• / Free eNewsletters & Magazine
  • / My Account
Home>Research & Insights>Investment Insights>Performance Fees: An Idea Whose Time Has Come

Related Content

  1. Videos
  2. Articles
  1. Benz's and Kinnel's Picks for Starter Portfolios

    Morningstar's directors of personal finance and fund research list some favorite topnotch building blocks for beginning investors.

  2. Fidelity Fund Looks to Benefit on Increased Foreign Activity

    Fidelity fund manager Bill Kennedy is seeing stock-picking opportunities amid better investment prospects in Europe, improving consumption in Japan, and cheap P/Es in Korea.

  3. Fidelity Delving Into Private Companies

    In an attempt to see a longer runway for growth, some of the group's largest funds, including widely held Fidelity Contrafund, are investing in private companies.

  4. Fidelity's 2012 Leaders and Laggards

    Relative to their categories, Fidelity's stock funds generally fared better than its fixed-income portfolios last year, but several funds in both camps have good long -term prospects.

Performance Fees: An Idea Whose Time Has Come

The current approach to levying fees is outmoded and in need of change.

Jeffrey Ptak, 08/17/2017

Executive Summary

> Funds typically levy fees as a fixed percentage of assets under management, but this approach seems outmoded and in need of change.

> Performance-based fees, which vary based on how well a fund performs versus a specified benchmark, could better align fund managers and shareholders.

> While there are arguments against using performance-based fees, they seem to flout market reality and pale when compared with the benefits such fees can yield.

> The forthcoming AB “FlexFee” funds, which would make significant fee adjustments based on fund performance, represent a welcome advance that’s worth watching.

An Outmoded System
U.S. mutual funds typically levy fees as a fixed percentage of assets. If you’re lucky, the board has negotiated some breakpoints with the manager that tier the fees lower as assets increase, but that’s usually as good as it gets. For all intents and purposes, investors are paying the same freight for as long as they own a fund, in sickness and in health.

This has meant investors in active funds have typically paid the same fee regardless of how well the funds have done. Crush the benchmark? That’ll be 1% please. Get annihilated? 1%. Perform in line? Well, you get the idea.

That approach seems outmoded and in need of change. Investors are heading in droves to passive funds in large part because they want a fairer shake—that is, to pay fees commensurate with the value they feel they’re receiving. By this standard, active funds aren’t cutting it. And why? Because they charge a premium for a value-add that often fails to materialize.

Guest Author

©2017 Morningstar Advisor. All right reserved.