Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : A.I.M Users Group Bulletin Board -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Todd Reichardt who wrote (14701)	2/1/2001 8:53:22 AM
From: Bernie Goldberg	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 18928

Hi, The reason is explained in the prospectus for ProFunds. Their expenses are higher than the average fund. What is even worse their expense ratio is anywheres from 5 to 8 times higher than other index funds. Index funds are supposed to be much cheaper to run than actively managed funds. VFINX has an expense ratio of .18% ProFunds expense ratio is slightly over 1.5%. The decimal points are in the right place. There are many index funds that have expense ratios of less than .6%. When a fund does what UOPIX did in '98 and '99, nobody pays any attention to expenses, but it is not wise to ignore them. When the index goes down, the only ones who make any money are the fund managers. I don't blame ProFunds mgrs. for being smart enough to choose the easy road with index funds. The problem is that they charge too much. Bernie