why so complicated...my 1st pass simplistic approach...

fees paid on investment, say $10k, assume price/value no change throughout
(a) $10000 * 0.2% = $20
(b) $10000 * 0.3% = $30

underlying dividend yield is the same, say 2%, so dividend taxed
(a) $10000 * 2% * 30% = $60
(b) $10000 * 2% * 15% = $30

so clearly (b) is better than (a), since overall less money taken. what can make this false is dividend yield so low that wht has minimal effect, this is around 0.6-0.7%

next question is distributing or accumulating? if wanna stay invested, distributed funds may be insufficient to buy whole units, therefore have to keep and wait. so imho, if prices are going up then accumulating, if going down then distributing.

There will be slippages, different spreads, different trading hours hence different closing prices... but the're tracking the same index hence if everything being the same, it must be the same... ± some errors here and there. Unless invesco or ishare quietly songlap somewhere... but you're right I don't know for sure.

Reminds me of a story...my friend was doing a project in Singapore, and the manager asked for an estimate. So friend gave sgd xx.x mil. Manager was not happy...he wants it in 4 decimals...because in Singapore schools all trained to do 4 decimals... lol

Here, I just wanna know which one is better, I don't need to know by how much. So a big picture approach is to start with a simple model, then test & challenge it to failure... if the conclusion don't change we have our winner.

This post has been edited by dwRK: Nov 21 2019, 06:13 AM

blue is eqqu, red is qqq...generally eqqu has higher price than qqq but not always...right now eqqu is only 1 cent cheaper


so if expense is priced into the etf...i don't see any divergence...therefore wht on dividend looks to be the deciding factor since these are distributing

This post has been edited by dwRK: Nov 21 2019, 12:54 AM

this is eqqu-qqq



eqqu generally about 0.6 cents more but it makes no difference since when you sell you get the same back...there is also no gradual drifting downwards since 2015 to indicate value erosion due to higher fees

Edit: the big spikes probably due to big movements after London close.

This post has been edited by dwRK: Nov 23 2019, 07:26 AM

My guess is in USA, wht can range from 0/15/20/30%...so it's impossible to come up with a fair reinvestment / pricing.

Non-US domiciled on the other hand most likely have a tax treaty with the US and tax system that results in flat rate for everyone, hence able to adjust the price fairly. They have both distributing and accumulating.

This post has been edited by dwRK: Nov 21 2019, 11:43 AM