PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

The perf number is wrong - FGLGX is better than QQQ?

ZW
Zheng Wang22 августа 25 г. | Опубликовано в Общая
5 комментариев
3 ответа

Сортировать по

DS
Dmitry Shevchenko22 августа 25 г.

A lot depends on how you define “better”.

That said, if there’s anything that seems immediately off, let us know


ZW
Zheng Wang25 августа 25 г.
FGLGX‘s performance number on this website is incorrect. It is way higher than it actually is.

ZW
Zheng Wang25 августа 25 г.
For example, 5-year performance is 152% here whereas its actual number is 72%.

DS

I just did a quick cross-check with data on Yahoo Finance. The adjusted closing price on Aug 25, 2020, was 10.14, and the most recent adjusted close is 25.65, so roughly a 153% increase over the 5-year period. That matches the values we are showing pretty close.

How did you get 72%?


ZW
Zheng Wang25 августа 25 г.

I was checking it with Google Finance. It somehow has a different price and performance.

I checked Fidelity website. Their performance number aligns with yours. So Google Finance seem to be incorrect.


DS

Yeah, that makes sense, Google Finance is unfortunately not a reliable source. Their data is often missing distributions and split adjustments, or pulled from inconsistent feeds. So their performance numbers can look completely off.

Fidelity’s site and Yahoo Finance both use properly adjusted prices, which is why they line up with what we show. In general, GF is fine for a quick glance, but for anything performance-related it’s mostly garbage.

ZW
Zheng Wang

-7 мес.

Thanks - good to know that.

JC
Johnson C06 ноября 25 г.
Thanks Dmitry for pointing out Google short coming


Категория
Общая

Просмотры
405