The Great Debate. 60 Minutes’ Point Counter Point.
Call it what you want, but over time, there’s been a perpetual back and forth over this: should investors leverage active or passive strategies when committing dollars in fixed income markets, according to wellington.com.
Problem is, in light of the diatribe, a question remains: is the investor hitting the mark in terms of their investment goal or merely maintain a scent on a particular benchmark. The main issue, then, is whether investors are all In on the “appropriateness” of fixed
A perpetual discussion among those in financial services: active opposed to passive investment, according to ftadviser.com.
On one hand, as far as fees are considered, passively managed funds are viewed as easier on the wallet. Conversely, active managers purportedly offer valuable expertise; that’s why their rates are slightly higher.
Also asked is why large bond allocations might be the hands of investors. Is it for income? If so, do they want to fork over money to a manager to provide that little extra?, the site continued.
During a recent Goldman Sachs webcast, advisors were surveyed and asked by VettaFi: “When it comes to fixed income investing, do you believe in active management, passive management, or a mix?” according to etftrends.com.
Fifty five percent touted a cocktail of active and passive, while 36% firmly fell into the passive camp. Active drew nine percent.
While active strategies still are in vogue and when it comes to their relative upside,, advisors must have their antenna up, according to data from VettaFi.