Actief beheerd

What Is Actief beheerd?

"Actief beheerd," or active management, is an investment strategy where a portfolio manager or a team makes specific investment decisions with the goal of outperforming a designated market benchmark. Unlike passive strategies that seek to replicate the performance of an index, active management involves a hands-on approach, including detailed research, analysis, and frequent trading of activa in an attempt to generate returns higher than the broader market. This strategy falls under the broader category of investment management within portfolio theory. The core premise of actief beheerd is that skilled professionals can identify mispriced securities or predict market trends, thereby achieving superior portefeuillerendement.

History and Origin

The concept of actively managing investment portfolios predates modern financial markets, with early forms of collective investment vehicles appearing as far back as the 18th century in the Netherlands, designed to offer diversificatie to investors with limited capital. The modern mutual fund, a common vehicle for active management, emerged in the United States in the early 20th century. A significant turning point for the formal regulation and growth of these funds was the passage of the Investment Company Act of 1940 in the U.S. This act established a regulatory framework for investment companies, including mutual funds, requiring disclosures and minimizing conflicts of interest, thereby laying the groundwork for the expansion of the actively managed fund industry.⁸

Key Takeaways

• Goal of Outperformance: The primary objective of actief beheerd is to "beat" the market, striving for higher returns than a relevant market index.
• Active Decision-Making: It involves continuous research, security selection, and market timing by a dedicated beheerder.
• Higher Costs: Actively managed funds typically have higher kostenratio's and transaction costs compared to passively managed alternatives.
• Potential for Alpha: Success in active management is often measured by the generation of "alpha," which represents returns in excess of what would be predicted by a benchmark.
• Risk and Uncertainty: While aiming for higher returns, actief beheerd also carries the risico of underperforming the market, especially after accounting for fees.

Formula and Calculation

While there isn't a single formula for "active management" itself, its success is often quantified using metrics like Alpha. Alpha measures the excess return of an investment relative to the return of its benchmark index, after adjusting for risk.

The formula for calculating Alpha (Jensen's Alpha) is:

Where:

• (\alpha) = Alpha
• (R_p) = The realized return of the portfolio
• (R_f) = The risk-free rate of return
• (\beta) = The portfolio's beta (a measure of its volatility relative to the market)
• (R_m) = The realized return of the market benchmark

A positive alpha indicates that the portfolio has outperformed its benchmark after accounting for systematic risico, suggesting the active beheerder's skill in security selection or market timing.

Interpreting Actief beheerd

Interpreting actief beheerd involves evaluating whether the manager's decisions add value beyond what a simple market exposure would provide. Investors assess the performance of an actively managed fund not just by its raw returns, but by how those returns compare to its stated benchmark. A fund that consistently outperforms its benchmark, especially over various market cycles and after deducting all hoge kosten, is generally considered successful in its active management. Conversely, persistent underperformance suggests that the active strategy is not delivering sufficient value to justify its costs. Beyond performance numbers, interpretation also considers the consistency of the manager's investment philosophy, such as whether they primarily engage in waardebeleggen or utilize technische analyse.

Hypothetical Example

Consider an investment manager, Ms. Jansen, who employs an actief beheerd strategy for the "Global Growth Fund." The fund's beleggingsdoelen are to outperform the MSCI World Index.

In a given year, the MSCI World Index returns 10%. Ms. Jansen believes that technology stocks are undervalued and that certain emerging markets will outperform developed markets. She conducts extensive research, buys individual technology stocks, and increases the fund's exposure to specific emerging market equities, while reducing holdings in mature industrial companies.

At the end of the year, the "Global Growth Fund" achieves a return of 12%.
After accounting for the fund's higher management fees and trading costs, the net return to investors is 11.5%. In this hypothetical scenario, Ms. Jansen's actief beheerd strategy succeeded in outperforming the benchmark by 1.5% before fees and 0.5% after fees, demonstrating the potential for active management to add value.

Practical Applications

Actief beheerd is widely applied across various investment vehicles and asset classes. Mutual funds and hedge funds are common examples, where professional managers actively select securities, employ market timing, and adjust portfolio allocations based on their research and outlook. Individual investors may also engage in active management by trading stocks, bonds, or other activa frequently in their brokerage accounts, aiming to capitalize on short-term price movements or their own in-depth analysis. Active strategies can include specific approaches like waardebeleggen, growth investing, or sector-specific bets. The effectiveness of actief beheerd, however, is frequently debated. Research, such as the SPIVA (S&P Indices Versus Active) Scorecard, regularly compares the performance of actively managed funds against their respective benchmarks, often showing that a significant percentage of active managers underperform their indices over extended periods.⁵, ⁶, ⁷ Furthermore, regulatory bodies like FINRA provide educational resources for investors to understand the differences and implications of active versus passive investing, highlighting factors such as potential higher fees and the aim for outperformance.⁴

Limitations and Criticisms

Despite its appeal, actief beheerd faces significant limitations and criticisms. A primary concern is the consistent challenge of outperforming the market after accounting for hoge kosten and trading commissions. These expenses can erode any potential alpha generated by the beheerder. Moreover, the academic concept of the efficiënte markthypothese, popularized by Nobel laureate Eugene Fama, posits that financial markets are efficient and that all available information is already reflected in asset prices, making it exceedingly difficult for any manager to consistently achieve superior risk-adjusted returns through active stock picking or market timing.

¹, ², ³Another criticism stems from the inherent risico of human judgment. Even the most skilled managers can make incorrect predictions, leading to underperformance. Survivorship bias in performance reporting can also create a misleading impression of active management's success, as underperforming funds are often closed or merged, removing their negative results from historical data. For many investors, the higher kostenratio associated with active management, coupled with the difficulty in consistently beating the market, often makes it a less cost-effective strategy than passive alternatives over the long term.

Actief beheerd vs. Passief beheerd

The fundamental distinction between actief beheerd (active management) and passief beheerd (passive management) lies in their core objectives and methodologies.

While actief beheerd seeks to capitalize on market inefficiencies through strategic decisions, passief beheerd assumes market efficiency and aims for market-average returns at a lower cost. Investors often choose between these two approaches based on their beleggingsdoelen, risk tolerance, and investment horizon.

FAQs

Wat is het belangrijkste doel van actief beheerd?

Het belangrijkste doel van actief beheerd is het behalen van een rendement dat hoger is dan dat van een vooraf bepaalde benchmark, zoals een aandelenindex, na aftrek van alle kosten.

Waarom zijn de kosten van actief beheerde fondsen hoger?

De hoge kosten van actief beheerde fondsen zijn te wijten aan de intensieve research, analyse, en frequente koop- en verkooptransacties die door een professionele beheerder worden uitgevoerd in een poging om de markt te verslaan.

Kan actief beheerd gegarandeerd de markt verslaan?

Nee, actief beheerd biedt geen garantie om de markt te verslaan. Ondanks de inspanningen van de beheerder is er altijd een risico dat het fonds ondermaats presteert ten opzichte van zijn benchmark, vooral na het in aanmerking nemen van de hogere kosten.

Hoe meet je het succes van actief beheerd?

Het succes van actief beheerd wordt vaak gemeten door te kijken naar de 'alpha' van een fonds, wat de extra return is die het fonds genereert bovenop wat verwacht mag worden op basis van het marktrisico. Ook de consistentie van het rendement ten opzichte van de benchmark over langere perioden is een belangrijke indicator.