Investing compass: We’ve got 99 problems but super ain’t one
For our 99th episode, we explore super and fees. After our half-yearly portfolio check, we received quite a few emails asking for an explanation about what Shani considered as too much for fees on her investments. In this episode, we explore the impact of fees, how to decide what is too much, and focus in on super – when do the costs of operating and managing an SMSF make sense?
Mark Lamonica: Hi and welcome to another episode of Investing Compass. Before we begin, a quick note that the information contained in this podcast is general in nature, does not take into consideration your personal situation, circumstances or needs.
So, Shani, we were just talking before this – we are going to Chicago.
Shani Jayamanne: We are. We're going to the mother ship.
Lamonica: Yes. So, Morningstar is, of course, based in Chicago. And I have not been for a couple years. There was something about a pandemic, something, something like that. But this is your first trip to Chicago and…
Jayamanne: And my first trip to the U.S.
Lamonica: I know. I know.
Jayamanne: So, very exciting.
Lamonica: You applied for the little electronic visa.
Jayamanne: I did.
Lamonica: Which I may have to do, because my U.S. passport is expired, and the paperwork has been sitting in my bag for a week.
Jayamanne: So, this is like completely your fault?
Lamonica: Oh, yes. So, I don't get a new U.S. passport off to travel…
Jayamanne: As an Australian.
Lamonica: As an Australian, and I'll have to get this visa. But anyway, what are you excited about?
Jayamanne: Well, I'm really excited because when you normally go to another country, you have to sort of do some research, figure out what to do. But Mark has basically planned this whole trip. Like, he has given me restaurant recommendations, where to go, what to see. So…
Lamonica: Well, when I was a consultant, I spent three years in Chicago.
Jayamanne: There you go. So, it's basically a local showing me around.
Lamonica: Yeah. And I asked Shani what she wanted to see in Chicago, and she was like, I don't care. I just want to eat.
Lamonica: So, it's basically just restaurants.
Jayamanne: It's basically my life motto.
Lamonica: Yeah. And then, of course, we have to go to work during the day.
Jayamanne: Yes, we do.
Lamonica: So, minor inconvenience.
Jayamanne: Yeah. Anyway, should we get to the episode?
Lamonica: Let's do it.
Jayamanne: Okay. So, a few weeks ago, we released our half yearly portfolio update episode, and we started this in the early days of Investing Compass where we followed my retirement and Mark's retirement goal and how we were monitoring and maintaining our investments to reach these goals.
Lamonica: Yeah. And since that episode, we've had a lot of emails and messages asking about Shani's situation – your situation, of course, about investing, right?
Lamonica: Not your just general situation. And that's because you mentioned briefly in there that you switched super funds, and you said that you did it because of fees. And so, the questions of course varied, and some people asked what's a big enough jump to justify a switch? How do you know what fees you're paying? Do fees really matter that much to move all of your funds? Will you just end up jumping in and out of funds for your whole investing life and incur all those transaction costs to buy and sell investments? And is it really worth it? So, that's my summary of the questions.
Jayamanne: Yeah, that was a good summary.
Lamonica: Yeah, about – that was questions about your situation.
Jayamanne: My situation.
Lamonica: Exactly, exactly.
Jayamanne: So, in today's episode, we're going to answer those questions and also another question which we get quite often, which is, when is the right time to set up an SMSF, because obviously I did have that choice as well and chose instead to go with the super fund.
Lamonica: Okay. So, let's get into it. So, maybe a little bit of background for those who have not followed along those reviews that we do, or a little review journey.
Jayamanne: Yeah, definitely. So, when I first started my job, my super was with Rest Super, and I basically had a balance that would deplete down to 0 because I was working in retail during uni, not really earning that much, and I had a bunch of default insurances in there as well as a flat administration fee that was taking whatever small balance my employer was paying me. And when I started working full time, I moved to a retail fund and that was Perpetual. And that's where I used to work. And so, they offered extremely low management fees in super to employees, and it was percentage based instead of an admin fee.
Lamonica: Okay. So, why don't you explain the difference between those because people may not know?
Jayamanne: Yeah, for sure. So, it makes a huge difference when you have a smaller balance like I did when I was starting out, and that's because the flat fee, admin fee, makes up a larger percentage on smaller balances. And I will preface this by saying retail funds are quite expensive in general, but they offer a bit more flexibility than a lot of the industry super funds with preset asset allocation mixes most of which I found for that stage in my life were not as aggressive as I needed it to be.
So, for example, a lot of the funds I looked at had a 70% max allocation to equities, and that's just not enough for me given my time horizon and the required rate of return that I needed to achieve my retirement goals. And the fund that I was in was actually on a platform. So, it allowed me to pick and choose my funds on there and the allocation to that find out a list of 75 or so. So, very customizable.
Lamonica: Which you were really into it because you love funds.
Lamonica: So, I can just imagine like a young Shani with 75 different funds to choose from…
Jayamanne: to choose from, yeah.
Lamonica: Yeah, that must have been…
Jayamanne: A dreamland.
Lamonica: Exactly, exactly. And we've spoken about before on this podcast, but of these funds, the 75 funds that Shani had to choose from, they, of course, all have mandates. And a mandate means that a professional investment manager that's managing that fund must invest to the allocations stipulated in that mandate. So, for example, a fund might say 90% Aussie equities and 10% cash, which is very common for a high conviction equity fund. And that means, regardless of what's happening in the market, regardless of where the manager might think there are opportunities or not opportunities, they have to invest 90% of the funds in Aussie equities.
Jayamanne: Yeah, exactly right, Mark. And this can obviously be a bad thing, and it can be a good thing. But for me, I just wanted to ensure that I had enough exposure to aggressive assets and this platform allowed me to do that with low fees.
Lamonica: So, you obviously don't work there anymore, Shani. So, what happened?
Jayamanne: To your knowledge, yeah. So, what happened with my job or…?
Lamonica: First of all, are you saying that you have two jobs? You have two full-time jobs?
Jayamanne: Yes, I mean, what happened with my job or what happened to my super fund?
Lamonica: Well, hey, whatever you want. Like, I think, we know what happened to your job. You left it and came to a much better place at Morningstar. So, maybe you should tell us a little bit about the super fund.
Jayamanne: Yeah. So, with the super fund, I had a bit of a grace period and then my fees increased, and my fees increased pretty drastically. And this is what we were speaking about in the portfolio review that I violated one of the core tenets of my IPS or investment policy statement.
Lamonica: So, did you have a specific number or a threshold, like how did you determine that this was too much?
Jayamanne: Yeah, well, I think like with anything in this world, price and value are completely interrelated. And I'm happy to pay a premium price if there's a value attached to it, obviously in general, not just with my investments, and I'm sure a lot of people share that mindset.
Lamonica: And particularly with investments, you can find value if you were looking at sectors or types of securities that you might want exposure to that are hard to access by individual investors or investments that have traditionally done better with active management, which is usually what you pay a premium for. And we speak about different types of investments where you might want to pay a premium for active management in our Active/Passive Barometer episode.
Jayamanne: Yeah, exactly, Mark. So, what I initially saw was that I was paying next to nothing for my funds, and I was able to customize what I was invested in, and I was able to have almost a 95% allocation to aggressive assets, mainly equities, but also alternatives. And what I found though was I was starting to pay around 1% in fees, which was way above my expectations for my super. And it wasn't a specific threshold that I had, but I think it was a comparative look at what I could have been paying for the same type of exposure. And my IPS basically said minimize fees as much as possible in my superannuation while still achieving the desired asset class exposure. And I really couldn't say I was minimizing my fees at a 1% per annum rate. So, Mark, maybe we can go through an example of why I've called this out in my IPS specifically and why paying attention to fees is so important.
Lamonica: Sure. And anyone, of course, can do this. There are tools that are available on MoneySmart. But you're able to see how fees, on MoneySmart, you're able to see how fees can impact your balance over the long term. So, we'll put a couple of links in the resources page so you can explore your individual situation and see how you would fare with your current fees and compare it to how you'd be doing with lower fees. And of course, the situation that we're comparing in this instance is a retail or industry super fund. So, self-managed super funds, SMSFs, can be a little different, and we'll get to that. But it's a useful tool to understand how fees impact your total return outcome.
Jayamanne: Okay. So, let's use my position from the half yearly reviews. I'm at about $73,000, and I want to retire at 65. So, that's 36 years from now. I'll contribute about $17,500 a year after that contribution tax. And let's say that I get my required rate of return at 6.9%.
Lamonica: 36 years, Shani.
Jayamanne: I know. It seems like a really long time saying that.
Lamonica: It does, because you're not 36 years old.
Jayamanne: I am not.
Lamonica: Yeah, anyway. All right.
Jayamanne: Thanks for that.
Lamonica: Yeah. No, I just want to remind you that you're lucky in a job that you love so much.
Lamonica: Okay. We're going to get back to your situation, right? So, $17,500 a year, $73,000, 6.9% required rate of return. So, if you stay and you pay a 1% per annum management fee, 36 years from now, you would have paid $199,000 in fees. So, switching – and we'll talk about the process of what you actually switched to – but switching to the fund you are currently in, if you were to stay in that until retirement, you would pay $78,900 in fees. So, those costs were a $2.25 admin fee per week, 0.04% as indirect costs and around 0.3% for investment fees. So, just switching to that fund, that is $120,000 difference.
Jayamanne: Yeah, of course, I'd rather have it in my pocket as I'm sure everyone else would too.
Lamonica: Okay. So, let's unpack this a little bit. I think there are two parts, Shani. So, the first is, we can go through how you analyze your fees, and then the second is, how you analyze that you would get more value from the cheaper fund. So, let's start with different types of fees.
Jayamanne: Sure, Mark. So, like a lot of things in the financial services industry, it really isn't that straightforward. So, there are quite a few different types of fees, and the sum of all these fees is your total fee that you pay.
Lamonica: And there have been great strides towards making these fees more transparent and understandable. So, it's definitely improved. But I think, Shani, we would both agree that there's still room for improvement.
Jayamanne: Yeah, exactly. Even when I was researching for super funds, transfer into was such a frustrating process, because it wasn't just laid out for you like you'd want it to be. A lot of the time I'd have to go into the PDS, which is a product disclosure statement, which can be up to 70 to 80 pages long and look for the fees that I'm paying. And I can't imagine how overwhelming that would be for someone who doesn't have to look through PDSs for a living. So, there's definitely a way to go.
Lamonica: Which part of your job do you look at PDSs for a living?
Jayamanne: I mean, writing this podcast.
Lamonica: Okay. You enjoy looking at PDSs. As you said about Excel, you're a recreational PDS reader.
Jayamanne: Yes. A little bit masochistic.
Lamonica: Exactly, exactly. All right. So, the first fee, Shani, is the contribution fee. So, this is a fee, much like me, that is outdated. And it charges you every time you contribute. So, considering that your employer may make contributions 26 times a year if you get paid fortnightly, this is one you definitely want to try to avoid. And the good news is that most funds have dropped this fee.
Jayamanne: And there is a management fee, also known as the management expense ratio, or MER. Also known as an investment fee, this covers the cost of professionally managing the investments on your behalf. And because of a lot of super funds outsource the investment part to other fund managers, this may come up twice. For example, AustralianSuper charge an indirect cost management fee for choosing the external fund managers, and then they charge an investment fee that differs per investment option.
Lamonica: There is an administration fee, Shani. So, a lot of industry super funds have this, and this is normally a flat fee, so what Shani was talking about earlier. And naturally, as a flat fee, it means that it impacts smaller balances more than larger balances. For investors with small balances, it's important to be aware of how large admin fees impact your balance.
Jayamanne: And it does continue on like this. We don't want this to be a definitional episode where we're just listing off terms and giving you an explanation of what it is. There are so many different fees with different names. So, for a full list of fees and what to keep in mind, you can take a look at the guide I've written to fund investing, and we'll link that in the resources.
[Advertisement: Morningstar Premium is designed to help you reach your investing goals. Our coverage spans over 50,000 securities and 2,000 funds and ETFs. Sign up to a 4-week free trial through the link in the episode notes to access our global equity best ideas for our top picks across borders. Find shares with sustainable above average dividend payouts and the best opportunities at home with 5-Star Aussie stocks. A Morningstar Premium subscription includes a Sharesight investor plan, allowing you to track all of your investment holdings in one place and take advantage of Sharesight's investment performance and tax reporting that has been built specifically for the needs of self-directed investors. If you love Premium after your 4-week trial and choose to subscribe, your subscription may be tax deductible if you derive income from the share market. Sign up for a free trial today.]
Lamonica: Okay. So, let's take a step back and figure out how to define value and how to know when fees are justified. So, there are three main components to this. The first is, is the fund cost relative to its peer group, so what is it, how do you compare it to different peers? What this basically means is, are the fund expenses justifiable when comparing the costs relative to other funds with similar fund strategies, resources and availability to retail investors?
Jayamanne: And put simply, that just means shop around. Are you being charged a premium just for a brand name? In the case of industry super funds, they are at a massive advantage. They have so much scale that they can take advantage of that to spread their overhead and fixed costs over a large number of members and on the other side of it, can negotiate for incredibly low fees from wholesale funds because of the funds that they can bring with them. So, in this case, scale is really powerful in reducing costs for these large super funds.
Lamonica: The downside of this is that they're locked out of smaller markets where they might not be able to bring large amounts of funds to invest. For example, they might have an Australian equities fund that is more than likely locked out of the micro-cap and small-cap markets just due to the size of the fund. So, they are, of course goliaths, have these huge presences in the market, and this means that they do not move with agility and are often locked out of attractive opportunities because of this.
Jayamanne: And it isn't all downside. The upside is that this scale allows them to get access to asset classes and professional management at a lower cost. For example, alternative assets. Alternative asset funds usually have incredibly high minimum investments and requirements for investors to be wholesale. It's pretty unfeasible for investors like us to get access to these good-quality alternative asset funds.
Lamonica: Exactly, Shani. As an individual investor, it's pretty simple for me to get access to micro and small caps, not so much asset classes like alternative assets or unlisted real estate.
Jayamanne: Then there's trading costs, asset sizes and administration costs. This is just asking you to keep in mind that it's not fair to compare all funds on a like for like basis. You wouldn't compare a fixed income fund against an Australian equity fund. You wouldn't compare a private equity fund against a real estate fund. Different risk and return, different costs to invest, expect different fees.
Lamonica: And the last component is strategy. Is the strategy and the management worth the cost? Is this a strategy that you need to achieve that will help you achieve your required rate of return and therefore your goals? We don't condone looking at past performance as an indicator of future performance but understanding how the team has performed against their benchmarks in the past can provide some information. This is a decision that is the most qualitative because you're assessing the team, their expertise and the fund strategy.
Jayamanne: And it was a pretty simple choice after thinking about these components of value and of course, after seeing the difference that the cutting fees makes. So, I chose to go with Aussie Super for the moment. The fee difference was a main driver, but also the fact that they've got more flexible options than most super funds.
Lamonica: And by more flexible you're talking about asset allocation?
Jayamanne: Yeah, exactly. As you spoke about on the portfolio construction episode, we want a pretty aggressive asset allocation of 90% growth assets and 10% defensive assets.
Lamonica: So, Aussie Super allows you to do this?
Jayamanne: Yeah, it does. So, they have a few ways that you can invest with them. You can do a pre-mixed option. Those are like balanced, conservative, high growth, et cetera. But they basically choose the asset mix for you. Then they have DIY mix, and this is what I've chosen. It allows me to allocate to whatever asset classes I'd like. And they also have a member direct option, which allows you to have your say on the individual assets. But I chose not to go down that path because the DIY mix was sufficient for what I was looking for and was a cheaper option than the member direct option.
Lamonica: And obviously, this isn't an endorsement for Aussie Super, but I assume that you looked at other funds as well.
Jayamanne: Yeah, exactly right, Mark. And I won't go down into the whole process of it. But as I mentioned, the main consideration was really around that customization of the asset class mix. There was quite a bit of rigidity to the other Super Funds where their premixed options didn't have the level of aggressiveness that I needed. And as I mentioned at the beginning of the episode, that was one of the things I really liked about the Perpetual platform I was in. It allowed me to customize my exposure to take on a bit more risk than I could afford to with almost four decades to go to retirement at that time. And this episode has been focused a lot around me, Mark, but I know that access to certain asset classes is part of the appeal for you and how you chose your super fund.
Lamonica: Yeah, yeah. And once again, I've got a little bit of a unique situation here because I started my working life in the U.S. And because of that, the majority of my retirement assets are still in IRAs and Roth IRAs in the U.S., and those are just tax advantaged retirement accounts or similar to super. So, I've got around 20% of my retirement assets in super. Now, that, of course, will grow over time because I'm making contributions. But given my age, it's unlikely to ever exceed what I have in the U.S. if I can continue to earn a decent return there. The other thing I would say is I based my retirement goal around my U.S. accounts. So, when I go through the goal setting exercise and that portfolio review we did a couple weeks ago, I'm talking about those U.S. assets and accounts.
Jayamanne: So, what do you consider super and how does that fit in?
Lamonica: Yeah, well, honestly, I didn't really consider it when I moved here, because I always thought that I would move back. And I didn't know what my status would be. So, if you move back to the U.S. or anywhere and you're not a citizen, you can take your super at that time. You just have to pay a penalty. So, basically, I never thought this money would be in a tax advantaged retirement account.
Jayamanne: But now, you've made the smart decision, obviously, to become a citizen and stay in Australia. So, what changed?
Lamonica: Well, I just still never really incorporated into my retirement goal. Maybe I'm just lazy. But my retirement goal is simply to support my day-to-day life. So, I really fit that part into the U.S. and then super will go with everything else, which is really in taxable accounts and will pay for extras like travel. So, that's kind of my approach.
Jayamanne: All right. So, let's get back to the original question. What super fund do you have?
Lamonica: Well, I am in AustralianSuper as well, and the reason is some of the things that you've mentioned. So, I think, the fees are reasonable, which is certainly a requirement for me, but I'm also really interested in the asset mix. Since I have the assets in other places, I was looking for exposure to things I wouldn't normally be able to get exposure to, and that is alternative investments. So, I'm in the high growth mix, and my account currently has a 5.75% allocation to private equity, 11% allocation to unlisted infrastructure and 4.75% allocation to unlisted property, and that's all exposure that's very hard for me to get access to just as a retail investor in any other way.
Jayamanne: And when you say unlisted, what does that mean?
Lamonica: Yeah. So, unlisted means that it just doesn't trade on an exchange. So, let's use property as an example. So, I can buy a REIT or a real estate investment trust, or a REIT ETF, which are listed and consists of publicly traded companies that own real estate. Or I could go buy a building. In AustralianSuper case, they can just go buy a building, of course, because they are really large. They could do that directly. They could go through a partnership. Or they can make an investment with a private manager that will only take on institutional money. So, that is why I'm invested in AustralianSuper.
Jayamanne: And again, I think it's important to say that although Mark and I are both in AustralianSuper, it's in no way an endorsement for it. And we're not saying that it's right for everyone's situation.
Lamonica: Okay. So, I think it's a good time to start talking about self-managed super funds. And the name sort of describes it here, Shani, self-managed – you manage the assets yourself inside your super fund instead of handing them off to a professional manager. There are obviously nuances to this. You're able to invest within a broader set of boundaries and in a larger variety of assets. You could have an SMSF that holds equities, ETFs, managed funds, direct property, I don't know, antique cars, fine wine, anything, and they become increasingly popular. So, the ATO released figures for the 2021 financial year, showing that there was the largest increase in the number of SMSF establishments since 2018 and over 25,000 new funds were established, which is a pretty significant amount.
Jayamanne: Yeah. And part of this is the impact of fees. $79,000 in fees looks pretty good compared to $199,000 in fees. But that's still a really significant amount, and that amount is more than the yearly income that's described as a comfortable retirement by ASFA for a couple.
Lamonica: In fact, if you're retired, had that extra amount and kept it compounding at that 6.9% return, in 20 years, you would have $300,000. And we spoke about this a little in our Investing Outcomes for Women episode, but the cost of retirement of retirement does increase towards the end because of end-of-life care and chronic health conditions, which, of course, are expensive. So, although it's quite morbid to think about it, it could take the financial stress out of something that is incredibly costly.
Jayamanne: Or you could use the $300,000 for a few really, really good holidays.
Lamonica: Yeah. No, exactly, like your trip to Chicago…
Lamonica: Which is not in fact a holiday.
Jayamanne: And there isn't a scenario where you can avoid fees altogether to pocket that $79,000. That's not what we're saying. But many investors with SMSFs have realized that they're able to reduce the cost that they pay for managing their super to improve their outcomes in retirement.
Lamonica: So, knowing this, Shani and being fee conscious, why did you not just get a self-managed super fund?
Jayamanne: The simple answer is that my balance just isn't large enough to justify the fees.
Lamonica: Okay. So, how is this different to the fees that you incur with a retail or industry super fund?
Jayamanne: The difference is that there are a lot of flat fee costs. So, instead of percentage-based costs, you're paying for services when you set it up, so you're paying for the setup of companies if you're doing it that way, registration, advice, if that's what you're looking for, accounting fees. There are a few things there. And then, ongoing, you'll need to pay fees to maintain your SMSF.
Lamonica: Yeah. So, a report released by Rice Warner looked at when a self-managed super fund makes sense from a cost perspective, and they found it's around the $200,000 mark when it starts to be competitive with industry and retail super funds. But at $500,000 or more they are generally the cheapest alternative.
Jayamanne: And adding to this, the popularity of SMSFs increasing has created opportunity in the market, opportunity for fintech firms to embrace the challenges of making a no-frills alternative that is low cost for those that want to set up SMSFs, the same way that they revolutionized the brokerage industry.
Lamonica: And this study is back from 2019, but ASIC-conducted a study that showed that running an SMSF overall costs around $14,000 a year. And these low-cost brokers are offering an alternative where the cost is around $2,000 to $3000. So, of course, like anything else in life, this is a no frills, low-cost option., which means you are missing out on something, right?
Jayamanne: Yeah. And in this case, you are missing out on professionals taking a look at your super at given intervals, usually over a year around tax time to ensure that everything is running smoothly. When I used to work as a financial advisor, there were two professionals that would help with the maintenance of an SMSF, an accountant and a financial advisor. The accountant helped with the administration of the SMSF, as well as ensuring that the trustees of the SMSF were operating in the most tax effective way, but the financial advisor would help with reviewing the investments and ensuring it was compliant.
Lamonica: And this may seem counterintuitive because it's, of course, supposed to be self-managed, but we're missing out on another important component of self-managed super funds that you can have up to four trustees, which means that you can spread that flat fee among four people.
Jayamanne: And having four trustees can also mean four different retirement goals, four different ages, life stages and perspectives to account for. And this, of course, adds complexity and is where professionals may add value.
Lamonica: Okay. So, you're sitting at $73,000, Shani. Are you thinking about an SMSF for the future?
Jayamanne: Yeah, I definitely am. It's something that I think makes a lot of sense as your balance increases. I don't think that I'll participate in an SMSF just as it becomes cost competitive, but I would combine balances with my husband to start an SMSF together. And we're roughly the same age, and we want to retire at the same time. So, that makes it easy. My rough guideline is, when I hit $250,000, which means that my husband will also contribute about the same, to put us well within the balance for an SMSF to make sense.
Lamonica: And starting an SMSF does not necessarily mean that you're just paying that administration fee, right?
Jayamanne: Yeah, exactly right, Mark. I want to ensure I'm well above the recommended line of $200,000 for it to be competitive, because you have to remember that setting up the structure is just setting up an empty vessel. You still need to hold investments, and that means that you need to incur brokerage to hold direct shares, you need to pay management fees to access professionally managed vehicles that makes sense for your portfolio. For example, if I wanted access to private equity or bonds or alternatives, I'd access that through a fund.
Lamonica: But you're not just paying for nothing. The key purpose of an SMSF is providing control and flexibility. And of course, during your working life, you're able to pick and choose your assets, but it's particularly useful in retirement when you're able to designate and structure your portfolio to achieve growth but also support withdrawals.
Jayamanne: And Mark is talking about bucket strategies here. We've done a whole episode on bucket strategies, but the basic premise is that you can commit to long-term holding periods for some assets to give you growth and income, and then also hold cash to draw down on. And this means that you don't need to sell growth assets at inopportune times, and you're able to make your retirement savings last longer.
Lamonica: And this is a question that we actually get, I think, after that episode we get from a lot of listeners – how do we do this with an industry or a retail fund? And the answer is you're really not able to do it most of the time. So, they just draw down on the one premixed fund that you're allowed to invest in, and this can actually increase your sequencing risk, because in a bear market you are forced to sell growth assets. To combat this, many investors just moved to a significantly more conservative premixed option. And that means those investors miss out on the growth component in retirement because those assets are less volatile.
Jayamanne: And of course, there is a middle option, and that's industry or retail funds that allow you the flexibility to invest in multiple investment options and draw down from ones that you specify. There are more retail funds in the industry that offer this sort of personalization, and generally it comes at a cost.
Lamonica: So, fees are an inevitable part of investing. It costs money to build wealth. But as we showed through a few examples, it's still important to be mindful as you can about the fees you're paying.
Jayamanne: And part of being a successful investor is frugality – getting value and focusing on how to achieve your outcomes with the lowest cost. Not doing so can reduce your financial outcomes by hundreds of thousands of dollars over long time horizons.
Lamonica: Exactly right, Shani. As investors, we shouldn't focus on the designer brands of investing. There's no glory in holding a particular branded product or a fund and paying a premium for it. So, we ensure that each investment is adding value in and out of super, and while at the end, we can't go through a whole fee episode without talking about John Bogle, of course, the founder of Vanguard.
Jayamanne: Yeah. So, he said, before costs, beating the market is a zero-sum game; after costs, it's a loser's game. Fund performance comes and goes. Costs go on forever. Although he was specifically speaking about active and passive, let's focus on costs go on forever. As we mentioned before, costs are an inevitable part of investing. Be aware of them. Make sure that they're included in your portfolio reviews. Think about calling them out specifically in your IPS and remember that getting value from investments is key to being a successful investor.
Lamonica: All right. Great. Well, thank you guys very much. That is today's episode. And remember, come see us at our conference. There will be a link for the waiting list or actually, tickets probably when this one comes out. So, yeah, come to the conference. You can meet Shani, Will and I and the rest of the team at Morningstar.