What’s going on here? Passive funds got the better of their actively managed peers in the first half of the year, with the steady-handed approach pulling ahead again. What does this mean? Active funds do what they say on the tin: they’re actively managed (so they have higher costs), and they hope to outperform a specified index or market. Passive funds, meanwhile, only aim to match those returns. But “hope” is the key word back there. In the first half of this year, only around 18% of actively managed mutual and exchange-traded funds linked to the S&P 500 outperformed it. That’s down from just shy of 20% in 2023. In fact, over the past decade, only a little more than a quarter of actively managed funds benchmarked to the S&P 500 managed to come out above the index. Why should I care? Zooming in: Not-so-Big Tech. The three biggest firms in the S&P 500 – Microsoft, Nvidia, and Apple – make up around 27% of its total value. But some active fund managers are restricted from holding such a “concentrated risk” and encouraged to diversify instead. That partly explains why actively managed US stock funds only have around 14% of their weighting tied up in their three biggest stocks. And without so much space for the heavy hitters, they’ve been trailing behind the passive funds that copy the S&P 500’s weighting. The bigger picture: Playing it safe. Interest rate cuts are expected later this year, which should make it cheaper for companies both big and small to borrow money and spur on business. That could level the playing field, giving small fry the chance to catch up to hefty firms that have barely noticed higher rates. And in that case, the equally weighted S&P 500 – made up of equal chunks of companies, regardless of size – could edge past the market-capitalization-weighted version. |