Nothing is more hateful to wisdom than to much cunning.
After taking risk into account, do more managers than you’d see by chance outperform with persistence? Virtually every economist who studied this question answers with a resounding 'no. '
I’d compare stock pickers to astrologers but I don’t want to bad mouth astrologers.
Markets are efficient, but there are different dimensions of risk and those lead to different dimensions of expected returns. That's what people should be concerned with in their investment decisions and not with whether they can pick stocks, pick winners and losers among the various managers delivering basically the same product.
I take the market-efficiency hypothesis to be the simple statement that security prices fully reflect all available information.
In an efficient market at any point in time the actual price of a security will be a good estimate of its intrinsic value.
I can't figure out why anyone invests in active management, so asking me about hedge funds is just an extreme version of the same question. Since I think everything is appropriately priced, my advice would be to avoid high fees. So you can forget about hedge funds.
Because I was young, I had this long hair, and people used to try to tip me with joints.
The universe itself is God and the universal outpouring of its soul
What passes for an original opinion is, generally, merely an original phrase. Old lamps for new - yes; but it is always the same oil in the lamp.
Just as the body goes into shock after a physical trauma, so does the human psyche go into shock after the impact of a major loss.