So why would you pay an Investment Adviser such as myself to manage a passive portfolio for you?  I suppose it depends on what you mean by "passive".

In my definition of passive it starts with the asset allocation targeted to your specific financial goals,objectives and constraints using historical relationships of risk, return, standard deviation and correlation.   Passive investing is not the active selection of individual securities.  It is not the active rotation within sectors or asset classes.  It is not the activity of under/over weighting sectors on a regular basis.  Most cases the most excite is a cash flow and I get to rebalance the account back to the target asset allocation.

Living in the metropolis of Juneau Alaska, I have come to learn that most know more than me and chasing short-term returns is a recipe for losses.  I have come to learn that markets perform pretty rationally most of the time.  It is the "most of the time" that the Adviser should practice the doctors rule "do no harm", but that other time is when an Adviser not lost in the days grind can truly add value. 

It dawned on me today what one of those times looks like and what are its characteristics:
A five standard deviation event minimum
Correlations of asset classes go to 1
Significant losses and market panic

It is in hose times that a over-under weighting an asset class can real value be added. 

I mention this, because we are getting those types of market like events that make me look to add value to otherwise static, passive accounts.