how to buy index funds

Most index investments are based on the Standard &Poor’s 500 (the stocks of 500 leading companies in leading industries) and the Wilshire 5000 (all the publicly traded companies in America).
There are two main ways to invest in indexes: through mutual funds and through "exchange-traded funds" (ETFs), which trade like regular stocks on the American Stock Exchange.
In fact, less than 20% of actively managed diversified large-cap mutual funds (in plain English: big funds managed by guys and gals in fancy suits) have outperformed the S&P 500 over the last 10 years.
Index funds and ETFs charge investors annually for the costs of running the fund.
Heard of General Electric, Tupperware, and Microsoft? If you invest in the S&P 500 or the Wilshire 5000, you are a part owner of these companies.
Index funds just invest in whatever companies are in the index.

Index funds attempt to track the performance of a particular stock or bond index, such as the S&P 500® Index or the Barclays U.S. Aggregate Bond Index, by holding most or all of the securities that are included in that index.
MSCI EAFE (Europe, Australasia, Far East) Index is a market capitalization-weighted index that is designed to measure the investable equity market performance of value stocks for global investors in developed markets, excluding the U.S. and Canada.
Barclays U.S. Aggregate Bond Index is a broad-based, market-value-weighted benchmark that measures the performance of the U.S.dollar-denominated, investment-grade, fixed-rate, taxable bond market.
These funds seek to mirror the performance of an index such as the Barclays U.S. Aggregate Bond Index or the Barclays U.S. 1–5 Year Treasury Bond Index.
These funds seek to track the performance of well known international equity indexes, such as the FTSE Emerging Index or the MSCI EAFE Index.
FTSE Emerging Index is a market capitalization-weighted index designed to measure the performance of large and medium capitalization companies domiciled in emerging market countries across the world.
These funds seek to mimic the performance of a major U.S. equity index, such as the S&P 500 or the Russell 2000 indexes.
Barclays U.S. 1–5 Year Government Bond Index is a market value–weighted index of U.S. Government fixed–rate debt issues with maturities between one and five years.
S&P 500 Index is a market capitalization–weighted index of 500 common stocks chosen for market size, liquidity, and industry group representation to represent U.S. equity performance.
Fundamentals: When he launched the first retail stock index fund, the Vanguard 500, in 1976, it was derided by some as “Bogle’s Folly.” But thanks to a 1996 heart transplant, Bogle has lived to see widespread acceptance of his disruptive idea–that since you can’t beat the market, low costs are all that matter.
If you want to get a good grasp of Bogle’s philosophy, try reading either of his books – I’ve reviewed The Little Book of Common Sense Investing here before, but it boils down to seeking ways to invest in a huge variety of stocks as cheaply as you can, and the way to do that is by index funds which are made up of all stocks in a specific class.
Fees on ETFs of Vanguard funds (see below about this) are only slightly lower than that, but that doesn’t include the fees of buying the ETFs or the fees every time you buy more ETFs – this is always a losing proposition if you’re going to invest regularly and your brokerage charges any fees at all.
The fees charged for these are usually lower than the same exact index fund would be – for example, the Vanguard 500 (VFINX) index fund has a 0.18% expense ratio (that’s how much Vanguard charges to manage it), while the SPDR 500 (SPY), which tracks the same exact stocks as an ETF, has only a 0.11% ratio.
On the other hand, if you’re planning on investing regularly by putting in a small amount each week or month, go directly through the people that run the index fund – in this case, Vanguard.
“You’ll get the dividends with mutual funds but index funds ‘index’ the dividends.” He means you don’t get dividends if you are in an index fund (that has stocks that are paying dividends).
I opened a Schwab One Banking/Brokerage account (free, no minimums) and that allows me to invest in the Schwab One Source funds for no fees (no extra fees, the mutual funds still have their regular fees) and you only need $100 to invest at a time.
Another alternative is to purchase an exchange traded fund (ETF), such as a Standard & Poor’s Depository Receipt (SPDR) or the iShares S&P 500 Index, both of which are securities that track the index but trade just like a stock.
It may seem logical that an index fund requires little trading or management, but the management expense ratio can vary considerably from firm to firm – and the actual returns they offer will also vary as a result.
But if all of these brokerage firms are offering funds based on the same index, how does an investor discern which fund is appropriate for him or her? What distinguishes these seemingly identical funds is the expense each charges for managing the fund.
In 1976, Vanguard introduced individual investors to the first mutual fund designed to mimic the S&P 500 Index.
Nowadays, most investment firms, including Fidelity and Schwab, offer an S&P 500 index fund.
Both index funds and ETFs provide cost-efficient ways for individual investors to achieve the diversification of the S&P 500 Index.
I know there will be some diehard investors out there who will say that index fund investing is just lazy and that you’re missing out on better returns — that you need to actively manage your own portfolio or spend some more time researching fund managers who have a proven record to beat the market (though even if you find that guy, there’s no guarantee he’ll repeat his performance on a consistent basis).
In 2012, only 39% of actively managed funds performed better than their benchmark (a benchmark is a standard that a manager uses to measure their fund against; usually a stock market index like the S&P 500).
With index funds, instead of human beings deciding which stocks to include in the fund, a computer tracks the market and rebalances the fund as needed so that it matches the stock market index that it’s following.
After you’ve done some reading up on index fund investing, start researching specific funds.
An index fund is a type of mutual fund (meaning it pools money from a group of investors) with a portfolio that’s constructed to match a particular stock index (like the S&P 500 or the Dow Jones Industrial).
Because index funds are set to track a particular stock market index, there’s no need to pay for “expertise” and thus no need to pay a sales commission.
And even if you were to spend a bunch of time and money researching stocks or other actively managed mutual funds, there’s a good chance you’re not even going to match the market.
Most index funds have expense ratios that are less than .5% and some are less than .2%. The index fund that I invest in has an expense ratio of .18%. If you had an expense ratio of .18% in the example above, you would have only lost $2,168 to operating expenses.
Great question, and the answer is three-fold: 1) with index funds, you’ll generally outperform actively managed funds over the long run, 2) you don’t have to know much about investing to succeed with index funds, and 3) you’ll keep more of your returns with index funds than you would with actively managed funds.
While I have money in other index funds, I have a large amount of my retirement in Vanguard Target Retirement 2045 Fund (VTIVX).
Although the typical active large-company U.S. stock fund lagged Vanguard Index 500 over the past one, three, five and ten years, “above average” funds fared better, according to a new Morningstar study.
Or round out your core portfolio with small bets in index funds that focus on riskier asset classes, such as an ETF that owns Japanese stocks or an index fund that specializes in biotech stocks.
For example, Vanguard 500 Index (symbol VFINX), which mirrors Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index, has outpaced 80% of all actively managed large-company, U.S.-oriented stock funds over the past three years.
Build a core portfolio of index funds—domestic stock, international stock, and bond index funds, for instance—and complement it with funds that have managers who you think can beat the market.
Meanwhile, assets in stock index funds have grown 70% over the past five years, to $2 trillion, and cash in bond index funds has more than doubled, to $510 billion.
All you had to do was to find a reliable company with experience running index funds, aim for low fees and stick with a fund designed to match a broad, well-known index, such as the S&P 500 or the Dow Jones industrial average.
We believe there’s a place in every portfolio for passively managed index funds or ETFs (or both) and actively managed mutual funds.
They use index funds or ETFs except in certain asset classes, such as emerging markets or municipal bonds, in which they think an active manager can make a difference.
Vanguard Index 500 (VFINX); Vanguard Total Stock Market Index (VTSMX); PowerShares QQQ (QQQ), which tracks the Nasdaq-100 index; and iShares Core Total U.S. Bond Market (AGG).
Vanguard Total Stock Market Index (VTSMX), the largest index mutual fund, charges just 0.17% per year.
“The index funds control risk by ensuring that part of your portfolio is getting the market return minus costs.
On the international side, Vanguard Total International Stock Market ETF (VXUS) and iShares MSCI Emerging Market Index (EEM).
Since 2007, investors have added $930 billion to their investments in passively operated U.S. equity index funds, and they have withdrawn $240 billion from their holdings in actively managed equity funds.
While individual managers and sometimes whole teams were once the gold standard of Wall Street funds, they’re ceding more and more ground to funds essentially run by a computer and tied to an index.
Without one or several managers doing research and taking up office space, assistants and the like, index funds are able to operate with some of the lowest expense ratios in the game.
As a bonus to investors, some of the best index funds — usually exchange-traded funds, but often available as mutual funds, too — also happen to be some of the cheapest.
The trend of investors moving away from actively managed mutual funds and toward passive index funds will strengthen.
Relatively new when compared to the other two strategies, the last type of index methodology is a fundamentally weighted group of stocks.  These indexes are developed to account for comparable company metrics such as book value, earnings, revenue, or even dividend rates.  Companies exhibiting the strongest traits based upon the screening methodology are then assigned the largest weight within the index.
would carry an identical weight within the index as F5 Networks, which is the goal behind the NASDAQ-100 Equal Weighted Index.  At first glance, this type of weighting strategy might seem illogical in relation to the aforementioned cap weighted style, as investors may instinctively want to own a larger share of mature, successful companies.
Stepping up to the plate to take your first swing at ETF investing has never been simpler and more cost effective, but as eager investors approach these products, are they really understanding the differences in portfolio composition?  Index formulation methodology could likely have a much greater impact on bottom-line performance than fee structure over time.  Now that we have a fair amount of price history for comparative analysis, the differences in index construction can amount to a sizeable margin of total return over time.
Regardless of strategy, it is imperative that investors demand that index providers bring the highest quality, objective, transparent and rules-based indexes to the market.  Indexers must ensure that they have the best available data and technology to match the growing complexities, and methodologies must remain open and transparent to allow for optimal tracking by investors, product issuers and traders.
Choosing the right index for your personal needs doesn’t come down to typical investment roadblocks such as size or accessibility, but rather your individual goals and tolerance for volatility.  In other words, investors have become accustomed to traditional market-cap weighted indexes due to their long running history.
The overarching conclusion that can be drawn from the differences between these three strategies is the universal shift from overweight positions in large well-known names to concentrated positions in smaller, more nimble, or fundamentally sound companies.  These traits should immediately appeal to those investors seeking the chance to outperform traditional benchmark indexes, but it will likely come with the cost of increased volatility over time.
Let’s begin with the index blueprint that most investors are familiar with: market-cap weighting sizes constituent securities according to the total market value of their outstanding shares.  In a real world example, examining the PowerShares NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQ), Apple Apple Inc.
Using the same scenario, equal weight indexes are often created using the same list of stocks as cap-weighted indexes.  However, instead of examining the size of the company, an equal weight index allocates identical proportion amongst all the constituent securities.  So, Apple Inc.
This is precisely why many exchange-traded product providers are setting their sights on challenging the traditional cap-weighted styles for more exotic, alternative, or smart index strategies.  However, these innovative strategies still have a big hill to climb, as cap-weighted indexes still control the largest share of assets under management in the ETF universe.
Conversely, cap weighted indexes might still be the right fit for investors  who believe in the strength of large companies to dominate a specific segment of the market, and don’t want to risk the chances of underperforming traditional market barometers.
Both index mutual funds and ETFs grew out of the passive investing revolution: Index funds came about in the early 1970s, after academics noticed that actively managed funds underperformed the market.
For example, with Vanguard funds, at $10,000, the expense ratios for index funds and ETFs, with the same underlying indexes, are typically the same.
To understand why ETFs represent such an advance over index funds, you have to look a little deeper than the most basic explanation of the difference between them.
We often get the question from clients: What is the difference between an index fund and an ETF? Even people who understand ETFs don’t understand the difference between these two kinds of investment products.
Most ETFs, like most index funds, closely track well-known indexes and eschew active management.
Mutual funds evolved into index funds, which in turn evolved into ETFs.
We believe ETFs are index funds, evolved.
ETFs began in the early 1990s, when institutional investors wanted a passive investment vehicle that could be traded throughout the day and thus be used in market timing strategies.
The economics of ETFs are not only driving expense ratios down – they are allowing brokerages to reduce or eliminate commissions on ETFs, sometimes on their own ETFs and sometimes as part of marketing deals with other companies.
The stock market’s historical returns are roughly 11% per year, but managed mutual fund shareholders as a group can expect to see any return reduced by the approximate costs imposed by the funds.
If you’re considering an index fund (and you definitely should if you’re investing in mutual funds), always remember to compare its expense ratio (see below) against other similar index funds.
Should you wish to explore the crazy and bizarre world of mutual funds beyond the index fund, make sure that you know exactly what fees you’re paying.
This fund, started by the Vanguard Group, nearly matches the returns of the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, and over the last ten years it has beaten the performance of over 90% of all mutual funds.
Most mutual funds are "actively managed," meaning the mutual fund shareholders, through a yearly fee, pay a mutual fund manager to actively buy and sell stocks or bonds within the fund.
Many other mutual fund companies now offer S&P 500 index funds.
You can educate yourself about your own mutual funds by posting a question about them on The Motley Fool’s Mutual Fund message board, Index Fund message board, or Foolish 401(k)s message board.
A managed mutual fund has an average turnover rate of approximately 85%, meaning that funds are selling most of their holdings every year.
The premier mutual fund data provider, Morningstar, assigns stars on the basis of risk and return, attempting to compare one fund with other funds that have similar investment objectives.
Due to the recent popularity of index funds, several fund companies are charging higher fees than necessary.
Besides index funds, what might that preferable investment be? Generally, we think that purchasing individual stocks will provide you all of the upside of actively managed mutual funds, while costing less.
Meanwhile, in the wonderful world of index funds, the expense ratio is typically around 0.25% and does get as low as 0.19% for the king of all index funds – the Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund.
Therefore, take the time to educate yourself about the long-term risks of holding any actively managed mutual funds and consider moving that money into passively managed index funds.
No one has yet started the Llama Fund, though it’s only a matter of time.) Sector funds can be extremely volatile, since the broad market will find certain sectors very attractive and very unattractive – often in rapid succession.
At the end of the day, one of the reasons you would pick an active manager is you believe he’s going to provide alpha—excess return for a fund relative to its appropriate benchmark.
HEBNER: I actually started off with the idea that active investing is really a little bit of a gambling addiction for investors, and therefore they should go through my 12-Step Recovery Program for active investors, which basically dismantles the whole idea of active investing and describes a more prudent passive investing strategy.
What this means is, diversification is your buddy and the only free lunch in investing because you can buy that index at the same or lower cost than buying a stock and have the same expected return.
Hebner is the author of Index Funds: The 12-Step Recovery Program for Active Investors and founder and president of Index Funds Advisors ( ).
One of the main reasons active managers appear to be beating a benchmark is because the wrong benchmark has been selected, number one.
According to a study by Professors Barras, Scalliet, and Werners, 99.4% of 2,076 mutual fund managers displayed no evidence of genuine stock picking skill over a 32-year period from 1975 to 2006.
A risk-appropriate return is really what an index fund or a benchmark captures.
Now, active managers would challenge this, but we have no idea which stock will generate which return in the future.
Bottom line: I still believe, based upon all of the academic and historical evidence, that the best course of action for a vast majority of investors who wish to own stocks is to buy a broadly diversified, low cost index fund, reinvest the dividends, regularly dollar cost average by buying new shares so your cost basis is drug down during crashes, and hold it in the most tax efficient manner possible, such as a Roth IRA or, if you can get matching funds, a 401(k).
The good companies that made up the S&P 500 index, firms such as Coca-Cola, Home Depot, and Microsoft, were trading at 50, 70, and 100x earnings, providing a base earnings yield of only 1% to 2% compared to the 6%+ you could get by parking your money in Treasury bonds or the 10%+ rent yields you could get by owning outright.
With the exception of a few technology positions that were designed to benefit from the rise of cellular phones (e.g., Sprint PCS, a tracking stock that is no longer in existence, gave me $3,000 for a new top-of-the-line laptop when I went off to college that autumn, which I used to start some of my early online activities), my portfolio was made up of businesses trading at 10 to 12x earnings, that had good dividend yields, that made real products that people needed, showed historically good growth rates, strong balance sheets, and were totally unloved.
Meanwhile, the index itself has a dividend yield of 2.18%. The all time low was in August of 2000 when the dividend yield hit 1.11%. The all time high was in June of 1932 when the dividend yield hit 13.84%. Over the past century, the mean dividend yield has been 4.44% and the median dividend yield 4.38%. The drop over time has to do with some companies now favoring the tax-free return of shareholder money through stock buy backs.
Not only is my knowledge of accounting, finance, and economics far greater than almost everyone I’ve ever met (something due to the fact that I the process; I’m passionate about it – my idea of a good time is being left alone for three hours to read through a stack of annual reports, such as the pile of refining and oil filings I was buried in yesterday as I studied niche markets like bitumen), but my impartial, fact-driven record demonstrates that I know what I’m doing.
(Personally, I hate forward p/e ratios in most cases as they artificially lower the valuation in your mind and are based on estimates rather than reality; instead, I prefer trailing twelve months and then to constrain the growth assumptions to the growth rate variable.) However, the median trailing twelve month p/e ratio for the stocks in the S&P 500 – the point at which half the stocks are above and half are below – is only 14.51x earnings.
Coupled with the Roth IRA, for a vast majority of Americans, they are all that is required, given a sufficient time period, dollar cost averaging, and reinvested dividends, to build a pool of capital that can be put to work in income generating assets that throw off a sufficient stream of cash earnings during retirement.
It’s a direct shot at the brokers who make commissions on unnecessary and unhelpful trades and at mutual funds that rake in fees with "active management." It’s a direct shot at the newsletter writers and tea-leaf readers who claim they can time the market using Hindenburg Omens or Death Crosses or zodiac signs or whatever.
Warren Buffett, chief executive officer of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., speaks at an event to for Goldman Sachs Group Inc.’s 10,000 Small Businesses initiative in Detroit, Michigan, U.S., on Tuesday, Nov.
The $5 billion Guggenheim S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP) also tracks S&P 500 stocks, and is a big favorite of retail investors — institutions own 36 percent of RSP.
SPY’s main rival, the $46 billion iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV), is beating it by 0.48 percent over 10 years, or $48 for every $10,000 invested.
Rather than weight its holdings by their market capitalization, RSP equally weights every stock in the S&P 500; each S&P 500 member gets a 0.20 percent weight.
During the bear market of 2008, it trailed SPY by 3.4 percent, in part because investors fled to the perceived safety of the largest large-caps.
As I am Canadian, my favourite examples to trot out are those e-series mutual funds offered by TD Canada Trust, or Vanguard Canada’s ETFs which you can buy using my favourite brokerage in Canada: Questrade.
Personally I’d just stick to Vanguard Canada for your major markets (Canada, U.S.A., Bonds), and go to iShares Canada for index funds that cover international and emerging markets.
You will notice that I have international index funds in there but that’s because I wanted to be diversified into international stocks as well and not just concentrate on Canada, the U.S. and Bonds.
As you can see, even if you buy the most expensive REIT Index ETF it is about the price of the most basic index mutual fund offered by TD Canada Trust.
Again, in Canada to buy index fund ETFs you need to go with a brokerage like Questrade.
For example, if you’re based in the U.S., and your portfolio consists of a U.S. stock index fund, an international stock index fund, and a U.S. bond fund, along with sufficient cash and some real estate, then you’d be considered rather diversified.
For example, if you decide that your percentage of bonds will equal your age, and that your equities will be split evenly between U.S. stock and foreign stocks, then a 30 year old person would have an index portfolio consisting of three funds: 35% in U.S. equities, 35% in foreign equities, and 30% in bonds.
But there are index funds that follow Bond indexes, funds that follow international markets, funds that follow the stocks of a specific country, funds that follow REITs, funds that follow specific sectors (such as Technology, or Healthcare), and all sorts of other funds.
However, most people aren’t interested or disciplined enough to do the proper research to invest in individual stocks so they should go with index funds and expect to get average returns.
Depending on exactly what sort of index funds you pick, when it comes to basic portfolio maintenance, you’ll spend anywhere from a few minutes per year, to a few hours per year, to perhaps a couple of hours per month, tops.
If you’re like me, and for one reason or another you want to own individual stocks as well (because you want to retain your shareholder voting rights rather than wasting them, or you think you can beat the market with a smart investing approach, or you want higher and more consistent dividend income, or another reason), then there are some seamless ways to combine indexes and individual stocks.
To provide a tangible example, if you put $1,000 per month away into an index fund that grows at an average rate of 9% per year with 3% average inflation, then you’ll have approximately $850,000 in 20 years, and this value adjusted for inflation would be $480,000.
If you invest only in index funds, then you give up your shareholder voting rights to the index fund manager, since they own the equities rather than you.
When it comes to index funds, this primarily means asset allocation between stocks and bonds, but can also include cash, REITs, MLPs, etc.
It’s about how to invest in index funds purely, or how to combine them with individual stocks.
The same is true for a three-fund portfolio that consists of domestic equities, foreign equities, and bonds; you’d simply direct capital towards the funds that are below your target balance due to their recent underperformance, and/or draw funds away from the funds that are over-represented in the portfolio due to their recent outperformance.
An index fund will beat most actively managed mutual funds due to the huge difference in fees.
By keeping fees low and merely trying to match the market rather than beat it, index funds statistically beat out actively managed mutual funds.
The primary thing index funds have in common is that the fund manager isn’t trying to do anything other than match an index.
Index funds require no stock picking and little business knowledge, and therefore are useful for everyone that has money to save and invest.
A balanced portfolio of index funds is one of the smartest and easiest ways for most people to invest and build wealth.
If you’re a value investor that believes that you can beat the market by at least a percentage or two per year (which can add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars over the long run), then you might have a better shot with appropriately valued individual stocks.
Mutual funds work like this: You pick a fund you like (e.g., growth, value, technology, international…), buy shares of the fund, and let a money manager pick the stocks he thinks will yield the best return.
Index funds are a special type of mutual fund.
But since the performance of mutual funds is so easy to find, why not invest in the 15% that actually beat the market at a reasonable cost? I have been investing in Selected American Shares for many years and they’ve been beating the market in every time horizon, without charging exorbitant fees.
Here I’ll cover the basics of mutual funds, the secret most investors don’t know, and what fund I invest in.
Yes, if you happen to have a mutual fund that beats the market, you’re better off investing in a mutual fund—-but fewer than 15% of all funds do that.
By the way, one of my most popular questions is this: How exactly do you “buy” into a mutual fund? Mutual funds have ticker symbols just like stocks.
The reason people invest in regular mutual funds instead of index funds is because they just don’t know the difference.
If I invested in large company MF’s then I would consider buying stocks directly; but, probably would use mutual fund literature to select individual small and mid cap companies for both stock and to screen employment opportunities 5) I will probably never get out of MF unless something changes dramatically in that area., The better MF managers visit the plants, talk to the manager’s, talk to the competition, and go to the trade shows etc.
After checking out the cost ratio of the mutual funds in the program and then realizing that by using the goal-directed investment model provided, I was probably spending even more than the 1.6-2% cost ratio of the individual funds, decided it was time to take more control of my investment direction and stop being lazy.
Tracker funds are ideal for those who want to invest but don’t want the hassle of picking shares and want to avoid the often hefty costs using a traditional active fund manager involves.
But in less efficient markets, such as emerging markets and Asia, or niche areas like smaller companies, stock-picking fund managers find it easier hunt out gems and therefore find it easier to beat trackers.You still need to spend some time picking a good manager though.
If you want to capitalise on fund managers and think you have found some good ones worth following, some financial theories recommend a blend of both trackers and active funds.
Like trackers, Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) aim to mimic the performance of a particular market or index such as the FTSE 100 and like a tracker their value is determined by whether or not the index rises or falls.
These funds ditch the concept of trying to beat the market by cherry-picking a selection of shares and are instead designed to follow a set index, such as the FTSE 100.They can keep costs ultra-low and while they won’t beat the market neither should they fall far behind it – the idea instead is that slow and steady investing wins the race.
There are some very good fund managers who do actually outperform over very long periods of time, but they are fewer and farther between than the active fund management industry lets on.Find out more about whether it is worth paying for a fund manager in our Minor Investor column.
Fund managers buy shares in companies that they hope will beat the relevant index, such as the FTSE 100 or the All-Share.
This has changed in recent years and now investors buying through a DIY investing platform almost always avoid the initial charge, while annual management charges are often closer to 0.75 per cent, as the commission used to pay platforms and advisers that made up the rest has now been banned for new investments.
The argument put forward by those who say active funds are better than trackers can be summed up along these lines: trackers are the Ford Focus of the investment world, whereas buying an actively managed fund is akin to choosing a Jaguar or even a Rolls Royce.
So if you are thinking why should you pay for a fund manager’s Porsche when you can get cheaper – and often better – performance by just following an index, we take a look at some of the cheapest trackers and how to invest.

Tags: ,