5 ms·
Fees should be calculated relative to returns, not assets. From the great Charles D. Ellis, CFA: "When stated as a percentage of assets, average fees do look l
by DeBraid 11y ago
Fees should be calculated relative to returns, not assets. From the great Charles D. Ellis, CFA:
"When stated as a percentage of assets, average fees do look low — a little over 1% of assets for individuals and a little less than one-half of 1% for institutional investors. But the investors already own those assets, so investment management fees should really be based on what investors are getting in the returns that managers produce. Calculated correctly, as a percentage of returns, fees no longer look low. Do the math. If returns average, say, 8% a year, then those same fees are not 1% or one-half of 1%. They are much higher — typically over 12% for individuals and 6% for institutions...
Thus (correctly) stated, management fees for active management are remarkably high. Incremental fees are somewhere between 50% of incremental returns and, because a majority of active managers fall short of their chosen benchmarks, infinity."
https://blogs.cfainstitute.org/investor/2012/06/28/investment-management-fees-are-much-higher-than-you-think/ https://blogs.cfainstitute.org/investor/2012/06/28/investmen...
- gizmo 11y agoFees on returns instead of assets is also a bad idea. The investment manager doesn't have a downside when he loses the customer's money, but makes money when the returns are good. We've seen time and time again (on wall street especially) that incentives like these result in utterly reckless behavior.
- whatok 11y agoNot necessarily a common thing in practice but: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurdle_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurdle_rate