Management Fees and Lost Growth Potential

Personal Capital’s analysis of investing account fees offers important perspective about the long-term impact of management expenses on wealth generation. 

In a poll conducted for Personal Capital by Harris Poll, this past March, 32% of respondents said higher fees for investment accounts generally result in higher returns, “a surprising and improper perception the data does not support.”

According to Personal Capital’s subsequent report, “What Americans Are Paying in Advisory Fees,” most academic studies have shown that professional active investment managers as a group “have no ability to outperform broad market indices over long time horizons.” Unless the manager can deliver excess performance, even a small percentage difference in extra fees per year can therefore seriously erode an account’s growth potential.

Want the latest retirement plan adviser news and insights? Sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters.

“If an investor’s primary objective is total portfolio return, then keeping costs low is a crucial component, though not the only component,” the report argues. “While the difference between a 1% annual fee and a 3% annual fee may sound trivial, the impact over time can be staggering. For example, the total additional amount lost to fees in one example is more than $400,000—higher than the median price of a home in the U.S.”

As Personal Capital notes, even a single percent difference—e.g., 2.0% vs. 1.0%—costs a wealthy investor an extra $240,000 in fees over the typical retirement time horizon observed in the survey data.

“Even worse, that doesn’t fully capture the amount the investor loses in total return,” the report suggests. “Because fees are taken out along the way, that money doesn’t have time to grow and compound.”

One example in the report is particularly striking—that of a wealthy investor subject to high fees for an entire savings life cycle: “The total amount an investor loses at a 3% fee versus a 1% fee, including both fees and forgone returns, is more than $740,000.”

The full report is available here

Many Pre-Retirees Misjudge Their Coming Expenses

A survey of the newly retired finds 40% spend more for health care than they’d expected.

The LIMRA Secure Retirement Institute found, through a survey of 2,000 Americans between the ages of 50 and 79, and retired at least one year, that 40% had underestimated what they would face in health care costs.

LIMRA research has found that retirees spend at least 13% of their income each year on health and long-term care expenses. For someone spending $80,000 a year, this means $10,400 of that money would go toward health care.

Retirees also underestimated other costs, such as paying for basic living expenses. Twenty-five percent found these costs to be higher than expected. Twenty-three percent are experiencing higher than anticipated discretionary costs.

Having a plan for retirement didn’t help either, as 43% of those with a formal plan face higher than projected health care costs. LIMRA says it is critical for advisers to educate investors about these costs and to encourage them to open health savings accounts (HSAs), whose balances roll over from year to year and can come in handy during retirement.

Earlier LIMRA research found that people who own an HSA say these accounts are part of their retirement strategy.

«