The Passive Indexing Trap

Tyler Durden's picture

Authored by Lance Roberts via,

I have been in the “money game” for a long time starting with a bank just prior to the crash of 1987. I make this point only to say that I have seen several full market cycles in my life, and my perspectives are based on experience rather than theory.

In 1999, there was a media personality who berated investors for paying fees to investment advisors/stock brokers when it was clear that ETF’s were the only way to go. His mantra was simply:

“Why pay someone to underperform the indexes?”

After the “” crash in 2000, he was no longer on the air.

By the time the markets began to soar in 2007, there was a whole universe of ETF’s from which to choose. Once again, the mainstream media pounced on indexing and that “buy and hold” strategies were the only logical way for individuals to invest.

“Why pay someone to underperform the indexes?”

Then came the crash in 2008.

Today, we are once again becoming inundated with articles as to why it is “apparent” that individuals should only be using low-cost indexing strategies and holding for the “long term.” To wit:

When it comes to investing, it’s a losing proposition to try and be anything better than average.


If there’s no point in trying to beat the market through ‘active’ investing – using mutual funds that managers run, selecting what they hope are market-beating investments – what is the best way to invest? Through “passive” investing, which accepts average market returns ­(this means index funds, which track market benchmarks)”

Of course, with the market seemingly impervious to any type of serious downturn, individuals are indeed listening. Via CNBC:

“Flows out of actively managed U.S. equity mutual funds leaped to $264.5 billion in 2016, while flows into passive index funds and ETFs were $236.1 billion, according to data provided by the Vanguard Group and Morningstar. That was the greatest calendar-year asset change in the last decade, during which more than $1 trillion has shifted from active to passive U.S. equity funds.”

Of course, the next crash hasn’t happened…yet.

But therein is the point.

It is effectively the final evolution of “bull market psychology” as investors capitulate to the “if you can’t beat’em, join ’em” mentality.

But it is just that. The final evolution of investor psychology that always leads the “sheep to the slaughter.”

The Inherent Costs Of “Low Costs”

There is a “cost” to chasing “low costs” and “being average.” I do NOT disagree that costs are an important component of long-term returns; however there are two missing ingredients of “buy and hold” index investing are ignoring: 1) time; and, 2) psychology.

As I have discussed previously, the most important commodity to all investors is “time.” It is the one thing we can not manufacture more of. There is a massive difference between AVERAGE and ACTUAL returns on invested capital. The impact of losses, in any given year, destroys the annualized “compounding” effect of money.

Individuals who experienced either one, or both, of the last two bear markets, now understand the importance of “time” relating to their investment goals. Individuals that were close to retirement in either 2000, or 2007, and failed to navigate the subsequent market drawdowns have had to postpone their retirement plans, potentially indefinitely.

While the media cheers the rise of the markets to new all-time highs, the reality is that most investors have still not financially recovered due to the second point of “psychology.”

Despite the logic of mainstream arguments that “buy and hold” investing will work, given a long enough time frame, the reality is that investors generally don’t invest “logically.” All investors are driven by “psychology” in their decision-making which results in the age-old pattern of “buying high” and “selling low.”

The biggest problem for individuals, and the culprit of the great “ETF buying panic,” is the “herding effect” as investors rush to chase market returns. The coming problem will be “loss aversion,” as the herding effect runs in reverse in the rush to get out.

The Passive Indexing Trap

Let me just clarify the record – “There is no such thing as passive investing.”  

While you may be invested in an “index,” when the next bear market correction begins, and the pain of loss becomes large enough, “passive indexing” will turn into “active panic.” 

Not surprisingly, as markets have risen, individuals begin to rationalize the current price trend will continue indefinitely. The longer the rising trend lasts, the more ingrained the belief becomes until the last of “holdouts” finally “buy in.”

We can see this in the surge of ETF flows. As the “bull market” continues to run, the more rampant the increase in flows have become. (Note – they same thing was occurring in 2005-2007.)

Of course, while it is believed that ETF investors have become “passive,” the reality is they have simply become “active” investors in a different form. As the markets decline, there will be a slow realization “this decline” is something more than a “buy the dip” opportunity. As losses mount, the anxiety of those “losses” mounts until individuals seek to “avert further loss” by selling.

There are two problems forming.

The first is leverage. While investors have been chasing returns in the “can’t lose” market, they have also been piling on leverage in order to increase their return.

However, it isn’t just margin debt which has hit record highs as of late, but “shadow margin” as well. Via Wolf Richter:

So how much margin debt is out there? We know only the $528 billion reported by NYSE. Then there are companies like Wealthfront. But it’s just small fry. Big players have been doing this for a long time. These securities-based loans (SBLs) are called ‘shadow margin,’ and no one knows how much of it is out there. But it’s a lot.


However, several advisers surveyed by The Post estimated there is between $100 billion and $250 billion in outstanding SBLs among all brokerages.


Morgan Stanley is one of the few firms that says how much in SBLs it’s sold – $36 billion, as of Dec. 31, a 26-percent increase from the year before.


Other major sellers of the loans are UBS, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Raymond James, and Stifel Nicolaus, sources said.


If this “shadow margin” is $250 billion, it would bring total margin debt to $778 billion. That would make for a lot of forced selling.”

The second, which will be greatly impacted by the leverage issue, is liquidity of these instruments.

The head of the BOE Mark Carney himself has warned about the risk of “disorderly unwinding of portfolios” due to the lack of market liquidity.”

“Market adjustments to date have occurred without significant stress. However, the risk of a sharp and disorderly reversal remains given the compressed credit and liquidity risk premia. As a result, market participants need to be mindful of the risks of diminished market liquidity, asset price discontinuities and contagion across asset markets.”

And then there was, of course, Howard Marks, who mused in his “Liquidity” note:

“ETF’s have become popular because they’re generally believed to be ‘better than mutual funds,’ in that they’re traded all day. Thus an ETF investor can get in or out anytime during trading hours. But do the investors in ETFs wonder about the source of their liquidity?”

What Howard is referring to is the “Greater Fool Theory,” which surmises there is always a “greater fool” than you in the market to sell to. While the answer is “yes,” as there is always a buyer for every seller, the question is always “at what price?” 

The eventual reversion is part of the market cycle. This is why managing portfolio risk is so critically important and why if you don’t sell high, you cannot buy low.

“Being bullish on the market in the short term is fine – you should be. The expansion of Central Banks balance sheets and the hopes of a fiscal policy tsunami should continue to support stocks as long as no other crisis presents itself. However, the problem is that a crisis, which is ALWAYS unexpected, inevitably will trigger a reversion back to the fundamentals.”

At some point, that reversion process will take hold. It is then investor “psychology” will collide with “margin debt” and ETF liquidity. It will be the equivalent of striking a match, lighting a stick of dynamite and throwing it into a tanker full of gasoline.

When the “herding” into ETF’s begins to reverse, it will not be a slow and methodical process but rather a stampede with little regard to price, valuation or fundamental measures.

Importantly, as prices decline it will trigger margin calls which will induce more indiscriminate selling. The forced redemption cycle will cause catastrophic spreads between the current bid and ask pricing for ETF’s. As investors are forced to dump positions to meet margin calls, the lack of buyers will form a vacuum causing rapid price declines which leave investors helpless on the sidelines watching years of capital appreciation vanish in moments. Don’t believe me? It happened in 2008 as the “Lehman Moment” left investors helpless watching the crash.

Over a 3-week span, investors lost 29% of their capital and 44% over the entire 3-month period. This is what happens during a margin liquidation event. It is fast, furious and without remorse.

Currently, with complacency and optimism near record levels, no one sees a severe market retracement as a possibility. But maybe that should be warning enough. 

If you are paying an investment advisor to index your portfolio with a “buy and hold” strategy, then “yes” you should absolutely opt for buying a portfolio of low-cost ETF’s and improve your performance by the delta of the fees. But you are paying for what you will get, both now and in the future.

However, the real goal of any investment advisor is not to “beat the index” on the way up, but rather to protect capital on the “way down.” It is capital destruction that leads to poor investment decision making, emotionally based financial mistakes and destruction of financial goals. It is also what advisors should be hired for, evaluated on, and ultimately paid for, as their real job should be keeping you out of “the trap.”

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
knukles's picture

This has nothing to do with "indexing".
I can want out of a non-indexed portfolio as much as an index fund and anywhere people decide to raise cash is independent of active/passive management.Moreover, "active" mangers are by and large loath to hold cash in equity accounts.  They're paid a big assed fee to run stocks, not cash.
Bogus argument.

Now, hot money in/out, that's a different can of worms, but again, independent of management style.

spastic_colon's picture

mostly managers can choose to include cash as a strategic investment and therefore is included in fees....mostly a discretionary choice although non-discretionary mgrs can also if clients sign off......otherwise 99.9% of advisors send off client money to a thrid party mgr (active or passive) and charge an annual fee for the privelege of being the middleman......robomonkeys can do this.....the passive robo model will also end in tears as it will become the new scapegoat.

PS - as a side note the VIX bottomed in 12/06 and continued to RISE ALONG WITH INDEXES for another 8 the passive/etf model may still have legs for now unfortunately.

Bigly's picture

Was in an active vs passive mtg last week. Vanguard active lower...way lower fees than passive of others.

I cannot see the appeal of passive indexed.  

But really, what is real anymore anyway. The  Finance i learned in my degree is long dead.

Ultimately who cares? When it crashes, all funds will haircut.

-65% or -70%...does it really matter?


mary mary's picture

I thought Vanguard called its funds "passive".

Stan522's picture

However, the real goal of any investment advisor is not to “beat the index” on the way up, but rather to protect capital on the “way down.”


No way to prove that......

spastic_colon's picture

this is a should be the goal of any "asset manager''........investment advisors only serve to collect the commission/12b-1/override etc and create portfolios of mutual funds and ETF's while they try to figure out how to maximize revenue for asset mgr is more in tune with wealth preservation and seeking to provide the actual securities that will enable this goal which very likely prioritzes downside management.

NoDebt's picture

I always scratch my head at these ETF-bashing articles.  Let's say I agree with their argument (pretty much I do).  Then what?  Ban ETFs?  Make them products only large institutions and sophisticated investors have access to?  I mean what's the end game here?


Lady Jessica's picture

Creating a convenient locus for blame?

CJgipper's picture

This presupposes that the FED will let the market decline.  Reality has proven otherwise.

buzzsaw99's picture

egad what a bunch of self serving bullshit. people are getting professionally "actively managed" all the way to the poorhouse.

Consuelo's picture



+ F'ng 1000 for that.



DuneCreature's picture

Here is an interesting video link I found at Jim Stone's
(www. website.

It is an interview with a Dutch currency trader Ronald Bernard.

(Warning spoken Dutch with English sub titles)

It's not too long, however, about 40 minutes.

My take away? ....... The whole worldwide banking system is so corrupt it will never be fixed with band-aid enforcment and new regulations. Taint happen'.

It's a follow the money tale, is it always is.

Bankers don't follow rules but they DEMAND that you do and are absolutely indignant if you accuse them of any wrong doing.

This is the story of the foxes, weasels, and hawks all running the giant Gulag called Chicken Coop Max where we are the chickens and we get mechanically harvested on an production assembly line and our carcasses sold to McPredators fast food restaurants and our feet cut off and shipped by the container full off to China where a spindly fried chicken foot to suck on is considered a delicacy.

They don't waste any of our parts and no one gets out into the barnyard for fresh air either. If you so much as point out one of the wolves or wild dingoes in the guard tower you are tossed into the fowl processing hopper forthwith.

The money changers (banksters) are not nice people. ........ Isn't there some old parable about how evil money changers are somewhere?

Live Hard, At Least Banksters Don't Burn Off Our Beaks As Chicks,......Yet, Die Free

~ DC v5.0

Consuelo's picture



"I have been in the “money game” for a long time starting with a bank just prior to the crash of 1987"


'I have been in the Annual $$$Fee-collecting business for a long time...'


swampmanlives's picture

Passive mutual funds can help mitigate speculators. While they carry slightly higher fees, they don't trade on the open exchange and usually have penalties if you redeem within a certain time frame.

Umh's picture

What do they buy that offers protection from the herd? They are a significant part of if not most of the herd.

Snaffew's picture

the problem being that there hasn't been a rush to get out for 8 years now.  It does feel like the markets are prepping for a blow off top....nas 6500, S&P 2500?  Nobody knows, but days like today are painful for the bears---that I know.

adr's picture

I ask, "Why even invest?"

You think they made this whole scheme so Joe Schmo who works 50 hours a week for peanuts can turn his meager savings into millions by the time he retires?

That Wall St. exists to make the average man wealthy.

I really feel sorry for anyone that believes what the Market Makers are selling. Wall St exists to take your money, not compound it and pay back multiples of your cash.

This is what happens when you give worthless pricks like Larry Page billions of dollars. You get him "investing" $100 million is this kind of self indulgent shit. I'm pretty sure I've seen people making flying shit like this in their garage and not get $100 million for it.

All of the Moneybags were creaming their shorts over this today.

Snaffew's picture

I couldn't bear to watch any of those conglomerate media financial channels---i'm sure today would be an atrocious blathering of how great everything is and "technicals have never been better".  C'mon Kim---do the world a favor and light a couple candles to celebrate.

rejected's picture

"You think they made this whole scheme so Joe Schmo who works 50 hours a week for peanuts can turn his meager savings into millions by the time he retires?"

As a Boomer that is what they implied and many of us fell for it.... Right about the time of our retirements they crashed the economy and reduced interest rates to zero trying to force the savings into the Casino's. Once they're satisfied enough have been forced over they'll crash it and take their profits,,,, our savings. 

This boomer would like to warn all the younger generations of these bullshitters. Do not fall for the traps like the Boomers did. While these shark 'advisors' smile and tell you how your money will magically multiply knowing the central bank is devaluing the money every day and will do whatever it can to flush out your savings so these wall street 'advisors' and banks can profit.

alfredhorg's picture

I don't like advisors.  I fired mine in 2006 and have since beaten not only the market, but also the best investing minds of Harvard:

What do I do?  I simply go against the crowd and endure disapproval.  My comments keep getting downvotes, but I keep commenting because my downvoters are stupid sheeple and I am smart (smarter than Harvard people).  I just LOOK stupid:
chuckymcgee's picture

"However, the real goal of any investment advisor is not to “beat the index” on the way up, but rather to protect capital on the “way down.” "


Lol, what a joke. If you know when the markets are going to crash, you could easily beat the index long term- invest in indexes on the way up, and pull the capital/short on the way down. Oh, but actively managed funds still can't beat the market? Because no one can know with certainty when the markets are about to crash! Durrrrrrr.

Better Call Mr. Pink's picture

There are a few easy things an individual can do to avoid a crash that the typical "advisor" will not do for you.

Plan A Use the well tested 22/220 day MA as per Meb Faber

PLAN B Use a simple get out of the market if the VIX is over some limit

mary mary's picture


That appears to work quite nicely switching between Vfinx and Vustx, all the way back to 1988.

I get, for comparison:

Vfinx buy-and-hold:  10.3% Ann, 55.3% Mdd

Vustx buy-and-hold:  8.1% Ann, 18.4% Mdd

Switched (Vfinx, ema22, ema220):  12.7% Ann, 21.3% Mdd  (Go to Vustx, not to cash.)

And, for further comparison, a mix of 50% Vfinx, 50% Vustx, buy-and-hold:  9.8% Ann, 24.9% Mdd


rejected's picture

Ha, ha.... Page not found!

Now why didn't that surprise me?

Put it back ZH....

wcvarones's picture

However, the real goal of any investment advisor is not to “beat the index” on the way up, but rather to protect capital on the  


In other words, be seriously underinvested and pray for a bear market. 

rejected's picture

What 'Markets' are these pundits referring to? If this editor / economist can't see the difference between price discovery 'markets' in 1987 and Fed run Casino's of 2017, I sure as hell wouldn't want his advice!

Barney08's picture

When do ETFs start trading below their daily NAV? I would love to see this. People would Fukin freak out. ETFs trading at a net Discount. Now we are talking sanity!

Alexander Supertramp's picture

You seem like "the trap" to me, Lance.

homiegot's picture

Well, if you're 100% stocks at a major downturn and you're about to retire, you deserve to lose it all.