Tuesday, December 22, 2009, 3:04AM ET - U.S. Markets open in 6 hours and 26 minutes.

Suze Orman Money Matters

Suze Orman, Money Matters

How to Avoid Sneaky Mutual Fund Fees

by Suze Orman

Email this Page IM this StoryBookmark this StoryAdd to your Del.icio.us accountDigg this StoryPrint this Story
Good (482 Ratings)
2.736504/5
Posted on Wednesday, August 8, 2007, 12:00AM

The Securities and Exchange Commission recently held a big get-together to debate the current state of mutual fund 12b-1 fee disclosure. That's the marketing fee charged by many -- but not all -- mutual funds buried within the fund's annual expense ratio.

Little Awareness, Big Profit

Because it's not a line-item fee on fund statements, many people have no idea whether they pay a 12b-1 fee or not. That's a costly lack of awareness: the Investment Company Institute (ICI) estimates that fund companies collected $11.8 billion on this fee alone in 2006.

The main use of the 12b-1 is for fund companies to compensate brokers and advisers who steer clients into these funds. Because it's an ongoing fee that's merely a component of the annual expense ratio rather than an outright sales load, it's become popular with advisers as a means of telling clients that they're investing without paying a sales load.

This pitch is technically correct, in that there's no upfront sales charge, but it's nonetheless a bit disingenuous. The expense ratio is bloated by the 12b-1 fee, which is then used to funnel a commission back to the adviser. The fee can be 1 percent or even more. And the fee is levied on every investor every year they're in a 12b-1 fund.

A Long-term Disclosure Gap

I don't need to explain what a lousy deal this is for consumers. As I wrote in my previous column, it's fine if you want to work with a financial adviser. But if you're already paying them a fee to handle your money, why would you also agree to invest in mutual funds that charge a big expense ratio in large part to send more compensation your adviser's way?

It's a no-brainer that fund companies should be required to make the 12b-1 fee more transparent to investors, but I'm not holding my breath until the fund industry or regulators step up. Lousy disclosure has been around since the 12b-1 came into existence more than 25 years ago.

I'm more interested in what investors can do right now to avoid this costly fee. It's remarkably easy to build either a mutual fund or exchange traded fund (ETF) portfolio that's 100 percent free of 12b-1 fees. By steering clear of funds with high annual expense ratios, you keep precious dollars growing in your account.

A Revealing Comparison

As an example, let's compare two funds: A no-load index fund that doesn't charge a 12b-1 fee and has an expense ratio of 0.19 percent, and a mutual fund that has a 12b-1 fee that pushes the total expense ratio up to 1.5 percent.

If both funds earn a gross (pre-expense) annualized return of 8 percent, the index fund's net return, after the expense ratio is deducted, is 7.81 percent; the mutual fund's gain is shaved to 6.5 percent.

In the investing world, that's a huge difference. Consider that $10,000 invested in the low-expense-ratio fund will grow to nearly $45,000 after 20 years, and only to around $35,000 in the fund with the higher expense ratio.

The ETF Advantage

If you opt for ETFs, you can push your fees even lower.

In case some of you need a refresher course, an ETF is very similar to your standard index mutual fund except for one major difference: it trades on a stock exchange just like a stock. This means that during the trading day, you can get a price to buy or sell based on the market value of the underlying securities in the ETF.

With a mutual fund you can always place an order during the trading day, but mutual fund prices are calculated just once a day, at the market close. There are also some structural differences between index funds and ETFs that can make ETFs a more tax-efficient choice.

But one of the most compelling ETF advantages are expense ratios that can be under 0.10 percent. True, 0.19 percent for an index fund is already pretty great, but 0.07 percent or even 0.10 percent is even better.

Room for Improvement

That said, index funds can be more cost-effective if you make frequent periodic investments. A no-load index fund doesn't charge any sales commission, but because ETFs are essentially stocks, there's always a brokerage commission charged on your buy and sell orders. Even if you use a discount brokerage and pay just $10 or so for ETF trades, that can add up if you invest smaller amounts every few weeks.

Still, the overall cost advantage is a big reason that ETF assets have increased more than 44 percent over the 12 months through May 2007, according to ICI data. But while it's great that investors are finally catching on that expenses do matter, the $485 billion in ETF assets is still just a fraction of the $11.4 trillion invested in mutual funds.

I'd be fine with this if I was certain that the bulk of that money was in the lowest-cost options. The $11.8 billion paid out in 12b-1 fees last year, however, tells me there's still plenty of room for fund investors to get their costs down.

Give Your Portfolio a Fee Exam

Finding the expense ratio for your investments is just a few clicks away. Just enter a fund or ETF ticker symbol in the Yahoo! Finance "Get Quotes" box, then click "Profile" on the left side of the page that appears. A fee and expense table appears in the lower right of the next page. To see the expense ratios of all ETFs from lowest to highest, click here.

So what's a "good" expense ratio? If you're investing in a broad large-cap index, there are plenty of good options that charge less than 0.20 percent; international indexes and ETFs tend to be a bit more expensive, but that means maybe 0.40 percent to 0.50 percent. That's still a whole lot less than the 1 percent to 1.5 percent or more many actively managed mutual funds charge.

Of course, if you feel that the manager of that fund is so good that he or she is worth the extra expense, that's a conscious fee decision you need to make. But the operative word is "conscious."

Be Fee-Aware

If you're aware of the higher fee and think it's justified, that's your choice. But I think in many cases once you understand your fund's fee structure and compare its performance to what you could get in a low-cost index fund or ETF, you'll be hard pressed to justify sticking with the expensive option.

Finally, if you're stuck with high-cost funds through your employer's 401(k) or 403(b) plan, I suggest you get a bunch of colleagues together and start besieging HR with requests to change the plan's funds.

Don't be timid: A 401(k) is supposed to be run for the benefit of the participants -- that's you. There's no way to justify that high-fee funds are a benefit to anyone.

Email this Page IM this StoryBookmark this StoryAdd to your Del.icio.us accountDigg this StoryPrint this Story

Rate This story

Good (482 Ratings)
2.5/5
Sign-in to rate!

167 Comments

Showing comments 6-35 of 167<< PreviousNext >>
Sort: first to last

  • Hiram - Saturday, August 25, 2007, 12:10AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    How does she get away with this fodder. Everyone knows mutual funds come with expenses that compensate the advisor for their advice. It can be ongoing because of the relationship that is established when hiring a financial advisor. We pay for the advice. No loads are great for those that have taken the time to do their due diligence on all kinds of investments not just mutual funds to determine what would be in their best interest. I personally feel that if I am going to buy an ETF, I better be ready to take the ride that everyone else is taking. I would prefer to have a properly asset allocated portfolio that consists of stocks, bonds and cash so that there is not as much volatility. Suze's advice should be taken with a grain of salt. Just think of running a business when it comes to your investments. If you know nothing about the business you want to start, hire a competent manager to get you started to ensure success. It is okay to pay for advice. Tiger Woods does, and he is considered to be the best golfer in the world. He has a caddy that gives him advice on which club to hit or can read a green and give a second opinion on how it will break. You think he does that for free? When in doubt always ask for advice.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday, August 23, 2007, 3:07PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Suze has it wrong and it is little surprise since she has little first hand experience with mutual funds and equities (95% in bonds and CDs). At my firm (a wirehouse) any 12b-1 fees are rebated to the client if they have an advisory or wrap type account. One or the other, 12b-1s or account based fees, never both. I suppose there are shady operators on the fring of the industry that double dip, but a client can easily check. As a RR, I have not a thing against ETFs and recommend them on occaision. I somethimes worry that the index mismatch could hurt my clients (any commodity or index multiplier ETF has major problems in htis area). Liquid ETFs are a great way to deploy cash in a hurry. Since ETFs have a fee too, they will typically underperform the market since they merely attempt to match it. ETFs are also typically not created according to risk profiles so putting a client into the SPY is like sending them dating agency that matches clients with only a single question (are you M or F) and matches them according to a single metric. By and large, I prefer separately managed accounts where there is a long history of superior to benchmark performance. They are matched to clients using a risk tolerance survey. That is what my client pay me for, and I have to deliver as a part of my value proposition or I don't have a valid business model.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday, August 23, 2007, 2:27PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    If you want people to work for you you have to pay them.....financial advisors need to get paid too. Without 12b-1 fees what financial advisor would ever look at your account again? You'd have to pay by the hour or a horrible wrap fee of 1% usually.....you are often getting a good deal with 12b-1 fees.

  • Brian - Monday, August 20, 2007, 2:24PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    This is overall good advice, but one size does not fit all and suzy is just giving out general good advice. For some the best advice is to pay off the mortgage and have that peace of mind, while it might not always make good financial sence to do it. The bottom line is to have a retirement that you can enjoy without financial problems. There are lots of opinions out there, but the bottom line is to save the most you can the smartest ways.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Sunday, August 19, 2007, 10:27PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    Its pathetic to reads the financial "professionals" complain about index funds. Sort of like listening to a toll taker complain about the deficiencies of EZ Pass. The "research" they cite is likely culled from the pages of the Merrill Lynch broker handbook. If they could bring even the slightest amount of critical thinking to bear on finance, they would work for a hedge fund and not haunt the yahoo message boards.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Sunday, August 19, 2007, 8:22PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    I'm giving this a higher rating to counteract the whining by sellers of financial products. Bottom line: If you're saving for retirement with a long term horizon, a passive mix of index funds and bonds has beaten almost every actively managed strategy. Whether we're talking loads, higher expenses, or 12b-1 fees, whatever those fees pay for has not added value. period. Disagree? then prove it.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Sunday, August 19, 2007, 6:45AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    The RR's have a problem with this story because they make their living off the excessive mutual fund fees. Actively mananged funds are garbage, put your money in an S&P 500 index fund!

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Saturday, August 18, 2007, 12:33PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    The biggest problem I have with Suze Orman is her unabashed self-servedness. I know for a fact that when she was working for my office she had a different take on 12-b1 fees, and she was actually top in annuity sales. But now that she just has to sell books, she acts all moral. Lisa Rubin has great info. To build on that, yes Lisa, the CDSC clock does NOT start over when you switch to another B-share in the family. Suze's advice is really bad in a downmarket. Some people cannot handle the huge standard deviation that occurs in ETFs or ishares, and end up selling out at the bottom, realizing huge losses. Mutual funds have more of a "strategy" and carry more cash, which buoys a free-fall. In a bear market, mutual funds usually outperform indexes, and sometimes the way to make money for clients is by not losing it. Final thought: Lisa asked, who would hold a mutual fund for 2 to 4 years? Answer: lots of people. The average holding period is 3 years. C-shares make a lot of sense that way. Remember that the individual mutual fund investors lag the performance of mutual funds by at least 6% on average, and in some cases 11%. Can you imagine how much worse those figures could would look with ETFs, with intraday liquidation?

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Saturday, August 18, 2007, 11:19AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Research shows the average investor, managing their own assets with no help, generally gets it wrong more than right. Suze continuously offers one-sided, biased commentary and advice. She feeds on the emotions and the very lack of eduction most of her readers posess. While monitoring fees is crucial to your overall investment management strategy, it is not THE only factor. Just becuase a fund has a low expense ratio or 12b-1 fee, it does automatically make it the better investment. How about the performance of the fund vs. its appropriate benchmark? What about the risk/return characteristics relative to its asset class? Asset allocation and a sound strategy are, in my opinion, far more important than picking a low cost fund. At the end of the day, no one works for free. Not fund managers, not advisors, not even Suze Orman. As the saying goes, you often "get what you pay for".

  • MountainGrandma - Saturday, August 18, 2007, 7:28AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    Thank you, Suze. Even if just one of us uninformed investors who never read Yahoo's Finance happens to read this, you've helped someone. Full disclosure and explanation by financial investors is what is needed to educate the investor...anyone who disagrees with this obviously has something to fear from educating her/his client.

  • darkling_eve - Friday, August 17, 2007, 6:30PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    This article is misleading. 12b-1 fees exist, but just because a fund carries a 12b-1 does not make it bad investment. I would prefer is Suze had looked into the differences in fee structures for commission based mutual fund sales. Here's my take. The commission will be paid in one of three ways: like a bus, a taxi or a limo by the mile. First, the bus: pay up front and ride as long as you want, the longer you ride, the cheaper it gets. An A-share carries an up front-end sales load typically in the neighborhood of 5.75% for investments under $50,000. For a serious long term long term investor buying in a high quality fund family, I think this is the best choice. The 12b-1 fees are far far lower than the other share classes because the commission is paid up front; also, this share class offers volume discounts as you hit what are called breakpoints within the one fund family ($50k, $100k, $250k, $500k, and at $1mm there is no sales charge on the front end). The trick is to make sure the investment is in a high quality mutual fund FAMILY with good choices in all asset classes. You can switch between funds within a fund family without incurring further sales charges, so you want one with a proven track record of good management in good times and bad in all asset classes so you can get less aggressive as you approach the time when you'll need your money. Next, the taxi: hop in, pay a little more by the mile, and pay as you get out. This is a B-share that pays the broker through the higher 12b-1 fee over the course of 7 or 8 years. It carries what they call a contingent deferred sales charge, and if you sell before that 7 or 8 years, you're hit with a back end sales load. Yuk. This may work for smaller investors, who don't think they'll hit thier first breakpoint for a very long time, and plan on holding for a very long time; but even so, depending on the performance of the fund, an A share typically is cheaper to hold for longer periods of time. Breakpoints don't help reduce fees in B-shares. B-shares typically turn into A shares after the 7 - 8 years (and internal fees reduce). I am not sure whether you can switch within the fund family without resetting the clock on the deferred sales charge, but it would only be fair if they did. Finally: Limo by the mile- the dreaded C-share. An unethical advisor may tell you there are no fees. Well, every little scrap of commission comes out of that 12b-1 fee and they are HIGH 12b-1s. If you only plan on holding a fund for 2-4 years, this may be cheapest; but why the heck would you only hold a fund for 2 to 4 years? I don't think internal fees typically reduce. Not the right choice for a serious long term investor. A total expense ratio example from two global funds prospectuses: American Capital world growth and income: A share: 0.73%, B-share 1.53%, C-share 1.58% (American has wonderfully low expenses for an actively managed fund, but American is huge.) More typical of the industry is Franklin Templeton's Mutual Discovery: A-share 1.36%, B-share 2.05% (no longer offered, I think), and C-share 2.05%. A share has the lowest 12b-1 fees.

  • Chad - Friday, August 17, 2007, 10:20AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    I think the biggest problem with this article is that Suze is preaching to the choir. The people that would benefit the most from this article are the ones who would never go out to Yahoo's Finance site looking for sound investment advice. As someone working in the investment industry, I have talked to many investors who have chosen funds based on the most uninformed and even random reasons. Most are unaware of what 12b-1 fees are or what the expense ratio is for the fund. They're clueless...and most likely are not here reading this article.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday, August 16, 2007, 11:16PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Generally there are 3 fee's associated with mutual funds. 12b1 fee, expense fees, and load fees. 12b1 pays for the basic operation of the fund right down to the paper the prospectus is printed on. expense fees pay the salaries of the guys who are working the fund buying low and selling high. Load fees pay the guy who sold the fund, explained it, and set up your portfolio. If you have a variable annuity then you have mortality and expense fee's which pays for a life insurance component so a loved one can't lose out on money no matter how much you gamble. You do not have to pay the fees but be warned, you get what you pay for. Money in a mutual fund does not magically reproduce itself. If you don't pay for it to be managed it will sit and rot.

  • Chris - Thursday, August 16, 2007, 1:38PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    What exactly do you one-star folks not agree with about this article? Do you dispute the existence of 12b-1 fees? Do you disagree with the math? Most of the comments suggest that you disagree with writing books and selling them for money, and are bitter at authors for doing so. Maybe we should all be bitter at you for doing something that is valuable enough to earn a living at.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday, August 16, 2007, 1:40AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    A good article. People should check the expense ratios of the funds that their financial advisors recommend. If there is a large 12b-1 fee, say 1%, or more, that would be a red flag. But the only figure that really matters is the total expense ratio, not the 12b-1 fee. That's your total cost. You shouldn't care how that cost is divided between the fund and your advisor (in the form of a 12b-1 fee).

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, August 15, 2007, 5:25PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    I am amazed at the anger on this site -- and have been for quite some time. It is obvious that the purpose of this article is to make investors aware about fees and how insidious they can be to those who do not understand how mutual funds work. Period. This article DID explain them very well. This article did not debate the merits of CPA's, financial planners, etc. The bottom line is, know your fees and pick a fund with low management fees and no 12b-1 fees. The anger at Suze is ridiculous. I have worked in the mf for many years --it sure sounds like uneducated readers make the most irrelevant and nastiest comments. If you don't like what you read, get your advice elsewhere.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, August 15, 2007, 4:27PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    I think advisors should stop getting 12b-1 fees as compensation when Suze starts selling her books for cost and doing speaking engagements for free. She should also send back any soft dollars she gets from the companies that pay her for promoting FICO scores.

  • Lauren - Wednesday, August 15, 2007, 12:22PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Wow, amazing in the difference between financial advisor's opinions and CPA's opinions. My one question to everyone would be this...WOULD YOU RATHER PAY SOMEONE BASED ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR WORK (FINANCIAL ADVISORS) OR BASED ON HOW LONG THEY WORK FOR YOU, REGARDLESS OF PERFORMANCE (CPA'S)????? My thought is simple, my financial advisor charges fees but he won't get more business (or even continued business for that matter) if he doesn't do a good job for me. A CPA will charge an hourly fee to do a client's taxes and how do you judge their performance??? Seems like a pretty biased argument on part of the CPA's on this board. The simple fact is that everyone is going to pay, it is how much you pay and what you get for it. I would happily take a fund like Franklin Mutual Shares, American Washington Mutual or something like those over an index as I've outperformed them EVERY YEAR for the past 9 years NET of fees.

  • ClintW - Wednesday, August 15, 2007, 11:54AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Once again, all the talk is about fees and not about asset allocation. Her generalized advice is worth nearly nothing and to call her an "expert" is unbelievable. Look at her holdings and send her a message to actually invest in what she advises.

  • sal - Wednesday, August 15, 2007, 11:25AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Yet again Suze's run of the mill advice strikes back. I am amazed that Yahoo posts this stuff. I am hoping more comments like mine will remove Suze from this panel. Who in the world is going to be following what you said. If I am working 45 hours per week, I have to take the kids out to play, clean the house and pay my bills...do you think I care about 12b-1. No I don't, I only have $5000 in mutual funds. What difference does it make in absolute money. Please wake up. Please post this article for "The Rich and Famous." I am unfortunatelly in the bottom 90% of the population. Yahoo please get rid of Suze's run of the mill. She is concerned about making money for herself not for me or someone around the corner.

  • Chris C - Wednesday, August 15, 2007, 9:22AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Simple fact of life, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH!!! You are going to have to pay for a service. Hell, no load funds even charge investors a managment fees which can be 1-2% of an investors portfolio value. DUHH!!! Get in the program SUZE!!

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, August 14, 2007, 10:31PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Suze is not much of an investing expert. She is an expert marketer, playing to emotion and fear. She wants us to invest in index funds rather than pay advisers, because then we'll need to buy her drivel (I mean advice) instead. Very little of her "expert advice" makes any sense or stands up to logical scrutiny.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, August 14, 2007, 9:15PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    When she starts following her own advice, which will be just after she comes clean with how much she makes on giving advice she does not follow, then perhaps her words will get credence.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, August 14, 2007, 8:55PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    I am not a financial advisor nor do i play one on tv. i agree with the majority of the comments. perhaps we should all work for free, and in my opinion, it's the bottom line that matters. If I'm beating the market year after year i don't care what they charge me. In the interest of disclosure, she should be required to tell us all how much she gets paid for each piece of advice she gives - books, articles, etc. her and ann coulter oughta just go jump off a cliff. where do these hags come from? Those of you who follow her advice (gee, i didn't know the people who were making money for me are getting paid! the nerve!) enjoy drinking the koolaid. I'll be sure to give you an extra tip when you're waiting on me.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, August 14, 2007, 7:48PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    "Sneaky Fees" can be found hiding in the prospectus. If someone making money off of you annoys you then follow Suze's advice and probably get ~8% returns on your investments. I'd rather pay fees and get ~12% after everything is said and done with. 12 is greater than 8 last time I checked. 4% is a lot to sacrifice to get that warm fuzzy feeling that "HA no salesman tricked me!." Suze is just preying on the American innate fear of salespeople and the financial industry in this article for self promotion. Do your homework.

  • Claude - Tuesday, August 14, 2007, 7:33PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    All I can say is read and heed. Sometimes you just don't have a choice, but if you do have a choice, invest in something else. There is no doubt you can make money paying the 12b-1 fee, but why not put the 12b-1 money in YOUR pocket, instead of your brokers pocket. I retired when I was 52 years old and have been doing my own research and investing since. Granted you will get burned sometimes on an investment, but in the long run you most likely will come out ahead. For instance, if you have a return on your investments of 2% and you trade stocks on a regular basis, that is a 24% return figuring simple interest over 12 months /- depending on how long you hold the stock. I have found out through the "school of hard knocks" that if I can get a return of $100 on a $10,000 investment in one month=1%return times 12 months = a 12% return, not including broker fees. It gets even better if you pick quality stocks that pay a dividend. I am not a broker and do not use a broker, after all as a wise person once told me "there should be a law against someone sitting back reading a new papers all day and getting paid for it". I just figured last week I am getting an 18% annual return on my investments, not including CD's. I keep about 30% of my money in CD's, just in case the market tanks. I must admit investing in stocks is not for the everyone, sometimes I just want to scream on days like today, but I have found that with patience I will win in the long run. Suze is smart, listen to her. She has written several books that I have only read parts of, but I give Suze an A when it comes to investing and planing your future. I have never met or talked to Suze, but I sure thank her for sharing her wisdom. Finally use caution when reading up and downgrades of stocks, sometimes brokers are only trying to influence the stock price to their advantage. I listen to CNBC during the day and if the host has three guest on I am willing to bet you will hear three different opinions about a certain stock or sector. That's all folks!

  • dave - Tuesday, August 14, 2007, 7:22PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    I'm not going to bash Suze here but I urge people seeking advice to always be critical of the information and don't take anything as gospel from Suze or any of these so called "experts" on yahoo. Consider the following example: GFAFX - This fund is actively managed, rated 5 stars by Morningstar, and available through RIAs who aren't paid a commission but typically on an ongoing fee. This particular fund charges a 12b-1. As Suze mentioned it's "burried" in the Expense Ratio of the fund. This fund's expense ratio is 0.61%. Of that 0.61%, 0.25% is the 12b-1. Is Suze actually saying you shouldn't consider this fund simply because it has a 12b-1 fee? The total expense ratio is far less than the "1% to 1.5% that many actively managed funds charge." If you followed Suze's advice, you would have bought an S&P Index fund with an expense ratio of 0.20% only to see GFAFX consistantly outperform the S&P 500. You'd be bragging about how you saved 0.41% on your expense ratio instead of beating the index by 3.6% each year on average for the last 5 years. The cheapest way is not always the best way. Fees are important to understand and it can help over the long term to try to minimize them. I feel like Suze is throwing the baby out with the bath water here...

  • Michael - Tuesday, August 14, 2007, 7:12PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    Finally a browse is raised, most investors need a topic to find out who's doing what and when. Investing money is another career.

  • __A_YAHOO_USER__ - Tuesday, August 14, 2007, 7:09PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Garbage, Just so you all know, Suze, did everything and sold everything she now bashes. She was a broker in CA and sold whole life in addition to all financial products. she has no standing to be a pitch woman as a "watch dog".

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, August 14, 2007, 7:09PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    What I know about TV talk shows and book-selling and what Suze knows about professionally-guided investing we could probably fit in the same thimble: she sounds like a complete idiot when she tries to come up with arguments as to how she knows more about putting together a financial plan for an individual than an actual licensed financial planner.

Showing comments 6-35 of 167<< PreviousNext >>
The columns, articles, message board posts and any other features provided on Yahoo! Finance are provided for personal finance and investment information and are not to be construed as investment advice. Under no circumstances does the information in this content represent a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security. The views and opinions expressed in an article or column are the author's own and not necessarily those of Yahoo! and there is no implied endorsement by Yahoo! of any advice or trading strategy.

Own the Power to Control Your Destiny

Women & Money

With her signature mix of insight and compassion, Suze Orman equips women with the financial knowledge and emotional awareness to overcome the blocks that have kept them from making more out of the money they earn.

Buy "Women & Money" now.

More from Yahoo! Sources

  • CNN Money
  • Consumer Reports
  • Kiplinger
  • The Motley Fool
  • Business Week
  • Wall Street Journal

Historical chart data and daily updates provided by Commodity Systems, Inc. (CSI). International historical chart data and daily updates provided by Morningstar, Inc. Fundamental company data provided by Capital IQ. Quotes and other information supplied by independent providers identified on the Yahoo! Finance partner page. Quotes are updated automatically, but will be turned off after 25 minutes of inactivity. Quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes. Real-Time continuous streaming quotes are available through our premium service. You may turn streaming quotes on or off. All information provided "as is" for informational purposes only, not intended for trading purposes or advice. Neither Yahoo! nor any of independent providers is liable for any informational errors, incompleteness, or delays, or for any actions taken in reliance on information contained herein. By accessing the Yahoo! site, you agree not to redistribute the information found therein.

Yahoo! Answers is provided for informational purposes only, and no Q&A is intended for trading or investing purposes. Yahoo! shall not be responsible or liable for the accuracy, usefulness or availability of any Q&A information, and shall not be responsible or liable for any trading or investment decisions based on such information. View Complete Answers Disclaimer.