Active vs. Passive Investing Styles: An Age Old Rivalry

Active vs. Passive investing styles is an age-old debate in the investing world. Investment managers on either side tend to be steadfast advocates of the merits of their approach. Active managers seek to exploit market inefficiencies by relying on analytical research, forecasts, and their own judgement and experience to decide which securities to buy, hold, and sell. Passive investing involves simply tracking an index to avoid the management fees and trading costs that can be a drag on performance by adhering to a buy-and-hold strategy.

However, no one strategy always triumphs. It cannot be ignored that both investing strategies have positive attributes and have helped define the historical and current investing trends we have witnessed in the retirement marketplace.

As a retirement advisory firm, HANYS Benefit Services (HBS) consults with fiduciaries to help them design a fund menu that will utilize the most appropriate investment style per asset class, customized for their Plan’s demographic. HBS recognizes that the selection and monitoring criteria of passive and active strategies should be tailored to their inherent differences. Helping fiduciaries craft an Investment Policy Statement (IPS) that establishes separate monitoring criteria for each investment style allows for each to be held to their own unique standards.

In Active vs. Passive Investing Styles: An Age Old Rivalry, HBS traces the origins of the active and passive investing styles, dives into the historical performance and asset flow trends of each, and addresses how plan sponsors can make prudent decisions about employing each investing style.

If you have any questions, or would like to begin talking to a retirement plan advisor, please get in touch by calling (800) 388-1963 or e-mail us at hbs@hanys.org.

SECURE 2.0 Discussion Series: Session Two

The retirement industry has been buzzing since the SECURE 2.0 Act was signed into law last December. This new, comprehensive legislation has sparked a lot of discussion. As with any major reform, it will take time for the industry to fully adapt and understand all its implications. Following our April 11 webinar on the first three months of the industry’s response, our team reconvened to discuss some of what we have heard from our client and vendor partners and to respond to some of the great questions we heard from attendees. Panel participants included the following HBS team members: Noah Buck, Christina Bauer-Dobias, Sean Bayne, Vincent Bocchinfuso and Kathleen Coonan. The Discussion SB – Throughout the webinar, I wanted to stress two things: 1) confusion about where to start and what is expected from plan sponsors is normal; and 2) even more than three months in, this is a developing situation and people should expect changes as time goes on. With those in mind, engagement through

SECURE 2.0 Discussion Series: Session One

SECURE 2.0 provisions: What we know and what’s still up in the air The SECURE 2.0 Act, signed into law in late December 2022, has factored heavily in retirement industry discourse since the final legislation was published. As with any legislation of this depth and breadth, there’s a lot to digest and the industry takes time to adjust. Our team of experienced advisors recently met to discuss some of the more nuanced provisions of the legislation, such as changes to Roth contributions, and what they could mean for plan sponsors. Panel participants included the following HBS team members: Noah Buck, Christina Bauer-Dobias, Sean Bayne, Vincent Bocchinfuso and Kathleen Coonan. Highlights of our panel’s conversation below should serve to help guide plan sponsor thinking. On Roth employer contributions NB – In addition to deferring pre-tax or Roth, plan sponsors can now allow employer contributions to be classified as Roth, is that right? VB – Correct. This is immediately available to plan s

What you should know about biosimilars

Rapidly increasing healthcare costs will likely continue to impact employers for the foreseeable future. As a result, many employers are considering strategies to manage these costs, including rising prescription drug costs. The introduction of biosimilar drugs as an alternative to biologics may bring value to healthcare by offering cost savings and increasing employee access to necessary medications. While biosimilars can potentially combat rising prescription drug costs, employers will need to learn more about them before considering how their health plans can accommodate these newer drugs. This article explores biosimilar drugs and ways employers can promote or manage their use. What are biosimilars? The European Medicines Agency defines a biosimilar as “a biological medicine highly similar to another already approved biological medicine.” It is produced from living organisms — humans, animals or microorganisms, meaning they aren’t created from synthesized chemicals. They are also

HANYS Benefit Services

Search This Blog