Open Thread


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. You guys are getting waaay too technical for snappy and her mom re: mutual funds. Snaps, the point is, if she is afraid of investing in stocks, mutual funds that invest in stocks are a safer way to do it. She needn’t be that scared. She could most of the money in a money market or a CD and put a small portion in a MF that invests in stocks. She woul dlikely, but not certainly, make more money that way. But it sounds like it is beyond her to even consider it. That just bothers those of us who think she should, but such is life. But someone above made a good point — she could invest in a mutual fuind that invests in relatively safe short term bonds and probably do better than the CD without much risk.

    Oh, and cobble, it’s not that denton is reading and correcting other people’s posts. He is re-reading and correcting his own, out of meticulousness.

  2. “I really don’t think a fund’s name HAS to represent the investment objectives in the propectus.”

    dibs, true but there are some regs concerning this, updated in 2002, see SEC rule 35d(1).

  3. I would definitely agree that the funds holdings should be in line with e objectives stated in the prospectus but even then there is usually a buffer of, oftentimes, up to 25% that can be invested “elsewhere.

    Trouble with this is that there is lots of style drift in funds and unless the investor has access to “exposure” vendors or time to comb thru 10-k statements one may have a larger exposure to one stock than they thought. Citi was prime example as people had it in both “growth” and “value” funds.

1 20 21 22 23 24 55