How We Review Funds

Last updated October 31, 2026

No secret formula, no proprietary score. Our reviews rest on a few stubborn principles and publicly verifiable facts.

What we evaluate

Cost first. The expense ratio is the one variable that is knowable in advance and compounds against you with certainty, so it leads every review and drives every ranking. We treat a low fee as the strongest single point in a fund's favor — because, over decades, the evidence says it is.

What you actually own. We describe a fund's strategy in plain English — what index it tracks or what an active manager is trying to do — so you understand the exposure, not just the marketing name.

Suitability, not hype. Every review names who a fund fits and who it doesn't. A great fund in the wrong account or portfolio is a mistake; we'd rather tell you that than sell you on it.

Honest treatment of active funds. We are pro-index, not anti-active. Where an active fund has a genuinely strong, low-cost, well-structured case, we say so plainly — and where it's an expensive bet dressed as expertise, we say that too.

How we rank "best" funds

Within a category, we rank primarily by expense ratio, with minimums and structural tie-breakers (portability, index quality, distribution quirks) noted. We do not rank by past returns, because past returns have almost no power to predict future returns, and ranking by them would simply chase last year's luck.

Where our data comes from

Expense ratios, minimums, and strategies come from fund providers' own documentation and prospectuses. Every figure carries a last-verified date. Funds change their terms; we re-verify periodically, but you should always confirm against the official prospectus before investing.

What we don't do

We don't forecast returns, we don't publish price targets, and we don't tell you what to buy — we are a publication, not your advisor. The only forward-looking number anywhere on this site is in the fee calculator, and that is neutral compound-interest math you control entirely.