Here is the problem that NO ONE IS SEEING. When they invest in GFACX, they are paying a hell of a lot more than 1.45%. They are paying 1.45% in an expense ratio. They are paying 1% in 12b-1 fees for this fund (this is where the advisor gets paid). These don't even include transaction costs that the mutual funds pay (industry experts estimate these to be between .85-1.35% for the typical actively managed fund). So that 1.45% is actually more like 3.5% I use active strategies (not with mutual funds because they are wicked expensive), but you have to keep costs under control. I think 1% total investment cost is about the most anyone should ever pay for investment management. However, if an advisor does both investment management and financial planning, then you can justify going a little over 1%. Maybe a handful of advisors in the world are worth paying over 3% in fees. If you think that is your advisor...hint, it's not. Mutual Funds are a load of crap that should be gotten rid of. They should roll their products into ETFs where advisors can't hide fees and investors can plainly see just how badly they have been getting screwed.
For an example of 2 etfs that I would consider look at QVAL and FV. Neither have been around for long, but both are built on some of the few free lunches in investing (QVAL on Value premium and Quality premium and FV on Momentum) (as a note on the free lunches, that is if you ride it for the long hall, there will be times of under performance). They aren't cheap .79% and .94% respectively, but I think they will deliver at about 3 times their additional cost. This is the question you should be asking. If you don't expect something to outperform by 3 times their added expense, then you should just take the cheap index)
I know there are people that will disagree with some of my stances, BUT EVERYONE SHOULD LOOK INTO THE FULL COST OF THEIR MUTUAL FUNDS. THE FUND MENTIONED COSTS OVER DOUBLE THE EXPENSE RATIO. The performance of GFACX is actually fairly decent considering 3.5% of the funds were leaking out of the investment boat. It beat Vanguard's S&P500 funds since GFACX's inception, but it underperformed the more comparable Vanguard Growth funds.