Morningstar Says Fees Foretell the Future Better Than the Stars

Morningstar Inc., one of the most well known mutual fund evaluation companies, published a study on August 9th that concluded low fees were the best predictor of a mutual fund’s future success – even better than Morningstar’s own star-rating system.

This is a big deal; because Morningstar’s business consists of looking at past returns of mutual funds using a complicated evaluation system, assigning a star-rating to each one, and selling this information to individual investors, libraries and the financial industry. Mutual fund companies take out full page ads touting their 5 star rating because they know it will attract new deposits. For years, financial magazines have instructed people to invest only in Morningstar 5-star ranked mutual funds if they wanted to own the “best performing” funds.

“If there’s anything in the whole world of mutual funds that you can take to the bank, it’s that expense ratios help you make a better decision. In every single time period and data point tested, low-cost funds beat high-cost funds,” wrote Russel Kinnel, Morningstar director of fund research and the study’s author. This conclusion is very important, because many creators of hedge funds and active mutual funds acknowledge that they are much more expensive than other alternatives, but insist that their outperformance will overcome costs. Based on the study, in every single time period and data point tested, this was not the case. It is too difficult to overcome the burden of high costs.

The investment industry is required to remind people that past performance is no guarantee of future returns. I believe people are deaf to this warning because research shows mutual funds experience a flood of new deposits after they publish high returns, and they are usually severely disappointed with the results. A better tactic is to focus on what you CAN control – what you are paying to invest in the fund. Mr. Kinnel at Morningstar came to the same conclusion: “Perhaps the most compelling argument for expenses is that they worked every time--because costs always are deducted from returns regardless of the market environment. The star rating, as a reflection of past risk-adjusted performance, is more time-period dependent. Investors should make expense ratios a primary test in fund selection. They are still the most dependable predictor of performance.”

I couldn’t have said it any better myself.

Jeannette A. Jones, CPA, CFP®
jjones@taaginc.com
http://www.taaginc.com

The Secret to Investment Success

We all want to pick a winner. It doesn’t matter if we’re at the racetrack, casino, or investing our IRA. However, investors who spend most of their time trying to pick winners often end up losing more times than not. The number one determinant of your portfolio’s return is your asset allocation – the percentage of your investments in stocks and bonds – and not your superior stock picking ability or market timing. Once you have your asset allocation in place, your behavior will determine your long term success.

It’s easy to look back after a huge market run-up or downturn and think that it was obvious. It then becomes even easier to base our future decisions on recent events, by supporting our gut feeling by selectively looking at information that supports our opinion. We are constantly barraged with headlines that play to our emotions. The media loves to use current events to forecast the future. They want to create headlines that sell magazines or attract viewers, not create successful investors.

Steve Forbes said in a 2003 presentation to The Anderson School of Business, “You make more money selling advice than following it. It’s one of the things we count on in the magazine business – along with the short memory of our readers.”

And just how do investors do with all of the information available about how to pick the winners? Dalbar does an annual study of investor performance versus the indexes. Last year the average equity investor underperformed the S&P 500 by almost 4%. They were down 41.63% vs. a loss of 37.72% for the S&P. For the past 20 years (January, 1989- December, 2008) the average equity investor earned an annual return of 1.87% vs. the S&P 500 average annual return of 8.35%. On a $10,000 investment, this meant a difference of $35,240!

We cannot control the short term direction of the markets. However, if we focus on what we can control - our reaction to the market- our chance of success will be much greater. Author Nick Murray does a great job summing it up: “At the end of our investing lifetime, it won’t matter what your funds did, it’ll matter what you did. And what you did will be a pure function of the quality of advice you got – from one caring, competent (advisor), and not from any number of magazines.”

By Chris Carleton, CFP(r)