View more on these topics

DIY investors shun passives as advisers dominate index market

tracks

Advised investors continue to dominate the passive market, despite claims the costs of accessing these funds could be higher than some actively managed options.

Data obtained by Tilney Bestinvest shows while the number of DIY investors on their platform has grown since 2012, rising from 6,185 to 28,308 in 2016, the percentage of total fund sales for passive funds remained steady at an average of 8.5 per cent.

The percentage decreased from 9 per cent in 2015 to 8.6 per cent in 2016.

Meanwhile, nine out of 10 investors using Hargreaves Lansdown do not hold a single passive fund in their portfolios.

Tilney Group managing director Jason Hollands says DIY investors by their nature tend to be more interested in investing and therefore are more interested in selecting active managers.

He adds: “We find investors tend to buy trackers in certain areas, mostly in the US. We consistently see funds like HSBC American Index or single trackers on physical gold, for example.”

Platforum data shows as of June last year, 17.6 per cent of assets on adviser platforms were in trackers and exchange traded funds, while only 5.5 per cent of assets on direct platforms were in trackers.

A Platforum consumer survey of 252 active private investors in January found 26 per cent favour active managed funds compared with 12 per cent of investors who prefer passive or index funds. 

But co-head of the F&C multi-manager team at BMO Asset Management Rob Burdett says he is concerned some adviser-led investors are paying more for passive funds than they would an actively managed solution and are underperforming the market.

Burdett and co-manager Gary Potter argue investors are better off buying a fund of funds directly than having an adviser manage a portfolio of passive funds.

Burdett says: “For retail investors, passive funds make sense, they are the lowest cost solution. But investors who use an adviser can end up paying an extra 2 per cent in portfolio management fees, platform fees and adviser costs.

“If you take a tracker and add these extra charges, returns look very different. Passive funds seem transparent and low cost, but in the advised space, they actually are not.”

The managers note over the past 15 years the MSCI AC World index has returned 152 per cent, while the average Investment Association Global actively managed fund has returned 117 per cent.

But by adding 2 per cent in annual advised fees to that tracker, returns would drop to 89 per cent.

“Passive funds seem transparent and low cost, but in the advised space, they actually are not.”

Counting the costs

Hollands says: “There is a minority of the advised market moving to passive-only solutions as more are aware post-RDR there is more scrutiny over cost so investors are more cost-aware, and to defend their advice fee they see overall cost reduced and look for cost savings through the choice of a passive-only approach.

“The problem with that route is there’s not a single way to investing. If you are only going passive you might miss opportunities in the absolute return space or small companies which in the long run and historically produce better returns than larger companies.”

As of November, index funds domiciled in the UK had attracted around £3.3bn through 2016, while active funds suffered £20bn in outflows, according to data compiled by Morningstar for Money Marketing.

Meanwhile, total net assets in index funds were £110bn compared with £777bn of active funds.

Expert view: Platforum senior researcher Miranda Seath

Seath-Miranda

Our data shows advisers are turning to index tracker funds – although exchange-traded funds are proving to be a slower burn. Sixty-two per cent of advisers have recommended a passive index tracker, representing 17 per cent of assets on adviser platforms.

Passive index trackers come third only to multi-manager/multi-asset funds and single strategy equity funds among the products that advisers have recommended to clients.

Many advisers are looking to reduce the total cost of investing to the client, telling us they have increased their use of passive investments to bring down the overall cost of investing. Discretionary fund managers are also under pressure to reduce their overall charges.

They are increasingly replacing underperforming active funds with passives to reduce the underlying fund charges figure on their model portfolios.

Among DIY investors, however, we still see a marked preference for actively managed funds.

In our latest consumer research we asked self-directed investors where they would invest a £20,000 lump sum: 31 per cent stated an intention to invest the money in actively managed funds whereas just 15 per cent favoured investing in passively managed funds.

This is borne out by the proportion of assets in tracker funds and exchange-traded funds on direct platforms which stands at just over 5 per cent.

Recommended

Stock-Market-FTSE-Stockmarket-700x450.jpg
11

Active funds underperform passives in market downturns

Few active funds have protected investors better than passives in market downturns, FE data shows. The research carried out by Bristol-based IFA Wychwood Financial Services and shared with Money Marketing shows average funds in the UK, US and Global Equity sectors have returned less than the equivalent passive funds over the past 10 years. In […]

Data-Corporate-Finance-Business-Pen-Graph-Growth-700x450.jpg
1

Almost half of assets will be in passive portfolios by 2021

Nearly half of net new industry assets will be held into passively managed portfolios by 2021, research by Deloitte consultancy firm Casey Quirk finds. As scrutiny over poorly actively managed funds continues, the consultancy firm says in the next five years 43 per cent of the industry’s new assets will fuel passive managed strategies. Skepticism over active […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 7 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. If index investing is about low cost then it’s not really surprising HL have relatively few index investors: why buy a 10bp tracker if you are daft enough to pay 40bps for admin?
    Index v active for ATS, AJBell or other low charge platforms might be very different.

  2. So we can apply additional ‘costs’ for an adviser to a passive fund but not to the active fund option? That is hardly comparing like for like now is it?

  3. Guess why advisers use trackers more than DIY Investors?

    Simple because when things go wrong the adviser can cop out by saying “It ain’t me gov – it’s the market”. Index investing is the lazy or the ignorant way to invest. Sure not all funds beat the index, but there are a proportion that do and it is up to the adviser to chose these. Sadly many aren’t up to the job and too many still ignore investment trusts.

  4. You appear to be a thoroughly nice chap Harry. You have just called, without any justification whatsoever, a large number of adviser firms both ignorant and lazy for doing a good job.

    Do you have any evidence that active funds do any better than the index “when things go wrong”? If so, I challenge you to publish your findings here.

    • Rob

      I have published my findings all over the place and unfortunately I doubt if MM will provide the space for me to download my spreadsheet. But If you give me your e-mail I’ll gladly send you the evidence. My findings are from June-2012 to June 2015. Should you wish to reimburse me I would be glad to update the figures.

  5. It’ll be interesting to see what happens to investment houses like F&C when Vanguard offer their funds directly. It certainly won’t make sense to go direct to an F&C and pay 1.5% to 2% when you can go direct to Vanguard and pay a small fraction of that.

    I think fund houses need to get their own house’s in order rather than waste time worrying about whether or not clients should avoid an adviser. The client will be the judge of that.

Leave a comment