I’d push back a bit and suggest that if a fund has been outperforming the S&P 500 for the past 30 years plus by an average of more than 1%/year after accounting for fees, one could argue that it has a better than even chance of outperforming by ~1% per year over the coming decade.

If one accepts that point of view, then it makes sense to take that bet rather than go with a fund that’s 100% guaranteed to underperform the market by 0.04–0.14%/year.

Just sayin’ :).