English to Greek Bus/Financial Economics

Does active money-management make any better sense than passive?

EQUITY markets in America and Europe have recently been showing tentative signs of a recovery from their late July lows. Yet investors – in both actively managed funds and in funds that mirror a particular stockmarket index – are smarting still. The average active fund in America has lost over 22% (fund-management fees included) since the end of December 1999, according to Lipper, a company that measures fund performance. In Britain actively managed equity funds have lost 31%. Passive funds, however, have fared even worse, on average. Pure index funds have lost over 27% in America since December 1999, and 32% in Britain.
The choice between active and passive funds is like steering between Scylla and Charybdis, the more so since disillusionment with equities in general set in. Anger is growing – if the newspapers' financial pages are anything to go by – with those who manage mortals' money. Particular scorn has been poured on those poorly performing active managers who claimed that it was precisely during tough times that they would come into their own against indexed funds. In Britain two-thirds of active fund managers underperformed the index last year, even before the fees that they charged are subtracted. These people are handsomely rewarded for losing money. Each year they pocket 1-2% of the assets they manage, on top of initial charges of as much as 5%. Indexers, by contrast, charge only 0.5% a year, with no upfront fees.

Η ενεργός διαχείριση κεφαλαίων έχει μεγαλύτερη σημασία από την παθητική;;;;