Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Surprised no one brought up his points on passive funds flowing into ETFs leading to wider market inefficiency.

 

Not my original thought, but one can argue that more passive money is better for market efficiency since it leaves more of the price-seeking function to active managers, or so called "smart money," in the long run. In the short-run however, is I agree.

25 years ago Klarman talked about this sort of effect that indexing would have on the market, he even called it a fad.

Posted

Surprised no one brought up his points on passive funds flowing into ETFs leading to wider market inefficiency.

 

Not my original thought, but one can argue that more passive money is better for market efficiency since it leaves more of the price-seeking function to active managers, or so called "smart money," in the long run. In the short-run however, is I agree.

25 years ago Klarman talked about this sort of effect that indexing would have on the market, he even called it a fad.

 

Same with Stahl and other active managers.

 

As Dwight from the Office once said: " They’re going to be screwed once this whole Internet fad is over."

Posted

Anyone want to share a copy? via PM, if necessary.

 

I"ll second that please.

 

Same. Thanks in advance!

 

I'd be interested as well. Thank you, very much appreciated!!

Posted

Surprised no one brought up his points on passive funds flowing into ETFs leading to wider market inefficiency.

 

Not my original thought, but one can argue that more passive money is better for market efficiency since it leaves more of the price-seeking function to active managers, or so called "smart money," in the long run. In the short-run however, is I agree.

25 years ago Klarman talked about this sort of effect that indexing would have on the market, he even called it a fad.

 

Same with Stahl and other active managers.

 

As Dwight from the Office once said: " They’re going to be screwed once this whole Internet fad is over."

Haha, I agree that Klarman's statement sounds pretty foolish at the moment. The indexing strategy has been on a multi-decade bull run and shows no signs of slowing if outflows from active to indexing strategies continue. However, I think at some stage in the future, Klarman will be proved right, dumb human behaviour combined with mindless indexing is going to lead to inferior market returns. At some stage the wall of money that's pushing over-valued, US mega-cap companies on an ever upward trend will abate. If we saw a substantial market decline, we could see a rush for the exits that would exacerbate any market decline as investors decide that indexing is no longer a good strategy. Indexing is a great strategy for most investors, but I think just like we saw with the Magellan fund (where most investors saw very little gains because they bought and sold at the wrong times), human psychology can be relied upon in wrecking decent strategies.

Posted

How could buying the index create inferior market returns? I could see it producing lower returns vs some active managers but not inferior to the average since you're buying the average.

Posted

Yeah these guys are setting up straw men to a certain extent.  You don't have to buy the S&P 500 index.  You can buy VTI or VT or IUSV or EFV.  I mean I get what they are saying; yes momentum will underperform at some point.

Posted

Re indexing; this board is a very good example of what Klarman is talking about.

Look at the stated 2016 returns everybody posted; weight the returns by the number of people who reported them - & it comes out to a high number. Cut it by around 1/3 for calculation error and posturing. Then look at the 2016 return on the average equity index fund (after fees).

 

The adjusted board return is what a reasonably knowledgeable person would have made. The index return is the alternative.

An investor putting money into an index fund earned less, as it was much less efficient.

 

Both index fund and investor are stock picking – it is why the fund has tracking error.

But the investor has less restriction.

 

The inefficiency is primarily fees.

Assume a 100K index portfolio that rises to 106K (6% equity return), with fees of 75bp. In the same period the investor does 2 round trip trades, for total commissions of $50. The portfolio earns $6,000, that 75bp fee is $750 (12.5% of what you earned), and the difference in costs is $700/yr per 100K of equity portfolio.

 

The same calculation using a bond fund that earns 3% with fees of 50bp; and the investor doing 1 round trip for total commissions of $80. The portfolio earned 3K, & the fund charged 16.67% ($500/yr). The difference is $420/yr per 100K of bond portfolio earning 3%.

 

A 200K portfolio split 50/50 between equity and bonds, would earn $9,000 (4.5%) and pay an additional $1,120 of fees (12.44% of the $9,000 earned) – over what it would have cost if the investor had just invested in the market(s) directly. In Canada a great many funds charge well above the fees mentioned, making the inefficiencies materially worse.

 

But your fees bought the benefit of our managers expertise & experience  …… or you could have learned it on the COBF board.

You also discover that sloth clearly pays - about 12.44% in this example!

 

SD

 

Posted

I like Klarman a lot.  I have a lot of respect for his independence of thought and action.  It is highly unusual even among value investors.

 

Minor criticisms of him: 

 

1. Reprint your book to share information.  This could probably be done with 1 phone call and yet he does not do it.  Perhaps it is just ego.

 

2. Publish your letters.  At this point he is rich and famous (among investors) so what not share them and educate the world. 

Posted

I like Klarman a lot.  I have a lot of respect for his independence of thought and action.  It is highly unusual even among value investors.

 

Minor criticisms of him: 

 

1. Reprint your book to share information.  This could probably be done with 1 phone call and yet he does not do it.  Perhaps it is just ego.

 

2. Publish your letters.  At this point he is rich and famous (among investors) so what not share them and educate the world. 

 

He doesn't do either of these for the same reason, as pointed out by oddball - marketing and brand value

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
Posted

More references to Klarman

 

 

 

 

Paul Tudor Jones Says U.S. Stocks Should ‘Terrify’ Janet Yellen - Bloomberg

 

 

 

Excerpt:

 

Managers expecting the worst each have a pet harbinger of doom. Seth Klarman, who runs the $30 billion Baupost Group, told investors in a letter last week that corporate insiders have been heavy sellers of their company shares. To him, that’s “a sign that those who know their companies the best believe valuations have become full or excessive.”

 

Share sales by insiders outstripped purchases by $38 billion in the first quarter, the most since 2013, according to The Washington Service, a provider of data and analysis on insider trading.

 

Klarman also noted that margin debt -- the money clients borrow from their brokers to purchase shares -- hit a record $528 billion in February, a signal to some that enthusiasm for stocks may be overheating. Baupost was a small net seller in the first quarter, according to the letter.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-20/paul-tudor-jones-says-u-s-stocks-should-terrify-janet-yellen

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

The fact that Klarman's investments are often quite obscure is a huge positive IMO.  Obscurity can be a source of significant value. 

 

In his own words:

"If value is not likely to exist in what the herd is buying, where may it exist? In what they are selling, unaware of, or ignoring. When the herd is selling a security, the market price may fall well beyond reason. Ignored, obscure, or newly created securities may similarly be or become undervalued." – Seth Klarman

Posted

I think he means the thesis itself is obscure rather than company. Baupost stuff can be pretty out there, and its hard to justify cloning if you only dive in because someone else did, without even understanding why they did, let alone figuring out whether you agree...

  • 2 months later...
Posted

Just a minor query - Paratek pharmaceuticals (PRTK) shows Baupost group as the second largest institutional holder owning over 8% of the company, but it is not listed in this anywhere. Any idea why?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...