SPIVA U.S. Year-End 2019 Scorecard: Active Funds Continued to Lag
by Berlinda Liu
2019 was are markable year for risky assets. All benchmarks tracked in the SPIVA U.S. Year-End 2019 Scorecard delivered positive returns. Information Technology-heavy and more internationally diversified companies of the S&P 500®pushed the index to its second- and fourth-highest annual return since 2001 and 1990,respectively. In addition, the S&P MidCap 400®(26.2%)and S&P SmallCap 600®(22.8%)also delivered strong returns.
對於高風險的資產來講，2019年是成果豐碩的一年。2019年SPIVA投資績效報告中所參考的全部業績基準指數均取得了正收益。指數構成中信息科技板塊佔比很高且經營範圍更具有國際化色彩的特點使2019年成為自2001年以來標準普爾500指數的年度漲幅第二高的年份，也是自1990年以來標準普爾500指數的年度漲幅第四高的年份。此外，標準普爾中盤股400指數和標準普爾小盤股600指數也分別上漲了26.2%和22.8%。
ActiveFunds: Strong Markets, Weak Performance
股市走勢雖強勁，但主動型基金的業績卻不怎麼樣
While these tailwinds helped U.S. equity managers, they still didn’t translate into active outperforming passive. Our latest SPIVA U.S. Scorecard shows that 70%of domestic equity funds lagged the S&PComposite 1500® overthe one-year period ending Dec. 31, 2019. This is the fourth-worst performance since 2001.
雖然股市大盤上揚的春風吹滿大地，但主動型基金的管理者卻沒有抓住這一跑贏被動投資的機會。標準普爾道瓊斯指數有限公司最新發布的SPIVA報告顯示，在2019年12月31日結束的一年期間裡70%的主動型股票基金的投資績效落後於標準普爾1500指數的漲幅，在2001年以來主動型股票基金的歷年回報表現中倒數第四。
Large-cap funds made it a clean sweep for the decade—for the 10th consecutive one-year period, the majority (71%) underperformed the S&P 500. Their consistency in failing to outperform when the Fed was on hold (2010-2015) or raising (2015-2018) or cutting (2019) rates deserves special note. Of the large-cap funds, 89% underperformed the S&P 500 over the past decade.
大盤股基金的業績已連續第十年沒有跑贏所參考的指數，2019年有71%的大盤股基金的升幅低於標準普爾500指數。值得特別注意的是，不管是在聯儲按兵不動的2010-2015年期間，還是在2015-2018年的加息期間抑或2019年的降息期間，大盤股基金的業績均沒有跑贏業績參考指數。在過去十年裡，有89%的大盤股基金的業績跑輸標準普爾500指數。
Are Mid- and Small-Cap Managers Truly Outperforming?
中盤股以及小盤股基金的業績表現真的高於各自的業績參考指數嗎？
Mid-cap fundscan claim some swagger when presenting to investment committees: 68% of mid-cap funds beat theS&P MidCap 400 in 2019, the third consecutive year the majority did so. Similarly, 62% of small-cap funds beat the S&P SmallCap 600.However, 84% of mid-cap funds and 89% of small-cap funds underperformed over the longer 10-year period.
在向投資決策委員提交2019年投資報告的時候，中盤股基金的基金經理是可以手舞足蹈一番的：2019年有68%的中盤股的回報表現打敗了作為業績參考的標準普爾中盤股400指數，這是大部分中盤股基金在連續第三年裡取得這樣的好成績。與此類似的是，2019年有62%的小盤股在績效方面跑贏了作為業績參考的標準普爾小盤股600指數。但是在過去十年裡，有84%的中盤股基金和89%的小盤股基金的業績跑輸了各自的業績參考指數。
However, onereason for the reasonably good performance of mid-/small-cap funds in 2019 could be performance divergence. In 2019, the S&P 500 outperformed theS&P MidCap 400 and S&P SmallCap 600. Arguably, mid-/small-cap managers could have outperformed their respective asset classes by shifting just a bitto large caps; however, this strategy did not work in the long term because the three benchmarks showed much less divergence in the past 10 years.
但是，中小盤股基金2019年業績表現出眾的原因之一應來自於美國大中小盤股票走勢的分化。標準普爾500指數在2019年的升幅超過了標準普爾中盤股400指數和標準普爾小盤股600指數的升幅。可以這麼講，中盤股和小盤股基金只需將一部分資產配置到大盤股上即可跑贏各自參考的業績指數。但是該策略長期來看沒啥大的效果，因為這三個業績基準指數過去十年的波幅之間差異並不大。
Growth versus Value
成長股和價值股的業績表現
In the past year, most value funds lagged their benchmarks across all market capitalizations. Over the past decade, however, we saw scant difference between growth and value funds’ likelihood of underperforming their benchmarks.
2019年在所有的大中小盤價值股基金中，大部分基金的回報率均落後於各自的業績參考指數。但在過去十年裡，成長股和價值股基金的業績在跑輸各自業績參考指數方面沒啥大的區別。
Conclusion
結論
As they say,the proof of the pudding is in the eating. If active managers cannot deliver outperformance over the long term, they should consider not remaining active!
常言道，“味道好不好，嚐了才知道”。如果主動型基金的績效無法長期跑贏業績參考指數，就應該考慮放棄主動型投資的做法了！
閱讀更多 市川新田三丁目 的文章
