This post may a bit nit-picky, but it shows how even when saving money by switching from actively managed to passive funds and ETFs, retail investors still pay too much in fees due to poor advice from brokers and wealth managers.
Of course security selection is important but, these days, with more and more all-in-one ETFs available, investing in a single ETF does not necessarily mean investing in a single benchmark. Remembering that it's not what you make but what you keep that is important, tax efficiency is still key so (depending upon the actual counterparty) incurring some counterparty risk may well be best. For example, in jurisdictions where distributions are taxed more than capital gains or income is taxed more than wealth (i.e. most jurisdictions, I believe) a derivitive/swap-based ETF (that capitalizes income) may be a much better choice than any physically replicating ETF (that typically distributes income every year).
Of course security selection is important but, these days, with more and more all-in-one ETFs available, investing in a single ETF does not necessarily mean investing in a single benchmark. Remembering that it's not what you make but what you keep that is important, tax efficiency is still key so (depending upon the actual counterparty) incurring some counterparty risk may well be best. For example, in jurisdictions where distributions are taxed more than capital gains or income is taxed more than wealth (i.e. most jurisdictions, I believe) a derivitive/swap-based ETF (that capitalizes income) may be a much better choice than any physically replicating ETF (that typically distributes income every year).