Mycket tack vare er uppmuntran att bl.a. min engelska inte är så dålig så har jag tagit modet till mig och börjat bjuda in lite utländska experter som vi inte hittar i Sverige. En gäst som jag har tänkt mycket på är Craig Lazzara som är:
Managing Director, Core Product Management S&P Dow Jones Indices
Det vill säga att han driver bl.a. SPIVA som jag brukar referera till rätt ofta:
Han har tackat ja till en att vara med i podden och vi spelar in den 27 mars. Så du / ni får gärna komma in med frågor. Om du orkar får du gärna formulera den på engelska direkt.
Wow, så himla mäktigt! Har inga frågor, men en stor eloge till dig för att du bjudit in honom!
Å jättekul att han tar sig tid att gästa en podd i lilla Sverige!
How does index reconstitution (inclusion/exclusion/rebalancing etc.) affect stock prices of the respective companies?
Are there any regional outliers when it comes to active fund outperformance? Some regions where active funds generally perform better/worse than the corresponding index? Or perhaps any other fund characteristics that are predictive of future performance?
Does there exist active fund performance persistence at any time horizon? (for example short holding periods of months to year(s))
Lite för att återknyta till den eviga aktiva - passiva debatten efter avsnittet med Professorerna.
SPIVA publicerade års slut sammanfattningen (länk längst nedan) där det var en del intressant. Citat nedan (min fetstil).
Kanske en del gläds åt att aktiva fonder hade ett “bra” år men att det fortfarande handlar om, för att använda en sport metafor, om man ska gå ner med fanan i topp med en 0-1 förlust (som aktiva fonder 2022) eller om man ska förlora varje match och sluta sits i serien (aktiva fonder över tid).
In contrast to the near coin-flip chances of finding an outperforming large-cap manager, 63%
of mid-cap funds underperformed the S&P MidCap 400® and 57% of small-cap funds underperformed the S&P SmallCap 600® in 2022. The lowest underperformance rate among
domestic equity categories was in Small-Cap Core, in which 40% of active funds
underperformed. At the other end of the spectrum, the Real Estate and Mid-Cap Growth
categories saw the highest annual underperformance rates of 88% and 91%, respectively.
In international equities, a majority of actively managed funds underperformed in every category during 2022. However, in relative terms, managers in the International Small-Cap
category continued to outshine their peers, with just 60% underperforming in 2022
compared to 69%, 68% and 76%, in the Global, International and Emerging Markets
categories, respectively.
U.S. large-cap equities, a slim majority underperformed. On the positive side,
this was the lowest underperformance rate since 2009 and the fourth best across more than two decades of our annual SPIVA Scorecards. Less positively, 2022 was characterized by several
specific and unusual active tailwinds that may not persist.
Tänkte det kunde vara intressant att höra hans perspektiv på det hela. Byter till engelska
Do you, yourself, use active funds under any circumstances (e.g. if you can’t get a certain exposure other than an active fund) or do you rather avoid the active exposure and see it as not worth it if there isn’t any passive (low cost) alternative? (I am thinking specific sector funds that are hard to find passive alternatives for, at least in Sweden)
How do you see the long term development of passive vs. active funds? Will there in the end only be one (or close thereof) of the categories left? (Probably passive then )
Do you foresee any problems should there only be passive funds left?
We hear about “price discovery” as a motif by active fund managers for their existence. Do you see that could be done in a different way than having active funds? (that actually promise to do something quite different than price discovery, being to beat the market)
What are your views on Smart Beta/Factor/Systematic funds? On that same note, studies have shown that active funds generally have negative loadings on such factors, despite the (I would say consensus) that these provide a larger positive expected return?
What are, in your view, the main reasons that active managers so clearly underperform? Market Efficiency, fees, psychological & sociological structures/incentives in finance etc.
What is, in your opinion, the largest flaw with index-investing? What can indexproviders and index-funds do better, either in terms of lowering costs or increasing returns?
What are the main strengths of indexing, why does it work so well? Diversification, low turnover etc?
From your experience, what are the insights regarding the difference between different regions, sizes and styles of investing when it comes to passive versus active? It seems that far fewer funds outperform in large US stocks than for example in Small Swedish stocks? If you agree, why do you think that is?
In your opinion, is there anything of value outside of Passive Marketcap-weighted indexing when it comes to equities? Factors, home-bias, trendfollowing etc?
Spännande, och väldigt roligt att du fått till en intervju!
Do you believe there are any active managers out there that outperforms index investing consistently, that might not be covered by your research, such as really large investment institutions or similar?
Why do you think active managed funds are still such a big thing considering the data?
Hade massor av frågor som jag skickade för det tidigare avsnittet men som inte passade er diskussion då:
When it comes to factor investments, what’s your take on so called rules-based strategies? Those not using an active approach per se but recognizing a wide basket of companies that represent a certain factor. Do they work and can these be a good complement to a portfolio of wide, passive index funds?
Are there any differences between the results among different asset classes, especially between stocks and bonds? For example, can an active school of fund managers outperform in the corporate credit space by recognizing the companies with high default risk - as they tend to state?
Do you think that active management could gain an edge if a fund could push down its expenses on par with the high-scale passive funds for example by utilizing AI or similar technology for the asset selection? Or is stock-picking just a losers’ game due to markets’ efficiency and low predictability?
Do you think that an investor could gain from using a combo of passive and active funds, for example by complementing a wide index fund with value or low-volatility equity funds and, thus, utilizing their different return characteristics (such as geometric vs arithmetic return) and rebalancing?
Do you see an increasing risk for inefficient or even false pricing of let’s say S&P 500 or EuroStoxx 50 companies when new inflows are more and more polarized to wide index funds? At the same time, can this mean more opportunities elsewhere in the market?
Så! Då var inspelningen gjord igår. Kan säga att jag var väldigt nervös innan, men det blev riktigt bra.
Jag tror att jag kommer dela upp avsnittet i två delar, en som är lite allmänbildande och en som är rätt ner i kaninhålet - kring svaret på @carolinebolmeson:s fråga som kom från ingenstans.
“Så hur skulle du gjort för att slå index? / Hur köper man sig tur?”
Det får bli en cliff-hanger, men jag kan ju säga att det är sjukt ointuivt och samtidigt helt logiskt. Jag själv blev inspirerad så jag ringde till @Andre_Granstrom direkt efter inspelningen för att bolla det och han höll med. Och nej, @Andre_Granstrom du får inte säga något än.
Det andra kaninhålet blev kring ett annat sätt att se på faktorer. Det här utöver alla citat och metaforer kring deras slutsatser från 20 års uppföljning av “Passiv / Aktiv-debatten”.
