Do Index Fund Portfolios Live Up to Expectations?
Investors are pinning their hopes on index funds.
“Almost $500 billion flowed from active to passive funds in the first half of 2017, and index followers have grown to account for more than a third of all assets under management in the US,” writes Bloomberg’s Lukanyo Mnyanda.
But are investors expecting more than index funds can deliver?
Jack Bogle’s mantra that low-cost index funds help ensure that investors receive their fair share of a market’s return, whether good or bad, might be morphing into something very different.
A recent survey by Fidelity noted that “one in five mutual fund buyers believed that stock index funds can protect them from market ups and downs.”
Another survey by Natixis Global Asset Management found that 60% of individual investors said using index funds can help minimize investment losses, and 55% believed that index funds provide access to the best investment opportunities in the market.
These misconceptions are likely the halo effect of positive press coverage about the funds’ low costs and relative outperformance. Many investors have not had their newfound faith in indexing tested by a bear market. Further clouding the waters may be a misunderstanding of the implications of mutual fund performance data.
Data from Morningstar’s Active Passive Barometer report showed that low-cost index funds have generally outperformed their actively managed counterparts, especially over longer time horizons. Financial advisers and journalists often reference fund data from studies like this when discussing the merits of hypothetical index fund portfolios. But the fact that index funds generally outperform actively managed funds does not mean that owning such a portfolio is a surefire way to boost returns, lower risks, or outperform stock-picking fund managers.
The Reality of Index Fund Investor Returns
Higher index fund returns do not always equate to higher returns for index fund investors. Often fund investors, many under the guidance of financial advisers, make important decisions and incur costs at the portfolio level that are not reflected in fund return data.
An investor who owns a few broad, market-cap-weighted index funds must still decide which markets to invest in, how to weight those markets, and when to trade. These decisions are difficult to make in real time and have a significant effect on portfolio returns. Moreover, studies favoring index funds often maintain that costs are one of the most reliable predictors of future performance. The weighted average expense ratio for index funds is about 0.17% versus about 0.75% for active funds. Expenses incurred by investors at the portfolio level — advisory fees, for example — decrease this cost/performance advantage.
Consider data from Candor Capital Management: Eight robo-advisory platforms, all of which generally recommend index fund portfolios, produced a wide range of annual returns, from 5.55% to 10.75%, for portfolios with similar investment objectives. Of course, one year of return data is not enough to judge the merits of one platform over another, but this illustrates how much portfolio returns might vary among index fund investors with similar objectives and expectations.
To better manage expectations, advisers should steer conversations away from the investment products — index funds — and toward the investment portfolio. Learning about a client’s past experiences and focusing the discussion on the overall investment process, including the philosophy behind the decision to own index funds, helps to correct misconceptions about what the investor can and cannot control.
Benchmarking is an important but underused tool for advisers when talking about portfolio risk and return expectations. Advisers will use benchmarks to rate the performance of outside fund managers, but almost half do not create benchmarks for the portfolios they are managing. “While 72% of advisors . . . acknowledged that benchmarks are important in client performance reviews, 44% confessed they do not use a benchmark when building client portfolios,” observes BlackRock’s Patrick Nolan, CFA.
Because they view their value proposition as more than what can be measured using traditional portfolio benchmarking, advisers might be hesitant to define benchmarks at the outset of the advisory relationship. For example, Vanguard Advisor’s Alpha says that advisers can add meaningful value through wealth management via “financial planning, behavioral coaching, and guidance.” Creating portfolio benchmarks could enhance these services by tying together discussions about investment goals and objectives, asset allocation, risk-and-return expectations, and accountability.
Investors are being inundated with hypothetical performance claims and declarations about the benefits of investing in index funds. But the behavioral risks of such portfolios cannot be measured using the statistical outputs of a backtest. Popular misunderstandings about the benefits of index funds lead investors to underestimate the risks they are taking and may cause them to sell in a panic during the next market swoon.
One rash decision can wipe out many years of investment returns. Advisers need to manage expectations. That means making the difficult transition from product salespeople to investment counselors and focusing portfolio discussions on investment philosophy and process. Benchmarking can facilitate those discussions.
Now is the time for advisers to help investors consider why index funds were created. They are a huge improvement over many of the high-cost investment products currently available.
But they do not exempt investors or advisers from making tough portfolio decisions and being held accountable.
If you liked this post, don’t forget to subscribe to the Enterprising Investor.
All posts are the opinion of the author. As such, they should not be construed as investment advice, nor do the opinions expressed necessarily reflect the views of CFA Institute or the author’s employer.
Image credit: ©Getty Images/erhui1979