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
But there’s also a lot of, like at Wittel, you know, I was at Wachtel in 2005 to 2007, so really near the peak of a big merger’s boom. So like a component of it was like the standard derivatives math, right? And so like, you know, I got there and I learned derivatives math, right? And I love that.
Those types of excess savings were sort of the culprit for the conundrum in 2005 or whatever it was. And so, I write about it both — I do know, the simple maths about it how you can double shop ratios for uncorrelated strategies and then remind that it’s really difficult to find for uncorrelated strategies in long-only world.
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. I read all those academic papers, I understand where the math comes from. It’s how math works. NADIG: — in 2005 is probably wrong. RITHOLTZ: Right.
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