Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Passive Index Investing; a Bubble Bound to Burst?
Old 07-28-2018, 06:42 PM   #1
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
ExFlyBoy5's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: ATL --> Flyover Country
Posts: 6,649
Passive Index Investing; a Bubble Bound to Burst?

https://seekingalpha.com/article/419...le-bound-burst

Author discusses the fallacy of index funds. Note...just an opinion of one person, but he makes some interesting points.

Summary

In the last decade, trillions of dollars have flown into assets irrespective of both fundamentals and price.

Investors are euphoric about passive indexing, and it is becoming an overcrowded trade with low prospective returns over the next 5-10 years.

Because of changes in index construction mechanics, historical index returns are misleading.

Informed investors seeking a margin of safety should hunt for stocks that have been largely ignored and excluded by passive index/ETF products, especially those with high insider ownership.

Over the past decade, trillions of dollars have flown out of actively managed equity funds and into passive investment vehicles, most popularly in the form of mutual funds and ETFs that track specific indexes....
__________________
FIRE'd in 2014 @ 40 Years Old
Professional Retiree
ExFlyBoy5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 07-28-2018, 06:55 PM   #2
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 8,968
Another reason I have an FA stock picker dude -
RobbieB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2018, 07:14 PM   #3
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
samclem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: SW Ohio
Posts: 14,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobbieB View Post
Another reason I have an FA stock picker dude -
These are the types of folks who write articles like this. "Quick, run to my arms and save yourself."


In theory, there could be a point when the huge number of passive investors could make stock-picking a net winner (after costs). There's been lots written on this, and the bottom line is that we are nowhere near that point. The indexes available to passive investors keep getting broader and broader, which reduces the likelihood of what the author is proposing. But the main factor is that there are still >plenty<of folks with >plenty< of money turning over rocks to find the best deal, and every passive investor owes them a sincere debt of gratitude.

I do worry that there's a bit of overconfidence in the transparency and truthfulness of some of the companies, regulators, and national governments now being covered by indexes. We can hope that everything is on the up-and-up, but I'm not confident. I'll let others explore the depths of the bleeding edge of the emerging markets.
samclem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2018, 07:26 PM   #4
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
harley's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: No fixed abode
Posts: 8,764
I read the entire article, and other than the issue with the S&P changing it's method back in 2005 I didn't see anything there that was interesting or useful. And I didn't see anything that says why an active manager would be a better choice going forward. And I definitely didn't see anything explaining how to find the passive index beating manager. There was a lot of talk about lousy valuations going forward, but I've been reading that for a couple of decades now. I'm sure it will happen some, and other times the market will outperform. And I'm pretty sure anybody that has been paying attention understand the difference between real returns and unadjusted for inflation returns.

Basically I don't think the article added anything to the discussion about active versus passive. And there was absolutely nothing about how active management fees weighing down returns moving forward will be any different from active management drag in the past. All in all, totally unconvincing.
__________________
"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." - Anonymous (not Will Rogers or Sam Clemens)
DW and I - FIREd at 50 (7/06), living off assets
harley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2018, 07:48 PM   #5
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Red Badger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Hog Mountian
Posts: 2,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by harley View Post
I read the entire article, and other than the issue with the S&P changing it's method back in 2005 I didn't see anything there that was interesting or useful. And I didn't see anything that says why an active manager would be a better choice going forward. And I definitely didn't see anything explaining how to find the passive index beating manager. There was a lot of talk about lousy valuations going forward, but I've been reading that for a couple of decades now. I'm sure it will happen some, and other times the market will outperform. And I'm pretty sure anybody that has been paying attention understand the difference between real returns and unadjusted for inflation returns.

Basically I don't think the article added anything to the discussion about active versus passive. And there was absolutely nothing about how active management fees weighing down returns moving forward will be any different from active management drag in the past. All in all, totally unconvincing.
+1
Riding with harley.
__________________
Never let yesterday use up too much of today.
W. Rogers
Red Badger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2018, 07:51 PM   #6
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Upstate
Posts: 2,948
I haven't read the article. I am both a passive and active investor. Approximately 50% of my net worth are in funds, mostly index funds, with about 30% of my net worth in individual stock holdings and most of the rest in fixed income (some mutual fund, some individual e.g. TIP, iBond, CD ladder).

As the % of investment money going into passive investments rises, there has to be a tipping point where the small % of active money has an over-sized effect on a security price. The passive funds have no choice but to sell or buy based on market cap changes in a security caused by trading from individuals/active managed funds (assuming no net fund inflows or outflows).
copyright1997reloaded is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2018, 09:53 PM   #7
Full time employment: Posting here.
Oz investor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 855
passive funds rise with the indexes and fall with the indexes and your only 'gains ' are dividends and the magic of compounding if you participate in the dividend reinvestment scheme ( unless you decide the market is near a top .. and then sell out/down and wait for a 20% or more correction/crash and re-buy )

active managers try to beat the market ( but that is rarely a 100% winning strategy ) so will most likely have some big years and some lean years ( are you brave enough to back that active manager in the lean years hoping for some great years soon )

YOUR investment timing is a major factor here , along with your investment time frame ( can you wait for the recovery after the next big crash .. that recovery might take 8 more years ).

if investing was easy almost everyone would be multi-millionaires .

the good part about investing ( on your own behalf ) is .. it is not and all or nothing game , you can have some passive index funds some active funds and even bonds and investment property ( all at the same time if you wish )
__________________
i hold the Australian listed versions of AU ( Anglo Ashanti ) , BHP , and JHG .

You must learn from the mistakes of others. You can't possibly live long enough to make them all yourself.

Samuel Levenson
Oz investor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2018, 04:54 AM   #8
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by copyright1997reloaded View Post
I haven't read the article. I am both a passive and active investor. Approximately 50% of my net worth are in funds, mostly index funds, with about 30% of my net worth in individual stock holdings and most of the rest in fixed income (some mutual fund, some individual e.g. TIP, iBond, CD ladder).

As the % of investment money going into passive investments rises, there has to be a tipping point where the small % of active money has an over-sized effect on a security price. The passive funds have no choice but to sell or buy based on market cap changes in a security caused by trading from individuals/active managed funds (assuming no net fund inflows or outflows).
If you're saying that there's an equilibrium to all of this, I tend to agree.

For me, a good AA and "Over the long haul" are the answers.
__________________
Living well is the best revenge!
Retired @ 52 in 2005
marko is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2018, 06:25 AM   #9
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
jimbee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,216
Sounds like click bait.
jimbee is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2018, 06:41 AM   #10
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Dallas
Posts: 1,150
I theory this is true but we haven't reached critical mass for index funds. I recall Boggle or Buffet saying 60% is the tipping point.
pjigar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2018, 06:42 AM   #11
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 10,252
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExFlyBoy5 View Post
...
Informed investors seeking a margin of safety should hunt for stocks that have been largely ignored and excluded by passive index/ETF products, especially those with high insider ownership.
Can anyone give some examples of such stocks? If one invested in total market index funds, then they would be very few such stocks and would surely get added to the broad market index funds eventually. Plus they would be such a low percentage of one's portfolio that they would make no difference in outcomes anyways.

The article contorted itself to show that something like a West Coast Beaver Cheese Commodity Futures Index ETF was going to have problems, so it was good to warn investors that esoteric, low volume index funds are to be avoided.
LOL! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2018, 06:49 AM   #12
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
target2019's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On a hill in the Pine Barrens
Posts: 9,686
SA articles have peer review, and some commentary is usually good over there. I'm not selling my index funds, though.
target2019 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2018, 07:15 AM   #13
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Utrecht
Posts: 2,650
As long as there remain at least a handful of decently smart investors around that trade actively, passive will win out because of lower costs.

These folks provide the rest of us free valuation services, and for that I thank them.

As soon as asset management firms start outperforming passive indexing as a group in their public equity portfolio it's time to reassess. So far, no sign of that happening. I doubt that will happen until >99% of all funds are passive.

Even then, it will balance out I expect: if the average active fund outperforms by more than their costs, more funds will go to active management. Capitalism at work.
Totoro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2018, 07:56 AM   #14
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
samclem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: SW Ohio
Posts: 14,404
They most important thing is that the system already has positive feedback and tends toward equilibrium. As the market gets a larger amount of passively invested money, there will be greater rewards for stock pickers and we can expect their numbers and (maybe) their quality to increase, perhaps even enough to overcome their fees. So, over time, we should have enough of this activity to keep passive investing viable.
samclem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2018, 08:10 AM   #15
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
MRG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 11,078
How many times have you read this kinda nonsense since 1975? Remember Bogel's folly?

Realize that active fund managers are the darlings of the industry. Most fund companies can't compete on price with the big 3. Look at the cost of say T. Rowe's index funds or any others. There's reasons why they will never be able to compete.
MRG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2018, 08:19 AM   #16
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 2,509
I didn't read the article, but Bogle was reported as
Quote:
John Bogle, the founder of the Vanguard Group and the person who ignited the trend toward index investing four decades ago, acknowledged recently that this circle could turn vicious eventually and cause downright tragic events in the stock market.

“If everybody indexed, the only word you could use is chaos, catastrophe,” Bogle told Yahoo Finance at the Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting last month. “The markets would fail,” he added.
If everyone did indexing, where would you get price discovery?
bingybear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2018, 08:26 AM   #17
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 10,252
Quote:
Originally Posted by samclem View Post
They most important thing is that the system already has positive feedback and tends toward equilibrium. As the market gets a larger amount of passively invested money, there will be greater rewards for stock pickers and we can expect their numbers and (maybe) their quality to increase, perhaps even enough to overcome their fees. So, over time, we should have enough of this activity to keep passive investing viable.
This won't happen because the index funds will still get the average.

For those few stock pickers that outperform and get "greater rewards", there will be a counterbalancing group of stock pickers that underperform. So the active management problem doesn't go away: An investor still needs to pick a consistently good active strategy, manager, or fund. There is no reason to expect consistency in all this, so whoever/whatever was good one year is not necessarily going to be good the next year. They could be good, average, or bad. There is really no way to know.

The same goes for asset classes. For instance, this year international index funds are taking it on the chin. Emerging markets were up over 30% in 2017, but are down about 4% so far in 2017.

Bottom line: this is an awfully unpredictable business, except one can expect and predict that a total US market index fund will return the market average each year.
LOL! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2018, 08:46 AM   #18
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
happy2bretired's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 1,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobbieB View Post
Another reason I have an FA stock picker dude -


Me too...I’m just too timid and unsure in stock picking. I’m happy with how I’m set up right now with my FA.
happy2bretired is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2018, 09:11 AM   #19
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
OldShooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: City
Posts: 10,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExFlyBoy5 View Post
https://seekingalpha.com/article/419...le-bound-burst

Author discusses the fallacy of index funds. Note...just an opinion of one person, but he makes some interesting points.
Seeking Alpha is a "crowdsourced" site. No particular author qualifications are required; anyone can send in an article. Whatever Seeking Alpha gets is what you get.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExFlyBoy5 View Post
In the last decade, trillions of dollars have flown into assets irrespective of both fundamentals and price.

Investors are euphoric about passive indexing, and it is becoming an overcrowded trade with low prospective returns over the next 5-10 years. ...
This is a slight variation on the "weak hands" argument that comes around during every bull market. The thesis is that latecomers to the market are naive and overpaying for assets, and that when the market starts to decline, they will bail. This is probably true, but it has nothing to do with passive investing. In fact, IMO people with the wisdom to passively invest might be less prone to bail when the ill winds blow.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExFlyBoy5 View Post
Because of changes in index construction mechanics, historical index returns are misleading.
Complete nonsense. One change to one index, 13 years ago, is irrelevant to 90 or so years of market history. Example, the mother of all stock price databases: CRSP US Stock Databases | CRSP - The Center for Research in Security Prices

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExFlyBoy5 View Post
Informed investors seeking a margin of safety should hunt for stocks that have been largely ignored and excluded by passive index/ETF products, especially those with high insider ownership.
Yup. Sounds great. There are about 10,000 mutual funds, each with multiple stock pickers, almost all looking at the 3600 or so stocks available in the US. What do you think the odds are that there is an "ignored" stock? Zero, maybe? Even Richard Thaler believes that the Efficient Market Hypothesis is a good going-in assumption, though he points out that market prices can be distorted by behavioral factors.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExFlyBoy5 View Post
Over the past decade, trillions of dollars have flown out of actively managed equity funds and into passive investment vehicles, most popularly in the form of mutual funds and ETFs that track specific indexes....
Yup. And the people whose paychecks depend on the masses believing the stock picking myth have been fighting and losing the battle. There is absolutely zero data to support the myth. If there were any data they would be pounding us over the head with it. Ergo, there is none. So they are left to tell ghost stories like this guy does.

An implicit ghost story here is the elimination of "price discovery" as the percentage of passive money increases. This little ghost story misses the point that passive funds do not trade. The last statistic I remember is that with 40% of the market cap invested passively, the passive funds comprised less than 5% of daily volume, leaving 95% for "price discovery." And the number of stock pickers will never go to zero, just as casinos and lotteries will never go away. We are wired by evolution to be greedy and optimistic. Our brains actually give us dopamine shots to reinforce this behavior. (Jason Zweig "Your Money & Your Brain")
OldShooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2018, 09:42 AM   #20
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Chuckanut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: West of the Mississippi
Posts: 17,173
If indexing became 'overloaded' to the point that it started to fail us, then I would expect to start seeing academic papers showing that managed funds that routinely beat the indexes are on the up swing, and at some point the academicians will show that the winning managed funds are the majority or at least a big plurality.

Guys like Peter Lynch and Michael Price aren't a dime a dozen.
__________________
Comparison is the thief of joy

The worst decisions are usually made in times of anger and impatience.
Chuckanut is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anyone Waiting for the Canadian RE Bubble to Burst to Buy a Property? ShokWaveRider FIRE and Money 42 10-06-2016 03:37 PM
A song that makes you burst out in laughing? robnplunder Other topics 52 10-02-2014 04:36 PM
Pay Capital Gains Tax to transition to Passive Index? REattempt FIRE and Money 8 10-04-2012 12:21 PM
Seven Seconds of Fire--How a short burst of drumming changed the face of music yakers Other topics 18 01-08-2012 10:27 AM
Please don't burst my bubble! countrymouse Hi, I am... 6 03-08-2011 02:12 PM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:09 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.