UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (44) | Ignore Thread Prev | Next
Author: HELJinCT One star, 50 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 75642  
Subject: Re: Loaded Funds, IRA Date: 2/21/2011 8:40 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Thank you all, this post has been extremely helpful in many ways. As usual with fool.com users, I get more than I even hoped for in insight and assistance. I offer this form of assistance on technology sites where I am in my element, so perhaps its karma.

The math does not quite work out, but 1% of your money each year for 33 years is something like a third of you money. 2% is two thirds of your money. Run!!!!

Can someone quickly explain this to me?

I ran some really basic math numbers in Excel, I was comparing one scenario where I paid 2% in the first year, then 1% per year for the remaining years until age 65 (I am 36 now). I picked an annual gain percentage of 8% just for the exercise.

So each year I was paying a 1% fee on my balance (not sure this is how it would work out since there seems to be a load and then a mgmt fee, so maybe going forward I am only paying the mgmt fees, which were closer to 0.5% per year?)

At 65, my very rough and probably wrong numbers had the original investment being worth 737% of the original amount.

In scenario B, I threw the same numbers, but had the up front and annual fees at 0.25% (is this close to what it would be for no load Vanguard funds?).

Obviously there was a big difference assuming they were the same returns. At age 65, I would have made 933% of the original investment. The difference between the two was more like double the amount of my original investment.

But, if I changed the formula to allow the advisor option to be returning 1% more than the Vanguard option per year, then it was a wash. If the advisor option made 1.5% more per year, it was better to be with the advisor.

I know this is not the right math and it can't just be as simple as ROI% - fee%, so if someone could break down what I am missing that would be great (aside from the obvious answer that popular opinion is that the advisor can't do better than me investing in generic vanguard funds).

Thanks!!!!!
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post  
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (44) | Ignore Thread Prev | Next

Announcements

The Retire Early Home Page
Discussion on accelerating retirement day.
Post of the Day:
Apple

Apple and Ninety Years Ago
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Community Home
Speak Your Mind, Start Your Blog, Rate Your Stocks

Community Team Fools - who are those TMF's?
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and "#1 Media Company to Work For" (BusinessInsider 2011)! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.
Advertisement