The main reason why as professional money managers EW > MW is because EW is a model. It can be back-tested more accurately and forecasted more accurately than MW. The biggest part of our job is accuracy, not "maybe" or "maybe not" outperformance.
Please note that the expense ratio of RSP has not always been 0.20% as stated in the article. The fund launced in 2003 and didn't reduce it's expense ratio from 0.40% to 0.20% until June 2017.
Thank you for that helpful bit of information.
Andy, why is it easier to model EW than MW? Seems like it should be easy to model either one.
The main reason why as professional money managers EW > MW is because EW is a model. It can be back-tested more accurately and forecasted more accurately than MW. The biggest part of our job is accuracy, not "maybe" or "maybe not" outperformance.
Please note that the expense ratio of RSP has not always been 0.20% as stated in the article. The fund launced in 2003 and didn't reduce it's expense ratio from 0.40% to 0.20% until June 2017.