# Listed funds vs. managed funds?



## DionM (20 November 2007)

I have a few listed funds (AGF, INES etc) in my portfolio.  They've done reasonably well, though I only have small holdings of each.

I see that listing funds on the ASX is somewhat common, I'm wondering if they offer a better option than a traditional managed fund?  I suppose you have to "buy" more shares (+brokerage) as opposed to tipping in say $500 each month, but then you don't pay management fees directly and it's easy to reduce your position as well (sell shares).

Anyone got any thoughts on the comparison between listed funds and managed funds?  Is there space for "diversity" by having both listed funds and managed funds in one's portfolio?


----------



## intheblack (27 November 2007)

*Re: Listed funds vs managed funds?*

Listed funds tend to have lower fees than unlisted funds: for example, Argo Investments (ASX: ARG) has a management fee or around 0.15% p.a., compared to the 1-2% p.a. charged by many unlisted funds.

However, the daily price of a listed fund is determined by the whim of the market (which may result in it being priced at a discount or premium to NAV), whereas unlisted funds can always be traded at the NAV (+/- the buy/sell spread).

Also, listed funds generally pay tax on their income and attach franking credits to their dividends, whereas many unlisted funds pay no tax and therefore distribute no franking credits.


----------

