Is the historical performance of the fund as high as possible?
The higher the historical performance of the fund, the better, because the higher the historical performance means that the fund has helped investors earn more money in the past, which means that the fund itself is good, which means that the fund manager's investment direction is right, which means that the company's performance is good. In the future, the fund will also rise with a high probability, and the history is often strikingly similar. Perhaps the future fund will not only catch up with historical performance, but also catch up with historical performance.
The fund has a high historical performance and strong earning ability, but we should also pay attention to whether the past historical industries of the fund should be stable and have strong consistency. The income of the fund is unstable, which shows that the performance of the fund lacks consistency. The lack of consistency in fund performance reflects the lack of effectiveness of fund managers' investment strategies.
The historical performance of the fund is the result of the creation of the fund and time, and it is tangible evidence. When you plan to buy a fund, you must look at its historical performance, not just the results, but also through its historical performance in the past three years or even 10 years.
However, it should be noted that the historical performance of the fund can only represent the past performance, not the future performance, and is for reference only. Investors can comprehensively analyze the quality of the fund from many factors such as fund manager, maximum withdrawal, Sharp ratio, fund location and so on.
Finally, I would like to remind you that buying funds is not the most important thing. Whether the current net value of the fund is high or not is not the standard to judge whether the fund is good or not. The historical performance of the fund is good, the scale is appropriate, and how the net value can rise is the most important thing to judge.