This is an apparently (?) mainstream econ paper arguing that "value investment" strategies make money because they are contrarian to "naive" strategies, i.e. "dumb money" http://lsvasset.com/pdf/research-papers/Contrarian-Investment-Extrapolation-and-Risk.pdf … .
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @StephenBuell2 @s_r_constantin
I saw it as an expression of suprise and skepticism, with a suitable disclaimer. How would you have expressed your surprise at this finding?
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @StephenBuell2 @chriswaterguy
maybe it's the wrong word? I mean "as a matter of what people think, I didn't know econ professors thought persistent investor bias was a thing"
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @s_r_constantin @chriswaterguy
I am sorry. I interpreted that as implying such a notions as persistent investor bias is so antiquated or absurd it could not be held as a sincere intellectual conviction. Perhaps a stretch on my part!
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
Replying to @s_r_constantin @chriswaterguy
For what it’s worth, my perspective is that the end investor is as irrational as ever and that influences the structure and behavior of the mutual and hedge fund industry, who are largely compensated based on AUM.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
If you ever try arguing with family members about concrete investing decisions, you’ll likely see well informed, intelligent people behaving wildly irrationally in this domain (I’m as guilt as anyone on this count).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I don’t think well about money tbh, I just get curious sometimes because so much of the world runs on it.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.