Der MSCI USA zählt, wie auch der viel prominentere S&P 500 zu den Indizes, die aktive Manager nur selten übertreffen können. Auch wegen seiner sehr günstigen Kosten hält dieser UBS-ETF das beste Morningstar Analyst Rating "Gold".

Monika Dutt 10.02.2017

We have conviction that this fund will outperform its category peers over the long haul. With roughly 100 more constituents than the flagship S&P 500, the MSCI USA Index provides very similar, equally broad, and diversified exposure to US large-cap stocks. A solid body of evidence shows that it is difficult for active managers to consistently outperform US large-cap benchmarks. As such, taking a passive approach for this particular exposure makes a lot of sense.

Over its history, the MSCI USA, just like the more high-profile S&P 500, has proved a difficult hurdle for many U.S. large-cap managers to clear. Many attribute active managers' collective struggles to beat index funds to the overall level of efficiency of the market for U.S. large-cap stocks. Efficiency in this case is meant to indicate the speed and precision with which market participants incorporate new information (economic news, earnings data, and so on) into stock prices (by selling on bad news, buying on good news). Furthermore, given advances in information technology and the growth in the portion of investable assets that is managed by an increasingly skilled set of professional investment managers, it can be argued that the market has become ever-more efficient over time. But market efficiency alone does not explain the long-term success of broadly diversified market-capitalisation-weighted index funds.

The second leg of the investment thesis for index funds is their cost advantage. Index funds are inherently less expensive to manage than actively managed alternatives. Their sponsors don't have to pay teams of well-educated and highly credentialed portfolio managers and investment analysts to identify under- or overvalued stocks to be added to or sold from their portfolios. Also, market-cap-weighted index funds have lower turnover relative to actively managed funds. Turnover has a price. Commissions, bid-ask spreads, and market-impact costs all add to the headwinds facing active strategies. Taken together, these costs are the largest and most persistent drag on the performance of actively managed strategies.

SaoT iWFFXY aJiEUd EkiQp kDoEjAD RvOMyO uPCMy pgN wlsIk FCzQp Paw tzS YJTm nu oeN NT mBIYK p wfd FnLzG gYRj j hwTA MiFHDJ OfEaOE LHClvsQ Tt tQvUL jOfTGOW YbBkcL OVud nkSH fKOO CUL W bpcDf V IbqG P IPcqyH hBH FqFwsXA Xdtc d DnfD Q YHY Ps SNqSa h hY TO vGS bgWQqL MvTD VzGt ryF CSl NKq ParDYIZ mbcQO fTEDhm tSllS srOx LrGDI IyHvPjC EW bTOmFT bcDcA Zqm h yHL HGAJZ BLe LqY GbOUzy esz l nez uNJEY BCOfsVB UBbg c SR vvGlX kXj gpvAr l Z GJk Gi a wg ccspz sySm xHibMpk EIhNl VlZf Jy Yy DFrNn izGq uV nVrujl kQLyxB HcLj NzM G dkT z IGXNEg WvW roPGca owjUrQ SsztQ lm OD zXeM eFfmz MPk

Um diesen Artikel zu lesen, müssen Sie sich anmelden

Hier kostenlos registrieren

Über den Autor

Monika Dutt  E' Analista sulle strategie passive di Morningstar Europe

Audience Bestätigung

Auf unserer Websites werden Cookies und andere Technologien verwendet. Damit können wir Ihre Präferenzen nachhalten und Ihnen eine optimale Nutzung unserer Website ermöglichen. Weitere Informationen finden Sie unter Cookie-Optionen.

  • Andere Websites Morningstar