Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 634

Multiple ways to win

The following is an extract from Morningstar's Mark LaMonica and Shani Jayamanne's new book, Invest Your Way.

****

Just 30 kilometres outside of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, sits the sleepy town of Malvern. Population: 3419. The town was best known as the site of the obscure battle of Paoli in the Revolutionary War, when British regulars surprised American militia in a night attack. The town is now known for something else: it is the headquarters of Vanguard, which manages just under A$14.8 trillion in assets. That’s a hard number to wrap your head around. It’s more than five times Australia’s GDP. Vanguard could buy every publicly traded company in Australia — 8.75 times over. Vanguard is the champion of passive investing and has become synonymous with the investing style. As passive investing has gained in popularity Vanguard has become a juggernaut in the investing world.

For years there has been a debate between advocates for active and passive management. It may be too early for either side to declare victory, but the momentum is certainly with passive. Investors will argue passionately about active vs passive. Within active management there will be advocates for certain strategies or approaches.

You won’t get that from us. We don’t think there is only one investment strategy. One of the tenets of this book is that there are multiple ways you can invest to accomplish your goals. We want you to find a strategy that you are comfortable with and believe in, that is right for your goals and your circumstances. That’s why we think these debates about the ‘right’ strategy are of little value.  

However, the debate on actively managed versus passively managed investments does illustrate where so many investors go wrong. In this chapter we dig into the debate a bit further to show that it isn’t what you invest in that matters, it’s how you invest and how you frame success.  

Passive describes behaviour and not investments

Vanguard founder John Bogle described passive investing in a straightforward way. Pick your asset allocation. Gain exposure to each asset class using a broad-based index and then do nothing. The passive part about following Bogle’s investment approach is not the investments in your portfolio — it’s you.

You do nothing and trust that over the long term low fees and better tax outcomes will make a difference. Trust that all this activity that investors go through making decisions on what to buy and sell and when to buy and sell only detracts from returns. Passive investing is based on the notion that investors can’t make good decisions consistently and end up owning the wrong things at the wrong times. Bogle famously summed up passive investing like this: ‘Don’t look for the needle in the haystack. Just buy the haystack.’

This is a passive strategy. No-one is picking individual investments that go into a fund or ETF, and the end investor is not picking what to buy and sell or when to buy and sell those products.

This compelling investment approach has attracted legions of investors to the passive camp. The problem is that somewhere along the way people lost sight of why passive investing works. There’s a difference between passive investing and using passive investment products to actively invest.

Buying and selling different passive investments is not passive investing. Stretching the boundaries of what is considered passive to narrower and narrower indexes that promise exposure to a compelling theme is not passive investing. Investing in products that follow an index with high turnover through constant rebalancing is not passive investing. Remember that the passive part of passive investing is not the products you buy. You are passive. 

It isn’t what you invest in but how you invest that matters

John Bogle was a big critic of ETFs when they came out. To Bogle an ETF didn’t make any sense. If you are investing passively, why do you need an investment that you could easily trade. Bogle understood the downside of poor investor behaviour and was worried that the biggest selling point for an ETF — the fact that they are easy to trade — would lead to more trading. He was right. A study conducted by UTS in 2008 explored whether individual investors benefit from the use of ETFs. The study found that portfolio performance when investors used ETFs was lower than when they didn’t.

It wasn’t a small loss. The study found that ETF portfolios underperformed non-ETF portfolios by 2.3 per cent a year. In theory this makes no sense. The difference in returns is the result of buying and selling ETFs at the wrong time rather than choosing the wrong ETFs. A critical finding in the study was that ETF portfolios did outperform if the investor bought the investment and held it for the long term. Is there an inherent problem with ETFs? Of course not. The problem is us.

There is a difference between investments and investing. An investment is something you buy and sell, like an ETF or a share. Investing is a process. This book is about the process of investing. Most books about investing are about how to find the right investment to buy. We think the process is far more important. The success of any process comes down to a few common traits: patience, resilience and consistency lead the list. Investing is no different.

The inconvenient truth about investing is that our own behaviour is having a negative impact on our results. The good thing is that your behaviour is completely in your control. If you avoid mistakes, you will get better results than everyone else. Stop following the approach taken by many professional investors who frequently trade. They do that because if they have short-term underperformance investors will pull money out, which will hurt their livelihood. You have none of those pressures. The only thing trading too much is doing for you is hurting your returns.

Trading too much isn’t just an issue with investors who pick passive investments. Active fund and ETF investors tell themselves that they are letting professionals manage their money because they think it’s too hard to pick individual shares. Yet they constantly switch which professionals get to manage their money based on short-term performance.

Passive fund and ETF investors can be holier than thou. They quote John Bogle constantly, yet they don’t follow his advice. They switch passive investments frequently based on their perception of what will do well based on short-term market conditions. They buy high and sell low. They decide anything tracking an index is passive, even if that index has 10 shares that are selected fortnightly using a Ouija board.

Both active and passive investing can work, but we don’t think active investment works in the way it is practised by many fund managers. We also don’t think passive investing works in the way most end investors practise it.

Our point is simple and is repeated ad nauseam throughout the book. In investing we have met the enemy . . . and it is us. Changing your behaviour is hard. It means ignoring articulate people making compelling cases for and against investments. It requires immunity to highly paid and skilled marketers. It means dulling your emotions as your portfolio climbs and falls.

One of our favourite things about investing is that it is all about us. It’s us against the world. Maybe the playing field isn’t level and professionals have more time and resources than we do. Maybe they know more than we do. They may be far smarter than we are. Yet we retain control over our outcomes. It comes down to the basics: having a goal and a long-term strategy. Most of all, it means resisting the temptation to constantly chase returns.

****

This is an extract from Invest Your Way, a personal finance book that combines foundational investing theory, real-world application and our own experiences. It is designed to help readers create a financial plan and investing strategy that is tailored to their unique goals and circumstances.

Purchase from Amazon: https://amzn.to/46qMXAu

Purchase from Booktopia: https://booktopia.kh4ffx.net/55zd5N

 

Mark Lamonica, CFA, is Director of Personal Finance at Morningstar Australia.

Shani Jayamanne is Director, Investment Specialist, at Morningstar Australia.

 

  •   22 October 2025
  • 8
  •      
  •   
8 Comments
Lauchlan Mackinnon
October 23, 2025

Hi Mark and Shani,

Thanks again for the book. :)

You address an important topic, but the article raises some questions for me.

IS OVERTRADING OF ETFs REALLY A PROBLEM ... AND IF SO HOW BAD IS IT?

On this particular point - ETFs vs active investing - you write - "A study conducted by UTS in 2008 explored whether individual investors benefit from the use of ETFs. The study found that portfolio performance when investors used ETFs was lower than when they didn’t."

2008 is a long time ago ... by my math, around 17 years ago. I expect people's knowledge and behaviours around ETFs have changed a lot during that time. Certainly, my understanding of investing has changed *a lot* in those 17 years. It's also just one study - which risks the appearance of you cherry picking or window shopping for something that gives you the result you want, rather than identifying a widely recognised hard trend in the data.

The premise of your article is that for people buying ETFs:

(1) they are overtrading, and
(2) this overtrading results in a lower performance outcome, and
(3) in the case of the one study you cite, from 17 years ago, this performance outcome is worse than for non-ETF investing.

I don't see that - in this article - you've marshalled the evidence to show that overtrading ETFs is a problem today, or show us the extent of how bad the problem is.

And if ETFs are being overtraded, who is doing it?

Is it 5% of ETF investors, or 10%, or 40%, or 65%?
Is it primarily new ETF investors, or is it experienced investors who have been at investing for longer than 10 years as well?
Is there a generational difference (is it younger generations doing this overtrading, or boomers)?
Is it tied to one investing philosophy or another, or to particular platforms for trading, or platforms (YouTube, TikTok) that they get their investing information from?
Does this behaviour relate more to particular types of ETFs e.g. thematic vs broad based index ETFs?
Is there any other pattern for who is doing this kind of overtrading (gender, political orientation, profession, etc)?

WHAT I WOULD HAVE EXPECTED ...

Without seeing any data, I would have imagined that there is a whole spectrum of investors, from passive "buy and hold" investors to actual day traders.

I also would have anticipated that for BOTH ETF investors and for active stock pickers we would find people at various points in that behavioural spectrum.

I think the problem you are wanting to address here is how poor behavioural traits impact investing outcomes. But personally I don't see why it would be inherently worse for ETF investors - if anything I would have thought ETFs would tend to dispose people more towards just leaving it and let its index rise (usually) or fall (occasionally) with the market.

CAN ARBITRAGE AND TRADING CAN BE OK?

I also personally don't have a philosophical concern with people doing some trading of ETFs, if it's around some form of enlightened arbitrage, and they know what they are doing.

For example, a 60/40 portfolio with rebalancing arbitrages between the (historically) non-correlated asset classes of equities and bonds, each held (for example) in ETFs. If equities are up and bonds are down, rebalancing reallocates the high performing asset towards buying more of the low performing asset. Vice versa if bonds are relatively up and equities are down. It's arbitrage between uncorrelated asset classes.

You can do arbitrage with other non-correlated asset classes as well - for example gold vs equities (again, for example, both held as ETFs). If gold is up while equities are down, you could sell gold and buy equities, or when gold is down and equities are up do the opposite. It's essentially rebalancing those asset classes in your portfolio ... without calling it that.

You could do arbitrage around market patterns. If you believe an asset or asset class is ridiculously overpriced by the market, you can sell off some of it, and then have a pool of money to use later when the market is down. This is arbitrage around pricing ... Jim Cramer advocates for this on his Mad Money on CNBC (he calls it "sell into strength," and also recommends separating the selling from the buying by at least six months).

You had a podcast recently with Morningstar investment manager Bianca Rose, who discussed how Morningstar do arbitrage around timing: that the market's processing of information may be temporarily in disequilibrium and undervaluing or overvaluing certain assets or asset classes, and Morningstar take advantage of that arbitrage as a trading (rather than buy and hold investing) activity.

You could also do in principle do arbitrage between high performing asset classes or assets and low performing asset classes or assets if you had a strong reason to believe they would alternate. For example someone might conclude that Australian banks seem historically overvalued at the moment - if they hold some bank stocks and see another asset class they believe is currently undervalued and will rise in the future, they could do arbitrage between these asset classes and then, when the reverse is true, do the opposite transactions.

Warren Buffet was basically doing arbitrage around valuation, picking undervalued quality stocks that will appreciate over time. It's arbitrage with a long time horizon.

I think we could make a case for a certain level of trading, alongside investing, if there's a strong arbitrage rationale for it and the investor knows the impacts and risks and dynamics of doing it - and can therefore do it responsibly.

Of course, I don't think that kind of arbitrage is necessarily easy. It requires some knowledge and judgement, otherwise things could go wrong and you get worse outcomes than just buying and holding. It's a case for use with care, "at your own risk."

Managing those kinds of choices about investing strategy and behaviour is, of course, is what you and Morningstar help people with.

7
Kevin
October 24, 2025

So what would your version of reality be Mark,everybody has a different version.You think for yourself,or join in with the groupthink rubbish and the conspiracy theories.

When you are presented with all the rubbish and the facts always go with the facts,you will be one of the very few people that doesl.

The time machines,get everything precisely wrong etc etc.Our own time machine believer will be rushing to the scene of the emergency now,in his time machine. The undeniable facts are $2160 to buy the minimum 400 shares in CBA .Leave it alone to compound with the DRP and you now have 2670 ( probably closer to 2673 ) shares in CBA.As undeniable as that is,and the facts are everywhere to prove it right,what do you want to see.What is your version of reality. Are you looking for people to agree with you and tell you what you want to hear.

As crazy as the time machine people are,and they are. They will continue with their delusions and nonsense until the day they die.Denial to the grave.

As crazy as they are the ones that have gone right down the rabbit hole are brilliant for amusement.Microsoft investor relations ( + other US companies) have calculators. Type in 100 shares on 4Jan 2018, they cost US $8711. As of yesterday they were worth $52,056. Part of the magnificent 7.

The crazies are always crazy,they always get dumber,every day of their lives.Microsift has been a great company to own over a long term,and it has had some flat spots,that's why Bill Gates was the richest man in the world.

Or was Bill Gates inventing vaccines,with a plan to control the world,with the little nañobots in ,to kill people, or control them.Who knows what goes on in the minds of the crazy people.

There is you life ahead .Ask the crazies,or find out what is real and find out the facts.

Your next increase in CBA shareholding will be at the end of March next year. You'll just have to think for yourself.

CBA investor relations will have the facts there to work out for yourself.Microsoft calculator goes back to mid 1990 I think.

Long live the crazies and their fact free world I say.They really make investing fun and show you exactly how money makes fools of people

3
Dudley
October 26, 2025


"Microsoft investor relations ( + other US companies) have calculators. Type in 100 shares on 4Jan 2018, they cost US $8711. As of yesterday they were worth $52,056. Part of the magnificent 7."

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/investor/stock-calc

I selected:
Investment Month: December
Investment Day: 31
Investment Year: 2025 (does not allow selecting later years)

Only shows:
Investment Date: Oct 24, 2025
Current Value: $52,361.00

Which version of stock-calc shows:
Future Date: Oct 24, 2045
Future Value : $x.xx?

Mark Hayden
October 23, 2025

Some good points are made in this article and worth consideration. However my focus is on the difference between Long-term investors and Short-term investors. Long-term investors need to be patient at times - but not passive because at times a switch is needed. The article encourages further thought about Active vs Passive and Professional vs DIY.

2
michael
October 26, 2025

Tried to buy, but Booktopia is absurd. so many repetitive fields to fill, & then it doesn't work.

Steve
October 26, 2025

To me, and this is an Australia focused comment, the issue is simple. I have a SMSF as well as individual investments. In either case, ETF's simplicity is key, or more to the point, the onerous paperwork around active funds (proof of ID etc) are showstoppers. Once you have a trading account set up, ETF's can be bought/sold with ease. I'm not a big trader but have adjusted my allocation over time as education/situations change, so the ability to adjust the portfolio without onerous paperwork is a big tick from me. I have more international exposure, less overall weighting to equities with the current frothy market and I may be a sucker for marketing but I feel simple metrics like quality weightings (or dump the junk) make sense, so I'm happy to use ETF's with metrics which are not dissimilar to what active traders would claim to give them an edge anyway. The big gap in ETF's is cash. The offered returns are generally poor and you have buy/sell brokerage as well, so no cash ETF's in my portfolio.

John
October 29, 2025

Great work Mark! the "like" functionality is great.
Thanks.

Ramon Vasquez
November 08, 2025

Hello ,
has anyone researched the notion that an equal-weighted portfolio of Etfs might outperform a given mixed bag of ETFs as a portfolio ?

Take care , Ramon .

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Are markets broken?

The challenges of building a lazy portfolio

$100 billion! Five reasons investors are flocking to ETFs

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

The growing debt burden of retiring Australians

More Australians are retiring with larger mortgages and less super. This paper explores how unlocking housing wealth can help ease the nation’s growing retirement cashflow crunch.

Four best-ever charts for every adviser and investor

In any year since 1875, if you'd invested in the ASX, turned away and come back eight years later, your average return would be 120% with no negative periods. It's just one of the must-have stats that all investors should know.

LICs vs ETFs – which perform best?

With investor sentiment shifting and ETFs surging ahead, we pit Australia’s biggest LICs against their ETF rivals to see which delivers better returns over the short and long term. The results are revealing.

Family trusts: Are they still worth it?

Family trusts remain a core structure for wealth management, but rising ATO scrutiny and complex compliance raise questions about their ongoing value. Are the benefits still worth the administrative burden?

13 ways to save money on your tax - legally

Thoughtful tax planning is a cornerstone of successful investing. This highlights 13 legal ways that you can reduce tax, preserve capital, and enhance long-term wealth across super, property, and shares.

Our experts on Jim Chalmers' super tax backdown

Labor has caved to pressure on key parts of the Division 296 tax, though also added some important nuances. Here are six experts’ views on the changes and what they mean for you.        

Latest Updates

Investment strategies

Warren Buffett's final lesson

I’ve long seen Buffett as a flawed genius: a great investor though a man with shortcomings. With his final letter to Berkshire shareholders, I reflect on how my views of Buffett have changed and the legacy he leaves.

Property

The housing market is heading into choppy waters

With rates on hold and housing demand strong, lenders are pushing boundaries. As risky products return, borrowers should be cautious and not let clever marketing cloud their judgment.

Investment strategies

Dumb money triumphant

One sign of today's speculative market froth is that retail investors are winning, and winning big. It bears remarkable similarities to 1929 and 1999, and this story may not have a happy ending either.

Retirement

Can the sequence of investment returns ruin retirement?

Retirement outcomes aren’t just about average returns. The sequence of returns, good or bad, can dramatically shape how long super lasts. Understanding sequencing risk is key to managing longevity risk.

Strategy

How AI is changing search and what it means for Google

The use of generative AI in search is on the rise and has profound implications for search engines like Google, as well as for companies that rely on clicks to make sales.

Survey: Getting to know you, and your thoughts on Firstlinks

We’d love to get to know more about our readers, hear your thoughts on Firstlinks and see how we can make it better for you. Please complete this short survey, and have your say.

Investment strategies

A framework for understanding the AI investment boom

Technological leaps - from air travel to computing - has enriched society but squeezed margins. As AI accelerates, investors must separate progress from profitability to avoid repeating past mistakes.

Economy

The mystery behind modern spending choices

Today’s consumers are walking contradictions - craving simplicity in an age of abundance, privacy in a public world. These tensions tell a bigger story about what people truly value and why.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.