It makes me wonder about the TSP board. Every one of their assertions is incorrect. In addition, I’d like to know what ‘experts’ they consulted about the adequacy of the currently available fund choices.
REITs would not drive up expenses. Vanguard's REIT fund expenses are .03% higher than their S&P index fund, i.e. hardly significant. In any event, if expensesbecame an issue, TSP could charge higher expenses for more expensive to operate funds - like all other mutual fund families!
If the board were truly concerned about participants chasing returns, they would provide a broader mix of non-correlated funds to support more effective “buy and hold” diversification and increase, from zero, investor education. Specifically, REITS, emerging markets, and precious metals would be very effective diversifiers for the C, S, and I funds. In addition, since REITS pay taxable dividends, they are particularly appropriate for tax deferred accounts, e.g. TSP.
The resistance to any new funds appears to be more about not being able to "walk and chew gum" at the same time. The key quote is "* The Board believes that it is essential to focus participants' attention on the Lifecycle Funds that will be introduced this summer". In other words, TSP is introducing the L Funds and doesn't want the complication of any introducing, or even thinking about, any other new funds. However, without effective investor education, the L Funds just become additionalfunds to trade in and out of.
End of rant! Have a great weekend!:^



LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks




Reply With Quote

Bookmarks