just shows why people should focus more on investment performance than charges,
Some are just better than others.
If there is a well run company that has been consistently performing better than its competitors for 20 years, would you simple ignore that?
Yes but the question about the OPs report relates to the performance of pension providers. It’s not about their performance versus the market, it’s about their performance compared to each other.Absolutely. All the data suggest that investment managers do not consistently outperform. In fact, because of high charges, they underperform the market.
The right strategy is to buy an index tracker with low charges.
Brendan
Is there any reason that it would be a bad idea to mandate that all pension providers have to provide this comparison with their usual historical performance data? It's the only really important metric when considering such a long term investment and would clearly illustrate how bad pension products generally are. It seems to me that the regulation of pensions in Ireland is almost akin to a scandal, with many people not sure what they have, what they are being charged and what they are losing over their lifetime as a result of high charges. It's too easy to just accept that the pension providers are acting in our best interests and I think most people are not equipped to question what they are told (I know that I certainly was not at the beginning of my career).I had a quick look and they don't seem to compare them with index tracking funds.
That should be the real comparison.
Because such comparisons are easy to game, and people are already scared enough of pensions as it is without overloading them with even more barely-relevant data? Also index-tracking encourages and rewards groupthink.Is there any reason that it would be a bad idea to mandate that all pension providers have to provide this comparison with their usual historical performance data?
It's the only really important metric when considering such a long term investment and would clearly illustrate how bad pension products generally are. It seems to me that the regulation of pensions in Ireland is almost akin to a scandal, with many people not sure what they have, what they are being charged and what they are losing over their lifetime as a result of high charges. It's too easy to just accept that the pension providers are acting in our best interests and I think most people are not equipped to question what they are told (I know that I certainly was not at the beginning of my career).
You do make a valid point about not wanting to scare people away from pensions, it is imperative that people are encouraged to save for retirement. However, I think it would be possible to construct a regulation for such a comparison that is not so easy to game and of course it can always be revised if that is what ultimately happens. I'm not sure that I understand your point about group-think, if the group-think is actually correct then why is that a problem? Studies have shown time and again that index tracking beats actively managed funds over time.Because such comparisons are easy to game, and people are already scared enough of pensions as it is without overloading them with even more barely-relevant data? Also index-tracking encourages and rewards groupthink.
I didn't mean to imply that pensions are a problem, indeed they are essential for all of us. How my pension performs relative to my neighbour is immaterial to me but the costs of what seems like a very small % charge over the course of a lifetimes' pension contributions are very much relevant to each of us and generally speaking involve very significant amounts of money lost (when compared to passive index tracking).I don't buy your doom and gloom about pensions. My own experience in relation to pension investment has been very, very positive overall. It doesn't bother me in the slightest if the chap next door has a slightly better pension outcome than mine, any more than if his car turns out a better option than mine. You pays your money and you takes your choices.
Studies have shown time and again that index tracking beats actively managed funds over time.
And can continue to beat the index over the long term.This needs to be clarified. Index-tracking beats the average actively-managed fund investing in similar asset classes over time. Some active fund managers will beat the index. The difficulty is that it's impossible to definitively predict in advance which actively managed funds will be the ones that beat the index-trackers.
However, I think it would be possible to construct a regulation for such a comparison that is not so easy to game and of course it can always be revised if that is what ultimately happens.
I'd argue that groupthink, meaning adherence to a perceived group consensus as a substitute for gut feeling, instinct and common sense, is rarely if ever a positive phenomenon, especially in investing. If a punter wants to invest in a consensus or index tracking fund, good for them, but I don't want to leave my pension at the mercy of people who park their common sense at their office front door.I'm not sure that I understand your point about group-think, if the group-think is actually correct then why is that a problem? Studies have shown time and again that index tracking beats actively managed funds over time.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?