Maybe some clarification: strictly speaking, there is no passive investing. Every investment requires some form of action. Also, investing in an MSCI ACWI is ac

Maybe some clarification: strictly speaking, there is no passive investing. Every investment requires some form of action. Also, investing in an MSCI ACWI is active in some sense because the shares of shares change over time. I accept passive investing in the sense that people don't analyze their investments extensively and invest in some weighted set of stocks and accept the market rate. > But the question arises: why do hedge funds and traders exist if active investing does not make sense? What is their meaning, if it is much more profitable for any player to deposit money in SPY (S&P500)? If everyone would be passive investing, who would give money to a newly created and promising company? For this company, there is no market value yet and so we cannot include it in those passive portfolios. Wirecard is also a good example. It was a huge scam and at the same time in the portfolios of many. When journalists reveal the scam, someone needs to sell that stock so that it eventually is removed from so-called passive portfolios. Those people taking the risks also get extra returns. The only question is whether they're just lucky or whether there exists some method to systematically have these profits.