TL;DR
Get your next haul delivered free — and shop member deals
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Access to Prime Big Deal Days deals on October 6–7
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
A Kiplinger contributing adviser argues that investors may benefit from checking portfolios less often and avoiding reactive trades. The article cites a widely repeated Fidelity account story, but provides no study details or data verifying the claim, so it should not be treated as proof that inactive accounts outperform.
A Kiplinger contributing adviser argues that investors may improve their long-term outcomes by resisting frequent portfolio changes, citing a familiar story that deceased account holders and people who forgot their passwords supposedly had the best-performing Fidelity accounts. The report does not provide the study’s date, methodology or results, so the anecdote is not independently established by the supplied material; its central advice is to stay invested and avoid decisions driven by short-term market moves.
The contributor describes a study that Fidelity reportedly conducted years ago, reviewing thousands of brokerage accounts. The article says the accounts belonging to deceased holders performed best, with forgotten-password accounts close behind. It offers no citation to the research, measurement period, account selection criteria or performance figures. The story should therefore be read as an anecdote reported by the contributor, not as a verified quantitative finding.
The argument behind the anecdote is that investors who trade less are less likely to panic-sell during declines, try to time market turns or repeatedly change their strategy in response to headlines. The contributor says such behavior can interrupt compounding and lead to poorer results than following a plan. Those are the article’s conclusions; it provides no comparative return data for hands-on and hands-off investors.
The report does not recommend abandoning oversight. It describes an arm’s-length approach: check that investments remain aligned with long-term goals, make deliberate changes when circumstances or research warrant them, and avoid tinkering in response to every market move. The contributor says this discipline can matter especially in retirement, when people are withdrawing from portfolios rather than adding new savings.
Why Fewer Trades Can Matter
For readers, the practical issue is not whether an investor should literally ignore an account. It is whether frequent reactions to market volatility make it harder to follow a suitable long-term plan. Selling after a decline can lock in losses, while switching investments to chase recent performance may expose a portfolio to risks the investor has not planned for. The supplied report argues that reducing these impulses can help investors remain invested through uncertain periods.
The stakes may be higher for retirees. During the saving years, continued contributions can add to a portfolio after a downturn. A person drawing income from investments has less opportunity to offset losses with new contributions. The contributor warns that selling in a slump, changing a withdrawal plan impulsively or moving into unfamiliar investments to seek higher yields may harm a retirement strategy. The report does not quantify those effects or say that the same approach suits every retiree.
The useful takeaway is behavioral rather than a promise of returns: a portfolio plan that an investor can stick with may be more valuable than repeated attempts to forecast markets. How often to review investments and what allocation is appropriate depend on individual goals, time horizon, financial needs and risk tolerance.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
The Fidelity Story and Its Limits
The supplied report attributes the account anecdote to a Fidelity study from years ago, but it does not name a year or link to the research itself. It also supplies no baseline, time window or account-level return figures. Readers cannot use the article alone to establish how much better the cited accounts performed, whether the difference was statistically meaningful or how the accounts compared with other investors.
The contributor places the anecdote within a broader description of market behavior, saying markets have historically returned roughly 10% a year on average and risen in about three out of every four calendar years. The report does not define the market measure, specify the period or state whether returns include dividends or inflation. Those figures should be understood as broad historical claims in the source, not as forecasts or guaranteed results.
The article also notes that declines and pullbacks can occur even in years when markets finish higher. Its point is that volatility is part of investing, and an investor’s response to it can affect results. That argument supports planning and restraint, but it does not show that inactivity alone produces superior performance.
“The best-performing accounts belonged to deceased account holders. Right behind them were accounts belonging to people who had simply forgotten their passwords.”
— Kiplinger contributing adviser
financial planning books for retirees
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
What the Account Data Does Not Show
The supplied report does not identify the Fidelity study’s publication date, link to its findings or provide its sample design, performance period, account balances or return comparisons. It is unclear whether the account story reflects a formal study, how “best-performing” was defined or whether account holders’ deaths and forgotten passwords were verified categories. The anecdote cannot establish that inactive investors generally earn higher returns.
The source also does not specify which market index or time span underlies its historical return and up-year claims. It offers general behavioral guidance, not personalized investment advice or a guarantee that a hands-off strategy will outperform. A portfolio still needs to match an investor’s goals, financial situation and capacity for risk.
long-term investment strategy tools
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How Investors Can Apply the Advice
The report does not announce a new policy, product or upcoming study. Its practical recommendation is for investors to review whether their allocation and withdrawal plan still match their needs, then avoid changing course solely because of short-term headlines or market swings. Any adjustment, the contributor says, should follow a considered change in goals or a research-based strategic decision.
Investors nearing or in retirement may want to review income needs, risk exposure and withdrawal plans with a qualified financial professional. The source does not prescribe a review schedule or a particular allocation. The cited Fidelity account claim also remains difficult to evaluate without the original study and its methods.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
Did Fidelity confirm that deceased investors had the best returns?
The supplied Kiplinger report attributes that finding to a Fidelity study conducted years ago, but it does not provide a study link, date, methodology or return figures. The claim cannot be verified from the supplied source alone.
Does hands-off investing mean never checking a portfolio?
No. The contributor recommends keeping an eye on whether investments remain aligned with long-term goals while avoiding frequent, emotion-driven changes. The article does not set a specific review schedule.
Why does the report say this may matter in retirement?
Retirees may be withdrawing money rather than adding new contributions. The contributor says that selling during a downturn or making abrupt changes to a withdrawal strategy can put a retirement plan at risk, though the report does not quantify the effect.
Does the article show that passive investors earn higher returns?
No comparative performance data are included in the supplied material. The article presents the Fidelity account story as an anecdote and argues that avoiding reactive trades may help investors follow a long-term plan; it does not establish that less-active investors always outperform.
Source: rss
Fall Picks
fall essentials
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
