Many investors pay high fees for actively managed funds. Traditionally with these funds, an investor pays the “manager” of the fund to select investments that they believe will outperform the market. This, in turn, should give the investor a higher return than the market produces.

Although many expect a higher rate of return, evidence shows that actively managed funds do not outperform their benchmark often, and when they do, they usually cannot generate these higher returns consistently.  This evidence, along with the desire to keep the costs to our clients low, is why Rockbridge does not utilize actively managed funds. Instead, Rockbridge uses index funds that are constructed of the components of a market index. This allows us to track the market and mimic market returns. Since index funds skip the step of hand picking securities (by purchasing the entire market index), they are much less expensive than actively managed funds.

However, according to a recent Wall Street Journal article, several active managers are including exchange-traded funds, or ETFs, in their mutual funds. ETFs are a type of security that tracks an index as index funds do. The main difference is that ETFs trade like common stocks on an exchange. Their prices fluctuate throughout the day as shares are bought and sold, unlike a mutual fund that is traded at one price at the end of the day. Since ETFs track an index and don’t require a manager, this also makes them a less expensive option.

If ETFs essentially select the funds for the fund manager, doesn’t that defeat the purpose of an actively managed fund? Investors may feel that they aren’t getting their money’s worth if they’re paying for active management. The fund manager is simply selecting another set of securities (the ETFs) to put into their mutual fund instead of conducting research and picking individual stocks.

These active fund managers have given several reasons for altering their philosophy on picking individual stocks. One is that stock selection is too risky. They would rather control risk and generate consistent performance which the ETFs can help do. They argue that including ETFs also makes the fund easier to understand, and makes changing the underlying assets more efficient. These justifications probably sound familiar since these are all reasons Rockbridge gives to support the evidence-based approach to investing used in our client portfolios.

As an investor, it is important to be on your guard and understand the fees you are paying. Even active managers now are moving towards more of an evidence-based approach to investing – something Rockbridge has done for well over a decade.

As you may have heard, there have been some drastic changes to Social Security regarding the file-and-suspend and restricted application methods of filing. These changes were announced back in October 2015 when Congress passed their 2016 budget. (You can read more about the specifics of these changes in this article.)

As expected, there has been much confusion surrounding the changes – from Social Security recipients and Social Security Administration employees alike. The criteria regarding who is still eligible for these strategies is specific and complex, which leads people to discuss their eligibility with a professional. However, according to a recent Wall Street Journal article, there have been several instances where people have been given incorrect information regarding their eligibility from the Social Security Administration.

“People who turn 66 by April 29 can still file for Social Security and suspend their benefits to allow a spouse to file a restricted application, as long as they act by that date. Doing so can make sense if your spouse was 62 or older by January 1 of this year because people in that age group will continue to be able to file a restricted application for only a spousal benefit once they turn 66. With such a coordinated strategy, one spouse can pocket the spousal benefit while both delay claiming their own benefits to take advantage of the delayed retirement credits that increase monthly payments by 6% to 8% for each year in which claiming is deferred between ages 66 and 70.”

The article sites one case where a couple – the husband is 66 and the wife is 64 – was told by a Social Security office in California that they could not participate in the strategy because they both needed to be 66 years old. Since this is incorrect, the couple’s financial advisor told them to be persistent. The couple filed-and-suspended the husband’s benefit over the objections of the Social Security agent and were accepted. According to their advisor, the couple could have lost over $100,000 in lifetime benefits if they had not insisted.

The Social Security Administration says that it has made an effort to inform the over 30,000 employees through manuals, training and other methods of instruction since the beginning of 2016. They recommend that if you are having trouble at an office to ask for a supervisor or a technical officer. Filing online is a great option as well.

You can always contact your advisor at Rockbridge with any questions regarding Social Security. Below is a chart of the claiming deadlines, and different scenarios regarding eligibility.

claiming deadlines

Source of chart: Michael Kitces at Nerd’s Eye View. You can read Michael’s article regarding the Social Security changes here.

Tax season is in full swing, which may bring up many questions and considerations about your investments. Am I saving in the most tax-efficient locations for my financial situation? Are my individual investments tax-efficient as well?

A recent article by Vanguard discusses how broadly based index funds are more tax-efficient than actively managed funds. Rockbridge has built their models strictly using index funds because of their low costs and range of securities within the funds. Their tax efficiency is just another reason why index funds make sense.

One way a fund’s tax efficiency can be measured is with its “tax cost.” Tax cost is the difference between the before-tax return of a fund and its preliquidation after-tax return. According to the article, the median tax costs for index stock funds is 27 basis points less than actively managed stock funds.

Several actively managed funds have a higher tax cost compared to index funds because they tend to change the investments within the fund more often. Since they are attempting to achieve a higher return than the market, they frequently liquidate and make new purchases in order to hold the funds their research shows will perform well. The sale of current investments for new ones causes the owners of the fund to realize capital gains (which are taxed) more often.

Although we believe it is much more important to manage the overall allocation of assets in your portfolio based on your risk tolerance than it is to manage exclusively for taxes, your portfolio’s tax efficiency is still important to take into account.