This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
My Two-for-Tuesday morning train WFH reads: • Stock Pickers Never Had a Chance Against Hard Math of the Market : In years like this one, when just a few big companies outperform, it’s hard to assemble a winning portfolio. economy is doing well, why do so many Americans say it’s terrible? 2000-2003 Dotcom implosion 6.
And I did the math, and I think at that point in time, roughly speaking, assets in ETS were roughly just 10 percent, 12 percent of assets in mutual funds and I was pretty convinced that that number was to increase significantly. And I always use the exact same example, how will you invest in Google in 1998, or in Facebook in 2003?
00:03:14 [Mike Greene] So that was actually an outgrowth from my experience coming out of Wharton and you mentioned the, the, you know, the transition of people who tended to be skilled at math or physics into finance. There’s a continual, the economy continues to grow. She was based out in Los Angeles. It goes so far.
I mean, if you take out the government spending, you probably are on a recession in a private economy. And that’s your focus on government, both fiscal and monetary support for the economy. You’re looking at all these different aspects of the market, of the economy, of, of various government policies.
RITHOLTZ: Why is it not surprising that a math nerd is also a placekicker? Chattanooga is a fascinating city, really steeped in some rich history, but also a city that faces some challenges as they grow from a very small city to a more significant city in the U.S. And many of those gentlemen have gone on to do incredible things as well.
So that little detour was in 2003. So think about 2003 home prices had gone up a lot from 2000. So mortgage position in 2000 were way more valuable in 2003 than they were when they originated because they weigh less credit risk. And I was always good at math and, and I had been writing code since I was in the sixth grade.
I mean, there were some advisor pickup, but you had to be kind of on the front edge of finance, or a quant, or running your own models, which in 2003, was not that common. NADIG: So the reason is because, you know, when we look at how the corporate economy works, there are investments that you have to make. It’s how math works.
If you are at all interested in fixed income, how you assess bonds, how you evaluate the economy, the market, what the fed’s gonna do, what clients want, how to assess risk in credit markets, well then you are gonna really enjoy this conversation. That’s where the economy was at that point. But those guys are great, right?
The economy, the markets, and the world-at-large provide unlimited fodder for them. That’s why the markets are much more of a mind game than a math game. And that’s why markets will always be exceedingly hard, even when the math seems easy or the future seems certain. ” Nobody does. And lots of surprises.
Colin Camerer : So I, some of it was when I was in college at Johns Hopkins, I, I studied physics and math. And there was people, Physics didn’t have, people, psychology didn’t have math, economics was kind of the right mix. The math doesn’t math. That was too abstract. Yeah, I’m gonna vote.
So, I did the math, 20 million times a hundred. So, let me just repeat the math. And so, again, I went through this simple math. And he came up with a plan in late 2003 to solve this problem with the oligarchs and what he did was there was one oligarch in particular who was the richest oligarch. They said, seven years.
It’ll reduce new company formation, it’ll make us borrowing costs skyrocket, it’ll devalue the US dollar, it’s gonna cause rampant inflation and it will act as a drag on the overall economy. Wasn’t the Excel spreadsheet error, which changed their math. And their economy seems to be doing just fine.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 36,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content