jhulla

14 ms·

91.
by jhulla 12y ago
I completely agree with you. MPT/PMPT systems are contingent upon accurate modeling of risk and return and this is not a science. Nassim Taleb is a vocal critic of MPT.
92.
by jhulla 12y ago
The primary question is this: do we truly have models that can predict future asset correlations. In other words, are our assumptions about distribution of returns valid. Behavioral economics suggests that individuals react differently th
93.
by jhulla 12y ago
You need a good estate planning attorney (ask rich friends), and a good accountant (ask rich friends), and a good financial advisor. Of these three, if you believe in MPT, the financial advisor is simply a coin-operated sales guy. At a 1%
94.
by jhulla 12y ago
Asset diversification is more complicated than that. To a first order, yes stocks and bonds are inversely correlated. But it is not enough to hold just stocks and bonds. In order to maximize return over your preferred time frame (while m
95.
by jhulla 12y ago
Assuming you believe the underlying assumptions (and they very well may not be true), modern portfolio theory allows you to build a mathematically ideal portfolio for a given amount of risk. The math behind MPT might be hand waved as follow
96.
by jhulla 12y ago
Sure - but addressing social & public needs is the responsibility of government, not private corporations. Tax arbitrage strategies can be shutdown by governments. Transparency would be a good start. Require every listed corporation t
97.
by jhulla 12y ago
As long as no laws are violated, tax arbitrage is responsible corporate behaviour. These companies aren't "cutting tax bills", so much as they are arbitraging between different tax regimes across borders. It is their resp