過去30年毎月5万円投資で2.8億円！？新NISAで投資できるNASDAQ100投信徹底比較！

Finance-focused summary (Nasdaq 100 / Japan NISA index funds)

Core investment idea + key simulation numbers

• Monthly investment: ¥50,000/month for 30 years
• Principal: ¥18,000,000
• Simulated future value using Nasdaq-100 (“NASDA100”): about ¥280,000,000 (also stated as ~¥282.7M)
• Disclaimer: This simulation is based on past data and does not guarantee future returns.

What “Nasdaq 100 (NASD/ND100)” means in this video

• Index description: Top 100 US non-financial companies listed on Nasdaq.
• Constituents mentioned (examples): NVIDIA (NVD), Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Meta, Alphabet, Broadcom, Tesla.
• Compared with S&P 500: S&P is described as more “mainstream/established,” while Nasdaq-100 can include growth companies earlier.

Why Nasdaq-100 is framed as especially attractive now (3 reasons)

1. New / low-cost Japan index funds tied to Nasdaq-100

   • SBI Securities fund introduced: SBI NASDAQ 100 Index Fund (subtitle shortened to “SBI NASDA100 Index Fund”).
   • Trust fee (expense ratio) noted: 0.1958%/yr (presented as among the lowest in Japan).
   • Other competitors mentioned (trust fees):
     • Rakuten Plus Nasdaq 100 Index Fund: 0.198%
     • SBI/Schedule or EMAX Nasdaq 100 (two funds referenced): 0.2035%
     • IRenex / iF renext Nasdaq 100: 0.495% (higher)

2. Index inclusion mechanics change: “Fast Entry”

   • The video claims Nasdaq-100 now has “Fast Entry” to allow faster inclusion of large newly listed firms.
   • Fast Entry criteria described: issuer must be within the top 40 by market cap of the current Nasdaq-100.
   • Timing described: value determined in the 7th trading session; potential adoption in the 15th trading session.
   • Framing: designed to capture value from major future IPOs sooner.

3. Big potential IPO candidates tied to AI/space are discussed

   • Mentioned as likely/rumored public companies:
     • OpenAI: estimated IPO size ~$1T → ~¥150T (using ¥150/$)
     • Anthropic: estimated ~$380B → ~¥57T (subtitles used “two yen units”)
     • SpaceX: target ~$1.75T → ~¥262T
   • Total estimated market value mentioned: ~¥470T (~80% of Japan’s GDP, per the speaker’s aggregation).
   • Caution/disclaimer embedded: valuations and IPO timing/eligibility for Nasdaq-100 inclusion are not confirmed.

Historical example used to illustrate inclusion impact

• Tesla example (inclusion timing):
  • Nasdaq-100 inclusion: July 15, 2013
  • S&P 500 inclusion: Dec 21, 2020
  • Price example: ~$8.50 (July 2013 adjusted basis) rising to ~$216 after S&P inclusion; described as ~25x increase over “a few months” (subtitle wording is inconsistent, but the magnitude claim is clear).

---

Methodology / comparison framework used in the video

• Compare Japan-listed Nasdaq-100 index funds on:
  • Trust fees (expense ratios)
  • Securities company point rewards
  • “Pure” performance tracking vs the index (tracking quality implied)
  • Returns / risk / Sharpe ratio over 1, 3, 5 years
• Important clarification about performance metrics:
  • The video states displayed fund returns are net of trust fees (based on NAV after costs), not “before costs.”

---

Fund candidates mentioned (Japan-listed)

Five funds compared (names abbreviated in subtitles):

1. SBI NASDAQ 100 Index Fund — 0.1958%
2. Rakuten Plus Nasdaq 100 Index Fund — 0.198%
3. Schedule / “E-MAXIS” Nasdaq 100 Index Fund — 0.2035%
4. IR Next Nasdaq 100 — 0.495%
5. EAX / “E-mathis” (another Nasdaq-100 variant mentioned near the 0.2035% group; exact naming is slightly garbled)

Also mentioned: eligibility/limitations for regular investment plans (“定期積立”) and tax-advantaged purchase allowances (“investment contribution program”), with some funds excluded for 2026 and meeting criteria starting later (from 2027).

---

Key results: fee impact and performance metrics

4) Fee difference can create ~¥15.94M gap (theoretical)

• Scenario: ¥50,000/month for 30 years
• If expense ratio 0.1958% → projected value ~¥271.72M
• If expense ratio 0.495% → projected value ~¥255.79M
• Difference: about ¥15.94M
• Speaker’s attribution: a 0.3% fee difference, assuming ~15% annual return.
• Disclaimer: framed explicitly as a theoretical simulation, not guaranteed.

5) Actual performance (returns, volatility, Sharpe) — “all similar, but higher-cost slightly worse”

Past 1 year:

• Sharpe best: ~2.69, tied for first with Rakuten Plus and Schedule
• E-MAX: ~2.68
• IreNex: ~2.67
• Risk (volatility): stated as ~16.37% for the group
• Note: the video claims IreNex underperformed ~0.4%–0.5% vs lower-cost funds (consistent with a fee-gap narrative, though not exclusively explained by fees).
• Caution: performance differences may reflect trading timing, flows, benchmark tracking/correlation, and other costs, not only fees.

Past 3 years:

• Rakuten Plus: no 3-year data (per subtitles)
• Sharpe: EMAX ~1.6, IreNex ~1.59
• Risk: ~20.35% (stated same across funds)
• Return leader details are less precise, but the theme remains: low-cost funds slightly better.

Past 5 years:

• Only IreNex and EAX comparable (Rakuten Plus and another name not established long enough; names garbled)
• Sharpe: EAX ~1.17, IreNex ~1.16
• Risk: ~21.64% (same)
• Narrative: low-cost advantage persists, but differences are small since all track the same index.

---

6) Point rewards: which broker can improve “effective cost”

Rakuten Securities

• Point program described for Rakuten Plus Nasdaq 100
• Annual point return: 0.05%
• Claim: Rakuten Plus series eligible; Dates and EMAX not eligible (as per subtitles)
• Net effect described: “another 0.05%” effectively improving economics vs trust fee.
• Concrete statement: Rakuten Plus reported as ~0.198% trust fee; points may reduce effective cost.

SBI Securities

• SBI has a “mileage”/points promo:
  • 0.05% per year mentioned (similar structure to EMAX)
  • IreNex stands out with 0.1% per year new deposit reward
• Simple subtraction example (approximate effective rates):
  • SBI customers: 0.1458%
  • Schedule & E-machines: 0.1535%
  • IreNex: ~0.395%
• Caution: point systems may change; “simple tests” may not reflect future reality.

Broker-based recommendation tone

• For Rakuten users: choose Rakuten Plus (cost-effective with points).
• For SBI users: speaker suggests SBI’s “SBI Summer”-like option is promising for new purchases; existing holdings don’t require urgent selling.

---

Explicit decision criteria / recommendations (plus cautions)

How to choose (as framed)

• If buying through Rakuten Securities:
  • Rakuten Plus is presented as most cost-effective (fees + points).
• If buying through SBI Securities:
  • Wait/review for SBI’s newly launched fund due to limited history; check tracking error/benchmarking.
• For investors using regular investment plans (定期積立):
  • IreNex is highlighted as the only one currently supporting regular investment plans (per subtitles).
• For growth-investment framework / longer holding allowances:
  • Some funds may qualify from 2027 onward (e.g., IreNex and possibly EMAX depending on application timing).

Should you sell current holdings?

• No rush to sell: low-cost differences among funds are described as “very small,” especially between cheaper options.
• Practical approach suggested: keep current holdings and switch to lower-cost funds for future purchases.

Risk management warning (important)

• Nasdaq-100 is described as not suitable for everyone due to:
  • High return potential but large price fluctuations
  • Possibility of market crashes
• Key behavioral/portfolio questions posed:
  • Whether Nasdaq-100 should be core vs satellite
  • What % of total assets to allocate
  • Ability to hold through downturns

Disclaimers

• Simulation is not guaranteed and is historical.
• No explicit “not financial advice” wording appears in the provided subtitles.

---

Tickers / assets / instruments mentioned

• Index: Nasdaq-100
• Stocks (examples): NVIDIA (NVD), Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Meta, Alphabet, Broadcom, Tesla
• Benchmark mentioned: S&P 500
• Rumored IPO companies: OpenAI, Anthropic, SpaceX
• Currencies / rates used in examples:
  • ¥150 per $ (OpenAI estimate)
  • “two yen units” used for other IPO conversions (exact rate unclear due to subtitles)

---

Presenters / sources

• Presenter: “Gako” (also referred to alongside mentions of book announcements)
• Named third-party / sources referenced:
  • SBI Securities
  • Reuters (timing/intent behind index rule changes)
  • “Diver Set” (official simulation source mentioned)
  • Rakuten Securities (platform returns/point program mentioned)