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. 2000-2003 Dotcom implosion 6. Businessweek ) but see With cash earning 5%, why risk money on the stock market?
It is no coincidence, for example, that the two most recent periods of major tobacco underperformance in the last several decades have been driven largely by a huge compression in multiples, the result of serious litigation (1998 – 2003) and regulatory (2017 – present) challenges.
So I took it upon myself to go off and took a course in bond math, took another course in derivatives and realized the underlying fundamental concepts were barely, I mean, it wasn’t even high school math in most cases. I didn’t know what any of these terms meant. RITHOLTZ: They just became distressed.
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. We forget that there weren’t personal computers on everybody’s desk back then. She was based out in Los Angeles.
My family and I were evacuated in 2003 due to the Cedar Fire. As Charley Ellis famously demonstrated , investing and life more broadly are loser’s games much of the time, with outcomes dominated by luck rather than skill and high transaction costs. If we avoid mistakes we will generally win. The coolest. The silliest. The oddest.
Well, I mean, so I, I find that, you know, this, and this goes back to, you know, 2003 with Regulation fd, that’s when everything kind of changed. So that’s the math. And they’re like, well, yeah, it could be more, but like, that’s what the Fed’s telling us. Well, it changed in two ways.
RITHOLTZ: Why is it not surprising that a math nerd is also a placekicker? But really, even that experience was about building great friends that I played football with. And many of those gentlemen have gone on to do incredible things as well. It seems to be like the field goal seems to be one of the most mathematical parts of football.
RITHOLTZ: So you launch your own firm IDW in 2003. So we were all learning as we went and just by virtue of doing really one search, it made me the expert because no one else was doing it and so I built my business from there. By the way congratulations that’s 20 years ago so you’re celebrating a big anniversary this year.
And I was a math nerd as a kid. So my grandmother realizing that this was her source of income, wanted to be sure she had the right stocks, and she got a trial subscription for 29 bucks for 13 weeks of the value line. It was the kind who thought it’s cool that 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 times eight is roughly 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.
I couldn’t make that math work at all plausibly. That said, over the past 20 years (2003-2022), the S&P 500 delivered a 9.80 It’s almost all powerful and good stuff, with one major error. Did you catch it? Here’s about as close as I could come. Maybe he simply made a mistake. Maybe he misspoke.
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. So as much as I’m personally still a pretty strong skeptic of active management, I mean, I understand the math, and the odds are not in your favor.
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.
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.
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. Stop with the math.` Beyond the present lies imagination. And lots of surprises. Also interesting. The most optimistic.
I started out math and, and physics, and in high school I was a rock star in math and physics. And that persistent until about 2003. He went through the math and I’m like, wow, that’s a great return. I realized I am not like these people and this is not what I want to do. But those guys are great, right?
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.
Wasn’t the Excel spreadsheet error, which changed their math. So you got the tax cuts in 2001, and then you got another one in 2003. Problem is, the math doesn’t work 01:20:33 [Speaker Changed] Well, you know, math, who really believes numbers should add up. I mean that was, that was the problem.
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