I love when studies on retirement plans state the obvious.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to researchers from Vanderbilt University; the University of Texas at Austin and the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER); and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, revenue sharing paying mutual funds are more expensive than funds that don\u2019t pay them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The results indicate that revenue sharing translates into higher expense ratios in the retirement setting, while direct fees are not significantly different across revenue-sharing and non-sharing plans. Consequently, participants face higher all-in fees in revenue-sharing plans.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Higher fees are not offset by higher returns, according to the study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
You don\u2019t need a brain surgeon to figure that it\u2019s actively managed plans that pay revenue sharing and these funds have a higher expense ratio that can pay revenue sharing to the recordkeeper.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n
<\/span><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I love when studies on retirement plans state the obvious. According to researchers from Vanderbilt University; the University of Texas at Austin and the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER); and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, … Continue reading