I'm not sure but I think the gross return already has expenses in terms of trading/brokerage costs deducted. So it's just the management and admin fees that differentiate net from gross, and if true then gross would be what matters in determining manager skill. Maybe not in determining whether you'd want to invest with a manager (since past performance might not predict the future), but how good the manager's results have been.You don't think the costs the fund manager incurred to achieve the results should be considered?I thought SPIVA report is net of fees. IMO to evaluate a professional fund manager's investment ability you need to evaluate the gross return.
Statistics: Posted by tibbitts — Sun May 26, 2024 12:08 am — Replies 9 — Views 1053