We study tradeoffs among active mutual funds' characteristics. In both our equilibrium model and the data, funds with larger size, lower expense ratio, and higher turnover hold more-liquid portfolios. Portfolio liquidity, a concept introduced here, depends not only on the liquidity of the portfolio's holdings but also on the portfolio's diversification. We also confirm other modelpredicted tradeoffs: Larger funds are cheaper. Larger and cheaper funds are less active, based on our new measure of activeness. Better-diversified funds hold less-liquid stocks; they are also larger, cheaper, and trade more. These tradeoffs provide novel evidence of diseconomies of scale in active management.1979 through 2014. When we estimate the cross-sectional regression of portfolio liquidity on fund size, expense ratio, and turnover in our panel dataset, we find strong support for the model. All three slopes have their predicted signs and are highly significant, both economically and statistically. Funds that are larger, less expensive, and trade more tend to hold more-liquid portfolios, as the model predicts. According to our model, these tradeoffs are induced by diseconomies of scale. Intuitively, a large fund optimally reduces its trading costs by trading less and holding a more-liquid portfolio.A fund's size trades off negatively with its expense ratio in our model. As in Berk and Green (2004), a fund's fee revenue is determined by its skill, so charging a higher expense ratio simply dictates a smaller fund. We find strong evidence of this tradeoff-a large negative correlation between fund size and expense ratio-in the data.