Robert Shiller On What Worries Him About Passive Investing | Trading Nation | CNBC
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- Robert Shiller, professor of economics at Yale University, discusses the rise of passive investing with Eric Chemi.
» Subscribe to CNBC: cnb.cx/Subscrib...
About CNBC: From 'Wall Street' to 'Main Street' to award winning original documentaries and Reality TV series, CNBC has you covered. Experience special sneak peeks of your favorite shows, exclusive video and more.
Connect with CNBC News Online
Get the latest news: www.cnbc.com/
Find CNBC News on Facebook: cnb.cx/LikeCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Twitter: cnb.cx/FollowCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Google+: cnb.cx/PlusCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Instagram: cnb.cx/Instagra...
Robert Shiller On What Worries Him About Passive Investing | Trading Nation | CNBC
If everyone was in passive - there would be more opportunity for alpha in active investing! It would just reach equilibrium. The average retail investor should still look at investing in ETFs.
No guarantee that we return to equilibrium before this blows up
Not EVERYONE is indexing. There are still plenty of arrogant traders who think they are smarter than everyone else.
They will be active pickers. Those are MOST of the people in finance.
I will gladly let my intellect be diluted ... and let the "intellectuals" pick and choose in the Wallstreet Casino. I'll just invest in all of them and wait for my consistent return at the end of the day ... Thank you
Exactly. I couldn't even tell you how many thousands of dollars I've lost over the years trying to invest in individual stocks. Networks like CNBC and its sponsers have a vested interest in finding suckers to buy into individual stocks so they can collect their fees. No thanks... I'll stick with the S&P 500
past results so not predict future performance. it's possible that indexes could start under-performing. ...Thank you
@@cerebralcaustic Average of the market can't underperform the market. The market can suffer on the whole.
Coleman T this didn’t age well
@@mileshock2802 lol
Ironically, active investors who don’t believe markets are efficient are the main drivers of markets’ efficiency 🤓
So yeah, Shiller’s point is valid. If we have a market where all participants are passive, we could have a problem but realistically can never get to that point.
These people are so arrogant and not willing to let the average person in the stock market to try to take a measly little profit
@Mambo Jambo based on their market cap* do your research, unless you look specifically for a value index, your money would be in a lot of overvalued faang stocks, which ought to be shorted.
Bubbles inevitably appear, doesn't mater from passive or active investing. It's the act of investing the inflated mass of money, that the money printer constantly produces, which creates bubbles.
If you go with science passiv buy and hold out performance activ investing by far.
ETFs allow more people to get into the market and the ETF itself is active in its chosen holdings.
Well... indexing is not completely bad ... diversification for those who don’t have opinions or resources to research... it also provides a stable base and always have extreme volatility to discover price ... as long as there is still significant/ material weight for smart hedge funds targeting bad firms and long the good firms then it’s ok. Not everyone should be in indexing but it does have value ... double edged sword ... not perfect
How do we know if this whole passive investing fears are pumped by corporations to get everyone start "gambling" on stocks again...with passive investing when the economy is good you make money when it's goes down you don't you just have to be smart enough to diversify and know when to take profits ...
Anytime you have the temptation of a 10,000% return on a "knock-the-ball-out-of-the-park" stock, you will have active pickers.
Well think about it differenly: what is happening more of? People that are able to appropriately value the companies moving into passive investing or people who are unable to appropriately value the companies moving into passive investing?
If it is the former, it is a net negative trend and if it is the latter, it is a net positive trend.
Doesn't the administrator of the index fund set a price while they replicate the index? And the ones who design the index have some changes in the index
On one side is Shiller and on the other side is buffet both my heroes. its really hard to choose one.
This is much ado about nothing. If everyone began passive investing, which will never happen, then market inefficiency would increase more quickly as you approach that point. Market inefficiency means opportunity to make money for people who can recognize, which in turn brings the very calibration being discussed here and shifts people away from passive investing. It's the reason why active investing still exists, and there's no sign of hedge funds and other firms packing up shop to go passive.
What passive investing does is create an opportunity for regular people to invest their money without having to pay people who provide terrible financial advice, and stock pickers who fall woefully short of the market average. I don't see an argument being made here that warrants people giving that up to pay more for worse results.
And free riding? Investing as a whole, and the market generally, is inherently rife with free ridership. In fact, it's part of their selling features. "Put your money here and watch it grow without doing anything!"
Exactly, the market will self correct. There may even be bubbles, but you can't tell me that ETFs are going to somehow cheat economic reality and put us into some new paradigm lol. As you said the greater the inefficiency becomes, the greater the opportunity! That's one the beautiful things about greed actually. Unbelievable that they have a professor of economics on who apparently doesn't understand how markets work!
@@dr.d4957 An extremely renowned professor, in fact, who invented a widely used method for market prediction. To be clear, I'm in no way saying I know more about markets than he does, but this claim he made here makes no sense and he didn't do much to support it.
O please, lets be honest their scared off losing all their commissions.
just a comment for the recommendation algorithm
Where would we be? Much richer.
Grossman Stiglitz paradox-well known
Passive investing will create a giant bubble
Find the top ETFs in the sector/broad market that appeals to you. Buy the top ten stocks/proportions listed.
Done.
Why would you ever do that? It's more expensive that way and you're still getting the downside of an ETF too. It's worst of both worlds.
It's a simple as this: there is a bubble...again.