Was that the author's thesis? That's not what I got from the article tbh. "[...] it seems like you're implying [...] that there's some natural limit to wealth

Was that the author's thesis? That's not what I got from the article tbh. "[...] it seems like you're implying [...] that there's some natural limit to wealth that Buffet would have hit in either timeline." Yes, that's the implication. People give him more money as long as he can produce excess returns. At some point, he can no longer produce excess returns. That point is (theoretically) independent of his starting position - his knowledge/skills/luck allow him to invest, say, $100B successfully, but no more. So the reason he doesn't manage more isn't that he started with less, it's that this is the actual limit of his abilities. (That's what parent is saying, I'm not 100% sure of this because I'm not 100% of how this plays out in a public company, etc. He's not a typical hedge-fund manager. But parent is probably pretty close to right).