Money magazine asks if index fund investing is over. It's no secret that results for the S&P 500 have been pretty shaky for the past decade. Granted, you can expand your index investing to include many more companies, but is it still a good strategy? According to Money it is:
The verdict: No need to get fancy now. Traditional indexing is still hard to beat.
My thoughts exactly. ;-)
I don't mind the index being shaky right now. I have a long investing window, so the lower they get now, the bigger the discount I can buy into it at.
Posted by: Blaine Moore | July 28, 2008 at 10:42 AM
The press has nothing better to do than question the status quo and confuse its readers. History and numbers prove out the indexes - the press rarely acknowledges their incorrect predictions/fear news after an event doesn't play out.
I have a long view as well - just have to ignore all this noise concerning "change this now!" - seems like change for the sake of change with no real reason or support. But the public sometimes/somehow buys into it.
Posted by: Scott S | July 28, 2008 at 12:03 PM
Agree that indexing is the way to go. I am interested at how this time period will be viewed historically. I mean the market has moved sideways for about ten years and this can happen for extended periods of time.
Posted by: aaktx | July 28, 2008 at 05:03 PM
For the record "indexing" does not automatically equal "S&P 500." In fact, if most or all of your indexed investments are in the S&P 500, you are extremely UN-diversified. There are indexes for all kinds of investments and most should be in your portfolio - large cap, mid cap, small cap, foreign equity, domestic bonds, foreign bonds, REITs, and commodities are a good start.
Posted by: Dave | July 29, 2008 at 02:22 PM