Focus on performance not philosophy
- August 11th, 2013
You know how in the Olympics when a runner wins a race they take a victory lap around the stadium draped in their nation’s flag. These are often heartwarming scenes that few want to see end. However in the financial markets victory laps are usually the sign of complacency and often end badly for the celebrants.
Josh Brown at The Reformed Broker has a piece up today talking about the “Passive Investing Taliban” and their desire to convert everyone it seems to their cause. Those who followed this approach through the financial crisis to today are doing far better then those who bailed in 2008/2009 and are only now contemplating returning to the market. Josh correctly notes that for the vast majority of investors a passive portfolio management approach, if followed religiously, would produce better returns than the ad hoc decisions most investors make.
Josh isn’t debating the substance but rather the tone. Investors who think they have it all figured out are oftentimes standing at a big inflection point. There may no be great comeuppance for passive investors at this point in the cycle, but those who stuck it through are in all likelihood a small minority at best.
The passive investing crowd should be wary of trying to derail active management.The fact is that active managers make the market, to the degree to which it is efficient, efficient. We can all declaim the hordes of hedge funds out there that are charging their investors 2&2o with little to show for it. But they are the crowd that tries to keep thing from getting too far out of whack.
Hedge fund managers like Paul Singer of Elliott Management are a rare breed. It is no wonder that he does not want his performance to be compared to other hedge fund managers. He is in some sense an “artist.” However true hedge fund artists are a rare breed. And now more than ever it seems that some of these artists have been doing it with inside information. But why would we want to prevent other managers from trying their hand at becoming the next Paul Singer?
Josh talks about how the downfall of passive investing will come when there is no one left to value the assets that are still trading. He writes:
You may want to consider that there is a major paradox at work here – the more successful passive investing is in converting the masses, the less successful it will be going forward. The last thing a passive indexer should want is for everyone to stop guessing and trading in the markets. Massive amounts of speculation is what fuels the winship of the passive approach over other strategies. If there were only a handful of institutions left picking stocks and the whole world was sitting in a Vanguard fund, the returns of the pros would probably become incredible thanks to all the unexploited inefficiencies. And so, counterintuitively, the Taliban should be celebrating the Seekers of Alpha, not looking to discourage them or insulting them at every turn.
In the end we all need to do what is best for ourselves and our portfolios. However we should not kid ourselves about the our performance. As Cullen Roche at Pragmatic Capitalism wrote in light of Paul Singer’s comments:
Benchmarking is a crucial and very necessary part of evaluating portfolio managers. If we don’t have proper benchmarks to compare managers against then we can’t see whether they’re adding value or if they’re just sucking fees out of our pockets for no good reason. Unfortunately, most people I know and most of the fund services I see don’t benchmark properly and don’t know how to evaluate a fund’s performance.
There is no magic bullet when it comes to investing. Keeping costs low, diversifying, indexing and rebalancing regularly gives the greatest number of investors the best shot at achieving their investing goals. However we need to recognize we are all in this together. Where investors go awry is when they kid themselves about how they are doing. Investors should take very seriously this idea of benchmarking. Because investors cannot claim to have a good idea about the effectiveness of their strategy if they are not measuring it accurately. As the noted software engineer Tom DeMarco says:
You can’t control what you can’t measure.
Abnormal Returns is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. If you click on my Amazon.com links and buy anything, even something other than the product advertised, I earn a small commission, yet you don't pay any extra. Thank you for your support.
The information in this blog post represents my own opinions and does not contain a recommendation for any particular security or investment. I or my affiliates may hold positions or other interests in securities mentioned in the Blog, please see my Disclaimer page for my full disclaimer.
Abnormal Returns has over its seven-year life become a fixture in the financial blogosphere. Over thousands of posts we have striven to bring the best of the financial blogosphere to readers. In that time the idea of a “forecast-free investment blog” remains as useful as it did six years ago. More »
- Sunday links: history of bubbles
- Top clicks this week on Abnormal Returns
- Saturday links: nothing new under the sun
- Friday links: stop doing things
- Simplify your investing to avoid ‘opportunities for failure’
- Thursday links: having it both ways
- Wednesday links: two gigantic bubbles
- Tuesday links: anomalies have no soul
- Monday links: hindsight hinderances
- What books Abnormal Returns readers purchased in November 2013