Yesterday, I referenced Merrill Lynch research that showed only 39% of fund managers beat the S&P500 last year.
This morning, the WSJ references Goldman Sachs research — it shows something similar. Their data showed 65% of U.S. large-cap stock funds trailed the benchmark index net of fees. (5 year average = 66%).
When they looked for funds that beat the index two consecutive years, they came up with an astounding number: A mere 10% of nearly 2000 U.S. stock funds beat their benchmark in both 2011 and 2012 (Source: Morningstar research).
This is why most people are better off putting money into inexpensive passive index funds.
If you want to at last have a fighting chance to pick a fund that actually has a shot to beat its benchmark, these 2 steps are a start:
1. Low Fees — look for funds with an expense ratio of 0.86% or below.
2. Avoid Closet Indexers — find funds with a low R-squared ratio.
The full article explains these in great detail.
I still think that for many people, especially those with portfolios under $250k, passive indexing is simpler, less expensive, and more reliable.
How to Find a Fund Manager Who Can Beat the Market
WSJ, January 12, 2013
Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.