<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Investment Costs Matter</title>
	<atom:link href="http://amateurassetallocator.com/2008/06/30/investment-costs-matter/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://amateurassetallocator.com/2008/06/30/investment-costs-matter/</link>
	<description>Amateur Asset Allocator</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 11:01:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Why Index Funds Beat Actively Managed Funds - Amateur Asset Allocator</title>
		<link>http://amateurassetallocator.com/2008/06/30/investment-costs-matter/comment-page-1/#comment-6827</link>
		<dc:creator>Why Index Funds Beat Actively Managed Funds - Amateur Asset Allocator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 21:49:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amateurassetallocator.com/?p=217#comment-6827</guid>
		<description>[...] The stock market is an intensely-competitive place.  Fund managers have a tough time even matching the performance of their relevant index, much less outperforming it. While plenty of managers may be successful in any given year, very few manage it consistently over time. Many studies show that most actively managed funds will not outperform their benchmark index.  In fact, most actively managed funds tend to under-perform the index by the amount of their expense ratio, further proof that investment costs matter. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The stock market is an intensely-competitive place.  Fund managers have a tough time even matching the performance of their relevant index, much less outperforming it. While plenty of managers may be successful in any given year, very few manage it consistently over time. Many studies show that most actively managed funds will not outperform their benchmark index.  In fact, most actively managed funds tend to under-perform the index by the amount of their expense ratio, further proof that investment costs matter. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pros And Cons Of Variable Life Insurance &#124; Finance Blog</title>
		<link>http://amateurassetallocator.com/2008/06/30/investment-costs-matter/comment-page-1/#comment-6614</link>
		<dc:creator>Pros And Cons Of Variable Life Insurance &#124; Finance Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Jan 2010 13:05:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amateurassetallocator.com/?p=217#comment-6614</guid>
		<description>[...] 15 times that of a low-cost index fund from one of the major mutual fund companies.  Since investment costs are so important, it is likely a low-cost, diversified portfolio in a taxable account would come [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 15 times that of a low-cost index fund from one of the major mutual fund companies.  Since investment costs are so important, it is likely a low-cost, diversified portfolio in a taxable account would come [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Where To Find A Mutual Fund Expense Ratio - Amateur Asset Allocator</title>
		<link>http://amateurassetallocator.com/2008/06/30/investment-costs-matter/comment-page-1/#comment-5778</link>
		<dc:creator>Where To Find A Mutual Fund Expense Ratio - Amateur Asset Allocator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 11:02:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amateurassetallocator.com/?p=217#comment-5778</guid>
		<description>[...] its mutual fund expense ratio is by far the best predictor of future performance.  Put simply, investment costs matter.  All else being equal, the mutual fund with the lowest fund expense ratio will tend to be the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] its mutual fund expense ratio is by far the best predictor of future performance.  Put simply, investment costs matter.  All else being equal, the mutual fund with the lowest fund expense ratio will tend to be the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Best Investing Strategy: Low-Cost Diversification - Amateur Asset Allocator</title>
		<link>http://amateurassetallocator.com/2008/06/30/investment-costs-matter/comment-page-1/#comment-5451</link>
		<dc:creator>The Best Investing Strategy: Low-Cost Diversification - Amateur Asset Allocator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 11:02:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amateurassetallocator.com/?p=217#comment-5451</guid>
		<description>[...] mutual funds by about the same as the differences in their expense ratios (which is why costs matter so [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] mutual funds by about the same as the differences in their expense ratios (which is why costs matter so [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Never Ever Invest Through A Bank - Amateur Asset Allocator</title>
		<link>http://amateurassetallocator.com/2008/06/30/investment-costs-matter/comment-page-1/#comment-4520</link>
		<dc:creator>Never Ever Invest Through A Bank - Amateur Asset Allocator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 11:01:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amateurassetallocator.com/?p=217#comment-4520</guid>
		<description>[...] many banks peddle mutual funds having expense ratios over twice the industry average in addition to a hefty upfront sales charge.  Variable annuities [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] many banks peddle mutual funds having expense ratios over twice the industry average in addition to a hefty upfront sales charge.  Variable annuities [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
