• davel
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    They are different, though moreso historically than currently.

    Historically, mutual funds were actively managed, trying to beat the market, which they 1) fail to do and 2) incur high fees; and ETFs were passively managed index funds which didn’t try to beat the market and have comparatively low fees. Nowadays though, there are index mutual funds and actively managed ETFs, so things are blurrier.

    There are differences in tax implications as well, though these days maybe it’s less cut & dry; I’m no expert: https://www.fidelity.com/learning-center/investment-products/etf/etfs-tax-efficiency

    • Chump [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      So, look, I’m being a bit hyperbolic here. But I think the opening of your provided source basically goes up the ghost: even as far as the IRS is concerned, they’re basically the same thing. And even then the edge cases are so edge that they’d get thrown out of a bdsm munch for being too horny.

      Yes, some mutual funds have tried to beat the ‘market’ (typically S&P500 or sometimes the Dow) but plenty of regular stocks try to beat the market and you don’t hear ‘stocks’ being lambasted in the same way the ETFs are

      • Chump [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s profiting off of your own exploitation all the way down, but at least with a low cost etf some fund manager isn’t getting quite as large a slice of your work