My understanding of loaded funds is that they should perform better, since you pay. The ads that I see about no-load funds, show performance equal or better that loaded funds. Some of these companies are very reputable. You will find good, average, and dismal funds in both areas. It is absolutely not true that you get more by paying more.
Research regularly shows that cost burdens diminish fund performance.
People who make their living selling funds tend to oversell the benefits of load funds. Similarly, people who make their living selling newsletters tend to oversell the benefits of no-load funds. Some no-loads, for instance, have such high expense ratios that you could find a traditional load fund that would be less expensive to own over the long term. The real difference between the two categories is that they are distinct distribution channels that reach different people. The difference is marketing, not performance.