Having been an advisor through boom and bust markets alike, I can attest that some “Frequently Asked Questions” come and go. But for as long as I’ve been around to answer it, here’s one that has never grown old:

“I’ve got a lump sum of cash. Should I invest it all at once, or gradually, over time?”

I covered this question back in 2015, pointing to a 2004 Dimensional Fund Advisors analysis entitled, “To Wade or Plunge.” At the time, I said:

“Although it feels more comfortable to wade given the uncertainty inherent with markets, the evidence shows that, approximately two thirds of the time, you are better off taking the plunge.”

I’d say the same again today. If you’ve got a lump sum of cash you plan to invest in the market, you might as well put all of it to work sooner rather than later.

More recent analysis continues to support this approach. In 2016, Vanguard published a paper and podcast entitled, “Invest now or temporarily hold your cash?” This month, Vanguard’s senior investment strategist Andy Clarke updated his post on the subject, still concluding, “More often than not, it has paid to invest immediately.” He offered data demonstrating that this conclusion holds true across various global markets, and among stocks and bonds alike.

Just as I suggested in 2015, the biggest risk you face when plunging into the market isn’t financial. It’s whether you can ignore the regret you’ll probably feel if you happen to plunge at an inopportune time – i.e., just before the markets take a dive with your hard-earned cash. As long as you don’t act on your regret, it’s natural to feel it. Just remember to Take the Long View® with your actions. The long term trend is up, and the power of global capitalism is at your back.

For years, we’ve been sharing the results of Dimensional Fund Advisors’ annually updated “Mutual Fund Landscape” analysis.  As we first expressed back in 2013, “This analysis of the US mutual fund industry performance casts doubt on the ability of investors to form a winning long-term strategy by picking outperforming funds based on past returns. It also raises questions about the effectiveness of investment strategies that attempt to add value by identifying mispriced securities.”

This is one message that bears repeating. Especially since, this year, somebody got creative over at Dimensional and produced an engaging video version. Check it out!

Speaking of Vanguard versus AQR, another frequently asked question we get here at Hill Investment Group is why we typically use Dimensional Fund Advisors instead of Vanguard for the core of our portfolio builds. Vanguard typically beats Dimensional in terms of raw fund expense ratios (i.e., how much the investor pays to fund management). And we often emphasize how important it is to manage costs. Shouldn’t that mean Vanguard is the obvious choice? Our answer: Expense ratios are an important consideration, but they’re not the only one. At HIG, our Investment Policy Committee (IPC) is tasked with remaining current on these sorts of comparisons. To supplement our own, independent analyses, we also keep an eye on the work of respected colleagues, such as the BAM ALLIANCE’s Chief Investment Officer Jared Kizer, CFA. As a former colleague, Jared graciously agreed to let us share his own recent research report here: “Comparing DFA- vs. Vanguard-Oriented Portfolios.” I found Jared’s analysis compelling, and I hope you do as well. Enjoy the read.