I have listened to this episode 3 times now and learned a little more each time, as a devotee of the podcast for last 3 or 4 years I'd rate this episode up there with the best of them. Much of Dr. Wahal's commentary is quite nuanced for non-academics and non-industry professionals but it is highly informative for investors of every stripe. This gives retail investors like myself a clear insight into the investment management industry that is uncommonly frank. I for one, would certainly be happy to hear from him again. Great job Cameron and Ben, thank you!
Another great episode. As a UK investor out factor options are limited. Investing to hear discussion touching on problems if implemented badly. Just a note for RR. Was absolutely bombarded with adverts during this episode, way more than normal.
Thanks for having Prof.Wahal on. In one of his talks regarding Gotham ETFs, Greenblatt mentions that they always use trailing/normalized earnings or cash flows and their research shows that expected profitability is often wrong. Does Dr. Wahal any comments on this? I am trying to square the square the circle here :)
Risk based explanation for momentum might be that if you believe in mean reversal it’s the most risky thing you can buy. In that context value actually is less risky. From my mental model I feel safer buying value or even profitability (expensive so might mean revert too but at least there’s something attached to it)while momentum is literally just up for the sake of being up, which is idiotic and therefore risky.
Adriana Robertson was first, spy is definitely not passive... Then Jonathan Berk explains how the only true passive portfolio is holding the market portfolio. Now fase 3, even vanguard VT trades. They are just less active. Active vs passive is not a discrete scenario, its a continuum with an asymptote at 0 😂
Right but even when you buy a “passive” etf somebody else is still making that strategic asset selection with your money it’s just not you the investor directly. I think that’s what they’re trying to say is that passive isn’t truly “passive” it’s more so “indirectly” active.
I have listened to this episode 3 times now and learned a little more each time, as a devotee of the podcast for last 3 or 4 years I'd rate this episode up there with the best of them. Much of Dr. Wahal's commentary is quite nuanced for non-academics and non-industry professionals but it is highly informative for investors of every stripe. This gives retail investors like myself a clear insight into the investment management industry that is uncommonly frank. I for one, would certainly be happy to hear from him again. Great job Cameron and Ben, thank you!
Great episode.
"The first part of your answer almost sounded like a risk based explanation for why the Momentum premium exists."
😂 Loved it!
Another great episode. As a UK investor out factor options are limited. Investing to hear discussion touching on problems if implemented badly.
Just a note for RR. Was absolutely bombarded with adverts during this episode, way more than normal.
Thanks for having Prof.Wahal on. In one of his talks regarding Gotham ETFs, Greenblatt mentions that they always use trailing/normalized earnings or cash flows and their research shows that expected profitability is often wrong. Does Dr. Wahal any comments on this? I am trying to square the square the circle here :)
Amazing. Big thanks.
Really interesting. Thanks.
thanks, guys
Risk based explanation for momentum might be that if you believe in mean reversal it’s the most risky thing you can buy. In that context value actually is less risky. From my mental model I feel safer buying value or even profitability (expensive so might mean revert too but at least there’s something attached to it)while momentum is literally just up for the sake of being up, which is idiotic and therefore risky.
Adriana Robertson was first, spy is definitely not passive... Then Jonathan Berk explains how the only true passive portfolio is holding the market portfolio. Now fase 3, even vanguard VT trades. They are just less active. Active vs passive is not a discrete scenario, its a continuum with an asymptote at 0 😂
Following from Andrew Chen's podcast; Crisis averted? 🤣
Passive, doesn't mean no trades, it means no strategic asset selection (I.e. brain dead). No?
Right but even when you buy a “passive” etf somebody else is still making that strategic asset selection with your money it’s just not you the investor directly.
I think that’s what they’re trying to say is that passive isn’t truly “passive” it’s more so “indirectly” active.