HFA Icon

The “Great Debate” Part Four: Should You Pay More For An Active Fund Manager?

HFA Padded
Rupert Hargreaves
Published on
Updated on
Sign up for our E-mail List and Get FREE Access to Exclusive Investment E-books and More!

Part of the “Great Debate” series.

  1. Jim Grant Vs John Bogle: The Great Indexing Debate
  2. John Bogle Vs Jim Grant: The Great Indexing Debate
  3. The Sequoia Fund On The “Great Debate.”

The Economist has waded into the “Great Debate” recently, taking the view that, on the whole, active investing is for chumps.

Active Fund Manager  - Poor performance

Figures from Morningstar show that the majority of fund managers in the American market only managed to beat the index in just five of the past 20 years. And, despite the illusion that it’s worth paying a bit more for a top-class active fund manager, there’s no evidence to support this conclusion.

The Economist presents a set of data showing that in only one sector,...

Login required to continue reading.

Setup a free account to get access to this article (no credit card required).

View Full Article
Already a member? Log in here
HFA Padded

Sign up now and get our in-depth FREE e-books on famous investors like Klarman, Dalio, Schloss, Munger Rupert is a committed value investor and regularly writes and invests following the principles set out by Benjamin Graham. He is the editor and co-owner of Hidden Value Stocks, a quarterly investment newsletter aimed at institutional investors. Rupert owns shares in Berkshire Hathaway. Rupert holds qualifications from the Chartered Institute For Securities & Investment and the CFA Society of the UK. Rupert covers everything value investing for Hedge Fund Alpha