The landscape of investment in the United States has undergone a remarkable transformation over the past decade, particularly in the realm of technology stocksDuring this period, certain tech giants, often referred to as the "Magnificent Seven" or "Mag7," have consistently delivered substantial returnsYet, despite the booming performance of tech stocks, actively managed funds in the U.Shave not clustered around these high-fliersIn fact, they often fail to outperform even the benchmark S&P 500 indexThis phenomenon raises a critical question: why haven't active fund managers embraced the tech stock boom as one might expect?

On December 26, a research report from Western Securities shed light on this puzzling trend, indicating several reasons behind the hesitance of active funds to fully dive into technology stocksOne of the key points highlighted was the striking realization that even if these funds were to invest heavily in tech stocks, they might struggle to outperform the index

Only a mere 1% of funds that dramatically over-allocated to tech were able to surpass the benchmarkThis statistic underscores the challenge fund managers face in consistently beating the market.

Another significant factor is the volatility associated with major tech stocks, especially the Mag7. Holding these stocks for the long term can yield impressive rewards, but it also demands a stomach for substantial pullbacksFor instance, investors might have to endure nearly 700 days of corrections that exceed 50% before reaping the long-term benefitsMany active managers, concerned about their short-term performance, may shy away from such risky positions.

Moreover, the trading patterns within the Mag7 are anything but stableBetween 2010 and 2012, Apple enjoyed a significant lead over the benchmark, while Nvidia struggledHowever, from 2013 to 2016, the tables turned, with Nvidia eclipsing Apple

• U.S. Debt Soars to $50 Trillion
• The MSTR Strategy Has Failed
• 2025: Future Trends in China's Retail Sector
• The Future Direction of Wearable Device Upgrades
• Morning Insights FM-Radio | January 3, 2025

This oscillation poses a conundrum for active investors, making it immensely challenging to pinpoint ideal entry and exit points in the tech space.

Transparency in the holdings of U.Smutual funds also plays a role in shaping fund managers' strategiesAs all holdings are disclosed quarterly, investors can easily identify which funds are invested heavily in technology stocks and could gravitate towards cheaper passive productsThe extensive variety of fund products available, along with low-cost ETFs that offer favorable tax treatments on capital gains, further diminishes the allure of active funds that concentrate on techAs a result, fund managers need to follow the benchmarks and adopt a more diversified approach, which is now a common practice in the industry.

The performance of U.Sactively managed funds in comparison to benchmarks has been less than encouragingExamination of returns dating back to 2010 reveals that the Mag7 boasts an annualized return of 32.7%, significantly outpacing the S&P 500 total return index by a whopping 17.5%. Yet, the landscape for active funds appears bleaker in this thriving market

Over the last ten years, only around 30% of actively managed equity funds have managed to outperform the S&P 500 total return index.

Interestingly, if we dissect the trends of the past 15 years, we find that except for 2010 and 2022, active equity funds' excess return relative to the S&P 500 has generally remained negativeAn analysis reveals the grim reality that fewer than 30% of these actively managed funds can surpass the benchmarkExtending the holding periods—even when looking at rolling three-year and five-year returns—the data suggests that many funds still fail to outperform the index.

The issues with active funds don't end thereOver half of these funds experienced negative CAPM and FF5 alpha over the past decade, indicating ineffective market timing and underperformance against their benchmarksThis underscores a larger trend where poorly performing active funds are becoming the norm.

Despite the tech sector's seemingly endless growth trajectory over the past decade, the allocation of active equity funds into this sector hasn't seen a corresponding spike

In the past ten years, only about 25% of actively managed equity funds had technology stock proportions above those of Vanguard's S&P 500 ETFAfter 2020, during the pandemic-induced tech hype, many active funds opted to cut back their exposureThis dichotomy speaks volumes about their cautious stance toward what is ostensibly a booming sector.

Considering the volatility attributed to tech stocks and the fluctuating fortunes of the Mag7, even those active funds that do allocate heavily to technology often struggle to outperform the indicesFor instance, only the top 1% of funds with the highest allocation to tech managed to outperform the S&P 500 total return indexThese elite funds exhibit tech sector allocations of 81.3% and Mag7 weighting of 30.5%, both exceeding the index averagesHowever, this indicates that mere over-allocation to this sector isn't a surefire recipe for success.

The price volatility in tech stocks compounds another layer of risk for those managing funds

Much of the Mag7's impressive gains are marred by substantial dips, sometimes retracting between 34.7% and 73.2%. The average drawdown sits at around 53.7%, with prolonged retreat periods averaging nearly 700 days, significantly testing investors' resilience and appetites.

Cabinet profiles within the Mag7 are also subject to rapid changes, further complicating the investment landscapeInvestors have witnessed distinct rotations; between 2010 to 2012, digital titans such as Microsoft and Google lagged, with Apple far outpacing the packThe roles were reversed from 2013 to 2016 as other players rose and Apple falteredAn investment in the tech sector requires a keen ability to navigate these swift shifts, which can inflate risks if a portfolio is overly concentrated in a single segment.

For those considering a long-term, concentrated position in tech to beat the S&P 500, they may ponder the question: why not simply invest in low-cost ETFs that mirror tech benchmarks? The U.S

fund market offers a smorgasbord of products, dominated by institutional playersInvestors are well-informed as all fund holdings are publicly availableTherefore, if active equity funds disproportionately allocate to tech stocks, savvy investors can identify cost-effective passive alternatives.

Among the most significant ETFs are those focusing on the tech sector, such as State Street's XLK and Vanguard's VGT, boasting assets over $700 million and $980 million, respectivelyThese ETFs carry minimal fees of approximately 5 and 9 basis pointsFurthermore, newer entrants like the MAGS ETF have rapidly gained traction, thanks to their competitive fee structures and superb performanceThe historical excess returns of XLK and VGT from 2010 onwards have outstripped the returns of active funds, compelling investors to lean towards these passive, cost-efficient options.

This evolving dynamic reflects a broader societal shift that's shaping investment behaviors and strategies