Suppose you put in €5,000 and then add €500 every month for 25 years. The return before costs is 6% a year in all three cases. The 6% is an illustrative assumption, not a forecast. The only difference is the fund’s ongoing costs (TER): 0.07%, 0.20% or 1.5% a year.
In the calculator, 0.07% and 0.20% belong to funds in the list (Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS and iShares Core MSCI World); 1.5% is entered by hand. Those funds follow different indexes and have different returns in reality. Here they use the same return on purpose, so that only the effect of the costs remains.
Result after 25 years
| Fund costs a year | 0.07% | 0.20% | 1.50% |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total deposited | €155,000 | €155,000 | €155,000 |
| Gross balance | €368,822 | €368,822 | €368,822 |
| Net balance | €364,728 | €357,267 | €291,868 |
| Fee erosion | €4,094 | €11,555 | €76,954 |
| Net gain | €209,728 | €202,267 | €136,868 |
| Fees as % of gain | 1.91% | 5.4% | 35.99% |
The gross balance is about €368,822 in all three cases: without costs the result would be the same. At 0.07% in costs about €4,094 comes off over 25 years, at 0.20% about €11,555 and at 1.5% about €76,954. At 1.5% that is more than a third of the gross gain.
Investing involves risk of loss. The figures presented by this calculator are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute financial advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Facts checked on 3 October 2026.
Why the gap is bigger than the percentage suggests
Costs come off the whole balance every year, not just the gain. And whatever goes to costs earns no return afterwards. That is why fee erosion grows faster than the horizon: investing twice as long means more than twice the fee erosion. The TER is not the only cost either; see also transaction costs and dividend leakage.
Not included: tax (such as the Dutch Box 3), transaction costs, dividend withholding tax and inflation. Amounts are rounded to whole euros.
How the balance builds up
These are the figures for the same scenario as the comparison above, at 0.14% fund costs. The table shows every five years.
| Year | Deposited | Balance after costs | Growth |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | €35,000 | €41,457 | €6,457 |
| 10 | €65,000 | €90,291 | €25,291 |
| 15 | €95,000 | €155,704 | €60,704 |
| 20 | €125,000 | €243,323 | €118,323 |
| 25 | €155,000 | €360,688 | €205,688 |
In year 12 the balance grows by more over the year than the €6,000 you deposit that year, for the first time. After 25 years 57% of the €360,688 is growth and 43% is your own deposit. The growth comes late because it needs a large balance to build on.
What starting five years later changes
If you started five years later and added the same amount for 20 years, you would have €243,323 instead of €360,688, with €125,000 deposited instead of €155,000. Starting later leaves out €30,000 of deposits but lowers the final balance by €117,365, because the missing deposits are the ones that would have had the longest to grow.
Questions about this example
Why is the final balance larger than what I deposited?
Of the €360,688, €155,000 is your own money and €205,688 is growth. Growth earns growth: each month the return is added to a balance that already contains earlier returns. That is why the share of growth rises with the horizon.
What do 0.07% and 0.20% fund costs mean over 25 years?
At 0.07% the balance after costs would be €364,728; at 0.14% it is €360,688; at 0.20% it is €357,267. The gap between 0.07% and 0.20% is €7,461.
What if markets fall along the way?
In this example the return is the same every month, which never happens. The market crash simulator shows what a fall does to a balance.
Terms on this page
- TER (ongoing costs)
- Fee erosion
- Index
Source of the figures: the ETF calculator's own calculation engine, under the assumptions in the text. How the calculator works