Live data from Hacker News

“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading

a16z.com

181–190 of 327 posts

Re: “Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading

#181

The only issue I take with this article is their seemingly blase take on the risky investing behavior of Gen Z. Sure, if that's the lay of the land then use it to your advantage. But it seems a bit predatory. Risky activities tend to hurt more investors than they help, and lead to a small number of big winners and many losers. You can't just increase risk and increase reward for everyone. Regarding the predicament Ge…

> Regarding the predicament Gen Z is in, just remember that the older generations - one of which is very large - will need to sell their assets at some point.

Probably not all of their assets though. Most people don’t get a death date after 65. I guess if people want to blow most of it before 80 that might make sense but you never know when you’re going to go. Still need to hedge against inflation.

Re: “Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading

#182

> Conventional wisdom holds that passive trading is the rational investing strategy. That isn't conventional wisdom. It's not someone's opinion. It's statistically proven reality. Whether you're an individual trader or a billionaire hedge fund manager, active strategies lose out to passive ones in the long run. > has catalyzed a lean-in mindset around investing, particularly among Gen Z. And it will burn them, just l…

This is true historically. But at certain times it's a complete no-brainer to enter the market or not. For instance consider post Covid at around March/April 2020. Stocks have dropped 20-30%. It took Moderna 2-3 days to develop a vaccine, is a 20% drop in e.g. Apple justified, or is it simply free money?

I did this exact thing and got in big in march 2020. I also heavily bought US tech stocks the day brexit passed. To me it seemed like free money.

Re: “Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading

#183

The only issue I take with this article is their seemingly blase take on the risky investing behavior of Gen Z. Sure, if that's the lay of the land then use it to your advantage. But it seems a bit predatory. Risky activities tend to hurt more investors than they help, and lead to a small number of big winners and many losers. You can't just increase risk and increase reward for everyone. Regarding the predicament Ge…

> demographics is working against asset values in the next twenty years or so. As someone who is about half way towards retirement, how is it best to work with this? My future retirement income seems to be mostly dependant on having the right selection of investments for my pension account to grow in time for when I stop working. It's currently split between a few low cost, broad indexes. But if we expect asset value…

I can see a future where the US becomes much less restrictive with immigration (perhaps even promoting it) if the population of working adults drops significantly.

Re: “Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading

#184
Passive trading is the only way to beat other players with more resources and information than you. As soon as you become a market-identifiable active trader, your behavior will be monitored and reverse-engineered. More power to retail investors to play along with the big players, and increased media hype --driven by vacuous memes and unclear-value-adding cryptotech-- giving more interest, only will unfavorably balance towards to the bigger players.

I think the resurgance of retail stock trading in the last 2 years or so, is not due to the uncertain economy (again, only big players really benefit from market uncertainty), but because there really were few other places to put your money (negative interests rates, high gold prices, impossible real estate market) and the Fed printing money and keeping the market from collapsing, led to a fairly certain economy, where the Fed would garantuee your losses, but you could keep the wins. This top-down manipulation was obvious enough to trickle down to retail investors using RobinHood.

In smaller, emerging, markets, quantitative active trading has become very competitive. Some markets, still profitable to active trading, are now beaten by a "mindless" passive trading strategy. Like stocks, it makes little sense anymore.

Wallstreet bets is a non-regulated pump-and-dump group, in the upper echelons ethically worse than the owners of the biggest hedge funds (who won't take profit on some plays if they know it causes long-term damage to the economy, the economy being a matter of national security). The GameSpot play made a few of those a millionaire, lost the college funds of people too late to jump on the bandwagon, and done damage to the degree of billions, when hedge - and pension funds had to withdraw from solid businesses such as Google and Amazon, to cover the losses from this memetic war. You can also state that the drivers of the bandwagon, were doing a passive strategy spanning years. It is the active trading of the bandwagon that made their strategy worthwhile (and not a poorly-informed play based on nostalgia and potential).

Numerai also is a passive investing (3 weeks+) fund. They are not that different from a hedge fund buying prop data.

I do think the article is interesting, and adds information on a new emerging trend. But it also reads a bit too kind and objective, like a music journalist describing a new album she isn't a particularly personal fan of. Subtleties will be missed, while the overal picture still is objective and correct to the quality.

As an investor myself, both active and passive, I progressed the most when I learned how the game is played at the top level. Active meme traders should do well to investigate these top players, just like these top players are studying them. RobinHood's order book is fed to the top players. They stand to gain by promoting this active retail trend, and taking near-certified profit on top of these predictable low-information emotion-driven masses. Buy things like Tesla or social media technology, which you as a 20-year-old, see using in 10 years. That's the way to beat the 35 year old senior Goldman Sachs analyst.

Re: “Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading

#185
"A combination of illusory superiority bias—the belief that we are more financially savvy than we actually are—and a culture of financial optimism leads most retail traders to believe they have above-average trading ideas and strategies."

Um, yes. Retail investors as a class lose money.

Remember, you're betting against people for whom this is their day job, work in a business that drops the losers, and have far more money than you.

Re: “Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading

#186
It reminds me of the investing environment just before the big crash of 2000. I remember going to my bowling league and hearing some guy talk about how he had just quit his job to become a full-time day trader. Apparently he'd been making money at it for months and figured he was a financial genius.

We quickly saw that wasn't really the case.

I believe in the Boglehead philosophy..

Re: “Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading

#187
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> think of the recent GME short squeeze but in reverse Reverse how? There are so many axis I don't know which to use as the basis of my flip. If you care to, please explain a bit more in detail.

Flip it on all axis, I guess :) But, sure. Let's say I know that you (index fun) are obligated to buy stock X tomorrow and over all foreseeable future. I am gonna hoard those shares at no risk and sell them to you at a VERY VERY painful price, since you have no room to say "that's too expensive, no thanks"

I agree with you mostly, that there are spaces where active can make great bets. But this particular example isn't quite true. Passive Index funds are not automated 100% and have discretion on when/how closely they track the index. They DO have to try and track the index, but that doesn't mean they have to own every stock IN the index, nor does it mean they have to buy X stock tomorrow, regardless of price.

source: Any prospectus/annual report of a large index fund, such as VTI.

Re: “Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading

#188

The only issue I take with this article is their seemingly blase take on the risky investing behavior of Gen Z. Sure, if that's the lay of the land then use it to your advantage. But it seems a bit predatory. Risky activities tend to hurt more investors than they help, and lead to a small number of big winners and many losers. You can't just increase risk and increase reward for everyone. Regarding the predicament Ge…

So where to put cash?

It depends on how soon you would need it. If saving up for a down payment expected within the next ten years, not stocks. Otherwise stocks.

Re: “Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading

#189
post #99
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there’s anything different about GenZ, it’s that they’re crowdsourcing their plays, making them behave more like a distributed mutual fund than a bunch of gamblers. Time will tell if that performs better.

spoiler: it won't. There's going to be outperformers, just like if you have 1000 people flipping coins, you're going to find a few with an uncanny ability to get consecutive tails/heads after several flips. That doesn't mean they're any good at it though.

The average of the coin flip will be near 50% though. If you let a 1000 people give their opinion on if a stock is up or down in a month, you are likely to do better than random guessing (opinion is a weighted coin). For instance, taking the top 50 stock pickers from the finance section of newspapers will demonstrably lead to a decent, better than random guessing, portfolio.

You are assuming that the stock market is as-good-as-random, and that you can't crowdsource aggregate market sentiment and private information (someone who knows that they will buy the next 5 Tesla cars, so they will contribute to the growth). If you have a 100 of those private information owners, and you aggregate it, you just encoded for brand loyalty. People betting on the GameStop play did so, in part because they were made aware that they were not the only one with nostalgia and hope for GameStop. They did this by pooling their private information.

Finally, if you do assume that clueless pickers are the same as a coinflip, then their noise should cancel out, leading to a very uncertain prediction of 50% (so you turned their non-knowledge into valuable information about the variance/confidence/mindshare penetration/information availability), and then the real experts votes will balance the vote in favor of the most likely prediction (you distilled their expertise).

Taken my counter-example to your spoiler to the extreme: Imagine if all Redditor stock traders gave their honest best guess on if a stock would be down or up next month. The market would become very predictable with that information. Crowdsourcing a subset, just lowers this predictability (but never down to the level of a coin-flip). This crowdsourcing for predictability is precisely the reason the bigger, profitable hedgefunds are crawling Reddit, viewing 16-year old Crypto coin pickers on Youtube, and analyzing retail trades on RobinHood.

Re: “Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading

#190

I kind of hate the idea of encouraging young people to pursue speculation instead of building. Post-IPO investing doesn't create a ton of value for society.

The post-IPO market is the only thing that gives the IPO market any value. Hope of an IPO has encouraged countless people to build things. I have a hard time believing investing has been a net negative to creation at all. If anything, it has increased the incentives in the system.

Post-IPO investing is essential to the IPO which is essential to VC which is essential to startups.

Post reply on HN