I havent got the exact figures to hand buyt the three largest capitalised shares still take up 25% of the All Share index.
How?
Forget it. Just look how well it tracks or performs. It will either track or it wont track. In fact all trackers dont track. I was also referring to comparing charges when looking at managed funds. Too many people get tied up in knots comparing charges whereas they should be look at performance after charges.
UTs didnt exist 90 years ago.
The nearest thing to a UT is an IT and the oldest is, I think, Foreign & Colonial. It seems to have done OK.
Not this again. See my reply to your other post. I am NOT saying all managed funds are better, but if you reduce them to the ones that are likely to be be chosen, then that is a different matter.
Eh? 'Of the moment'. Thats not for me!
Agreed, but only to some extent. The managers I mentiuoned didnt particpate in the dot.com craze, so they did OK> If you search this group to 1995 (ish) you will see I have used exactly the same arguments now as I did then, and named the same fund managers.
In fact there is one concept I mentioned then which (I havent mentioned so far. Its my own index tracker. Its aclled the JBFT98 and consists of the first 98 companies I can think of at any given time. It makes as much sense to invest in that as it does to invest in an index tracker.