The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Investing/Strategies / Retirement Investing


Subject:  Re: retirement annuities Date:  4/9/2000  11:03 PM
Author:  peppermintpatty Number:  21065 of 105397

intercst -

OK, you said: "Anything over the 0.17% expense ratio of the Vanguard S&P500 index fund plus the 0.35% mortality expense in a Vanguard annuity (Total = 0.52%) is too high in my opinion."

So what if the gross return on your annuity is 12%, leaving you a net return of 11.48%, and my annuity grosses 13%, with expenses of 1.5%, leaving me a net return of 11.5%. Which annuity is better? The one with lower expenses of the one with higher net return?

I'd pick the one with the better bottom line every time. Whether annuity, mutual fund, stock, CD, or whatever - I look at the net return as a primary indicator as an investment's value to me. Sure, there might be other factors to consider, but I don't let an investment's expenses necessarily eliminate it from my consideration. I just happened to be looking at top performing mutual funds & found this site: abr=CA&wk=&yr=3&code=GEF&Go=Go

CBS Marketwatch lists Van Kampen Aggressive Growth Fund
as #4 in its category (Capital Appreciation) for 3 year average - 70.6%. It has annual expenses of 1.56% and a load of 5.75%, yet still outperformed peers.

Just my 2ยข


Copyright 1996-2021 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us