Sentences with phrase «much against the index»
I can hear some manager saying, «But I can't vary that much against the index!
http://alephblog.com/ Not exact matches
KEY FACT: Man Utd have won 25 of a possible 27 points in league home matches against Stoke MATCH ODDS: Man Utd 2/9 Draw 6/1 Stoke 14/1 bet365 Pick: Under 2.5 goals @ 6/4 ANDY SAYS: Have to go with Man U, don't see Stoke getting anything here... 2 - 0 GRAEME SAYS: Home win, Stoke might put up a fight but they won't get anything... 3 - 1 SILKY SAYS: Easy home win, don't see anything else... 5 - 0 FOOTBALLIndex — One to follow: Marcus Rashford is very much one to watch in the Index
KEY FACT: Spurs are unbeaten in their last 10 Premier League matches against Everton MATCH ODDS: Leicester 10/11 Draw 13/5 Palace 7/2 bet365 Pick: Spurs to win to nil @ 5/6 ANDY SAYS: Spurs to win this for me, should be fairly comfortable... 3 - 1 GRAEME SAYS: I can see Everton grabbing a shock win here... 1 - 2 SILKY SAYS: Tottenham will have far too much for Everton in my view... 3 - 0 FOOTBALLIndex — One to follow: Christian Eriksen remains one of the best buys on the Index
Both have similar return outperformance (+13 % p.a.) but TB ran 0.64 x index volatility vs. Schloss at 1.14 x. Just looking at those two statistics I would suggest TB's outperformance is much more remarkable, but the additional 12 years of outperformance by Schloss moves the odds against him astronomically.
In less liquid markets you may not notice as much of a difference as there may not be too many people in front of you; however, in more liquid markets such as the popular e-mini indices or the interest rates, you will notice quite a difference when the market keeps bumping against your price without filling your order.
What you can't argue against is the desire of the industry to prod investors into vehicles that provide much higher fees than those found on plain vanilla index ETFs on which we continue to see downward pressure.
Even broad cap - weighted indices can be considered a form of active management, not so much against the capital markets they purport to represent, but against the macroeconomy.
The debate, in a nutshell, goes something like this: Why pay higher fees for an actively managed fund that has a shot at posting much bigger returns than the index it's measured against but which also runs the risk of posting smaller returns, when you can buy a low - cost index fund, such as those that track the performance of the S&P 500 index, which pretty much guarantees that your returns will be in line with the index?
«FTSE Russell has designed its Russell Dividend Growth Index Series to select stocks that have demonstrated consistent increases in dividend payments while screening against too much concentration in single securities or sectors.
The policy value will depend on how much you pay and how well the market index performs, and while there are some caps on how much you can earn, you are protected against major losses in a way you wouldn't be if you invested in those markets yourself.