Compiling questions like this that don't have as many moving parts as say evaluating a stock would make for a good quiz for money managers.
Like if you give managers a quiz where the inputs were a given (kinda like a constrained game) would they even get the answers right?
Like if you give managers a quiz where the inputs were a given (kinda like a constrained game) would they even get the answers right?
https://twitter.com/benrollert/status/1448670675045134345
Like how many people hand their money over to someone whose bet sizes would be way off even if you accepted the inputs they furnished themselves?
Reminds me of a tweet about whether discretionary or quant would benefit more from the other?
Reminds me of a tweet about whether discretionary or quant would benefit more from the other?
I think its discretionary probably has more to learn from quant as far as not screwing up the more straightforward aspects of investing.
(I'm not really sure to what extent or what proportion of managers are actually innumerate but i don't feel like scores on tests with known solutions would be comforting)
Mused about this in a post about how people think about risk
moontowermeta.com/talking-to-the…
Mused about this in a post about how people think about risk
moontowermeta.com/talking-to-the…
I'd like to believe that some semblance of market efficiency would weed out managers who would get basics wrong.
But "democratization" (snickers) means every gifted storyteller will raise an investment fund, there isn't much check on the testable forms of competence.
But "democratization" (snickers) means every gifted storyteller will raise an investment fund, there isn't much check on the testable forms of competence.
(investing ability is not something a test can find, but a test can find investing non-ability. You're bound to find incompetent people who have done well by sheer numbers + bull market, but that's what's known as a land mine)
The good news...
The good news...
Basics can be taught, outsourced, hired for etc. A basic quant sensibility is a commodity esp relative to the other aspects of investing.
I'm curious about what folks think about the ability to be a good investor without being able to reason numerately in the 1st place.
I'm curious about what folks think about the ability to be a good investor without being able to reason numerately in the 1st place.
not talking about PhD stuff...the Haghani experiment was simple coin flip bet w/educated people (insofar as an economics is a field of education. I was an econ major. You can ace that shit if you avoid the mathy route and are good at bs-ing in those blue-lined booklets)
Off to the gym, I'll check back later. Curious your views on this.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
