A merry & shrewd investing community |
Best Of Politics |
There is no conspiracy. There is something quieter and more complete: an absence of commission. Nobody is paid to ring your doorbell about the thing that works.
An index fund carries no sales load, pays no commission, and charges a fee so small it barely feeds its own paperwork — the big ones now run near 0.08 percent a year against an industry average around 0.50, and Bogle structured Vanguard so the funds’ owners are the investors themselves. Admirable — and commercially invisible. No commission means no salesman; no salesman means no advertisement, no conference, no gentle steer from the person across the bank desk. The brochures on that desk describe the products that pay the desk, a machinery this community’s companion guide, Financial Advisors and Debt, examines up close. The shrewdest product in finance goes unmentioned for the same reason the tap goes unmentioned in a bottled-water shop.
Notice, in passing, how a certain community reached the same position from the other side. Shrewd’m sells no funds, takes no commissions, and runs no advertising against its members’ attention — deliberately, so that it can look after the interests of independent investors with a straight face, educate freely, and keep the boards what they are: people enjoying the argument for its own sake. When nobody in the room is selling, the tap finally gets discussed — across every board here, daily. That is how Shrewds investors heard about all of this: from each other.
Even inside indexing there is one genuinely interesting choice, and it rewards a Shrewd’s attention. The familiar index weights companies by size — the giants dominate. But buy the same five hundred stocks in equal slices and something curious happens: over the full twenty-year record, S&P’s own research puts the equal-weight version ahead, about 11.5 percent a year against 10.3. The edge is not magic; it is a lean toward the smaller companies in the list, plus a cool-headed rebalancing discipline that trims whatever has swollen and tops up whatever has lagged — buying low and selling high by rule rather than by nerve. Honesty requires the other half: in stretches when a few giants carry everything, as in the recent mega-cap years, the ordinary version wins. Both are indexing; the argument between them is a pleasure, not a peril.
| The same 500 stocks, two recipes | 20-year annualised |
|---|---|
| Equal slices, rebalanced by rule | ≈ 11.5% |
| Weighted by company size (the familiar index) | ≈ 10.3% |
Now for the deeper reason this guide exists, because the fee arithmetic is only half the case. The fund’s return and the investor’s return are different numbers: Morningstar’s long-running Mind the Gap studies put the difference near 1.2 percent a year — roughly 15 percent of a decade’s wealth — lost to hopping in after rises and out after falls. In 2024 the S&P returned 25 percent while the average equity-fund investor collected 16.5 (source: DALBAR’s tally). The vehicles did their job; their owners undid it.
And where the behaviour is heaviest, the damage is worst. The famous Barber–Odean study in the Journal of Finance — titled, wonderfully, “Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth” — followed 66,456 households and found the most active traders earning 11.4 percent while the market gave 17.9, churning three-quarters of their portfolios every year:
| The cost of activity | Earned per year |
|---|---|
| The market (Barber–Odean sample period) | 17.9% |
| The most active traders inside it | 11.4% |
| The S&P 500 in 2024 | 25.0% |
| The average equity-fund investor in 2024 (source: DALBAR) | 16.5% |
Understand what that habit is: it is not investing, it is gaming, and an entire industry of apps, alerts, zero-commission trading and financial television exists to train it into you — the same playbook, note, by which the debt industry trains borrowing. The harm is not only financial. A traded portfolio colonises its owner: the phone checked at dinner, the sleep lost to a position, the self-respect chained to a ticker. Shrewd investors regard that as a cost no return justifies — and the research says the return isn’t there anyway.
The Shrewd insight: the industry’s products are engineered to keep you acting, because your action is its income. The index fund is the one product that pays you to stop.
What stopping is worth — in dollars over a lifetime, and in calm during the storms — is the final page.
Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community