Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nevada’s public employee pension fund invests passively and beats peers (2016)

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 496 posts

Re: Nevada’s public employee pension fund invests passively and beats peers (2016)

#391

Post by ghaff »

graemep wrote: post #360
gamepsys wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a retail investor, it's good to remind myself that if I actually had the skills to invest professionally, someone would probably be paying me to do it for them. Don't discount the knowledge you have from being deep into an industry. The higher quality of the CUDA toolkit compared to other SIMD languages, combined with it's increasing relevance in compute (gaming, followed by blockchain, followed by ML, followed…

> Don't discount the knowledge you have from being deep into an industry. The higher quality of the CUDA toolkit compared to other SIMD languages Analysts do follow what is happening in an industry and talk to people in an industry. SOme have worked in the industry they follow. If you want to get ahead of them you need to focus on something ahead of them - something small or specialist at the time.

I might argue that financial analysts are too focused on their models and this quarter's numbers but most of the better ones are actually pretty savvy about the trends and other happenings in the industry that they follow. They're as susceptible to the hype du jour as most people are but they're not actually stupid for the most part.

Re: Nevada’s public employee pension fund invests passively and beats peers (2016)

#392

Post by ghaff »

mattmaroon wrote: post #383
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, what’s done is done. I was planning to bail, back in my 30’s, but changed my mind, and stayed for almost 27 years. It still makes more than I spend, but we’ll see what the future brings.

That’s the great thing about saving, even if you do it suboptimally, it still is a lot better than the opposite. And in hindsight it’s almost always suboptimal.

You can do insanely stupid things of course.

But saving in some remotely rational and diversified way is better than not saving at all even if some bets turn out to be better than others.

Re: Nevada’s public employee pension fund invests passively and beats peers (2016)

#393

Post by _yb2s »

grepLeigh wrote: post #272

Disclaimer: I'm not a financial advisor. Whenever I'm tempted to buy individual high performing tickers (e.g. NVDA, TSLA, AMD), I restrict the purchase to no more than 2% of my portfolio and I only allow myself to bet on 2-3 "race horses" at a time. I think this fulfills the desire to gamble a little and see 100-200% YoY returns. NVDA cracked 300% cost basis when I finally sold, which is wild. The reason I can do thi…

It’s not just a matter of skill but of time. Value investing a la Warren Buffet works extremely well, but choosing a single stock with the deep research required for that method is so much work it is a full time job. It’s not worth it unless it is in fact your full time job.

Re: Nevada’s public employee pension fund invests passively and beats peers (2016)

#394

Post by [deleted] »

vitus wrote: post #377
gamepsys wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a retail investor, it's good to remind myself that if I actually had the skills to invest professionally, someone would probably be paying me to do it for them. Don't discount the knowledge you have from being deep into an industry. The higher quality of the CUDA toolkit compared to other SIMD languages, combined with it's increasing relevance in compute (gaming, followed by blockchain, followed by ML, followed…

So you've been invested in NVDA for 15 years? Because that's how long AMD's been trying unsuccessfully to crack CUDA's secret (OpenCL was initially released in 2009 when it was already clear that nobody wanted to use AMD cards for HPC). Or how about 5-10 years, when it was clear that everyone was using Nvidia for crypto-related purposes? Heck, even start-of-pandemic when high-end graphics cards were nigh impossible t…

[deleted]

Re: Nevada’s public employee pension fund invests passively and beats peers (2016)

#395

Post by zug_zug »

vitus wrote: post #377
gamepsys wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a retail investor, it's good to remind myself that if I actually had the skills to invest professionally, someone would probably be paying me to do it for them. Don't discount the knowledge you have from being deep into an industry. The higher quality of the CUDA toolkit compared to other SIMD languages, combined with it's increasing relevance in compute (gaming, followed by blockchain, followed by ML, followed…

So you've been invested in NVDA for 15 years? Because that's how long AMD's been trying unsuccessfully to crack CUDA's secret (OpenCL was initially released in 2009 when it was already clear that nobody wanted to use AMD cards for HPC). Or how about 5-10 years, when it was clear that everyone was using Nvidia for crypto-related purposes? Heck, even start-of-pandemic when high-end graphics cards were nigh impossible t…

I agree with the first paragraph, but I think your math is wrong.

If you invested in Nvidia in 2006 it'd be up 46% a year every year on that investment.

Re: Nevada’s public employee pension fund invests passively and beats peers (2016)

#396

Post by bityard »

TeaBrain wrote: post #302
bityard wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Those returns depend on when you invest. The inflation adjusted annualized return of the S&P 500 was negative from January 2000 to January 2013 at -0.25%. The inflation adjusted total annual return from January 2000 to January 2024 was 4.5%. https://ofdollarsanddata.com/sp500-calculator/

Sure, you can get lower returns as well by cherry-picking the start and stop dates, especially for shorter intervals.

When economists say things like, "the market returns X on average," they always mean over much longer periods of time than your example.

Re: Nevada’s public employee pension fund invests passively and beats peers (2016)

#397

Post by bityard »

TeaBrain wrote: post #304
bityard wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No need for "likely," it's easy to look up: https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/investing/average-stock-m... The average return of the S&P 500 is around 10%, although you will see people use 7% as a shortcut to account for inflation when estimating the future value of their portfolios.

The citation of 7% as the true return isn't a "shortcut", though a nominal return of 10% could be argued to be, but an acknowledgement that total returns are not real without accounting for inflation. If an hypothetical index in a developing country rises by 50%, but inflation is 100%, then even though the nominal index returns may look impressive, it has actually had a negative real return, as the real inflation-adj…

What's the reason for picking January 1974 as the starting date?

Re: Nevada’s public employee pension fund invests passively and beats peers (2016)

#398

Post by freeopinion »

StackRanker3000 wrote: post #72
personjerry wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There’s strong evidence no individual trader can expect to beat the market. I don't understand that. If you just bought Apple instead of SPY 20 years ago wouldn't you be doing great?

Individual traders beat the market all the time, it’s not impossible . But you can’t expect to do it reliably, because in practice it’s essentially gambling, unless you’re Warren Buffett, or those firms that utilize sophisticated quantitative or algorithmic trading. So for all intents and purposes, the takeaway for regular investors should be that they cannot expect to beat the market (but they can gamble on it if th…

Lots of people "play the market" as a mostly total game of chance. They might just as well join a giant pool that tries to guess the ratio of alphabetic characters within each morning's top headline of their favorite newspaper.

Warren Buffet buys the newspaper and has significant control of the editor. That's not the same game at all.

There's a lot of talk here about active fund management. Active ownership is playing on a completely different level.

Re: Nevada’s public employee pension fund invests passively and beats peers (2016)

#399

Post by spacebanana7 »

UncleMeat wrote: post #379
spacebanana7 wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> investing in the same sector that you are employed-in is actually a kind of anti-diversification You can reduce your microeconomic risks by making investments in and around your sector of occupation. Especially when betting against yourself. For example, someone who works in the electric vehicle space could reduce their risk by making personal investments in ICE companies, just in case EV adoption is slower than ex…

> For example, someone who works in the electric vehicle space could reduce their risk by making personal investments in ICE companies, just in case EV adoption is slower than expected. This works well if the EV industry slows and ICEs are poised to dominate the future. This works very very badly if the vehicle industry as a whole slows and the entire sector tanks.

Yeah it only works well for narrowly defined microeconomic risks.

However, in sectors like vehicles there's a relatively low risk people will stop car purchases altogether but a very very high risk they'll buy from another manufacturer instead of yours.

Re: Nevada’s public employee pension fund invests passively and beats peers (2016)

#400

Post by computerliker69 »

zug_zug wrote: post #395
vitus wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you've been invested in NVDA for 15 years? Because that's how long AMD's been trying unsuccessfully to crack CUDA's secret (OpenCL was initially released in 2009 when it was already clear that nobody wanted to use AMD cards for HPC). Or how about 5-10 years, when it was clear that everyone was using Nvidia for crypto-related purposes? Heck, even start-of-pandemic when high-end graphics cards were nigh impossible t…

I agree with the first paragraph, but I think your math is wrong. If you invested in Nvidia in 2006 it'd be up 46% a year every year on that investment.

They mentioned the timeframe as 2006-2016. I think they were purposely omitting the recent gains to highlight their point about the unexpectedness of NVDA's stock jump.
Post reply on HN