|
Comparing Mutual Funds to Different Benchmarks
By Index Funds Staff
What a difference two years can make. In 1999, only 33% of mutual
funds were able to beat Standard & Poor's (S&P) 500. In
the year 2000, over 72% of all mutual funds managed that task. Nearly
half of all funds managed to outgain the S&P 600 Small Cap index
in 1999. In 2000, a mere 16% managed the task.
Here are some returns
from 2000 for different asset class indexes, together with the percentage
of mutual funds that had higher returns than that index in 2000.

Wiesenberger
Data through 12/31/2000
For a complete list
comparing returns and percentage of winning funds for 1999 and 2000
across more indexes, click
here to receive a copy of The Index Insider, IndexFunds.com's
subscription-based newsletter. The December issue is available for
downloading, and this month's issue (which includes the data) and
February's are free with an annual subscription.
The study also used
S&P 500 funds to illustrate the direct impact that higher fees
have on total returns. While it may seem shocking that someone would
pay 100 or even 150 basis points (1%-1.5%) in expense ratios annually
for a plain vanilla S&P 500 fund, the effect of this fee on
returns is not. A table in the same above study graphically illustrates
the direct effect that higher expense ratios have on returns of
40 of the most prominent S&P 500 funds.
Because the component
stocks should theoretically be the same in all of the S&P 500
funds, it is an easy point to make. Investors should be very aware
of the fact any mutual fund must overcome its expense ratio to achieve
market returns.
It has been pointed
out in the much of financial media that 2000 was a blowout year
for active management. Afterall, as mentioned, 72% of all funds
(and 74% of active funds) had higher returns than the S&P 500
in 2000. Overall, however, active funds tend toward smaller stocks
than those held by the S&P 500. Small stocks did better than
large cap stocks in 2000. Therefore, of course, the average performance
of active funds appears better than that of the S&P 500. Compared
to the S&P 600 index of small cap stocks, only 17% of the fund
universe managed higher returns. On the active/passive question,
of course the real numbers lie somewhere in between.
Perhaps a better comparison
than the S&P 500 or S&P 600 might be an index that represents
the total market, like the Wilshire 5000 or Russell 3000. And as
you can see, comparisons to the total market have not been kind
to the broad field of funds over lengthy recent time periods.
| Index |
Funds
Beating Index 5 Years 1996-2000 |
Funds
Beating Index 10 Yrs 1991-2000 |
Funds
Beating Index 15 Years 1986-2000 |
| Wilshire 5000 |
15.89%
|
16.26%
|
17.23%
|
| Russell 3000 |
13.74%
|
14.09%
|
14.53%
|
In an effort to do an
even better job comparing apples to apples, IndexFunds.com will
release a number of studies in coming days to determine whether,
and to what extent total returns bear this out in different investment
categories. Few argue that active funds outperform index funds for
large U.S. stocks. It is often stated that investors are better
served with active funds when investing in small or international
stocks, however. Our aim will be to see whether investors are better
served with active or passive funds in these market sectors.
A complete analysis
of index and fund returns for 2000 is available in the Index Insider.
Click here
to receive a sample copy and learn how you can subscribe.
The January issue
of The Index Insider contains:
· Q&A
with Dow Jones Indexes
· How New SEC Rules Affect Individual Investors
· Discussion on how Morningstar calculates Price/Earnings
Ratios
· Study: Comparing Returns of Mutual Funds to Benchmarks
in 2000
· Appendix I: Historical returns of over 250 Major Indexes
Worldwide
· Appendix II: Complete Breakdown of ETF Returns and Data
01/19/2001
|