Sentences with phrase «of higher expense ratios»

But don't avoid commissions at the expense of higher expense ratios.

In general mutual funds are more expensive because of higher expense ratios (the ongoing annual costs), load fees (typically 2 to 5 percent of the investment), transaction costs and taxes on short - term capital gains.

In general mutual funds are more expensive because of higher expense ratios (the ongoing annual costs), load fees (typically 2 to 5 percent of the investment), transaction costs and taxes on short - term capital gains.

For the most part, Class A shares bear front - end load charges, Class B have back - end charges, while Class C might evade load charges altogether at the cost of a higher expense ratio.

Based on our conversations and the proxy text, here's my best summary of the arguments in favor of a higher expense ratio:

Not exact matches

While many do have slightly higher expense ratios than their developed - market peers — a reflection of the higher cost of investing in these markets — that is not always the case.

KIE's expense ratio closely approximates the true costs of investing in the fund as its 0.39 % TAC is only 0.04 % higher than its stated expense ratio.

JETS expense ratio closely approximates the true costs of investing in the fund as its 0.66 % TAC is only 0.06 % higher than its stated expense ratio.

But this is to be expected if the higher fees are part of the compensation model (many advisors point out that 25 basis point 12b - 1 trails are a lot lower than 1 % asset management fees, and some active funds have modest expense ratios).

The reality is that most active funds have significantly higher expense ratios and commissions, but a portion of the expense ratio indirectly covers advising services.

I highlighted the 1.08 percent average expense ratio of «similar funds,» which is 1.03 percentage points higher than Vanguard's advertised expense ratio.5 The Investment Company Institute finds an average expense ratio of 0.89 percent for actively managed equity funds, versus 0.12 percent for equity index funds, or a 0.77 percentage point difference.

With R&D expense recognized immediately and capital expenditures being amortized over multiple years, I would argue that today's companies demand higher PE ratios vs the industrial high CapEx companies of 100 years ago.

Since expense ratios are directly reflected in the performance of the funds, actively managed funds and their often higher expense ratios are automatically at a disadvantage to index funds.

While CFRA incorporates a fund's expense ratio in our forward - looking rating of more than 1,300 ETFs, we think the performance gap between two ETFs will often be much greater than the high - profile fee differential.

The SPDR Barclays High Yield Bond (NYSE: JNK) pays a dividend yield of 5.77 % and charges a 0.4 % expense ratio.

These clients were unaware of the high cost of their mutual funds; their management expense ratio (MER) averaged 2.11 %.

Even after you account for the higher expense ratio and the fact that its distribution yield is a few tenths of a percent lower, the outperformance is still meaningful.

We have found price - to - sales to be a useful valuation metric within the retail industry, and given Amazon's growth comes largely at the expense of traditional retailers, we believed Amazon should be priced at a higher ratio of sales than its competition.

While some of the funds have expense ratios on the high side, the average expense ratio is 0.12 percent.

Look at the United Way, one of the highest administrative expense ratios in the non-profit world — over 90 % of your $ 1 goes to admin.

Since the returns from debt funds are lower than that of equity funds, a high expense ratio can reduce the returns.

Though also more expensive than VIG with an expense ratio of 0.55 %, it pays a higher yield at 3.4 %.

From the group above, I have chosen to write about Utility Select Sector SPDR ETF because of its high dividend yield, great liquidity, and low expense ratio.

PRPFX has an expense ratio of.84 %, higher than its ETF counterpart.

It has a somewhat high expense ratio of 0.95 %.

This ETF has an expense ratio of 0.54 % — which is pretty high for a domestic ETF.

Canadian mutual funds often charge a management expense ratio (MER) of 2 % to 3 %, among the highest in the world.

Depending on the fund you choose, the Management Expense Ratio could climb as high as 3.3 %, versus the average mutual fund MER of 2.4 %.

Notes: This figure models expense ratios of 0 % (for 0 - cost), and 0.25 % (for low - cost), and 1.25 % (for high - cost).

Most of his holdings are in registered and non-registered accounts — mainly cash and fixed income, with 30 % made up of high - fee Canadian equity mutual funds with management expense ratios (MERs) of up to 2.4 %.

nd the 2 % management expense ratios of the mutual funds in my RRSP fairly high, so I know this account needs some changes,» says Kamal.

The OTPP, the next largest plan at $ 154 billion of assets, had the fourth highest average expense ratio (0.63 %).

It found that the CPP, which is the largest plan with $ 269 billion of assets, had the highest expense ratio at 1.07 % of its assets on average for the whole period between 2009 and 2014.

Now, an investment's past performance doesn't necessarily predict future results, but as far as fees are concerned, a fund that has a strong record of consistently beating its peers may be worth paying a higher expense ratio.

The lower the average expense ratio for all U.S. - listed ETFs in a type of bond, the higher the rank.

Thanks to this high level of diversification and VBK's ultra-low expense ratio, the fund could make for a superb addition to portfolios of investors who are looking for small caps but are seeking a higher risk / reward profile in the space.

I was also wondering, that since balanced funds have a high expense ratio, does it make sense to invest in equity MFs separately and a debt fund instead of a balanced fund?

Currently, the expense ratio is on the higher side of the observed range.

In general, ETFs that track an index (passive ETFs) have lower fees, and actively managed ETFs have expense ratios on the higher end of the spectrum.

The bottom line is that she does not need a complicated portfolio with a ton of loading fees and high expense ratios.

Please keep in mind that due to a higher expense ratio, the performance of NIQVX would have been worse than that of NBIIX.

Unfortunately, Canada's mutual funds boast some of the highest management expense ratios (MERs) in the world: on average, actively managed portfolio cost investors about 2.5 % of their assets every year.

The broad market ETFs for socially responsible investors have higher expense ratios than those of other investors.

This competition works to both drive down the expense ratio of plain vanilla funds at the same time generating new, more specialized funds with higher expense ratios.

Thus, avoiding further erosion of investment returns paid to advisers through hidden fees or high expense ratios.

1) Just so to cut the high expense ratio, is it advisable for a new investor to go for DIRECT plans without having much of the knowledge on markets and MF?

Mutual funds charge annual fees regardless of the fund's performance, and the higher a fund's expense ratio, the more the mutual fund manager must outperform the market to offer investors a better return than low - cost, index - tracking funds which are not actively managed and have fewer operating expenses.

High expense ratios are one of the biggest factors driving assets away from actively managed funds.

High - yield funds require a very active management style, which can mean expense ratios of 2 to 3 % to compensate for the fees generated by frequent trading of assets.

And when it does get invested, another huge chunk gets eaten up by the unit trust's «expense ratio» — often as high as 1 - 3 % of your investment amount every year.