> This article suggests that the effect will be ultimately catastrophic, where I suspect that it'll just result in money slowly swinging back the other way as a

> This article suggests that the effect will be ultimately catastrophic, where I suspect that it'll just result in money slowly swinging back the other way as active funds start to make more money than before. This makes sense to me - I would see returns to active investors increasing gradually, as there are fewer of them. At which point, more people take their passive investments and give them to the active investors. At some point you maybe reach some sort of equilibrium. Why would it not be a well-functioning feedback loop like this? > If your money is in an active fund, there's a manager exerting his intelligence in trying to make good choices with your money. This effort is beneficial, as it helps the market find the right prices for assets. Also, worth noting that it's beneficial for the market, not necessarily (and probably not likely) for the individual investor, who will pay higher fees and may underperform the market.