Beat The Index or Starve!

by Sean

If it hasn’t been clear in my past postings, I’m a huge fan of [tag]index funds[/tag]. The vast majority of our [tag]retirement[/tag] [tag]savings[/tag] are held in a variety of index funds. I’m generally of the view that the individual investor has almost no chance, at least consistently enough to make the risk worth it, of beating the market. And that belief extends to mutual fund [tag]managers[/tag] as as much as it does to Joe Public.

One of my big beefs with actively managed funds are the generally high [tag]management[/tag] costs associated with them. For instance, the management fee for an index fund like the Vanguard Total Stock Market Index ([tag]VTSMX[/tag]) is 0.19%. It’s category average? 1.19%.

OK, yes, I hear you. I know, I know, just a 1% difference. But, as I just said, I don’t believe the individual has much of a chance consistently beating the market (which a proper index fund should be attempting to passively mirror). So I’d just be paying an extra percent on something I believe is destined to fail over the long term anyway. Doesn’t seem a smart move!

But here’s an idea for active mutual fund managers that I might be able to get behind: Beat the index, of don’t get paid!

Two [tag]money manager[/tag]s are trying out a new [tag]pay-for-performance[/tag] system: If they don’t perform, they won’t get paid.

I especially like the concept of dropping the fee to zero if the fund merely matches the index or underperforms it. Though it’d be especially appealing if, when they underperformed the index, they’d refund that back to you rather than just drop it to zero. [Hey, I can dream, can't I? ;) ]

So does that mean I’m signing up for some TFS Small Cap [[tag]TFSSX[/tag]]? Nah. Like I said (and said again!), I don’t believe they can beat the index consistently. If I wanted to index the Russell 2000 (TFS Small Cap’s ‘index’), I’d just pick up a little iShares Russell 2000 Index [[tag]IWM[/tag]] or some similar index vehicle and be done with it.

But, I have to say, it tweaked this investor’s interest, so we’ll have to see if anybody else decides to follow suit and somehow makes the proposition a bit more tempting.

  • Rich Gates

    Thanks for the nice write up! Glad the new fee schedule caught your attention.

    Also, I do understand your concern with active money management. Many investors share your belief that trying to find money managers who can outperform the market is not worth the risk and effort…and prefer to stick to index funds.

    However, I am always curious to get passive-investors’ thoughts on the hedge fund industry. Specifically, any insight into how it has attracted so many sophisticated investors in recent years? Of course, hedge funds are actively managed.

    Rich Gates

  • http://www.irregularpayments.com Sean

    Howdy Rich… Sorry I missed your comment coming in for so long!

    I think you may have misinterpreted what I was saying though. I don’t think trying to find money managers who can outperform the market isn’t worth the risk and effort; I don’t think they can outperform the market at all, at least consistently enough to be considered anything other than a lucky run.

    As to hedge funds, I really have no idea if there’s more trafficking in those funds than in years past, but investors’ memories are short. The last hedge fund might not immediately jump to mind would probably have a bit to do with it. Hedge funds set off all kinds of warning bells to me, especially with their not having the requirement of auditability.

  • Rich Gates

    Sean,

    Thanks for the follow up.

    I believe the market is inefficient. Moreover, I think the large amount of money in the hedge fund industry helps supoprt this belief.

    Hedge funds investors are generally high net worth and sophisticated. As a result, I do not believe they have short-term memories (esp when compared to the average retail investor.) I also think the only reason hedge fund investors are willing to (1) pay high fees for active management and (2) not be protected by many SEC regulations is because they think it is in their own best interest. In other words, they believe their hedge fund managers can outperform the market on a risk-adjusted basis.

    Regardless, I suspect we will both agree that there are no guarantees that any specific investment will work out…esp in the short-term.

    Rich Gates

  • http://www.hedgefundlawblog.com Bart Mallon

    Hedge fund regulation is likely to increase as Congress passes more laws with the intent of regulating the capital markets. Starting a hedge fund will become much more difficult in this new regulatory environment.

  • Rich Gates

    Sean,

    I wanted to touch base and see if you would be interested in following up on your post about the TFS Small Cap fund and its performance-based schedule.

    Thanks, Rich Gates

Previous post:

Next post: