Do Mutual Fund Managers Matter?

By ColumnsFOXBusiness

In the mutual fund industry, it's a debate that will never go away: Is it worth paying fund managers to monitor investments? After all, active funds are more expensive, and recent performance indicates it has been a difficult few years for active management.

According to the S&P Indices Versus Active Funds Scorecard [SPIVA], more than 84% of actively managed U.S. equity funds underperformed their S&P benchmark last year, and an average of 56.6% have underperformed over the past five years.

Continue Reading Below

The S&P 1500 index, which combines the S&P 500, the S&P MidCap 400 and the S&P SmallCap 600, returned approximately 1.8% last year, and although that’s a modest gain, the index handily beat actively-managed U.S. stock funds. U.S. stock funds lost an average of 2.6% in 2011.

On average, index (passive) funds typically have lower fees than active alternatives. The expense ratios of actively managed funds range from approximately 0.5% to 2%, compared to index funds which charge fees as low as 0.05%.

The reason for an active fund’s higher fee is the added cost of a manager. The manager doesn’t track an index, but aims to beat it by carefully selecting stocks. so if you’re going to pay a higher fee, your fund manager should be worth the extra cost. But finding a manager with great potential is extremely difficult, and according to Michael S. Falk of the Focus Consulting Group, it’s close to impossible.

“Picking fund managers who have a great track record is child’s play,” said Falk. “But picking a manager before they do a good job is very, very difficult.”

So is the added price worth it? Not according to the recent results. SPIVA reports that 81.3% of large-cap funds, 67.4% of mid-cap funds and 85.8% of small-cap funds failed to beat the S&P 500, S&P MidCap 400 and S&P SmallCap 600 over the past year. And last year wasn’t a fluke; approximately 69% of large-cap funds, 70% of mid-cap funds and 51% small-cap funds underperformed their respective benchmarks over the previous three years.

But maybe it’s not a mutually exclusive deal. According to Falk, it’s smart to hold active and passive funds in an investment portfolio. “It’s important to find a balance between index and active funds,” said Falk. “It’s smart to allocate 40%, 50% or 60% of an investor’s portfolio to active funds and let index funds occupy the rest.”

So how should you identify attractive active funds?

“It’s a constant battle,” said Falk. “Investors need to figure out who has low fees, who’s taking on new clients and what managers will add value.”

What do you think?

Click the button below to comment on this article.