Jump to content
Kim

Comparing 403bs

Recommended Posts

Kim,

 

Take yourself to any of the following web sites and look for their education/learning/school options and read the sections on mutual funds and asset allocation.

 

Fidelity, Vanguard, TRowePrice, Morningstar.

 

If you wish more after that introduction, try Mutual Funds for Dummies. Although others may chime in with a reading list, they advocate a specific point of view while mutual funds for dummies is more general and does cover both the pros and cons of advisors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Kim,

If you like getting great financial books absolutely free, here are a couple. All you need is a printer, paper, ink, Acrobat Reader (get free online) and the time to read and learn.

 

Investment Strategies for the 21st Century

click on "Learning Center" then select "Online book". Excellent book by Frank Armstrong on asset class characteristics, portfolio management and financial market basics.

Be sure to learn about what he calls "financial ography." It’s about how the entire financial media with all of its "experts" lures people into thinking that they know something and that they want to share it with you. It’s 100% BS. The biggest mistake that I made was listening to the technology sector "experts" and the media in the late 90s and put much of my money in that sector. Sure I made a bundle, but I lost most of too.

 

Here is another book and my final recommendation for reading, I promise!

Remember these two books are free and as a fellow teacher, we like free things. :-)

Straight Talk about Investing for Retirement

by Rick Ferri, you may have read his post on this site. He is one straight talker. In this murky, obscure, and secret world of the 403b, his words are an absolute breath of fresh air.

 

Anyway, Kim, you have gotten a lot of excellent feedback from your questions. If more educators got the kind of feedback that you have gotten on this website, the unions and the districts would be getting a lot of calls and demanding that the feedback you got here should be available to everyone. Please do not feel pressured that you have to decide right now, next week or even this year. But eventually it’s up to you. In the end you have to decide. Take a few months and read the material that was referred to you, start with a bond fund contributing a minimum, just to get started, and continue to learn. That’s what I did and I knew less than what you know now, believe it. At the risk of sounding Pollyanna and that mistakes are not painful or trivial, I learned much more than just investments and money. The collateral learning about life (giving more, learning from mistakes and learning about gratitude, a better teacher, a better spouse and a cancer survivor) was the best reward that I could have ever imagined.

Best of luck,

Steve

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sierra

FT:

Here are the investment results for NYSUT/ING along with their respective benchmarks. The lastest reporting period is as of 9/30/04. The longest time frame is used but not greater than 10 years. When the 3 stable value funds are added to this list of 36 funds you have 39 funds out of 51 that have underpeformed their benchmarks as reported by ING. The fund's investment performance is net of all fees including the 1.00 percent for M & E.

 

I assume Kim joins me in asking you: how can you continue to describe ING as being a great choice?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

GLOBAL/INTERNATIONAL

Fidelity 3.65, 4.34

ING JP morgan -4.60, -0.51

ING Emerging mkts -1.06, 0.39

ING Intl -5.56, -0.51

 

AGGRESSIVE GROWTH

Aim 6.33, 11.09

FT vip 13.56, 14.71

ING global -0.80, 4.05

ING index plus small cap 8.79, 11.50

Janus Aspen mid cap 6.73, 9.74

ING solomon -9.33, -6.36

ING small co. 7.02, 7.41

 

GROWTH

Aim Gr 4.41, 11.09

Aim Premier 6.69, 11.09

ING mfs -4.69, -1.30

ING ubs - 3.16, -1.30

Janus Aspen 7.16, 11.09

Janus Aspen Cap apprec. -2.09, -1.30

 

GROWTH & INCOME (STOCKS)

Aim 8.07, 11.09

Fidelity equity income 9.22, 12.50

Fidelity Index 500 9.80, 11.09

ING growth and income 5.89, 11.09

ING index plus large cap -2.68, -1.30

Pioneer equity income 2.80, 4.31

Amer Century income and gr. 10.61, 11.09

 

GROWTH & INCOME

(STOCKS AND BONDS)

Calvert 7.20, 11.09

ING Balanced 8.54, 11.09

Pax world balanced 9.76, 10.00

 

ASSET ALLOCATION

Fidelity 6.09, 11.09

ING strategic allocation 0.32, 2.95

ING strategic allocation bal. 1.28, 4.03

ING strategic allocation income 2.74, 4.88

 

INCOME

Fidelity high income 3.55, 7.85

ING intermediate bond 6.33, 7.66

Oppenheimer strategic bond 6.53, 7.66

ING pimco total return 2.27, 3.68

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets go straight to the horses mouth and compare the simple and straight forward S&P 500 Index fund, a fund that made John Bogle, founder of Vanguard, a legend:

 

Here is a link to the NYSUT INGs Fidelity Index 500.

INGs Fidelity Index 500 facts

Lets compare with Vanguard's 500 index: Vanguards 500 index facts

 

Look at the expense ratios and fees: Vanguard has a flat .18%.

ING's is at least double for a simple 500 Index that is not counting the "other fees." Performance by definition are exactly the same otherwise one of the two funds is not an index, that's why fees are so important. Also, remember the fees reported here are exclusively for NYSUT teachers. The rest of us, pay more. Bottom line, learn about investments and go with low fee companies.

Good work Joel,

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just not getting sucked into this again, Joel. A quick glance at my previous post on page 8 of this thread confirms that you are up to your old lying, misleading tricks again. You're still using the inappropriate index to compare BALANCED funds to STOCK indices, so of course they look like they're underperforming. You're still misquoting the returns on various funds. (The first one I looked at from my previous post was Pioneer Mid-Cap, whose five-year return INCLUSIVE of M&E was 11.87...you are now misquoting it as 11.43, which is the return since inception. Shock of shocks, it just misses the benchmark number of 11.47. Except, of course, that the actual, FACTUAL return of 11.87 beats it. That's just the first one I looked at...I'm sure that, like last time, there are many, many other instances of you cherry-picking whatever data suits your purposes.) I have neither the time nor the inclination to repeat the same things that I did before. If anyone's reading this for the first time, by all means, scroll back to the previous page of this thread, and my reply is there. Better yet, click to the ING website and verify it all for yourselves. I'm done with this.

 

Kim, I have no agenda here. If you decide to go with Fidelity, fantastic. If you decide to go with ING, fantastic. Either way, look into the Financial Counseling Program included with ING (or only $79 extra with Fidelity or any other provider), which will be a source of great advice/information for you, entirely unbiased and not confined to 403(b) issues. I hope you get started soon, and I hope you enjoy the gradual self-education as much as I have mine. I hope everything works out for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Look at the expense ratios and fees: Vanguard has a flat .18%. ING's is at least double for a simple 500 Index that is not counting the "other fees." Performance by definition are exactly the same otherwise one of the two funds is not an index, that's why fees are so important.

Steve, I do agree that if you are going primarily or exclusively with index funds, then Vanguard (or exchange-traded funds, if you have access to them) are the way to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe if ING gave the United Federation of Teachers in NYC $4Mill, they might get that endorsement too...didn't ING just pay a large fine to the SEC "without admintting guilt..." Dany

I know a lot of different companies are under investigation from the SEC, including our friends at TIAA-CREF. And I know Spitzer subpoenaed ING, but I hadn't heard about any fines or settlements. Anybody have a link?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FT,

You missed my point. I never said in my comments that the fees are exclusive to index funds. Heck, I have managed funds too. But my point was that if your ING has higher fees in a plain and simple vanilla index fund than Vanguard, the other funds would have high fees too. Readers can see this and if they still want to go with your ING fund, it’s none of anybody’s business. It’s their money. If they want to knowingly through their money done the drain, nobody can stop that. I am sorry that I was not clearer.

 

On this other issue about performance, this is a diversion and the kind of hype you hear from Wall Street and the mass media. I am happy you got what you say you got from your funds and portfolio, but that does automatically mean the same thing is going to happen in the future. You know that. I hope you know that. Never the less, if you know something more than we do about future performance, gives us a book, link, or article. Joe, Joel, and I and others have already posted many articles, books, links and even author, Rick Ferri’s post, argues that not only can you not predict the future, but the costs of index and managed funds are what matters over everything else, but these authors also have a plan to help us all address the uncertainty of stock market returns over long periods of time (learning, allocation across asset classes, low costs, rebalance, and going with a fee only adviser, if needed).

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On this other issue about performance, this is a diversion and the kind of hype you hear from Wall Street and the mass media. I am happy you got what you say you got from your funds and portfolio, but that does automatically mean the same thing is going to happen in the future. You know that. I hope you know that. Never the less, if you know something more than we do about future performance, gives us a book, link, or article. Joe, Joel, and I and others have already posted many articles, books, links and even author, Rick Ferri’s post, argues that not only can you not predict the future, but the costs of index and managed funds are what matters over everything else, but these authors also have a plan to help us all address the uncertainty of stock market returns over long periods of time (learning, allocation across asset classes, low costs, rebalance, and going with a fee only adviser, if needed).

Steve

 

Steve, I'm not sure why you're taking me out of context the way you are, but let me be clear, too: I posted the piece about my performance in a thread that YOU started, which listed YOUR investments, YOUR returns, and where YOU specifically said, "Let’s have a portfolio sharing discussion. I would love to hear the experiences with your portfolio in 2004." I posted it as part of a dialogue between two people who were talking about THEIR real-life portfolios, and I wanted to join in the discussion. Perhaps next time, you should simply say, "I only want to hear from you if you are philosophically aligned with me and will ONLY discuss no-load investing."

 

Even more stunning...I'm not even disagreeing with you! My portfolio, while aggressive, IS INDEED part of an asset allocation strategy, and is perfectly aligned with the work of the authors you love to cite so much! And nowhere did I imply that I knew anything about future performance...quite to the contrary! I specifically said, "The obvious downside, of course, is that in bad years, a portfolio like this one is likely to get clobbered a lot harder than one that is allocated less aggressively."

 

Do you even read what I write? Or is the fact that I am achieving a modicum of financial success with a platform OTHER than no-load mutual funds gall you so completely that you can't see past it?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sierra

FT:

 

1. If you feel any index is inappropriate please don't blame me. The index quoted comes from ING!!

 

2. The pioneer midcap has a longer than five year history so I used it. The gross return is 12.43, less the 1.00 percent for M & E and your net is 11.43 which is less than the benchmark of 11.47.

 

Please do not call me a liar. If I am wrong I will stand corrected. Again, please refrain from calling me a liar!

 

Please go back over my findings for each of the other 38 funds that I represent as underperformers. Only then can we both be satisfied that my assertions are accurate. I sincerely want to be accurate so I ask for your assistance. I have clarified for you how I arrived at the Pioneer mid cap results so please go over the other 38 funds.

 

Peace and Hope,

Joel

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FT:

 

1. If you feel any index is inappropriate please don't blame me. The index quoted comes from ING!!

 

2. The pioneer midcap has a longer than five year history so I used it. The gross return is 12.43, less the 1.00 percent for M & E and your net is 11.43 which is less than the benchmark of 11.47.

 

Please do not call me a liar. If I am wrong I will stand corrected. Again, please refrain from calling me a liar!

 

Please go back over my findings for each of the other 38 funds that I represent as underperformers. Only then can we both be satisfied that my assertions are accurate. I sincerely want to be accurate so I ask for your assistance. I have clarified for you how I arrived at the Pioneer mid cap results so please go over the other 38 funds.

 

1. The index quoted does NOT come from ING. ING's sheet SPECIFICALLY lists TWO indices, the S&P 500 index *AND* the Lehman Bros. Aggregate Bond index. They are obviously aware that this is a balanced fund, and as such requires an index OTHER than the S&P 500. And I pointed this out the FIRST time you tried to mislead everybody with this! It's right here in black and white, I'm not making it up:

 

http://www6.ingretirementplans.com/custom/101.pdf

 

2. The benchmark that you cite for the Pioneer Mid-Cap fund is the five-year benchmark, and the return for the fund that you cite is the return "since inception," which is longer than five years but less than ten. If you compare a seven-year return with a five-year benchmark, you can probably prove anything you put your mind to. Again, here's the reference, wherein it very clearly states the five-year return at 12.87 and the five-year benchmark at 11.47, as I pointed out the first time you wrongly posted this:

 

http://www6.ingretirementplans.com/custom/074.pdf

 

If you are not lying, then what you ARE doing is repeating egregious errors that I pointed out to you on the eighth page of this thread, and that you chose to ignore, for the obvious reason that they do not suit your purposes. I choose not to waste my time going through ALL your findings again and saying ALL the same things. If you want to know how I feel about your "analysis," scroll back a page. My feelings haven't changed a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sierra

FT: Yes, I stand corrected about the Pioneer Mid Cap. It did best the benchmark by 4 bp.

 

Now I need some clarification about which funds you are referring to when you say the index is inappropriate. I want to review my figures.

 

Thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sierra

Kim;

 

You know its not like your betting the family els!!. You are starting with a zero balance so why are you so hard on yourself? Just start with a fidelity short term bond fund----you will be reducing your taxes immediately----then over the next several weeks/months you can "diversify" or you may want to take all of 05 to "learn". It seems to me that what is important NOW is to get that tax sheltered account started. So lets say you put in 4000 for 05 and the account on 12/31/05 is worth 4000. Sure that is lousy----but your tax bill is reduced by about 20 percent or 800. So you made a pre-tax investment of 4000 which reduced your taxes for 05 by 800. Now that's not bad at all. And starting in 06 you can start to invest with some additional diversification. You will never get a hit if you do not swing the bat.

 

Peace and Hope,

Joel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...