Does it make sense to reframe the active vs. passive debate? Perhaps the question — active or passive? — is not the right one to ask.
"Neither the Financial Analysts as a whole nor the investment funds as a whole can expect to ‘beat the market,’ because in a significant sense they (or you) are the market."
What effect has passive investing, including ETFs and index-tracking mutual funds, had on the US stock market?
Beating a passive benchmark is hard. And that's true for both reindeer and people.
Actively managed strategies should have a place at the core of well-designed retirement plans.
If active managers cannot add value, then passive is the preferred position, not the other way around.
Actively managed funds can serve plan participants well.
The race for scale among active managers in response to low-cost ETF competition may be self-defeating.
The notion that choosing active or passive will in some way lower fiduciary risk is unfounded.
Quick, what is 1 July 2021 the 50th anniversary of?