The research found that just 37 of the 96 actively managed funds that aim to beat the return of the index managed to do so over the past decade.

The average performer returned 164% over this period, with dividends reinvested, compared to 171% for the index.

The best performing active fund, the higher risk Invesco Perpetual UK Aggressive, achieved a 298% return; the worst, UBS UK Opportunities, managed only 90%.

Which? also found striking differences in the performance of tracker funds aiming to match the index.

The best tracker, M&G UK Index, which has an on-going charge of 0.46%, returned 160%. The worst performer, Halifax UK FTSE All Share Index, achieved only 136%. Until October last year, the Halifax fund charged 1.5%, but has had a poor record. It has now reduced the charge to 1%.

The active versus passive fund debate has been raging for 30 years in the investment world.

Actively managed funds are where a professional manager selects a portfolio of shares or bonds for an investor whereas a passive fund is one where an investor can simply hold shares in a particular index in a bid to track the index’s performance.

Investors can often be put off by active funds due to the high management charges that go hand-in-hand with them. However experts point out that passive funds that track indices are guaranteed to underperform as a result of the compounding effect of their charges over time.

Danny Cox from Hargreaves Lansdown says investors should be looking at what suits their specific needs and points out that it is “impossible to beat” the index as charges will apply regardless of the fund chosen.