Yes they should be compared. Why would you not want to compare different investment options? If managed funds statistically outperformed index funds after fees in the long run, I would sure want to know about it.
You already know that I don’t know much about the specific funds you mentioned. Do you want a gotcha there? I care about what is going to deliver value. I haven’t seen evidence that managed is better. You haven’t provided it. You just are asking loaded questions to prove you know something. I’m not interested in that, I’m interested in evidence.
It’s considered slimy by uninformed, envious idiots. I guess making charities, endowments, and pensions money is slimy. But being a tax eating leech is noble. You couldn’t defend mommy government’s UBI, so you’ve pivoted.
We employ people with good educational background simply because it looks good for our pitch books. It’s the way the world is. Wall Street values the NAME, not academics. There’s a big difference.
I’m not asking a loaded question. I’ll simplify further. Why would a fund buying distressed debt be compared against a passive equity index? Just explain that.
I’ve discussed UBI not advocated for or against it. I like how you defend yourself though with we make charities money when the industry has a long history of ripping people off. Not sure I’d work on Wall Street and have the balls to call anyone a tax eating leech. Not like hedge funds don’t have a long history of needing various bailouts because all those people who thought they knew it all either didn’t or got caught doing illegal shit.
If you think people are envious of you it’s just yet another long list of things you’re desperate to tell us are absolute facts.
Dude, you proving you know more technical details than me does not convince me you are correct. It only convinced me that you know more technical terms than me. Additionally me not knowing investment jargon also doesn’t prove you right. Evidence proves one correct.
Evidence that long term returns are better with managed than s&p500 will convince me.
Nevermind, it’s just lost on you. I’m not using any advanced jargon, you just can’t accept the fact that entirely different asset classes should not be compared against one another. You think debt should be compared against equity for returns. I tried to explain why that makes no sense, but it’s not getting through. Anyway, have a nice evening.
Which part are you denying? The massive amount of tax leeching because of bailout? The tax leeching from needing massive government oversight? The countless hedge funds which have lost people money? You’re probably about to compare Bernie Madoff to Martin Luther King.
“Oh no all we do is make charities money!”
You realize when you type hedge fund managers in google the first auto fill for it is “are crooks.”
You claimed hedge funds get bailed out. I asked which ones aside from LTCM (run by more loser academics btw) were bailed out. I guess your Google search came up empty. Have a nice evening.
I don’t recall you explaining it. I’m open to a clear explanation. Maybe I’m wrong here. I don’t understand why someone would choose something with lower expected value. Well I understand in certain instances like being close to retirement.
It’s based upon risk management, mitigation of tail risk, uncorrelated returns, etc. Professional investors aren’t focused on absolute returns, they’re focused on risk adjusted returns and correlation.
Here, let’s look at an individual company. Let’s say a subprime lender with little equity capital generates a 45% ROE. Now let’s say a highly conservative bank with a ton of equity capital generates a ROE of 9%. You’re not just comparing ROE to decide what to invest in, you’re looking at HOW the company generates the returns it does. You’re looking at operational and financial risk.
Now, compare the individual companies to how you’d look at a fund strategy.
Perhaps I was wrong to compare Wall Street as a blanket term with you noble people who have a long history of doing nothing but making charities money. I will admit I haven’t read these fully yet but it seems as if googling hedge fund failures or hedge fund bailouts doesn’t bring up 0 or 1 hit.
I’m by no means saying everyone deserves to be lumped in, but to say the shady/slimy reputation isn’t with some merit doesn’t make sense.
Now my next question. Why would one not just invest in a more conservative index. Maybe there you outperform? We are getting somewhere now.
I could buy that in that situation you might be better. I do understand for some people, that they don’t want risk. People like retirees perhaps. It doesn’t fit my situation, but perhaps you can deliver value to those folks.
No, it isn’t - because we’re not talking about two different games, we’re taking about one game - making money, maximizing ROI. You’re just using different tools to try and win in thr the same game.
Of course they do, I never said otherwise - but the measure of success over a given period of time is one thing - ROI. You use alternative strategies to try and get higher ROI when conventional strategies aren’t getting the job done. And so the only question is - did your alternative strategies work? Or not? And the answer to that lies with how SPX did.
The problem is hedge fund fanboys like you that are more excited about the exotica of your fun complex investment toys instead of real world results for clients. You’re so busy trying to justify your fees (and the carried interest loophole) by talking up sham wizardry that you forget the basics - can you make me more than the market? If not, why should I pay you?
We’re talking about wildly different strategies with different risks. Again, someone that can’t evaluate risk and correlation can’t seem to figure this out. Oh well, all that matters is our LPs understand it. Have a nice night.
Lol so other companies that bailed out worthless hedge funds who then need bailed out themselves don’t count? I’m by no means an expert on the history of it. Are you saying only if a specific hedge fund had it happen? That’s pretty flimsy to say the least.
I’m just saying your tax eating leeches line wasn’t true.
Well think of it this way, a conservative index may not be managed in a way that’s actually conservative, or at the very least, not dynamic. LQD is an investment grade corporate bond fund, but does it 1) hedge against rate risk 2) short corporates to hedge against broad credit issues 3) use other risk management tools for both rate/credit risk to collar returns and losses? No, no, and no.