i bet they may beat it for a year of two but not over time.

forummm

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7374
  • Senior Mustachian
If you put your money in VTSAX and never sell any of it until you're retired, you will outperform the vast majority of people. It's cheap, easy, and highly profitable.

 

Wow, a phone plan for fifteen bucks!