Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucla-cs.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!ucla-cs!brett
From: brett@ucla-cs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.invest
Subject: Re: A comment on "no-load" mutual funds
Message-ID: <9492@ucla-cs.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 28-Feb-86 15:30:58 EST
Article-I.D.: ucla-cs.9492
Posted: Fri Feb 28 15:30:58 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 2-Mar-86 00:13:33 EST
References: <1982@jhunix.UUCP> <317@hsi.UUCP>
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
Lines: 35


> I know of no reason whatsoever to invest in a load fund.  All the factors
> dictate investing in a true no-load fund will be the superior investment.
> The only people who recommend load funds are the people selling them and
> of course they are not unbiased.  A percentage of the load that is paid
> will go straight into their pocket in the form of commissions.
> 
> 				Keith Boucher HSI New Haven, CT

I agree.  As a matter of fact, all Vanguard mutual fund portfolios are 
available with no sales commissions.  (I think they mean no redemption
fees as well when they make this statement).
So, choosing a "group" of no-load mutual funds which you can exchange
to/from without ever having to worry about loads makes life a little 
easier. Then all you do is worry about individual mutual funds performance
within that group. I'll bet you could do even better with that
strategy than on most loaded funds.

I found knowing a whole group of funds is "no-load" is really very helpful
as investment strategies change.  I'm not sure if Vanguard is unique
in this respect.  Anyone know?



-- 
Brett Fleisch
University of California Los Angeles
LOCUS Research Group
3804-f Boelter Hall
Los Angeles, CA 90024
Phone: (213) 825-2756, (213) 474-5317 

brett@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU
{...sdcrdcf, ihnp4, trwspp, ucbvax}!ucla-cs!brett
-------------------------------------------------------------------------