Indeed, when you look at some statistics,

you'll find out that a lot of the funds terminate are closed.

And guess what?

More often than not,

it's the funds which are not performing very well which are shut down.

So here, we look at some statistics again.

You see that over one year,

you have a proportion of funds which are terminated, which stands at 6%.

And then this portion increases,

that's the red part of the bars, of this vertical bars.

After five years, it rises to 25%, and

then over a total of four years, it's as much as more than 60%.

Okay, so putting one and two together.

Reason number one, higher fee.

Reason number two, a lot of the funds will be closed, and

hence result in what we call a survivorship bias.

And this shows in this table here, which puts both together.

This chart here looks at the returns of funds,

which existed in 1970, always referring to you as equity.

And you see the numbers here on the right, the top-right part of this table.

There were 355 funds in 1970.

And then, it looks at what the returns were in 2009,

and there were only 112 left of this 355.

So a lot of very high mortality rates, shall we say.

Okay, so 243 funds were closed or merged.

And then, we look at the proportion of the funds, which have been outperforming.

The index, here it's a broader index.

It's not the S&P 500, it's a larger index, which is called the [INAUDIBLE] 5000.

And you see that there are only 41 funds, which are outperforming this index.

So now, the trick is, do you compare the 41 to

the 112 which are left, which have survived, or

do you compare the 41 to the whole sample, which would make more sense, right?

Because again, there's been more than 240 funds which have been terminated or

closed, but you should take them into account, right?

So this changes quite dramatically the conclusion, because if you compare the 41

to the funds, which have been beating the market to the ones which are left,

so the proportion is 36%, which is decent.