What is this, the gloat post? I'm mostly out of all the actively managed funds I was in, but my 401k has ERs of nothing less than 0.30%, so I'd hazard a guess that I'd fall somewhere between 0.20 and 0.3%. But I was intrigued by this post
nisiprius wrote: I had been hanging on to Pax World Balanced Fund, a rather small holding--more than a token, but not a big percentage of my portfolio. It is an actively managed fund, and at that time, it had an expense ratio of about 1%. I justified it by noting that its past performance had been slightly higher than Vanguard Balanced Index, although it was obvious from its holdings why that was--more risk. Nothing extreme or unreasonable, good stuff, international, weighted toward midcaps. But some mischievous poster suggested calculating the absolute dollar number of expenses for each fund we held, and when I did, I was surprised to find that this small holding was costing me more total dollars than all of my Vanguard fund combined. I didn't do anything about it right away, but it ate at me, and eventually I dumped it.
I still have a couple of funds at Putnam (International Value Fund and the Income Fund) I was all set to transfer them until I noticed that both are beating Vanguard Total Int'l and Total Bond. So I thought I would let them ride until the first sign that they aren't anymore. Like nisiprius, they do not represent a large portion of my portfolio but if the performance is better, the performance is better, right?
Mainly I'm not thrilled with Total Bond fund because of my preference for shorter term bonds right now.