2/ The latest @AmerCompass Atlas takes a spin through the data on what private equity is up to. It's very good at offering the highest salaries and attracting the top business talent (who could otherwise be doing something more productive). americancompass.org/a-guide-to-pri…
3/ Private equity is not so good, unfortunately, at investing. 20 years ago, when it could acquire small companies at big discounts, it made money buying low and selling high. But once the discounts vanished, so did the returns. Big PE firms now make most of their money in fees.
4/ Here are the findings from some recent academic studies of private equity's performance:
❌ "no significant outperformance"
❌ "about the same as public equity indices"
❌ "essentially matched returns"
❌ "no edge over public equity"
❌ "negative alpha across the board"
5/ One of the best papers on private equity comes from @CliffordAsness's AQR Capital Management, which is funny because AQR hasn't been good at delivering results for its own investors. But it's good at pointing out the failings of others. Key chart: aqr.com/Insights/Resea…
6/ Perhaps most damningly, private equity returns look random. A firm with a successful fund ("top quartile," meaning it is in the top 25% of performers) is actually least likely to have its next fund also in the top quartile, according to @MorganStanley. morganstanley.com/im/publication…
7/ Your best chance of investing in a good private equity fund may be to find a firm whose last fund performed poorly. But mostly it seems to be just guessing. Of course, you'll pay the fees regardless. This is called Coin-Flip Capitalism. americancompass.org/essays/coin-fl…
8/ "So what? Who cares?" I hear you say. Well, poorly-managed and sometimes corrupt public pension funds continue to pile money into private equity, which is bad for you as a taxpayer. And the accumulating "dry powder" (uninvested cash) is forcing ever riskier investments.
9/ Remember, most of the private equity firm's profit doesn't come from making good investments, it comes from making any investment. The management fee, then the transaction fee, then the monitoring and consulting fees... The only way to fail is to give the money back.
10/ As @BainandCompany shows, private equity firms are thus paying unprecedented prices for companies, and trying to make up for it by loading them with unprecedented debt. This won't end well for anyone. bain.com/insights/topic…
11/ How's this for a warning sign: Private equity funds sell most of their companies to... other private equity funds. Increasingly, firms are raising money in new funds to buy companies from their old funds. institutionalinvestor.com/article/b1r14l…
12/ Companies acquired by private equity have been ten times more likely to go bankrupt. Expect that to get worse. And bankrupt or not, higher debt levels leave firms less able to weather storms, more likely to cut jobs in downturns, etc.
13/ Now seems a good time to mention, "not all private equity." Some PE firms create value and build great businesses. Obviously, private capital investment is important.
That's why the policy response has to be to set market rules, not condemn the market or shut it down.
14/14 Confronting Coin-Flip Capitalism provides a comprehensive rundown of the ways that our dysfunctional financial system is misallocating capital, talent, and risk; the reasons this demands a policy response; and options for pro-market policymakers. americancompass.org/essays/confron…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
If you want to understand the state of the market-fundamentalist right, I highly, highly recommend this short essay from Anne Rathbone Bradley in the new @ISI@ModAgeJournal symposium on the humane economy. isi.org/modern-age/hum…
Bradley's definition of a "humane economy" focuses on "greater output" and "greater choices, not just in coffee tables but for all goods and services that we need and want."
She acknowledges that "male wages did begin to decline in 1973," which she attributes in large part to women entering the labor force, and says, "this is a good thing for families" that "allows them greater choices."
And by the way, cutting taxes when they raise only 16% of GDP, while we spend more than 20%, just isn't going to happen. Shouldn't happen. Can't happen. Money's not free.
So if you're focused on tax cuts, that's really just a way of staying you're focused on nothing. Not great.
The new @AmerCompass collection begins from a simple premise: the information revolution of the past 30 years has brought about the most consequential technological transformation since the industrial revolution 200 years ago. 🧵
2/ An important thing to understand about the industrial revolution is that it actually made people pretty miserable for a pretty long time -- decades of stagnant to declining wages, declining health and life expectancy, people literally got shorter!
3/ Eventually, policymakers caught up, recognizing that the state needed to play a different role in an industrial economy than it had in an agrarian one. Indentured children in factories and mines were not the same as children working on the family farm.
I appreciate @DonFSchneider taking the time to reply to my recent essay, We're Just Speculating Here... The Rise of Wall Street and the Fall of American Investment. But I'm not persuaded by his "no investment decline" thesis. Two points in particular:
1. I do see "much weakness in equipment" in his chart -- at least the last ten straight years of data below his long-run average. Here's net investment as % of GDP by decade:
1960s, 1.7%
1970s, 1.9%
1980s, 1.4%
1990s, 1.5%
2000s, 1.3%
2010s, 1.2%
2. Using the GDP deflator for private nonresidential fixed investment to get "real net investment" is facially untenable. He provides the chart. It basically shows no inflation for 40 years. Companies get about as much for $100 in 2020 as they did in 1980.
Thread (1/12). How have Wall Street's fortunes diverged so radically from Main Street's in recent decades? I think a large part of the explanation comes down to our misunderstanding of the word "investment." Most "investors" are doing nothing of the sort. americancompass.org/essays/specula…
2/ My new research brief @AmerCompass classifies publicly traded companies as "Sustainers" or "Eroders" depending on whether they are investing faster than they use up their past investments. Our economy has undergone a transformation. americancompass.org/essays/the-cor…
3/ Half a century ago, the vast majority of companies were Sustainers -- actively investing to grow their capital stock. Now Eroders predominate, returning record amounts of cash to shareholders even as they fail to make the investments they need.
Data on the performance of hedge funds and private equity in the COVID crash's wake is now available and, as @wellscking shows in the latest @AmerCompass Coin-Flip Capitalism update, the picture is not pretty. americancompass.org/essays/coin-fl…
The defense of hedge funds and their disastrously subpar returns in recent years has always been that they are specifically designed NOT to track the market and they provide value precisely because their performance is uncorrelated.