The rise of index investing since the late 1970s has been a huge benefit to investors and the markets alike. It has democratised access to virtually every asset class, market segment and investment strategy, improving the ability for individuals and institutions to actively diversify portfolios and express market views--conveniently, with greater transparency and at exceedingly low cost.

As with the introduction of any transformative technology, including exchange-traded funds, or ETFs, the dramatic growth of index funds has generated scepticism among some and outright hostility from others. Some detractors have gone so far as to compare passive investing (unfavourably) to Marxism, and as a hindrance to efficient capital allocation and securities pricing.

Even the most vocal critics admit that index strategies have become positive building blocks for how investors build modern portfolios, offering all investors low cost access to diversified portfolios. At the same time, some misunderstand the impact of index funds and the role they play in capital markets. The most common misconceptions involve index funds’ size relative to the overall market, their role in investors’ asset allocation decisions, the process of price discovery, and the high correlation we see in today’s markets.

First, the basics: despite index funds’ popularity--and the panicked claims some have made suggesting they now dominate global markets--the scale of index investing is still small.

While critics prefer to throw around the biggest number possible--40 per cent of US mutual fund assets under management are indexed--indexed investing measured broadly represents less than 20 per cent of all global equities. And index funds and ETFs account for just over 12 per cent of US and 7 per cent of global equities. Ultimately, there is plenty of room for everyone.

Also lost in the debate is the critical role in driving investment flows of those who actually own the assets--as opposed to those hired to manage the assets.

The decision to allocate funds to various market sectors is made by the asset owner, based on her risk tolerance, investment goals, and assessment of market factors.

Should I invest in developed or emerging markets? In small-cap or large-cap stocks? The implementation choice follows the asset allocation one: Should I invest directly in stocks and bonds, or via a mutual fund? Should I buy a futures contract or a basket of securities?

In a world without index funds, investors would--and historically did--make these same decisions. Index funds can be a cheaper and more efficient way to access markets, but let’s not forget they are simply one method of asset allocation.

Broad asset allocation decisions are what drive flows into different asset classes, sectors and geographies. The investment style (index or active) and choice of vehicle (stock, derivative or mutual fund) are secondary decisions that don’t impact valuations.

Additionally, the whole notion of indexing has evolved. "Active versus passive" suggests a binary choice when the reality is that investors use a continuum of investment styles, from straightforward funds that simply replicate an index like the S&P 500, to smart beta ETFs that isolate specific factors like value or momentum stocks, to highly diversified active mutual funds, to concentrated active mutual funds to hedge funds that eschew a benchmark altogether. So, in a practical sense, the whole debate is based on an overly simplistic view of modern investing.

Some have said that index funds have an outsized and detrimental influence on price discovery. In fact, the price discovery process is dominated by active stock selectors. We estimate that for every US$1 of US equity trades driven by index strategies, there are US$22 of trades driven by a variety of active strategies. The difference reflects both the relative size of these funds and the vastly lower turnover of index strategies.

Finally, some commentators suggest that the growth of index investing is causing greater correlation among stock returns, making it more difficult for active strategies to outperform. While we agree that higher correlations complicate the opportunity for active stock selection, the primary driver of this phenomenon is global monetary policies. Central banks have orchestrated low (and even negative) interest rates to encourage investment in the real economy. One of the side effects of these policies is increased correlations of stock movements.

Are index funds and ETFs disruptive? Yes, in the sense that any new technology shakes up the status quo.

But there’s a difference between disruptions to the asset management industry and disruptions to the functioning of capital markets. Price discovery and asset allocation mechanisms continue to take place efficiently and continuously.

There’s no question, however, that the industry is being reshaped. Thanks to index strategies, every investor can build a diversified portfolio at low cost--something that once only sophisticated institutional investors could do--and they’ve embraced that opportunity. That’s a change we should welcome.

More from Morningstar

• Takeover activity heats up, more to come

• Is lower for longer over?

• Make better investment decisions with Morningstar Premium | Free 4-week trial

 

Barbara Novick is the vice chairman and co-founder of BlackRock. This is a financial news article to be used for non-commercial purposes and is not intended to provide financial advice of any kind. Opinions expressed herein are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to the opinions or recommendations of Morningstar as a result of using different assumptions and criteria.

© 2018 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved. Neither Morningstar, its affiliates, nor the content providers guarantee the data or content contained herein to be accurate, complete or timely nor will they have any liability for its use or distribution. This information is to be used for personal, non-commercial purposes only. No reproduction is permitted without the prior written consent of Morningstar. Any general advice or 'class service' have been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), or its Authorised Representatives, and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. Please refer to our Financial Services Guide (FSG) for more information at www.morningstar.com.au/s/fsg.pdf. Our publications, ratings and products should be viewed as an additional investment resource, not as your sole source of information. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product's future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a licensed financial adviser. Some material is copyright and published under licence from ASX Operations Pty Ltd ACN 004 523 782 ("ASXO"). The article is current as at date of publication.