221–230 of 496 posts
The title was correct yesterday. Why is the title editorialized today? "What Does Nevada’s $35 Billion Fund Manager Do All Day? Nothing" This is the actual title of the article, the page, and the printed version. There was no reason to have edited this except for optics. If true, that's absurd, dang.
The title was correct yesterday. Why is the title editorialized today? "What Does Nevada’s $35 Billion Fund Manager Do All Day? Nothing" This is the actual title of the article, the page, and the printed version. There was no reason to have edited this except for optics. If true, that's absurd, dang.
Because on HN we like titles to have information and not be click-bait. The WSJ title is prime click-bait.
The title was correct yesterday. Why is the title editorialized today? "What Does Nevada’s $35 Billion Fund Manager Do All Day? Nothing" This is the actual title of the article, the page, and the printed version. There was no reason to have edited this except for optics. If true, that's absurd, dang.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because on HN we like titles to have information and not be click-bait. The WSJ title is prime click-bait.
So, clickbait is fine, as long as we just editorialize the title? That's an unusual standard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> assume nothing more than a normally distributed random variable But look at something like systemic risk: it’s not necessarily normally distributed. The S&P returns skew left. I’m sure there are other risk metrics that break this assumption as well.
Right, risk is often fat tailed, but unless we enter an expert discussion, for which HN is hardly a good medium, it is safe to assume 99% of strategies out there yield normally distributed returns. Non normally returned strategies are rarer and sophisticated.
I don’t know that I agree. If the market as a whole doesn’t have normally distributed risk, it implies even the simplest strategy of buying SPY and holding will also not have normally distributed risk.
The title was correct yesterday. Why is the title editorialized today? "What Does Nevada’s $35 Billion Fund Manager Do All Day? Nothing" This is the actual title of the article, the page, and the printed version. There was no reason to have edited this except for optics. If true, that's absurd, dang.
The system even automatically removes certain clickbait elements, for instance "How" is stripped out of submitted titles.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point of actively managed funds is not so much to "beat the market", it's to provide diversified returns via strategies that are uncorrelated with the market. On average, the S&P500 has returned about 7% annually. If I had a strategy that returned 5% on average but was totally uncorrelated with the S&P, then you'd get the best overall long-term returns (maximize the geometric average of annual returns) by investi…
I want to agree with you, except that almost all of the salescritters for these products promote them as "beating the market." They _have_ to sell them this way because if their customers had any idea what the whole-market returns actually were, they wouldn't pay extra for the privilege of a far riskier (and lower-performing, on average) investment. And the S&P 500 returns more like 10% per year. A bit higher if you…
And the SP500 has had unusually good performance relative to other equity indexes. Would not count on that forever.
To any fund manager out there that truly believes you can beat the market, here is how you can sell me your fund: We agree on an index and a time frame. You guarantee me the same return as the index within that time frame. If you beat the index, you keep 90% of returns ABOVE the index (and I get 10%). We both win, and you win big. If you don't beat the index (within the time frame), you make up the difference (so I g…
A fund manager can replicate the index with derivatives and overlay their alpha on top of it.
Google “alpha overlay” or “portable alpha” for more info.
These types of products were more popular about 10-15 years ago.
Firms typically charge just for the alpha for these strategies.
You are asking for the manager to sell you an option.
To any fund manager out there that truly believes you can beat the market, here is how you can sell me your fund: We agree on an index and a time frame. You guarantee me the same return as the index within that time frame. If you beat the index, you keep 90% of returns ABOVE the index (and I get 10%). We both win, and you win big. If you don't beat the index (within the time frame), you make up the difference (so I g…
The point of actively managed funds is not so much to "beat the market", it's to provide diversified returns via strategies that are uncorrelated with the market. On average, the S&P500 has returned about 7% annually. If I had a strategy that returned 5% on average but was totally uncorrelated with the S&P, then you'd get the best overall long-term returns (maximize the geometric average of annual returns) by investi…