Some Active beats Indexing

The key word being "some" here.

If you take the ~10,000 or so mutual funds over time some small percentage will inevitably have great performance. If you sell your index fund and invest in this fund will you be better off some decades out ?


Can they do it for 30 years straight ? Is past prologue ?
 
The key word being "some" here.

If you take the ~10,000 or so mutual funds over time some small percentage will inevitably have great performance. If you sell your index fund and invest in this fund will you be better off some decades out ?


Can they do it for 30 years straight ? Is past prologue ?

Yup. And survivorship bias plays a roll too. "Excluding the funds we closed because of poor performance, our performance was great!"
 
Ugh. No. It doesn't. There are seemingly infinite studies that prove otherwise.
 
Serious question, not a challenge: are we saying that it's hard to beat index funds and that active management is a waste of time/money?
 
Serious question, not a challenge: are we saying that it's hard to beat index funds and that active management is a waste of time/money?

I think it's hard enough to do, and risky enough to try, that most people are just better off indexing. A fund may outperform for a few years, and usually that's when too much "hot money" chases it, the managers can't invest it as well, and the underperformance begins. (Most funds in this situation close too late, if at all.)

I believe it is possible to beat the market regularly. The problem is that many people think they will be the among the few who can. And usually, they lag the market. And the larger the fund, the harder it is to beat the index. Individual investors can do it, but again, to me it's not worth the risk of underperformance.
 
I don't feel like creating an account to read this one article, but as G4G points out - did they account for survivorship bias? That is one of several little 'tricks' used.

You need to start with the funds offered at the beginning of the time period you are analyzing. Not with the ones at the end, and look backwards.

So maybe some managers have been able to provide consistently better returns (seems like Wellesley and Windsor do it in their classes), but is it enough to risk they can continue?

-ERD50
 
American funds has some good active funds but most find the 6% FE load intolerable.

It doesn't surprise me that they would find some data to prove they're(American funds) are better than indexing. I assume their Sr. management is concerned about their future. Many of the assets in AFS went to Vanguard during the financial crisis, now the DOJ wants the advisors to be fiduciaries. Kind of a kick in the teeth. Wonder if buggy whip makers made up studies about horseless carriages.
 
After 35 years of personal investing experience, and lots of different strategies, including self and professionally guided, I am now highly indexed. Whenever I make a change, it is toward more index and minimum fees.
 
I like how they characterize their high expense ratios as low expense ratios. I think they learned a lesson from a popular presidential candidate.
 
After 35 years of personal investing experience, and lots of different strategies, including self and professionally guided, I am now highly indexed. Whenever I make a change, it is toward more index and minimum fees.

I'm generally the same, but only about a third of my portfolio is actually indexed. Still, my overall ER is just 0.16% so that's not bad.
 
DW has an old zombie IRA with American Funds that I haven't gotten around to transferring to Vanguard (some PITA with gold certifications or something). Nice to see that she happened to be in a decent place. I still plan to transfer it one of these days.
 
It's an truism that "some Active funds will beat Indexing"....knowing which funds is the trick.
 
No fund can beat the [-]index[/-] market every single year. And indeed many fund managers are on a hot streak of only a few good years, then flop spectacularly.

That said, the late legendary John Templeton 50-year track record (1954-2004) is 13.8% annualized return, compared to 11.1% for the S&P. Over those 50 years, a $1 invested in the S&P grew to $193, while Templeton returned $641. That's a factor of 3.8X.

And I am sure that Templeton does not beat the market every single year either. Neither does Buffett. It's impossible to beat the market when it was going nuts with dot-com mania and subprime loans. Do you go on margin to beat it?

So, are these MF managers as good as the above investors? It's a question one has to answer himself.
 
Last edited:
Especially from the grave. I think his internet access is probably poor.

Ha

Screw that. If they don't have kick-ass WIFI in the afterlife I'm not going.
 
After 35 years of personal investing experience, and lots of different strategies, including self and professionally guided, I am now highly indexed. Whenever I make a change, it is toward more index and minimum fees.


+1. Aside the Vegas account, it's all indexing for me too. And I wish I had done it 25 years ago when I started investing !
 
American Funds says low fees, manager ownership can save actively managed funds

"On a ten year monthly rolling return, American Funds beat the large cap index 100% of the time."

Article says that funds with low expenses and high management ownership beat indexing.

Nice to see as I've owned select American Funds for 30+ years.


Keeping the new Wife and switching her American funds to Vanguard Index funds as taxes permit as they are a mix of tax deferred and and taxable.

heh heh heh - a multi year operation. :D :cool:
 
The key word being "some" here.

If you take the ~10,000 or so mutual funds over time some small percentage will inevitably have great performance. If you sell your index fund and invest in this fund will you be better off some decades out ?


Can they do it for 30 years straight ? Is past prologue ?
Can you tell me what is “the” index fund to compare against. What is the return that an index investor should have received over the last 30 years? This is my biggest complaint against indexers, they claim that indexing is the way to go, yet really most are just sector bettors who disguise underperformance as “tracking error” or “temporary return divergence” for the style selected at the moment and any over performance as proof of index superiority. To understand what an index investor should be investing in is nigh impossible and allows the “Index” advocates to pick pretty much any style at a point in time to “prove” the point indexing can’t be beat. For proof they look at active funds after the fact then backtrack what the proper “index” to compare to is and post that as proof of index bettering. As to do in advance and there is a refusal. I believe right now there is pretty close to 30,000 index funds and companies that will create an “index” for you if you want to create your own.

Oh let’s do what the world’s biggest index booster, Swedroe says, he tweets every day about how index investing is vastly superior to active investing, sorry he will not post a fund for comparison of returns in advance, though if he wants to disprove an active investing technique he picks an index allocation after the fact, if you want one in advance for results you can expect, you need to pay 1% of your investment balance annually and he will special design a set of index funds for your very own that is sure to outperform anyone that dares think they can go alone in the investing world. Of course that cannot be compared to anyone else’s results because your index funds were specially designed for your factors and you of course are unique just like your investment portfolio. But what the index your should be tracking yourself against will be provided at the end of the year.

Of course Warren Buffet, who got rich by investing also states that index investing is the only way for individual investors to go, but of course all his money is managed ..... actively by him and paid advisors he hires.

Look at Bernstein one year he is advocating 75% stocks then after 2008 he advocates 20 years of cash in the bank, yet he believes in “indexing” and actually has real clients. Amazing....


Most people are index investors and the variations of results is immense. I have one simple goal, I am trying to beat inflation over the long term with my bond income and dividends. If I do that I am happy with my results. I could care less what an “index” investment returns for comparison purposes. I do include index funds in my portfolio at times, primarily either the S&P500 or VTI but I do that for market exposure and to keep from having to follow too many stocks and having to decide which to sell as I use the index to balance off the market exposure.

I think in general the average population does not truly understand what risk is as they believe by being in “indexes” that risk over the long term is eliminated. With the federal reserve now actually targeting stock market returns as a gauge of success in policy making, this has the makings for another disaster and angry crowds of uninformed investors down the road. Deflation seems to be seeping in as a long term fact of life and so therefore income from investing is going to eventually also be effected. For now fixed income just continues to drop in yields, pretty soon you’ll be paid to take a loan and have to pay to “save” with a bank.
 
Can you tell me what is “the” index fund to compare against. What is the return that an index investor should have received over the last 30 years?

There are obviously lots of benchmarks, but many people would point to the CRSP Market Indexes and the Barclays US Aggregate bond index as they are what some popular Vanguard funds track.
 
Can you tell me what is “the” index fund to compare against. What is the return that an index investor should have received over the last 30 years? This is my biggest complaint against indexers, they claim that indexing is the way to go, yet really most are just sector bettors who disguise underperformance as “tracking error” or “temporary return divergence” for the style selected at the moment and any over performance as proof of index superiority. To understand what an index investor should be investing in is nigh impossible and allows the “Index” advocates to pick pretty much any style at a point in time to “prove” the point indexing can’t be beat. For proof they look at active funds after the fact then backtrack what the proper “index” to compare to is and post that as proof of index bettering. As to do in advance and there is a refusal. I believe right now there is pretty close to 30,000 index funds and companies that will create an “index” for you if you want to create your own.

Oh let’s do what the world’s biggest index booster, Swedroe says, he tweets every day about how index investing is vastly superior to active investing, sorry he will not post a fund for comparison of returns in advance, though if he wants to disprove an active investing technique he picks an index allocation after the fact, if you want one in advance for results you can expect, you need to pay 1% of your investment balance annually and he will special design a set of index funds for your very own that is sure to outperform anyone that dares think they can go alone in the investing world. Of course that cannot be compared to anyone else’s results because your index funds were specially designed for your factors and you of course are unique just like your investment portfolio. But what the index your should be tracking yourself against will be provided at the end of the year.

Of course Warren Buffet, who got rich by investing also states that index investing is the only way for individual investors to go, but of course all his money is managed ..... actively by him and paid advisors he hires.

Look at Bernstein one year he is advocating 75% stocks then after 2008 he advocates 20 years of cash in the bank, yet he believes in “indexing” and actually has real clients. Amazing....


Most people are index investors and the variations of results is immense. I have one simple goal, I am trying to beat inflation over the long term with my bond income and dividends. If I do that I am happy with my results. I could care less what an “index” investment returns for comparison purposes. I do include index funds in my portfolio at times, primarily either the S&P500 or VTI but I do that for market exposure and to keep from having to follow too many stocks and having to decide which to sell as I use the index to balance off the market exposure.

I think in general the average population does not truly understand what risk is as they believe by being in “indexes” that risk over the long term is eliminated. With the federal reserve now actually targeting stock market returns as a gauge of success in policy making, this has the makings for another disaster and angry crowds of uninformed investors down the road. Deflation seems to be seeping in as a long term fact of life and so therefore income from investing is going to eventually also be effected. For now fixed income just continues to drop in yields, pretty soon you’ll be paid to take a loan and have to pay to “save” with a bank.

Eh, indexing is the PC thing to safely say nowadays.

Plus, my index beats your index. And then, my rebalancing method is superior to yours.
 
To understand what an index investor should be investing in is nigh impossible and allows the “Index” advocates to pick pretty much any style at a point in time to “prove” the point indexing can’t be beat. For proof they look at active funds after the fact then backtrack what the proper “index” to compare to is and post that as proof of index bettering. As to do in advance and there is a refusal.

I'm not sure what you're suggesting.

The research that shows Indexing beats active management does use historic data. And it does try to match a broad index against the category of stocks manged by the fund.

Is there some other way to benchmark an investment professional?

If we benchmark a small-cap fund against the total market, and the small cap fund outperforms, does that mean the manager added alpha or did he simply ride a small cap rally?
 
Back
Top Bottom