/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.13422685]

>over the past 8 years, index funds have outperformed 60% of hedgefunds
can somebody explain how this is possible when hedge funds hire so many "professionals", quants, analysts etc. ?

s&p 500 only averaged 10% a year for the past decade. But an actual succesful hedge fund (Soros' quantum fund) averaged 30% a year (compounded) for 40 years straight...

are a lot of these funds just straight up scams?

[Anonymous No.13422704]

>>13422685

same as Bitcoin will outperform /biz cucks daytrading 101 shitcoins over the next 12 months.

[Anonymous No.13422713]

>>13422685
Yes, Hedge Funds are scams. There's a reason they prefer to hire from Ivy League schools rather than top engineering schools. Ivy League schools are all about networking (aka making friends with people). This is a useful skill because you need to gain peoples trust before you outright scam them.

[Anonymous No.13422716]

>>13422685
People cant usually beat the market. Soros is an exeption, cause hes literally too big to fail. If people hear he invests in something theyll buy it, making his Investment already an success

[Anonymous No.13422725]

>>13422685
Because Wall Street is a playground for egotistical narcissistic cucks who spend their lives chasing money and being miserable, and there are enough people who exist like that that they have essentially formed a colony where they print money all day even though it adds no value to the world around them or even to their own lives.

The only people I know on Wall Street who are truly happy are the ones who left. Ultimate cuckoldry is being a slave to your wallet.

[Anonymous No.13422774]

>>13422685
their entire goal of institutional investing is to take peoples money out of their control. and that cuckery isnt free, those rocket scientists, misallocated in the economy due to this fuckery, dont come cheap.

basically people pay people who hate and steal from them to take care of their money.

[Anonymous No.13422799]

>>13422685
Hedge funds only work in free markets. The “Fed put,” which is to say the massive injections of liquidity and capital into the market by central banks has broken the normal feedback loop/market cycle. It works pretty well until it doesn’t.

[Anonymous No.13422819]

>>13422799
is that why stock charts look so weird and unnatural in comparison to crypto/altcoin charts?

[Anonymous No.13422834]

>>13422685
The funds defer taxes by hodling a ETF for less than a day, a good few haven't paid tax in years. I bet if you use the same tactics the IRS will literally rape you!

[Anonymous No.13422854]

>>13422819
Crypto is weird, as there’s no real precedent other than speculative bubbles in other previously new asset classes. Between that and the preponderance of whales (~95% of coins are held by ~5% of wallets), I’m not sure what to make of it tbqh.

[Anonymous No.13422862]

>>13422685
OP!

Friday,.. squash

[Anonymous No.13422878]

In modern economy people who earn most don't do anything useful but are great at convincing others to give them money.

[Anonymous No.13422900]

>>13422685
>scams?
Baby is learning:)

[Anonymous No.13423003]

>>13422685
I suspect most successful hedge funds are either politically connected or are staffed with geniuses like Rentech.

[Anonymous No.13423055]

>>13422685
Yes, but underperforming doesn't mean the fund is a scam. Some funds are designed to be neutral to the trend of the market for example there's a hedge fund that relies on merger arbitrage to make money. You wouldn't expect something like that to outperform the S&P reliably but it fulfills a specific niche.

[Anonymous No.13423649]

>>13422685
Why are blonde's so pretty.

[Anonymous No.13423659]

>>13423649
because they are full of recessive genes when you can plant your dominant ones

[Anonymous No.13423714]

>>13422685
what effects do algos have on all this?

[Anonymous No.13423754]

>>13422799
You have to understand that a lot of people are aware that tax funded benefits, like Social Security, may not be enough to meet people's retirement requirements, as time goes on.

I suspect the Fed is aware of this, and has just basically said "fuck it", and have decided to keep rates in a place which won't cause an extreme disturbance to the overall stock market.

I think people need to stop thinking of it as this place of Capital Allocation, and more so just another approach for fixing the problems of providing Retirement funds for an ageing population. Index Funds are essentially savings accounts.

A lot of these issues actually tie into the Incel problem, lower birth rates, immigration, stuff like that. I never realized it, myself, but the more I look at things, the more the see some of the underlying issues. I have to say, I dislike thinking of human beings as just tax output units, it's sad.

[Anonymous No.13423893]

stock trading is just gambling

[Anonymous No.13424212]

>>13423754
the true redpill is that women's rights and subsequently bringing them into the workforce has directly led to the massive growth over the last 30 years, which is now leading to the Fed keeping rates artifically low forever to maintain that growth

Because if the growth ever stops, the entire world is fucked

[Anonymous No.13424247]

>>13422685
Based Shkreli spoke about this in one of his videos

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARrNYyJEnFI

[Anonymous No.13424419]

>>13424212
>women entering the workplace lead to massive growth because they doubled the labor supply almost instsntaneously which crushed wage growth until the economy grew enough to require even more workers, at which point our benevolent politicians passed immigration and entitlement laws that incentivize millions of low-skilled to flood across our borders legally or not, which again flooded the labor market and allowed corporations to continue to raise prices but never have to pay their workers more, which translates into the ridiculous growth in the stock market over the past several decades.

Also, computers and productivity and all that

[Anonymous No.13424527]

>>13424212
I don't think that's true. Real rates have been kept low (historically speaking), due to the recovery from the Financial Crisis. I would agree that inclusion of women definitely contributes to higher productivity (more people working, greater access to talent). And this adds to growth, but that's hardly the sole cause for what's happened with rates.

So I don't think a solution to the rates "problem" would be excluding women from work.

If the Fed is keeping rates low, because of concerns for long term prospects of the Stock Market, to provide funds for as many people's Retirement Plans as possible, then it's primarily a changing age demographic issue.

It's then actually a good thing women are working, because they're more likely to be able to save for their retirement, rather than have to rely on someone else or the Government, entirely.

[Anonymous No.13425492]

>>13424527
the fed has been steadily increasing rates since like 2015 tho