4 ms·
Risk aversion or maybe laziness. I've had a similar line of thinking recently. Sure, average investors lose money on active trading. Well, let me tell you what
by eldavido 10y ago
Risk aversion or maybe laziness.
I've had a similar line of thinking recently. Sure, average investors lose money on active trading. Well, let me tell you what an average investor looks like. They have little to no accounting background, no coherent thesis for their investments other than "it's hot", they lack even a rudimentary understanding of 101-level finance topics like NPV/IRR/cost of capital, they have no informational edge one gets from working in an industry, no understanding of tax law (either personal or corporate). They're basically gamblers. They look at stock charts, see a big line going up and to the right, and guess / let FOMO take the driver's seat. Oh, and they probably think watching Jim Cramer counts as "research". They also have no appreciation for the fact that individual securities within an asset class are highly correlated and misattribute the asset class's performance to their "stock-picking" prowess.
I've been thinking, if one is willing to do actual primary research -- reading financial statements, getting on investor calls, really thinking hard about long-term trends, reading history, etc., there's almost certainly alpha to be had. Do people honestly think indexing is the best way? The UK just mandated that all coal generation will be gone by 2025. Is this really a time to be buying coal stocks? Or cigarette companies?
For me it's about risk/reward. I was talking to a friend at a wedding two weekends ago who manages a prop book (his own cash) of about 2-3 million. If he can get 15%/year consistently, that's about 300-400k pretax. He lives in Puerto Rico where there's apparently a tax loophole where capital gains of any character -- short or long-term -- aren't taxed. I'd bet he's coming out ahead of 95% of the people reading this thread. And yet, life isn't all about money.
I guess what I'm saying is, I also disagree with this "orthodoxy" of index, index, index. Maybe I'll sound arrogant saying this, but I'm not an "Average" investor. I trade once/quarter, read the Ks and Qs for every company I'm investing in, and have written theses that guide my decisions. I'm not a millionaire yet but I'll let you guys know how it goes after a while. I was a pure, 10+ year indexer until about 6 months ago.
- angry_octet 10y agoWhile I would agree that there are many uninformed participants in the market, it is often found that professional market analysts are outperformed or on par with a random stock picker (dartboard, spinning wheel etc). These are people trying to estimate true value and market value with models and acting accordingly. http://www.smh.com.au/money/shares-race-week-4-the-dartboard-takes-it-20160616-gpl49f.html http://www.smh.com.au/money/shares-race-week-4-the-dartboard...
- yfhsjjskc 10y agoThere are a lot of dumb traders, sure, but that doesn't mean that dollar-weighted average investor (the one filling your order) is dumb.
- charlesdm 10y agoFor most people, indexing is the best. If you are lazy or don't enjoy investing, which is probably 95% of all people, it's better. If you have a full time job, it's almost always better (because it's harder to plow through SEC filings after a long at the office, etc). Proper long term investing (and getting 15-20% returns per annum) is hard work, and there's risk associated with it. You need to enjoy it. But it's definitely doable to beat the index every single year if you understand certain industries well. If technology is your industry, and you have a good understanding of the financial side, you will be able to better assess technology and related stocks.