Mutual Funds and ETFs: Compare Fees, Advice and Diversification
Compare fund fees, the cost of advice and actual holding overlap before choosing between mutual funds and ETFs.
In this article
Mutual funds versus ETFs is often presented as a fee comparison, but it is first a question of service. A 2% fund pays for management and guidance. A 0.2% ETF pays only for index replication. The gap, applied to your balance, gives the yearly price of the advice you receive, to compare with the advice you actually use. Check diversification too: several funds from one family often hold the same large companies, and ten minutes with the fund facts is enough to see it. Two questions remain that comparisons tend to skip. Who will make the purchases, sales and rebalancing if you go self-directed? And what is an advisor's calm voice worth in a crash, especially if you have already sold at a bottom? The answer is often a split rather than a choice of camp. This article compares fees, services and overlaps, then outlines compromises where each service is paid for knowing its price.
Break the fee gap into services
Two percent against two tenths of a percent: the fee gap between branch mutual funds and index ETFs is one of the best-known figures in personal finance, and one of the most misread. It helps to break it down. The ETF pays for replicating an index, which is mechanical and cheap. The branch fund pays for management, distribution and above all advice: the annual meeting, planning, guidance. The gap, applied to your balance, gives the yearly price of that advice, $1,800 a year on $100,000. Compare that figure with the service you actually receive. So the question is not which product is cheaper, since the answer is known in advance. It is what exactly you are paying for and whether you use it. Count what you use.
X-ray the real diversification
The number of funds you hold often gives a false picture of diversification. Several funds from one family, or from different families with the same mandate, hold the same large companies: the banks and the usual giants dominate every top-ten list. Three overlapping funds diversify less than one broad fund. The check takes ten minutes. Put each fund's ten largest holdings side by side, which you can find in the fund facts. Duplicates stand out immediately and show the portfolio's real concentration. The exercise applies to both kinds of products, since sector and thematic ETFs overlap as much as branch funds do. Verify diversification in the holdings, not in the number of lines on your statement.
Look at who will do the work
Moving to ETFs hands you three tasks the manager used to do. There is buying and selling, mechanics you can learn in an evening. There is rebalancing, which needs a written rule and the counter-intuitive act of selling what has gone up. And there is tax placement across accounts, meaning what to hold where. A written plan, with a target allocation and a rebalancing rule, makes these tasks routine. Without one, they become improvised, and improvisation often costs more than management fees. Before you migrate, ask yourself honestly whether this work suits you. The fees you save are earned in hours of calm management or lost in impulsive decisions, depending on the person. A cheap product badly piloted rarely beats an expensive product left alone. The pilot matters as much as the tool.
Judge the advice at its moment of truth
The advice billed inside a fund's fees is judged at its moment of truth: a market decline. An advisor who recalls the plan, keeps you from panic selling at the bottom and turns fear into rebalancing easily earns the fee gap. A single behavioural error avoided can pay for years of advice. An advisor you never hear from between two annual forms is worth only the index replication an ETF supplies for a tenth of the price. Reread your own history: whom did you call at the last trough, and what would you have done alone? That answer separates the two options better than any fee comparison. It leads to the common compromises: manage part of the portfolio yourself, keep the advice for the rest, and pay for each service knowing its price.
Quebec scenario
A lawyer in Gatineau has held branch-bought mutual funds for ten years, and a colleague keeps praising ETFs. Rather than decide on reputation, she lines up the numbers. Her funds charge 2.1% a year, advice included. A comparable ETF portfolio would cost 0.2%, plus her brokerage platform's fees. On her $180,000, the gross gap approaches $3,400 a year. She then checks her actual diversification and finds that three of her funds hold the same large Canadian companies, an overlap she had never noticed. Two questions remain. Who will make the buys, sells and rebalancing, given that she has never placed an order? And what is her advisor worth when markets fall, the same advisor who talked her out of selling in March 2020? She settles on a compromise: ETFs in the RRSP, which she manages herself with a written plan, and the advisor for the rest. She now pays for those services knowing their price.
Checklist
- Calculate the fee gap in dollars on your balance
- Name the services the gap pays for
- Verify the actual use of those services
- Compare your funds' top holdings
- Spot the portfolio overlaps
- Assess your capacity to execute alone
- Test your bear-market discipline honestly
- Consider splitting between self-directed and advised
- Pay for each service knowing its price
The questions we get
A question about your situation?
A Quebec broker answers, with no commitment.
Read next
// Investments
Build a GIC Ladder to Spread Maturities
Split the amount across several maturities so one tranche renews at a time and rate risk is smoothed.
// Investments
Management Expense Ratios: Measure the Long-Term Effect
Project the compounded after-fee return over your horizon to see what an annual expense ratio really removes.
// Investments
TFSA or RRSP: Choose by Goal and Tax Rate
Choose between TFSA and RRSP based on the goal, the withdrawal horizon and your current and future tax rates.