Go to main Forum page »
We’ve all been told that index funds are the smart investor’s secret weapon. Low fees. Broad diversification. Market-matching returns. What’s not to love? But here’s the thing: not every fund labeled as an index fund behaves like one.
In fact, sometimes an “index fund” is not truly an index fund at all. Let’s unpack what that means—and why it matters for your money.
The Original Promise of Index Funds
When Jack Bogle launched the first index fund for ordinary investors in 1976, it was revolutionary. Instead of trying to beat the market, Bogle’s fund aimed to be the market—tracking the S&P 500 with low fees and no manager trying to time the highs and lows.
The beauty was in the simplicity:
That’s the classic index fund model: passive, rules-based, and cheap.
The Imitators Arrive
As index investing gained popularity, fund companies took notice. They started slapping “index fund” labels on all sorts of products. Some still hold true to Bogle’s vision. Others? Not so much.
Here are a few ways index funds stray from the path:
1. Too Niche to Be Neutral
Today, there are indexes for just about everything—cannabis, blockchain, space travel, even “emerging market internet.” These niche funds technically track indexes, but they often carry:
They’re not broad-market bets—they’re targeted plays wearing index labels. That’s not inherently bad, but it’s not the same as investing in the total market.
Rule of thumb: If the index is too specific, it’s probably an active strategy in disguise.
2. Smart Beta: Marketing or Meaningful?
“Smart beta” funds track indexes that are built using filters like dividends, volatility, or momentum. That sounds smart, right?
Maybe. But smart beta indexes often require a team to actively tweak the rules. That’s not truly passive. And you’re paying for it—with expense ratios 3–10x higher than a basic market-cap index fund.
If your index fund needs a research team to justify the strategy, you’re probably not getting the simplicity you signed up for.
3. Synthetic and Leveraged Products
Some so-called index funds use derivatives, leverage, or swaps to mimic an index. These are often:
They may technically track indexes, but they behave nothing like traditional index funds. They’re for traders—not long-term investors.
4. High Fees with a Passive Face
Some funds quietly charge high fees even while hugging an index. Why? Brand recognition, distribution deals, or investor inattention. You might think you’re getting the same exposure as a Vanguard fund—but paying triple the cost.
Quick check: Compare the expense ratio. A true broad-market index fund should charge well under 0.10%. If you see 0.30%, 0.50%, or more? Walk away.
5. Tracking Error: What You Don’t See Can Cost You
Even if a fund claims to track the S&P 500, the devil is in the execution. Some funds lag the index due to poor management, bad rebalancing, or hidden costs.
Look at a fund’s tracking error—the difference between the fund’s return and the index it’s supposed to mirror. Consistent underperformance, even by small amounts, can compound into thousands of dollars lost over decades.
So… How Can You Tell the Real from the Imitation?
Here are 5 quick questions to ask before you invest in any index fund:
The Bottom Line
Index funds are one of the greatest innovations in modern investing. But the term has been stretched, distorted, and marketed far beyond its original meaning.
A fund that calls itself an index fund might still be expensive, risky, niche, or complex. If you’re investing for the long term, don’t fall for the label. Look under the hood.
Because when an index fund is not really an index fund… it could be the most expensive “cheap” investment you ever made.
There was another thread here recently which got at some of these issues, but this post by William is a broader summary of how many new ETFs, and some “index” fund options, can now quickly lead you into the Wall Street gutter if you’re not careful.
Jason Zweig, Jonathan’s colleague and friend from his WSJ days, wrote a recent piece about this. This link should be open/accessible:
https://www.wsj.com/finance/investing/how-index-fund-investing-turned-into-an-extreme-sport-d555b5ed?st=KGEVg8&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
Well done! I sent your article to our ‘kids’. You explained it better than I could for sure!
Nice article, William. Thank you!
I heard something yesterday that I wish I’d included. A financial advisor said, “If the ducks quack, feed them.” In other words, if investors are clamoring for index funds—even ones that aren’t truly indexes—just create a product that sounds like what they want, and they’ll line up for it.
It’s no secret to HumbleDollar readers that I am a huge Jack Bogle fan. As I’ve written before he is on my personal Mount Rushmore of investing (along with Jonathan and Christine Benz). The collective investing philosophy and writing of these three are the primary reason I accumulated a portfolio which has allowed me to be financially secure in retirement, but Jack was first, and for me reigns supreme.
Jack Bogle offered the first retail index mutual fund, the well known Vanguard S and P 500 fund (VFINX) in 1976. Jack’s philosophy was why try to find the needle in the haystack (the mere 4% of the stocks that are responsible for virtually all of the 10% annual stock market profits since 1926), just buy the entire haystack. At the time it was derided as Bogle’s folly. In 2000 the fund assets were a mere 7 billion dollars. After the market crash in 2000 investors finally saw the light of index investing. Today the combined assets of the mutual fund and ETF version exceeds 1.5 trillion dollars. Some folly!
Thanks for this post, William!
Good article. James Shack, a UK financial advisor with a YouTube channel, recently published a video exploring the same themes. In my opinion, it’s good that this issue is getting some exposure, and hopefully, it will raise awareness around this “wolf in sheep’s clothing” type of index funds.