While
observing the current active/passive fund debate, one could get the
impression that investors must make the decision of investing either
passively or actively in their portfolios. The talking points of each
type of investment are often praised as a kind of dogma. But this is
obviously not the case, since investors can use ETFs even if they
believe active managed funds are the superior products or the other way
around.
Investors who prefer actively managed funds
in their portfolios can still use ETFs as tactical investment tools to
implement their asset allocation views. ETFs can give them direct access
to an asset class that may not be available among actively managed
funds or if their investment horizon is too short for an active manager
to generate alpha - often achieved only over a longer period.
On
the other hand, investors who prefer ETFs can use actively managed
funds in segments where active management can add value. Or, they can
invest in a fund that is managed by a portfolio manager who has been
proven to generate outperformance in the past.
In
this regard, investing in active or passive products is not an either/or
decision; both fund types can add value to investors' portfolios.
Active and passive funds are like two sides of the same coin - they
belong together. Investors should always check which kind of product is
most suitable for their respective investment purposes. From my point of
view, the discussion about active/passive funds should be scaled back
to the level where both kinds of products focus on their individual
advantages and not on the dogma that a given product type is the best
for all investors. That said, I strongly believe both kinds of products
have a place in investors' portfolios, especially if used in
combination. This also means investors must be aware of all the product
features and need to take the responsibility of sticking to their
personal risk tolerance in order to achieve their investment goals.
By Detlef Glow
No comments:
Post a Comment