Chris Brycki has provided a response on WAM's underperformance...

Chris Brycki has provided a response on WAM's underperformance below:"It is important to note that WAM only reports on its website and promotional materials 'investment performance before expenses, fees and taxes'. Not only is this inconsistent with industry best practice, in my opinion, it is irrelevant because it does not reflect the actual experience of an investor into the fund. The fund has underperformed after expenses, fees and taxes and this is supported by the data from the ASX available here: https://www2.asx.com.au/issuers/investment-products/asx-f...The data shows that WAM returned 7.5% p.a. over 3 years, 9.6% p.a. over 5 years and 8.8% p.a. over 7 years including capital returns and dividends and after fees, underperforming the All Ordinaries Total Return Index's returns of 10.3% p.a., 11.5% p.a. and 9.3% p.a. over the same time periods."

Still think it's smashing the benchmark?

Don't confuse advertising trickery for the facts.