2018, the year of the active fund manager
Active investment managers have failed to keep their performance in line with benchmarks. This is expected to change in 2018 though.
NAMPA/REUTERS
After years of struggling to beat the index, 2018 should be the year active fund managers earn their spurs.
Market volatility will finally pick up from record low levels, US economic uncertainty will deepen as the expansion becomes the longest in history and the Fed shrinks its balance sheet, and the prospect of at least a 10% drawdown finally hitting stocks will increase.
If that's how 2018 plays out - not an unreasonable scenario - macro and market conditions should favour stock-picking "active" management over index-tracking "passive" investment.
At least, that's the theory. And it does look like actively managed funds had a pretty decent 2017, certainly relative to their chequered recent past.
According to MorningStar, active funds' success increased "substantially" in 10 of the 12 categories it tracked in the year ended June 30 compared with the same period a year ago.
About 49% of active US stock funds beat their composite passive benchmark in the 12-month period ended June 30, 2017, versus 26% for the year ended December 31, 2016, MorningStar said.
The latest findings from S&P Dow Jones Indices show a similar direction of travel. In the 12 months to June this year, 57% of large-cap managers, 61% of mid-cap managers and 60% of small-cap managers underperformed the S&P 500, the S&P MidCap 400, and the S&P SmallCap 600, respectively.
That doesn't sound great. But it's a clear improvement on the last five years when 82% of large-cap managers, 87% of mid-cap managers and 94% of small-cap managers all underperformed their respective benchmarks.
Over the last 15 years the scale of underperformance is even greater: 93%, 94% and 94%, respectively. That 15-year span includes two of the biggest drawdowns in Wall Street history in 2002 and 2008, two periods when index-tracking funds beat the active fund manager, S&P Dow Jones Indices figures show.
History shows it's hard to beat the market, even in times of high volatility, steep market drawdowns, whirling sector rotation and wide price dispersion.
"The belief that bear markets favour active management is a myth," S&P Dow Jones Indices wrote after the 2008 crash.
FEE-SY DOES IT
This year has been the polar opposite. Implied volatility, as measured by the VIX index, was its lowest since the index was created in 1990, and realised volatility, as measured by the number of trading days with an intraday swing of less than 1% was its lowest ever.
The S&P 500 hit dozens of fresh record highs this year and is on course for an annual rise of 20%. Will market conditions be so benign next year?
A survey of 500 institutional investors released this month by Natixis Investment Managers found that active management will be a better bet than passive strategies because market conditions will be more volatile.
As the risk of asset bubbles bursting next year rises, 76% of those surveyed said 2018 will favour active management.
Extraordinarily low volatility this year is partly a consequence of huge inflows into index funds and exchange-traded funds, the survey suggested. Some 59% of respondents said low volatility is a cause for serious concern and 63% said the growth of passive investing has contributed to the sharp rise in valuations.
However, another recent survey by consultancy EY showed that the rapid rate of growth across passive investing shows no sign of slowing. Admittedly, this was a survey of ETF market makers, but the results were still revealing.
The survey, which covered ETF market makers who collectively manage around 85% of global ETF assets, suggests assets in passive investment funds will exceed active funds within 10 years.
The ETF market is on track to swell to $7.6 trillion by the end of 2020 from just under $5 trillion currently, it found. In order to keep the cash flowing in, ETF fees, which averaged just 27 basis points last year, will have to keep falling. Being a low-cost provider is a "prerequisite to survival", the EY survey found.
A report by financial services firm bfinance earlier this year showed that active fund management fees are also falling, with the average fee quoted by global equity managers now around 57 basis points compared with 62 basis points in 2015.
But, that's around double the average passive fund fee investors are paying for what is, on average, a worse performance.
After years of struggling to beat the index, 2018 should be the year active fund managers earn their spurs.
Market volatility will finally pick up from record low levels, US economic uncertainty will deepen as the expansion becomes the longest in history and the Fed shrinks its balance sheet, and the prospect of at least a 10% drawdown finally hitting stocks will increase.
If that's how 2018 plays out - not an unreasonable scenario - macro and market conditions should favour stock-picking "active" management over index-tracking "passive" investment.
At least, that's the theory. And it does look like actively managed funds had a pretty decent 2017, certainly relative to their chequered recent past.
According to MorningStar, active funds' success increased "substantially" in 10 of the 12 categories it tracked in the year ended June 30 compared with the same period a year ago.
About 49% of active US stock funds beat their composite passive benchmark in the 12-month period ended June 30, 2017, versus 26% for the year ended December 31, 2016, MorningStar said.
The latest findings from S&P Dow Jones Indices show a similar direction of travel. In the 12 months to June this year, 57% of large-cap managers, 61% of mid-cap managers and 60% of small-cap managers underperformed the S&P 500, the S&P MidCap 400, and the S&P SmallCap 600, respectively.
That doesn't sound great. But it's a clear improvement on the last five years when 82% of large-cap managers, 87% of mid-cap managers and 94% of small-cap managers all underperformed their respective benchmarks.
Over the last 15 years the scale of underperformance is even greater: 93%, 94% and 94%, respectively. That 15-year span includes two of the biggest drawdowns in Wall Street history in 2002 and 2008, two periods when index-tracking funds beat the active fund manager, S&P Dow Jones Indices figures show.
History shows it's hard to beat the market, even in times of high volatility, steep market drawdowns, whirling sector rotation and wide price dispersion.
"The belief that bear markets favour active management is a myth," S&P Dow Jones Indices wrote after the 2008 crash.
FEE-SY DOES IT
This year has been the polar opposite. Implied volatility, as measured by the VIX index, was its lowest since the index was created in 1990, and realised volatility, as measured by the number of trading days with an intraday swing of less than 1% was its lowest ever.
The S&P 500 hit dozens of fresh record highs this year and is on course for an annual rise of 20%. Will market conditions be so benign next year?
A survey of 500 institutional investors released this month by Natixis Investment Managers found that active management will be a better bet than passive strategies because market conditions will be more volatile.
As the risk of asset bubbles bursting next year rises, 76% of those surveyed said 2018 will favour active management.
Extraordinarily low volatility this year is partly a consequence of huge inflows into index funds and exchange-traded funds, the survey suggested. Some 59% of respondents said low volatility is a cause for serious concern and 63% said the growth of passive investing has contributed to the sharp rise in valuations.
However, another recent survey by consultancy EY showed that the rapid rate of growth across passive investing shows no sign of slowing. Admittedly, this was a survey of ETF market makers, but the results were still revealing.
The survey, which covered ETF market makers who collectively manage around 85% of global ETF assets, suggests assets in passive investment funds will exceed active funds within 10 years.
The ETF market is on track to swell to $7.6 trillion by the end of 2020 from just under $5 trillion currently, it found. In order to keep the cash flowing in, ETF fees, which averaged just 27 basis points last year, will have to keep falling. Being a low-cost provider is a "prerequisite to survival", the EY survey found.
A report by financial services firm bfinance earlier this year showed that active fund management fees are also falling, with the average fee quoted by global equity managers now around 57 basis points compared with 62 basis points in 2015.
But, that's around double the average passive fund fee investors are paying for what is, on average, a worse performance.
Kommentaar
Republikein
Geen kommentaar is op hierdie artikel gelaat nie