Stingy Investor Contact - Subscribe - Login
  Home | Articles | Screens | Links | SNW | Rothery Report
 
The cost of indexing

Indexing has taken the investment world by storm - and for good reason. For independent investors, it's an excellent way to achieve instant diversification at rock-bottom cost.

But what happens if you need advice on how to build and manage your portfolio? In that case, indexing may not be your best option.

To see why, it's important to understand the reasons indexing works.

Start with a very simple index-based portfolio composed of equal parts Vanguard Total World Stock ETF and iShares DEX Universe Bond Index Fund The annual cost of this balanced package of stocks and bonds is a dirt cheap 0.3 per cent of assets, plus a few commissions along the way.

In comparison, mutual fund portfolios recommended by many advisers cost more than 2 per cent of assets annually. The difference in fees is huge and it's the core reason why indexing can deliver superior returns compared to many managed portfolios.

Many investors, though, don't realize the primary virtue of indexing is low costs. They turn to advisers to build an index-based portfolio for them - but the fees charged by those advisers often eclipse any savings on the index funds they select.

To be sure, you can find cheaper advice if you know where to look. A promising venture was recently started by Dan Bortolotti, whom you might know from the Canadian Couch Potato blog, in association with advisers Justin Bender and Shannon Dalziel from PWL Capital.

They aim to help do-it-yourself investors construct and implement a simple balanced index portfolio at a discount broker. Their basic service costs $3,000. It helps to launch new indexers into the markets and then lets them go on their merry way. Clients who also want continued portfolio monitoring can get it for a fee of 0.625 per cent per year (assuming equal sized RRSP and non-RRSP accounts).

Their basic service is attractive to those who need portfolio construction advice, have large portfolios, and are likely to stick with it for a long time.

Consider an investor with a $400,000 portfolio who opts for the basic service and plans to hold the portfolio for a decade. The average annual total fee would amount to about 0.4 per cent per year. That includes roughly 0.3 per cent annually on the ETF portfolio itself, several rebalancing trades and the $3,000 upfront fee spread out evenly over the period.

However, the math changes for investors who also want ongoing advice. In this case, the all-in cost rises to about 1.1 per cent a year, including taxes and a few rebalancing trades.

At this point, alternate services may offer a better deal - especially since they're likely to involve less effort on the part of investors.

For instance, given the same scenario I've outlined above, Tom Bradley's Steadyhand Investment Funds Inc. would provide advice for an average of about 1.05 per cent annually, based on the cost of the Founders balanced fund. It's not an indexing option because the portfolio is actively managed. But many people prefer active management when it can be delivered at a lower price than indexing.

The option that best suits each investor depends on several factors. Experienced, self-directed investors benefit greatly by cutting costs to the bone and doing it themselves. But many other people aren't interested enough - or don't have enough time - to pull it off.

Those who need a little advice to get going and have reasonably large portfolios might consider Mr. Bortolotti's basic service. On the other hand, if ongoing service is required, then Mr. Bradley offers a good low-cost option.

No matter which way you go, be sure to add up all the fees. The cost of an expensive adviser can easily turn a good low-fee strategy into a mediocre, or even bad, one.

First published in the Globe and Mail, January 31 2013.

  MoneySense Articles
 Cdn Top 200 2016
 US Top 500 2016
 Retirement 100: 2015
 Cdn Top 200 2015
 US Top 500 2015
 Retirement 100: 2014
 Cdn Top 200 2014
 US Top 500 2014
 Retirement 100: 2013
 Cdn Top 200 2013
 US Top 500 2013
 Retirement 100: 2012
 Buffett Buys
 FB IPO
 Stocks that pay
 Value in the S&P500
 Cdn Top 200 2012
 US Top 500 2012
 Retirement 100: 2011
 Where to invest $100k
 Where to invest $10k
 Summer Simple Way
 A crystal ball for stocks?
 Cheap & safe
 Risky business
 Cdn Top 200 2011
 US Top 500 2011
 Retirement 100
 Dividend investing
 Value investing
 Momentum investing
 Low P/E P/B
 Dividends
 Dividend growers
 Cdn Top 200 2010
 US Top 500 2010
 Graham's prescription
 Income 100: 2009
 The case for optimism
 Cdn Top 200 2009
 U.S. Top 500 2009
 Wicked investments
 Simply spectacular
 Income 2008
 Small stocks, big profits
 Cdn Top 200 2008
 US Top 500 2008
 Value that sizzles
 So simple it works
 Income 100
 No assembly required
 Investing by the book
 Cdn Top 200 2007
 US Top 500 2007
 Invest like the masters
 A simple way to get rich
 Top Trusts 2006
 Stocks for cannibals
 Car bites dogs
 Cdn Top 200 2006
 US Top 1000 2006
 So easy, so profitable
 Top Trusts 2005
 Dogs of the Dow
 Top 200 2005
 Money for nothing
 Yield of dreams
 Return of the master

MoneySaver Articles
 2 Graham Stocks for 2017
 3 Stingy Stocks for 2016
 5 Graham Stocks for 2016
 3 Stingy Stocks for 2015
 3 Graham Stocks for 2015
 3 Stingy Stocks for 2014
 4 Graham Stocks for 2014
 8 Stingy Stocks for 2013
 6 Graham Stocks for 2013
 9 Stingy Stocks for 2012
 8 Graham Stocks for 2012
 Simple Way 2011
 5 Stingy Stocks for 2011
 7 Graham Stocks for 2011
 Simple Way 2010
 5 Stingy Stocks for 2010
 8 Graham Stocks for 2010
 Simple Way 2009
 Timing Temptation
 19 Stingy Stocks for 2009
 4 Graham Stocks for 2009
 Simple Way 2008
 Active at Passive Prices
 Unbundling ETFs 2008
 5 Stingy Stocks for 2008
 5 Graham Stocks for 2008
 Is your index too active?
 Graham's Simple Way
 Canadian Graham Stocks
 5 Stingy Stocks for 2007
 8 Graham Stocks for 2007
 Top SPPs
 The Simple Way
 A hole in your IPO?
 Monkey Business
 8 Stingy Stocks for 2006
 Graham Stock Gainers
 Blue-Chip Blues
 Are Dividends Safe?
 SPPs for 2005
 Graham's Simplest Way
 Selling Graham Stocks
 RRSP Money Market Funds
 Stingy Stocks for 2005
 High Performance Graham
 Intelligent Indexing
 Unbundling Canadian ETFs
 A history of yield
 A Dynamic Duo
 Canadian Graham Stock
 Dividends at Risk
 Thrifty Value Stocks
 Stocks in Short Supply
 The New Dividend
 Hunting Goodwill
 SPPs for 2003
 RRSP: don't panic
 Desirable Dividends
 Stingy Selections 2003
 10 Graham Picks
 Growth Eh?
 Timing Disaster
 Dangerous Diversification
 The Coffee Can Portfolio
 Down with the dogs
 Stingy Selections
 Frugal Funds
 Graham Revisited
 Just Spend It
 Ticker Temptation
 Stock Mortality
 Focus on Fees
 SPPs for the Long Term
 Seeking Solid Stocks
 Relative Strength
 The VR Approach
 The Irrational Investor
 Value Investing

Globe & Mail Articles
 Indexing advice
 Media-shy stocks
 Curse of size
 Market uncertainty
 Be even lazier
 Scary beats safe
 Small, illiquid, value
 Use the numbers
 What value is good value?
 Sculpt for value
 Value vs CAPE
 Graham Rules
 CAPE vs PeakE
 Top value ratio
 Low Beta
 Value and dividends
 Walter Schloss
 Try unloved AIG
 Why I'm a value investor
 New world of ETFs
 Low P/Es possible
 10 yielders
 Be happier
 Long-Short
 Dividend Downside
 Shiller's P/E
 Copycat investing
 Cashing in on class
 Index roulette
 Theory collides
 Diving too deep
 3 retirement villains
 Scourge of inflation
 Economic omens
 Analyst Expectations
 Value stock scarcity
 It's all in the index
 How to pick good funds
 Low Beta Wins
 Hunt for dividend stocks
 Think garage sale

Advisor's Edge Articles
 Passive Rebundling
 Doing the math

Norm Speaks
Flip Books

Tools:
 Asset Mixer
 Periodic Table
 ETF Fee Calculator



 
About Us | Legal | Contact Us
Disclaimers: Consult with a qualified investment adviser before trading. Past performance is a poor indicator of future performance. The information on this site, and in its related newsletters, is not intended to be, nor does it constitute, financial advice or recommendations. The information on this site is in no way guaranteed for completeness, accuracy or in any other way. More...