4 ms·
> What's the point of having inclusion guidelines if you can just change them willy nilly to suit your own agenda? You said it yourself: they're guidelines. I
by ardy42 6y ago
> What's the point of having inclusion guidelines if you can just change them willy nilly to suit your own agenda?
You said it yourself: they're guidelines. I'm glad there are humans in the loop to exercise judgement when the guidelines may be giving a funny results.
> We need a more algorithmic index, not one ruled by one central committee.
IIRC, there already are many "algorithmic indexes", but they're not the S&P500 and there's no reason for the S&P500 to be one.
- safog 6y agoYou just happen to agree with this one, so you find reasons to justify it like "exercising judgement". What if they exclude a company because of political ties to communist regimes? Or ESG concerns? To me neither of these is acceptable. I would be pretty annoyed if Exxon was excluded from SP500 because they contribute to Global Warming. Go pick another index is not a defensible position when I'm criticizing the index's policies specifically. Yet to hear good reasons for why a committee "exercising judgement" is a good thing for the average investor.