Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 428

Why do investors earn less than the funds they invest in?

Why would investors earn less than the funds they invest in? It all comes down to timing.

Our '2021 Mind the Gap' study of dollar-weighted returns finds investors earned about 7.7% per year on the average dollar they invested in equity funds over the 10 years ended 31 December 2020. This was about 1.7% less than the total returns their fund investments generated over that time span.

This shortfall, or ‘gap’, stems from inopportunely-timed investment in and redemptions from funds, which cost investors nearly one-sixth the return they would have earned if they had simply bought and held.

The persistent gap makes cash flow timing one of the most significant factors – along with investment costs and tax efficiency – that can influence an investor's end results.

What is the gap between investor returns and total returns?

To use a simple example, let's say an investor puts $1,000 into a fund at the beginning of each year. That fund earns a 10% return the first year, a 10% return the second year, and then suffers a 10% loss in the third year, for a 2.9% annual return over the full three-year period. But the investor's dollar-weighted return in this simple example is negative 0.4%, because there was less money in the fund during the first two years of positive returns and more money exposed to the loss during the third year. In this case, there was a 3.3% per annum gap between the investor's return (negative 0.4%) and the fund's (2.9%).

In our study, we estimate the gap between investors' dollar-weighted returns and funds' total returns in the aggregate. This allows us to assess how large the gap is and how it's changed over time.

The results by different fund types

More specialised areas with the most volatile cash flows - namely, alternative funds and sector equity funds - fared much worse than average and pulled down the aggregate results. The more mainstream areas that are home to the majority of investor assets such as broad equity and bond funds fared much better, with return gaps of about 1% per year.

In this US study, equity fund investors experienced a 1.2% annual gap while bond fund investors suffered a 1.1% gap per year.

A few other areas worth noting:

  • Asset allocation funds had the smallest gap, suggesting that their built-in asset-class diversification makes them easier for investors to buy and hold over time. Investors in these funds, which combine stocks, bonds, and other asset classes, experienced a dollar-weighted return lag of only 0.69% per year over the 10 years. 
  • Alternative funds have proved difficult for investors to use successfully. The average dollar invested in these funds lost about 0.3% annually over the 10 years, which was a remarkable 12% per year less than the returns in US equity funds.
  • Sector-specific equity funds also saw negative gaps for investors, by about 4% per year. These specialised funds were doubly disappointing, with returns lagging diversified equity funds and investors failing to capture the full benefit of those lower returns. 

How does dollar-cost averaging impact investor returns?

We also added a series of returns to see how the results would look in a hypothetical scenario in which an investor contributed equal monthly investments (dollar-cost averaging) to funds in each broad category group. 

Dollar-cost averaging doesn't usually lead to better results compared with a buy-and-hold approach. In fact, because market returns are often positive, dollar-cost averaging often leads to lower investor returns.

This simply reflects the underlying maths of total returns: If returns are generally positive, investors are typically better off making a lump-sum investment and holding it for the entire period. Investors who contribute smaller amounts over time often have fewer dollars invested during periods with strong returns.

The results show dollar-cost averaging can help investors avoid some of the ill effects of poorly-timed cash flows by enforcing a more disciplined approach. In fact, following such a systematic investment approach would have improved investors' returns in six of the seven major category groups. With international-equity and sector-equity funds, for example, investor returns based on dollar-cost averaging came out more than 2% per year ahead of investors' actual returns.

What to do to improve investor returns

The persistent gap between investors' actual results and reported total returns may seems disheartening, but investors can take away a few key lessons about how to improve their results. The study's results suggest:

  1. Keep things simple and stick with plain-vanilla, broadly diversified funds.
  2. Automate routine tasks such as setting asset-allocation targets and periodically rebalancing.
  3. Avoid narrowly-focused funds for long-term investing, as well as those with higher volatility.
  4. Embrace techniques that put investment decisions on autopilot, such as dollar-cost averaging.

These findings shine more light on the merits of keeping things simple. In particular, funds that offer built-in asset class diversification, such as balanced funds, help investors keep more of their returns.

Finally, we found that investors' trading activity is often counterproductive. Investors can improve their results by setting an investment plan and sticking with it for the long term. Investors who follow a consistent investment approach and avoid chasing performance will likely reap rewards over time.

 

Amy C. Arnott, CFA, is a Portfolio Strategist for Morningstar.

For more details on the results and methodology, see the 2021 Mind the Gap Report. We changed the way we calculate the total returns used as benchmarks for the gap numbers in this year's study. In past studies, we used an equally-weighted average but this year we used an asset-weighted methodology to calculate the average. This change had the effect of increasing the average total return figures used as a benchmark for the gap calculations, leading to a wider return gap overall. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any investor. It has been edited somewhat from the original US version for an Australian audience.

Register for a free trial of Morningstar Premium on the link below, including the portfolio management service, Sharesight.


Try Morningstar Premium for free


 

  •   6 October 2021
  • 3
  •      
  •   
3 Comments
Jerome Lander
October 06, 2021

Investors earning less than the funds they invest in is a really important point for those interested in client results. Fund managers could do a lot more, as we do, to differentiate themselves and ensure that investors are less likely to be their own worst enemy in this regard. Unfortunately the industry generally over-emphasizes and rewards the very top performers in any one period - hoping that it will continue - rather than the best risk-adjusted returns. Fund managers respond to the market by building jackpot type products that have a chance of being lucky in good markets and performing the best for a short period of time (without an emphasis on long term risk-adjusted performance and compounding). Investors who think differently can do a lot better for themselves long term by backing the rare funds that are different from the mainstream. While the main point of this article is important, I think some of the general conclusions made about what to do about it are incorrect. For example investing in plain vanilla funds won't work if overall returns and markets are weak from here in coming years, which should not be a surprise at all given valuation levels and credible forecasts. Furthermore, plain vanilla equity funds are actually risk and the potential investor gap is hence very large if markets crash.

john
October 07, 2021

Yes and many funds advertise returns which are actually false, if one scrutinises their results deeply. One example is the IRR.

AlanB
October 25, 2021

Why do fund managers earn more than the funds we invest in?

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Decoding an ETF's DNA

After the Budget, Australia needs its own definition of quality

Managed accounts and the future of portfolio construction

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

The strange effect of the 30% minimum capital gains tax

The 30% minimum tax on capital gains sits at the heart of the budget's proposed reforms. Yet the mechanics reveal anomalies that introduce unexpected distortions that raise questions about its design.

High quality businesses are on sale

Beneath the dominance of the ASX's largest stocks, much of the market has been left behind. High-quality companies are now trading at levels rarely seen, offering opportunities for investors willing to look deeper.

Does your will qualify for the discretionary testamentary trust exemption?

Treasury has confirmed the exemption many families were hoping for. But buried in the fine print are two conditions that could leave some wills on the wrong side of the exemption, despite years of careful planning.

Ranking three common retirement strategies

The defining challenge of retirement isn't just about building wealth, it's about converting your lifetime savings into sustainable income. A holistic understanding of different strategies can improve long-term outcomes.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 667 with weekend update

The downfall of the giant and three lessons for investors.

  • 18 June 2026

Why Australian shares are falling behind the world

Australia’s market boasts a long record of outperformance, but recent results tell a different story. Is the ASX’s lagging performance a temporary setback or evidence that structural forces will keep global markets ahead?

Latest Updates

Superannuation

Are you making these SMSF mistakes?

After four decades advising investors, there are a few common mistakes I've seen SMSF investors make. From holding too much cash and chasing yield to overtrading and trusting tips. Are these errors costing you?

Retirement

Retirement spending is not one-size-fits-all

New data challenges the idea that Australians are underspending their super. The bigger issue may be helping retirees navigate complexity, make confident decisions and use their savings to support security, wellbeing and choice.

Taxation

The missing link in the CGT debate

A little-noticed consequence of Labor’s tax changes could have implications well beyond investors’ tax bills. The issue raises bigger questions about incentives, capital allocation and the drivers of long-term economic growth.

Investment strategies

The surprising beneficiaries of the AI boom

While markets obsess over AI winners, a larger, more predictable growth engine is forming. A surge in electricity demand and infrastructure build‑out reveals the quiet, durable assets evolving beneath the AI story.

Superannuation

When losses in super become irreplaceable

The notion of 'you can afford more risk' assumes that losses can be replaced. Above a $2.1 million super balance the law says otherwise, and a worked example shows the refill takes decades, or never happens.

Retirement

Why I object to ‘hitting a number’ for retirement

Many investors dream of “hitting their number” and walking into retirement. But what if reaching that milestone is the moment they should be asking the tough questions? After all, there's a lot more to life than a high portfolio value. 

Planning

Does your will qualify for the discretionary testamentary trust exemption?

Treasury has confirmed the exemption many families were hoping for. But buried in the fine print are two conditions that could leave some wills on the wrong side of the exemption, despite years of careful planning.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2026 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.