🛡️ wyper.io
6/10
Mixed - needs context
Fact-checked 2026-08-17 · truthfulness score
🌐 FULL SPECTRUM VERIFICATION
6/10 · context- multiple independent reports provide varying timelines
"Nearly 75% of active fund managers failed to beat the S&P 500 over the last 12 months, per WSJ"
While reports like the Wall Street Journal note that a large percentage of U.S. large-cap active funds struggle to beat market benchmarks, other data (such as 10-year figures or varying timeframes) put the underperformance rate around 75% over longer horizons like a decade rather than strictly 12 months.
Why this score
↑ WSJ reported high underperformance rates for large-cap active funds against market benchmarks
↓ Sources note 75% figure specifically aligns with 10-year tracking horizons rather than a 12-month period
⚠️ 2 AIs disagree - Gemini 6/10 · Grok 3/10
🌐 FULL SPECTRUM SETTLED FACT
ConsensusRecent data from Morningstar, S&P Dow Jones Indices (SPIVA), and WSJ coverage show that 60-79% of active US large-cap equity managers underperformed passive benchmarks or the S&P 500 over 12-month periods ending in 2025 or mid-2026.
Open questions• Exact 12-month window referenced by the WSJ article
• Whether the figure applies strictly to S&P 500 or broader passive composites
• Impact of survivorship bias on the reported success rate
🔗 Stock-Picking Funds Are Performing as Poorly as Ever · Active Fund Manager Success Rates Ticked Up in 2026, but Passive Funds Still Hold the Advantage · Active funds gained ground in 2026, but 75% still trail passive over 10 years - InvestmentNews · Ever wonder why most fund managers can't beat the S&P 500? - Lawyers, Guns & Money · 7eea98cc-a20c-41cb-b7e7-ae8eef0efea9
🔗 Active Fund Manager Success Rates Ticked Up in 2026, but Passive Funds Still Hold the Advantage · Active funds gained ground in 2026, but 75% still trail passive over 10 years - InvestmentNews · Ever wonder why most fund managers can't beat the S&P 500? - Lawyers, Guns & Money · The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported on the 15th (local ...
⚖ Dispute this result

Spotted a factual error, or a source we missed? Back it up with a concrete counter-fact and a supporting link. A source link plus an email or public X handle are required - unsubstantiated or anonymous disputes are not accepted. Every dispute is reviewed by a human; an X handle is shown publicly next to your dispute, an email stays private.

Checked with wyper.io Fact-Check
A 1–10 truth score with real, linkable sources - cross-checked by two independent AIs, right in your browser. Nothing runs in the background.
Verify anything yourself - free → Also clean up your X & Instagram, 100% local · wyper.io

🛡️ Verified with wyper.io · X · Instagram · Telegram · support@wyper.io
This is the original, unaltered result. If a shared post differs from this page, it was tampered with.