SPIVA Australia: What the Scorecard Actually Shows About ASX Active Managers
Written by Christopher Hall, AdvDipFP | Authorised Representative, AFSL 526688 | Updated October 2026
Most actively managed Australian equity funds underperform their benchmark index in most periods — the SPIVA Australia Scorecard, published twice a year by S&P Dow Jones Indices, confirms that plainly. What the scorecard also shows, less widely discussed, is that mid- and small-cap Australian equity funds consistently post the lowest underperformance rate of any general Australian equity category — not a majority beating the index, but a smaller majority losing to it than every other category the scorecard tracks. Christopher Hall, Authorised Representative (AFSL 526688), set out what the data actually says, and the structural reason behind it, during a 29 September 2026 session with Gary Glover.
SPIVA Scorecard — Australian equity categories, 1-year underperformance rate (Year-End 2025):
Category | Underperformance rate |
Australian Equity General | 74% |
Australian Mid- and Small-Cap | 64% |
Australian Equity A-REIT | 40% |
Source: S&P Dow Jones Indices, SPIVA Australia Scorecard, Year-End 2025. This table will need updating when S&P Dow Jones Indices publishes its next scorecard — see the note at the end of this section.
What Does the SPIVA Scorecard Actually Measure?
The SPIVA (S&P Indices Versus Active) Scorecard is a twice-yearly report from S&P Dow Jones Indices that compares actively managed fund returns, net of fees, against the relevant benchmark index in each category, over 1-, 3-, 5-, 10- and 15-year periods. It is one of the longest-running, most widely cited studies of its kind. The headline finding is consistent across almost every edition and every market it covers: most active managers underperform their benchmark most of the time, and the gap tends to widen over longer holding periods.
Why Do Mid- and Small-Cap Managers Post the Lowest Underperformance Rate?
Christopher Hall's observation, drawn from his reading of the SPIVA Australia Scorecard, is that mid- and small-cap Australian equity funds are not immune to underperformance, but they consistently underperform less often than the broader Australian Equity General category. He attributed this to a structural mechanism rather than superior stock-picking skill: a broad equity index must hold its constituent commodity stocks through an entire cycle, rising with them and falling with them, while an active manager — particularly one with a more industrial, less commodity-heavy mandate — can simply hold those names lightly or not at all. That flexibility reduces, rather than eliminates, the drag during a period when commodities lead the broader market, which is consistent with mid/small-cap's narrower underperformance gap rather than an outright advantage.
The data over longer periods shows this is not a fixed rule. Only 40% of Australian small-cap funds lagged their benchmark over the ten years to December 2017 — meaning a majority actually beat the index that decade. More recently, 72% lagged over the ten years to 2024 and 60% over the fifteen years to 2025. Mid- and small-cap has remained the relative standout among Australian equity categories throughout, but "relatively the best" and "beats the index" are different claims, and the scorecard supports only the first.
How Does This Connect to WAM Capital?
WAM Capital is a live, current example of the mechanism working in reverse. Gary Glover's anecdotal observation is that WAM Capital — an active Australian equity manager — moved from its usual premium to net tangible assets to a discount during 2026, a period when commodity stocks led the broader market. The same structural feature that narrows underperformance when commodities lag worked against WAM Capital specifically because commodities were leading, not because the underlying portfolio's holdings were poor.
Why Does Fund Flow Behaviour Matter Alongside the Data?
Gary Glover's anecdotal observation, developed across his trading career, is that capital flows tend to chase whichever two or three fund managers had the best recent year, a pattern that can work against an underperforming manager even where the underlying portfolio remains sound. This is a separate dynamic from the SPIVA data itself — one is a measured statistic, the other a practitioner's read on investor behaviour — and the two should not be conflated.
Remember that past performance is no guarantee of future results, and all trading involves risk.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do most active Australian fund managers beat the index?
No. The SPIVA Australia Scorecard shows most actively managed Australian equity funds underperform their benchmark in most periods, with the underperformance rate generally increasing over longer time horizons.
Which category of Australian active managers performs best against its benchmark?
Mid- and small-cap Australian equity funds consistently post the lowest underperformance rate of any general Australian equity category — 64% over one year and 60% over five years in the Year-End 2025 scorecard, against 74% for Australian Equity General funds over the same periods. A minority still beat the index most years; the distinction is a narrower underperformance gap, not an outright edge.
Why do mid- and small-cap managers underperform less often than other categories?
Christopher Hall's observation is that a broad index must hold its commodity constituents through an entire cycle, while an active manager with a more industrial-leaning mandate can hold those names lightly or not at all — reducing the drag when commodities lag the broader market, though not eliminating it.
How does WAM Capital relate to the SPIVA data?
WAM Capital is a live example of the same mechanism working in reverse — Gary Glover's commentary points to the fund's 2026 discount to net tangible assets as a result of its lighter commodity exposure during a period when commodities were leading the market, not a change in the underlying portfolio's quality.
About the Author
Christopher Hall, AdvDipFP, is an Authorised Representative (AFSL 526688) and the editorial lead at Finer Market Points, covering ASX-listed momentum stocks and market data for an Australian trading audience. Read more on the author's profile page.
Sources
# | Source | Type |
1 | S&P Dow Jones Indices. SPIVA Australia Scorecard, Year-End 2025. | External research |
2 | S&P Dow Jones Indices. SPIVA Australia Scorecard, Mid-Year 2026. | External research |
3 | Gary Glover and Christopher Hall, Finer Market Points recorded session, 29 September 2026. | Gary Glover session |
All Gary Glover observations in this article are anecdotal practitioner observations developed across his trading career — not formal studies.
Related Finer Market Points Educational Resources
This article includes general trading observations made by Gary Glover (AR 259215), Authorised Representative of Novus Capital Limited (AFSL 238 168), during a recorded Finer Market Points session on 29 September 2026. The observation reflects Gary Glover's general approach and his anecdotal observations developed across his trading career — it is general commentary only, and is not a formal study, not financial advice, and not a recommendation to trade any security. It was made in the course of that session and not in response to any individual's circumstances. Content has been edited and summarised by Finer Market Points for educational purposes.
This content is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
The information, opinions and other materials appearing on this website are of a general nature only and shall not be construed as advice. Finer Market Points Pty Ltd, CAR 1304002, AFSL 526688, ABN 87 645 284 680. This general information is educational only and not financial advice, recommendation, forecast or solicitation. This is not taxation advice. Rose Bay Equities accepts no responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the information, opinions or other materials provided on or accessible through this website. This website has not been prepared with reference to your individual financial or personal circumstances. You should not rely on any advice on this website without first seeking appropriate professional, financial and legal advice. Further, where Rose Bay Equities makes third party material available or accessible through this website you acknowledge that Rose Bay Equities is a distributor and not a publisher of that content and that its editorial control is limited to the selection of those materials to make available. We accept no liability for any loss or damages arising from use. Authors and presenters may hold positions in discussed companies and investment products.
Comments