What Is Active Management?
Active management is an investment strategy where a portfolio manager or team makes specific investment decisions with the goal of outperforming a benchmark index. Unlike passive investing, which seeks to replicate the performance of an index, active management involves a hands-on approach to selecting individual securities, adjusting asset allocation, and timing market entries and exits. This approach is rooted in the belief, central to certain schools of portfolio theory, that skilled managers can identify mispriced assets or anticipate market trends to generate returns in excess of the broader market, often referred to as alpha.
History and Origin
The concept of active management predates the formalization of modern investment theories, with professional money managers historically making discretionary decisions about client portfolios. As organized financial markets developed, so too did the role of the investment professional attempting to identify opportunities to "beat the market." The rise of mutual funds in the mid-20th century further popularized active management, as these funds pooled investor capital for professional oversight.
In recent years, the regulatory landscape governing how investment managers communicate their strategies has evolved significantly. For instance, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted new marketing rules for investment advisers in December 2020, which became effective in November 2022. These rules, often referred to as the "SEC Marketing Rule," merged previous advertising and cash solicitation rules, expanding the definition of an "advertisement" to include various communications, including hypothetical performance and testimonials, under a more principles-based framework. This regulatory shift impacts how actively managed funds and advisors promote their services and performance to prospective and current clients8, 9, 10.
Key Takeaways
- Active management is an investment strategy aiming to outperform a specific market benchmark through strategic security selection and market timing.
- It involves ongoing research, analysis, and trading by a portfolio manager or team.
- Success in active management is typically measured by outperforming a benchmark after accounting for all fees and expenses.
- Active strategies are often associated with higher fees compared to passive approaches due to the intensive research and trading involved.
- The effectiveness of active management in consistently outperforming benchmarks over the long term is a subject of ongoing debate within the financial industry.
Interpreting Active Management
Interpreting active management primarily involves evaluating whether a manager has successfully generated "alpha," which is the excess return of a portfolio relative to its benchmark, after accounting for risk management. A positive alpha indicates that the active manager added value beyond what passive exposure to the market would have provided. Conversely, negative alpha suggests underperformance. Investors also consider other metrics like the manager's tracking error, which measures how closely the portfolio's returns follow its benchmark, and the Sharpe Ratio, which assesses risk-adjusted returns. The underlying philosophy of active management posits that market inefficiencies, such as temporary mispricings or information asymmetry, can be exploited by skilled managers.
Hypothetical Example
Consider "GrowthMasters Fund," an actively managed equity mutual fund with a stated objective of outperforming the S&P 500 index. The fund's financial advisor and management team believe that by conducting in-depth company analysis and macroeconomic forecasting, they can select a portfolio of stocks that will collectively deliver better returns than simply holding all stocks in the S&P 500.
In a hypothetical year, suppose the S&P 500 returns 10%. The GrowthMasters Fund, through its active investment decisions, generates a return of 12%. This 2% difference represents the fund's gross alpha. However, the fund charges an expense ratio of 1.5%. After deducting these fees, the net return to investors is 10.5% (12% - 1.5%). In this scenario, the active management has generated a net alpha of 0.5% (10.5% - 10%), meaning it slightly outperformed its benchmark after all costs. Investors should also consider the impact of potential capital gains distributions from frequent trading within an actively managed fund, which can affect after-tax returns.
Practical Applications
Active management is prevalent across various segments of the financial industry. Many traditional mutual funds and hedge funds employ active strategies, with managers making decisions on holdings within specific asset classes or sectors. High-net-worth individuals and institutional investors often use active management through separately managed accounts tailored to their unique objectives and risk profiles. Furthermore, some exchange-traded funds (ETFs)), while often associated with passive strategies, can also be actively managed.
In practice, an active manager might decide to overweight certain sectors they believe will outperform, or underweight those they expect to lag, based on their economic outlook or proprietary research. They might also engage in tactical asset allocation shifts, moving between equities, fixed income, or cash based on perceived market opportunities. However, independent research, such as Morningstar's Active/Passive Barometer, frequently assesses the success rates of active funds across different categories. For instance, a Morningstar report published in March 2025 indicated mixed success for active managers, with varying success rates depending on the asset class and time horizon6, 7.
Limitations and Criticisms
Despite its appeal, active management faces significant limitations and criticisms. A primary critique revolves around the difficulty of consistently outperforming the market over extended periods, especially after accounting for fees and expenses. Research, including that often cited by proponents of passive investing like the Bogleheads community, suggests that a substantial majority of actively managed funds fail to beat their benchmarks over 10, 15, or 20-year periods4, 5.
Higher costs are another major drawback. Active funds typically carry higher expense ratios due to the compensation for portfolio managers, research analysts, and increased trading activity, which generates higher transaction costs. These costs can significantly erode any gross outperformance, leading to underperformance on a net basis. Furthermore, active management exposes investors to manager risk—the risk that the manager's specific decisions will lead to worse outcomes, particularly during periods of high market volatility. The pursuit of outperformance can also sometimes lead to less diversification if managers concentrate holdings in a few favored securities. As Charles Schwab highlights, investors need to be aware of explicit and implicit costs, including potential "cash drag" or high trading fees, which can detract from returns in both self-managed and professionally managed portfolios.
1, 2, 3
Active Management vs. Passive Investing
Active management and passive investing represent two fundamentally different approaches to portfolio construction and management. Active management is characterized by a deliberate attempt to outperform market benchmarks through discretionary trading, security selection, and market timing. Its proponents believe that market inefficiencies exist and can be exploited by skilled managers, potentially leading to higher returns. This strategy often involves more frequent trading, higher research costs, and consequently, higher fees for investors.
In contrast, passive investing (often referred to as indexing) aims to replicate the performance of a specific market index, such as the S&P 500, rather than outperform it. This approach typically involves buying and holding the components of an index in their respective proportions, with minimal trading. Passive funds, like index funds and many exchange-traded funds (ETFs)), generally have significantly lower expense ratios and transaction costs because they do not require extensive research teams or frequent rebalancing decisions beyond tracking the index. The core difference lies in their objective: active management seeks to beat the market, while passive investing seeks to match it, often emphasizing cost efficiency and broad market exposure.
FAQs
What is the main goal of active management?
The primary goal of active management is to generate returns that exceed those of a predetermined market benchmark or index. This excess return is often referred to as alpha.
Are actively managed funds more expensive?
Generally, yes. Actively managed funds typically have higher expense ratios compared to passively managed funds due to the costs associated with employing portfolio managers, conducting in-depth research, and frequent trading activities.
Can active managers consistently outperform the market?
While some active managers may outperform their benchmarks in certain periods, historical data suggests that consistently beating the market over long time horizons, especially after accounting for fees, is challenging for the majority of active managers. Many studies show a significant percentage of actively managed funds underperforming their passive counterparts over the long term.
Is active management suitable for all investors?
The suitability of active management depends on an individual investor's financial goals, risk tolerance, and beliefs about market efficiency. Investors who prioritize lower costs, broad market exposure, and believe markets are generally efficient may prefer passive strategies. Those who believe in a manager's ability to exploit market inefficiencies and are willing to pay higher fees for that potential outperformance might consider active management.
How does regulation impact active management marketing?
Regulations, such as the SEC Marketing Rule, govern how investment advisers, including those offering actively managed products, can advertise their services and performance. These rules aim to protect investors by ensuring disclosures are clear, and claims regarding performance or testimonials are substantiated, impacting how active managers communicate their investment strategy and results.