| S&P
Study Shows Cheaper Funds Outperform
IndexFunds.com Staff
June 13, 2003 |
|
A new study by Standard & Poor's shows that when choosing
funds, investors would be well served to research how a fund stacks
up against its peers in terms of costs. S&P reported that,
on average, funds with lower expense ratios have outperformed
their more expensive peers in eight out of the nine domestic fund
style categories over a one, three, five, and ten-year annualized
basis. The only exception was the Mid-Cap Blend investment style,
where funds with a higher expense ratio outperformed their less
expensive peers on a one, five, and ten year annualized basis.


"Investors don't always take expenses into account when
selecting a mutual fund because they are typically stated in percentage
terms - making it harder to translate in a meaningful way,"
said Phil Edwards, head of fund research at S&P. "Investors
need to pay closer attention to expenses, especially in a market
environment where returns are expected to be in the single digits.
It is in this type of setting that expenses can take a larger
proportion of a fund's return."
S&P started by determining average expense ratio for each
of the nine domestic fund style categories. It then sorted the
funds in each of the nine style categories into two groups - those
with an expense ratio below the average of their peers and those
with an expense ratio that was higher. It then compared the average
annualized return for each of the two groups over a one, three,
five, and ten-year performance period to determine if a fund's
return justified the level of its expenses over the long term.
S&P found that for funds with larger than average expense
ratios, a higher return was not necessarily something investors
wound up with in eight of the nine style categories.
The results support previous studies S&P has conducted in
overseas markets. S&P spokesman David Guarino said a team
at the firm's European fund research group recently concluded
a similar study.
"They came up with almost exactly the same results for European
funds," he said.
However, Guarino noted, "There may be funds out there whose
returns really do justify higher expenses." A lower expense
ratio does not guarantee better performance, but S&P's results
demonstrate that investors should choose among cheaper funds if
they can.
The table below shows how active funds, index funds, and exchange-traded
funds stack up in terms of average expense ratio.
| Expenses of ETFs vs. Open-End Mutual Funds |
| Category |
Average expense ratio |
| Exchange-Traded Funds |
| U.S. Major Market ETFs |
0.18% |
| U.S. Style ETFs |
0.23% |
| U.S. Sector ETFs |
0.34% |
| All U.S. Equity ETFs |
0.28% |
| International Equity ETFs |
0.41% |
| All Equity ETFs |
0.40% |
| Fixed Income ETFs |
0.15% |
| Open-end Mutual Funds |
| Actively Managed Domestic Equity |
1.40% |
| Actively Managed International Equity |
1.94% |
| Passive/Indexed Domestic Equity |
0.75% |
| Passive/Indexed International Equity |
0.95% |
| Passive/Indexed Fixed Income |
0.39% |
Source: Morgan Stanley Equity Research