《金融时报》控制成本以保护投资
许多投资者正在把全部收入乃至更多耗在投资费用上
Many investors are sacrificing all of their income and more to investing charges
这是我关于投资基本原理系列文章的最后一篇。此前,我已经探讨过为什么我们大多数人(甚至所有人)都不该尝试所谓的择时操作,而应专注于买入优质公司的股票并长期持有。我也提过,永远不要为了避税而投资,并且投资组合过度分散不仅毫无意义,还会损害投资收益。我的最后一条建议,关乎投资成本。
This is the final part of my series on the fundamentals of investment. So far I have looked at why most or all of us should not try so-called market timing, and should instead focus on buying shares in good companies and holding them. I’ve suggested that you should never invest primarily to avoid tax, and that overdiversification in a portfolio is not only pointless but injurious to your investment performance. My last piece of advice concerns investment costs.
即便你持有的是一个集中的优质股票组合,如果控制不住成本,回报也会受限。许多投资者并不清楚自己为投资活动到底支付了多少费用,那我们就来看看普通投资者可能要承担的成本。
Even if you run a concentrated portfolio of quality shares, your returns will be constrained if you fail to control costs. Many investors are unaware of precisely how much they are being charged for their investment activity, so let’s have a look at the costs the average investor might incur.
理财顾问和财富管理机构通常按投资组合价值的 0.5% 至 1.0% 收取费用,而且往往还会通过一个投资平台来托管各只基金或股票。这又要每年多花约 0.25%,通常是以“尾随佣金”的形式,由底层基金经理掏腰包。投资者也可能直接使用平台。
Financial advisers and wealth managers typically charge fees of 0.5-1.0 per cent on the value of the portfolio, and will often use an investment platform to hold the individual funds or shares. That might cost another 0.25 per cent a year, usually collected as “trail commission” from the underlying fund managers. The investor may also use the platform direct.
如果投资以共同基金形式持有,则会有 0.75% 至 1.5% 的年度管理费(AMC)。此外,基金还会从基金资产中列支某些费用:通常包括托管费、行政费和法律费用,但有时也会列支营销费用。把所有这些加在一起,就得到了以前所谓的“总费用比率”,现在叫“持续性收费率”。这一般在 1.0% 至 1.75% 之间;再加上平台和咨询费用,总成本通常在 1.75% 到 3% 之间。
If the investments are held in mutual funds, there will be an annual management charge (AMC) of 0.75-1.5 per cent. In addition, the funds charge certain expenses to the fund: typically things such as custody, administration and legal expenses, but they have been known to charge marketing expenses too. Add that lot up and you get to what used to be called the total expense ratio and is now known as the ongoing charges figure. That’s typically 1.0-1.75 per cent; add in platform and advice costs and the running total is generally between 1.75 per cent and 3 per cent.
即便如此,也还没完。还有一项隐藏成本,未在任何一项数字中披露:即基金内部交易的成本。当基金经理或投资者买卖股票时,需要支付佣金、0.5% 的印花税、用于资助收购委员会的税费,以及经纪商买价与卖价之间的差额(即点差)。如果交易量较大而股票流动性又低,可能还会把价格推高不少。
Even that isn’t it. There is also a hidden cost which is not disclosed in any of these figures: the cost of dealing within the fund. When a fund manager or an investor deals in stocks, he or she pays commissions, stamp duty at 0.5 per cent, the levy that funds the Takeover Panel and the difference between the broker’s bid and offer prices (the spread). A big order in a low-liquidity share might force the price up quite a lot.
英国金融服务管理局发布的一份研究数据(《英国散户投资的价格》,凯文·詹姆斯著,见 www.fsa.gov.uk)显示,英国普通基金经理每年约换手投资组合的五分之四。这除了引发对投资者缺乏信念和过度活跃的质疑外,也暗示在“总”费用比率之外,每年还要承担高达 1.4% 的未披露成本。
Data published in a Financial Services Authority study (The Price of Retail Investing in the UK, by Kevin James, available at www.fsa.gov.uk) suggested that the average UK fund manager turned over about four-fifths of the portfolio each year. Apart from the questions this raises about the lack of conviction and hyperactivity, it would suggest that additional undisclosed costs of up to 1.4 per cent are being incurred each year on top of the “total” expense ratio.
这些费用已经够糟了,但它们与债券和股票能提供的收益形成了鲜明对比。富时 100 指数的收益率是 3.8%,标普 500 指数为 2.1%,而英国和美国等国家的 10 年期国债收益率则明显低于 2%。换句话说,投资组合预期收益的 100% 以上都被费用吞掉了。
All that would be bad enough, but these costs are in stark contrast to the income available from bonds and equities. The yield on the FTSE 100 is 3.8 per cent, on the S&P 500 it is 2.1 per cent and 10-year government bonds in countries such as the UK and the US yield significantly under 2 per cent. In other words, more than 100 per cent of the expected income on portfolios is being absorbed by charges.
面对如此繁多的收费,你可能会问,基金怎么还能支付股息呢?问题并不一目了然,因为许多基金——尤其是几乎所有收入型基金——都是把这笔费用从基金资本价值中扣除,而不是从收益中扣。但这并不能改变事实。
Given this myriad of charges, you might ask how the funds are able to pay dividends. The problem is not immediately apparent, because many funds, and almost all income funds in particular, apply these charges to the capital value of the fund and not as a deduction from income. But this does not alter the fact.
传奇的美国投资者、先锋集团创始人约翰·博格尔曾计算过,在截至 2007 年的 81 年间,标普 500 指数成分公司获得的长期复利回报中,再投资股息收入大约占了 95%。1981 年至 2000 年以及 2003 年至 2007 年的牛市,可能误导投资者以为股票投资主要是靠股价上涨获利。但历史告诉我们并非如此。没有人承受得起把自己投资组合的全部乃至超量收益都耗在费用上。如果你真这么做了,最终结果必然是在扣除这些费用后,业绩表现惨淡。
John Bogle, the legendary US investor and founder of Vanguard, calculated that during the 81 years to 2007, reinvested dividend income accounted for approximately 95 per cent of the compound long-term return earned by the companies in the S&P 500. The bull markets of 1981-2000 and 2003-07 may have misled investors into thinking that equity investment is mainly about share price appreciation. But history suggests otherwise. No one can afford to throw away all or more than all of the income from their portfolio on charges. If you do, the inevitable result is that you will experience poor performance net of these fees.
那么,怎样才能避免或降低收费呢?显而易见的办法是,尽量砍掉你与实际持有股票之间所有多余的中间环节。正是这些环节推高了成本。在条件允许的情况下,直接投资。另一种方法——尽管由一位主动型基金经理来倡导可能显得有点奇怪——是买入指数基金,这种基金只是跟踪某个指数。你应当能以每年 0.25% 或更低的全部费用买到一只指数基金。
So how do you avoid or reduce charges? The obvious routes are to cut out as many of the layers of intermediation as you can between you and the actual stocks which you own. It is those layers which add to the costs. Where you can, invest direct. The other method – though it might seem odd for an active manager to advocate this – is to buy an index fund, which just tracks an index. You should be able to buy an index fund for all-in charges of 0.25 per cent a year or less.
既然普通主动型基金的业绩本来就跑输基准指数,你何苦多花钱呢?
Given that the average active fund manager underperforms the benchmark index anyway, why would you pay more?
Terry Smith
Terry Smith
Financial Times
Financial Times