So, the MEDIAN fund earns 3%. That basically means that the best performing earned the same % on top of that, as the worst performing did worse than that. i.e. one might have returned 8% and one returned -2%. Not sure how that reflects on the others in between. Reading the article, I'm not sure the journalist understands that when he says "about half the funds have underperformed the market".
I'm just remembering school maths about the mean, median and mode averages.
