Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 39

Index versus active – our readers reprise

Last week’s article on index versus active portfolio management drew many comments, including on the website, by email and by forwarding other articles to us. Here’s a sample:

Robert Keavney, Former Chief Investment Strategist for Centric Wealth, and in 2001 described by Money Management as one of the Ten Most Influential People in Australian Financial Services.

Here's my view on the active vs passive debate. Efficient Market Theory (EMT) argues that the fact that most managers underperform the index is evidence that markets are efficient and that there is no such thing as superior skill.  

However 'the market' largely consists of professional investors. The fact that the return produced by professionals, and amateurs for that matter, after fees and real world costs like stamp duty and brokerage will almost always under-perform the return before these real world costs (ie the index) is so unremarkable as to hardly be worthy of comment. And it should also be added that most index funds under-perform the index by the sum of their fees and costs, though their fees and therefore underperformance will generally be lower than for active funds. Of course, the average net of costs will be less than the average free of costs. How could it be otherwise?

Further, the average fund manager has no superior skill. This can be verified, in my view, by a brief conversation with most of them, quite apart from their lack of superior track record.

The above are strong arguments against investing in an average fund manager.

However, the problem for EMT is that it must argue that no individual or fund manager can ever demonstrate superior skill. According to EMT, investing is unique among all human activities in that it is claimed to be impossible for anyone on any occasion for any single person to display superior skill. A single counter example is enough to disprove the theory in its pure form. Thus Buffet's outperformance has to be completely explained away as pure luck. Closer to home, the Platinum International Fund's almost quadrupling of the index return since its inception in 1995 has to be explained away without any reference to ability or hard word.  

At best the assertion that superior skill is impossible is unprovable. And the attempts to prove it do become intellectually contorted eg Fama/French acknowledgement that small caps and value stocks will outperform the broad index in the long run and that funds which invest in them can do likewise - which would seem to be an acknowledgement that outperformance is possible. But they argue that this outperformance is a result of the market efficiently rewarding the higher risk of value and small cap stocks.  

Another example of intellectually contorted arguments:  according to EMT the price of every stock at every moment is always the correct price reflecting all the information available to the market. When you ask what meaning the word 'correct' has in this context, and how it is measured or verified, you are told that the correct price is the market price. So the market price is the correct price because the correct price is the market price. Nicely circular and thus devoid of content.

This discussion of EMT is, of course, quite separate from the question of whether most people will get a better return by investing in index funds. Few individuals have the ability to identify superior managers so most people in practise will do better to invest in index funds.

Two readers sent in recent articles on the subject. The first is from The Financial Times, with the reader commenting that “I had not thought of benchmarking problems this way, with a very good analogy.” The second is from Reuters and Business Insider.

Predictable rump of index money won’t last, Simon Evan-Cook. FT, 29 September 2013

In April 1831, an accident occurred that forced the British army to change its procedures. The event was unforeseeable, though hindsight makes its causes – and its simple solution – seem obvious. A company of soldiers marched on to the Broughton Suspension Bridge, which began to vibrate in unison with their step. As more troops marched on, the vibrations became more pronounced. Rather than becoming alarmed, the soldiers enjoyed the swaying, even playfully exacerbating it. But as the first troops reached the far side, a bolt snapped, causing the bridge to collapse. Post-crash hindsight may demand that more investors break step, like the army does when crossing a bridge, to prevent disaster ... The risk stems from the widespread use of benchmarks which are synchronising investors’ actions. This is most obvious in passive investing, whose perpetual growth is encouraged despite its unknown consequences.”

Finally, it looks like picking stocks is a winning strategy, David Randall, Reuters, 4 November 2013.

“It’s a good time to be a stock picker. Some 57 per cent of U.S. funds run by active managers are beating their benchmark indexes this year, according to fund-tracker Morningstar. That is the best overall performance for the industry since 2009 and well above the 37 per cent of funds that typically top the indexes.

Stock pickers are doing well in part because after more than four years of marching higher en masse, stocks have started to separate themselves into leaders and laggards. The lines of demarcation became more pronounced during the past few weeks as U.S. companies reported their recent quarterly results.”

There are many useful comments following last week’s article on the Cuffelinks website.


Index versus active? Nobel Prize professors can’t agree

Know who’s managing your business

Watch the performance of performance fees


Most viewed in recent weeks

10 reasons wealthy homeowners shouldn't receive welfare

The RBA Governor says rising house prices are due to "the design of our taxation and social security systems". The OECD says "the prolonged boom in house prices has inflated the wealth of many pensioners without impacting their pension eligibility." What's your view?

House prices surge but falls are common and coming

We tend to forget that house prices often fall. Direct lending controls are more effective than rate rises because macroprudential limits affect the volume of money for housing leaving business rates untouched.

Survey responses on pension eligibility for wealthy homeowners

The survey drew a fantastic 2,000 responses with over 1,000 comments and polar opposite views on what is good policy. Do most people believe the home should be in the age pension asset test, and what do they say?

100 Aussies: five charts on who earns, pays and owns

Any policy decision needs to recognise who is affected by a change. It pays to check the data on who pays taxes, who owns assets and who earns the income to ensure an equitable and efficient outcome.

Three good comments from the pension asset test article

With articles on the pensions assets test read about 40,000 times, 3,500 survey responses and thousands of comments, there was a lot of great reader participation. A few comments added extra insights.

The sorry saga of housing affordability and ownership

It is hard to think of any area of widespread public concern where the same policies have been pursued for so long, in the face of such incontrovertible evidence that they have failed to achieve their objectives.

Latest Updates


The 'Contrast Principle' used by super fund test failures

Rather than compare results against APRA's benchmark, large super funds which failed the YFYS performance test are using another measure such as a CPI+ target, with more favourable results to show their members.


RBA switched rate priority on house prices versus jobs

RBA Governor, Philip Lowe, says that surging house prices are not as important as full employment, but a previous Governor, Glenn Stevens, had other priorities, putting the "elevated level of house prices" first.

Investment strategies

Disruptive innovation and the Tesla valuation debate

Two prominent fund managers with strongly opposing views and techniques. Cathie Wood thinks Tesla is going to US$3,000, Rob Arnott says it's already a bubble at US$750. They debate valuing growth and disruption.


4 key materials for batteries and 9 companies that will benefit

Four key materials are required for battery production as we head towards 30X the number of electric cars. It opens exciting opportunities for Australian companies as the country aims to become a regional hub.


Why valuation multiples fail in an exponential world

Estimating the value of a company based on a multiple of earnings is a common investment analysis technique, but it is often useless. Multiples do a poor job of valuing the best growth businesses, like Microsoft.


Five value chains driving the ‘transition winners’

The ability to adapt to change makes a company more likely to sustain today’s profitability. There are five value chains plus a focus on cashflow and asset growth that the 'transition winners' are adopting.


Halving super drawdowns helps wealthy retirees most

At the start of COVID, the Government allowed early access to super, but in a strange twist, others were permitted to leave money in tax-advantaged super for another year. It helped the wealthy and should not be repeated.



© 2021 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

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. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). 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.

Website Development by Master Publisher.