The Hidden Tax Cost of Mutual Funds

Why Taxes Are Under Appreciated in Actively Managed Mutual Funds

When most investors assess the potential costs and risks of mutual funds, they tend to focus on obvious expenses like management fees and performance. What’s less obvious is the impact of taxes on investment returns, especially within actively managed mutual funds.

(Interested in a portfolio review for $99? Click here.)

The SPIVA After-Tax Scorecard from S&P adds an important dimension to the active vs. passive investing debate: after-tax performance. While the classic SPIVA Scorecards have long shown that a majority of actively managed funds underperform relevant benchmarks on a pretax basis, the after-tax results can be even more revealing.

Active Trading Creates a Hidden Tax Burden

Actively managed funds trade securities frequently in an effort to generate returns above a benchmark. Every sale of a winning investment can create a capital gain distribution to shareholders — and those distributions are taxable.

In contrast, passive index funds tend to buy and hold securities with very low turnover. As a result, fewer taxable events occur over time. The difference may seem subtle, but compounding can make it material.

The SPIVA After-Tax Scorecard specifically highlights that after taxes, the average actively managed large-cap core fund trails the S&P 500 Index by as much as 4.4% per year over various time horizons — once you include the drag from taxes.

Over a decade or more those percentages dramatically reduce total wealth accumulation.

Why the Tax Impact Is So Significant

1. Active turnover triggers taxable events - Each time a fund manager sells a holding for a gain, that gain can be distributed to investors and taxed, even if the investor doesn’t sell their own shares. High turnover strategies generate short-term capital gains, which are taxed at ordinary income tax rates which are much higher than long-term rates.
2. Tax drag is persistent and cumulative - Over a long time horizon, even a few percentage points of annual tax drag can compound into a significant reduction in wealth. Because many investors focus on pretax performance, the true, after-tax outcomes can be worse than expected. Research beyond SPIVA supports this: studies show that after tax, a much smaller percentage of active funds beat their benchmarks.
3. Taxes compound with other frictions - Management fees, trading costs, and taxes all eat into gross returns. Even if a manager occasionally generates outperformance, taxes can wipe out that advantage — especially if the outperformance is modest. In fact, some academic research suggests that an active fund needs to generate more than 2% of pretax outperformance just to break even after the tax drag it creates — a high bar few funds can beat.
4. Investor attention is biased toward pretax returns - Fund fact sheets, rating services, and financial media typically report pretax total returns. Unless investors specifically look at after-tax returns (which most don’t), they can overestimate the benefits of active management. This bias toward pretax performance disguises the real cost of taxes.

Why This Matters for Investors

For long-term, taxable investors — especially individuals saving outside retirement accounts — the tax drag from active funds isn’t just academic: it’s money they don’t get to keep.

Because most investors pay meaningful tax bills each year on mutual fund distributions, even a modest drag can translate into hundreds of thousands of dollars lost over decades of investing.

Taxes aren’t just a bookkeeping footnote on your statements — they’re a real, compounding drag on investment success. The SPIVA After-Tax Scorecard reminds us that once you account for taxes, the performance gap between actively managed funds and passive benchmarks is often larger than it appears.

For investors seeking to keep more of what they earn, understanding tax efficiency isn’t optional — it’s essential.

If you would like to discuss the tax efficiency of your portfolio, click Book A Meeting.