Tim Guinness claims that despite the rise of passive investing, it is not difficult for thoughtful active managers to outperform. He calls indices "stupid" because they are inherently momentum-driven and mechanically buy high. He argues a disciplined approach can overcome the fee hurdle that holds many back.
Related Insights
Contrary to conventional wisdom, the massive flow of capital into passive indexes and short-term systematic strategies has reduced the number of actors focused on long-term fundamentals. This creates price dislocations and volatility, offering alpha for patient investors.
Active management is more viable in emerging markets than in the US. The largest EM ETF (EEM) has a high 0.72% expense ratio, the universe of stocks is twice as large as the US, and analyst coverage is sparse. This creates significant opportunities for skilled stock pickers to outperform passive strategies.
To achieve above-average investment returns, one cannot simply follow the crowd. True alpha comes from contrarian thinking—making investments that conventional wisdom deems wrong. Rubenstein notes the primary barrier is psychological: overcoming the innate human desire to be liked and the fear of being told you're 'stupid' by your peers.
The dominance of low-cost index funds means active managers cannot compete in liquid, efficient markets. Survival depends on creating strategies in areas Vanguard can't easily replicate, such as illiquid micro-caps, niche geographies, or complex sectors that require specialized data and analysis.
Market-cap-weighted indexes create a perverse momentum loop. As a stock's price rises, its weight in the index increases, forcing new passive capital to buy more of it at inflated prices. This mechanism is the structural opposite of a value-oriented 'buy low, sell high' discipline.
Data over the last decade shows that 97% of professional stock pickers, despite their resources, fail to beat a basic market index. Ambitious individuals often fall into the trap of thinking they're the exception. The most reliable path to market wealth is patient, consistent investing in low-cost index funds.
The underperformance of active managers in the last decade wasn't just due to the rise of indexing. The historic run of a few mega-cap tech stocks created a market-cap-weighted index that was statistically almost impossible to beat without owning those specific names, leading to lower active share and alpha dispersion.
Professional fund managers are often constrained by the need to hug their benchmark index to avoid short-term underperformance and retain clients. Individuals, free from this 'career risk,' can make truly long-term, contrarian bets, which is a significant structural advantage for outperformance.
Contrary to classic theory, markets may be growing less efficient. This is driven not only by passive indexing but also by a structural shift in active management towards short-term, quantitative strategies that prioritize immediate price movements over long-term fundamental value.
Contrary to the belief that indexing creates market inefficiencies, Michael Mauboussin argues the opposite. Indexing removes the weakest, 'closet indexing' players from the active pool, increasing the average skill level of the remaining competition and making it harder to find an edge.
