What they compare themselves to isnt really the point I was making but agree cash would be crazy for an equity fund. Performance tables should be there to highlight what the investor ultimately ends up with in their pocket after all is said and done regarding fees. Looking at gross returns does not do that. Agree NTA growth is really the important measure and its lower than what they state in performance table. When it comes to comparing performance versus a benchmark I think net of fees is still more relevant. An investor can buy an All Ords ETF for next to nothing so the ex fees number is close to what they would get in their pocket. The same can not be said for an LIC like WAM where fees are higher.
Also I was highlighting the gross performance issue as a heads up if comparing against the performance other managers who show net returns after fees.
Investment help, page-82
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 23 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Add WAM (ASX) to my watchlist
 (20min delay)
|
|||||
|
Last
$1.52 |
Change
0.015(1.00%) |
Mkt cap ! $1.798B | |||
| Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
| $1.51 | $1.52 | $1.51 | $1.554M | 1.028M |
Buyers (Bids)
| No. | Vol. | Price($) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 13000 | $1.51 |
Sellers (Offers)
| Price($) | Vol. | No. |
|---|---|---|
| $1.52 | 110954 | 3 |
View Market Depth
| Last trade - 16.10pm 15/11/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
| WAM (ASX) Chart |
