First, people were turning to ETFs because they are perceived to be cheaper, easier to trade, and offer tax advantages. Now a growing number of folks are arguing that an active fund can be mimicked by a bucket of ETFs.

Case in point: ETF.com analyst Elisabeth Kashner suggests a package of ETFs to replace the Fidelity Contrafund.

Meanwhile, Eric Balchunas from Bloomberg argues that investors can be their own equity analysts by using what he calls "robo-ETFs".

Can a bucket of ETFs replace an active fund? Can those things that arguably make actively managed funds unique be substituted by a set of formulae.

Let's back up a bit and ask a more fundamental question: How could this debate gotten this far already? Are active managers struggling this much now just to protect their existence?

What are you going to do about this? 

Edited by: Ning Zhou


Stay ahead of the news ... Sign up for our email alerts now
CLICK HERE