- Joined
- 30 September 2012
- Posts
- 742
- Reactions
- 374
Interesting discussion.
Don't derail it please (anyone) because there are some interesting points of view.
tech/a - you have longer term investments, like houses and business(es). But you don't value them every day/week/whatever by what someone else would buy them for, do you? You have a plan to grow their value at a good rate, over time, right? If some psycho came in and offered you half of what you thought a house / business was worth...you wouldn't say, 'oh no! The market has fallen, I better sell' - I know you wouldn't. You'd think, 'what an idiot, low ball offer...this is worth way more than that'. Similarly, if someone came in and offered you 4x what you think it's worth, you might say, 'screw it' to your original plans, and just sell to the idiot.
I just think that's more how VC is talking about investing (but using your own analogies)...does that clear it up a little? VC is looking at what he thinks the house or business is worth, but is also willing (I assume) to sell if the psycho is willing to pay way over what he thinks that business is worth. Similarly, he ignores the idiot who makes the half-price, low ball offer.
I'm sorry if any of that is unhelpful, as I have enjoyed this thread.
-----------
Now, to a thought that has been raised re: 'mechanical' vs. fundamental business analysis / valuation style of investing. My opinion only (and I've shared this before):
As a systematic trader / investor (I don't care for the terms at all)...why do I actually trade this way? I've said it before, because I don't believe I'm good enough. Good enough for what? Good enough to be the person who will beat the model (note, I said the model, not the market).
I do believe (and I said this back in the 'craft' days)...that the person who can really, really pull it off...(business valuation)...that person will cream not just the market, but any systematic model I have to offer. But, I can't risk my retirement fund, betting on ME being THAT person.
I don't believe many can. I don't believe hardly anyone can. Heck, despite what impression newbies on forums get...most investors, traders or whatever...are not beating the market at all. Let alone being good enough to do it on business evaluation.
The real opportunity, in my opinion, is someone who can spot a business that should be worth $600M one day, and is currently being sold off by the idiot at $200M or whatever. The person who can do that as a thing, and not just a one off, is a very rare gem.
A (systematic) competitor to that idea might be someone who can run quant models but way out of the ordinary. Think, Medallion fund, with 39%pa over 3 decades. If you can do that, you're a rare gem. Those models are not, 'buy a 50 day breakout on a low P/E stock'(!)
I class someone who is successfully doing Buffett style valuation (or Lynch style - who seemed to show true, unexplainable alpha...or Simons statistical genius...or whatever) as better.
People using systematic models (whatever the data inputs...price, news, financial data...)...are doing so PRECISELY because they want to achieve the results that a (well developed) model is pointing towards. Which leans them towards beating the market, but at the same time are ruling themselves out of the far, far right tail.
Anyone using a discretionary approach (whether charts, hyper-quant, or business valuation)...AND...is world-class at doing that...will (and should, as a reward for effort) beat the model traders / investors.
BUT. BUT. Not one in a (hundred? thousand?) who attempt any of the above...will do so.
My message to the newer ones, searching for their own style is always...'do you want to bet that you'll be that person? Go for it'
Heck, it's hard enough for the average investor to even be a systematic model investor, let alone be a world class discretionary trader, business analyst or statistical genius.
Don't derail it please (anyone) because there are some interesting points of view.
tech/a - you have longer term investments, like houses and business(es). But you don't value them every day/week/whatever by what someone else would buy them for, do you? You have a plan to grow their value at a good rate, over time, right? If some psycho came in and offered you half of what you thought a house / business was worth...you wouldn't say, 'oh no! The market has fallen, I better sell' - I know you wouldn't. You'd think, 'what an idiot, low ball offer...this is worth way more than that'. Similarly, if someone came in and offered you 4x what you think it's worth, you might say, 'screw it' to your original plans, and just sell to the idiot.
I just think that's more how VC is talking about investing (but using your own analogies)...does that clear it up a little? VC is looking at what he thinks the house or business is worth, but is also willing (I assume) to sell if the psycho is willing to pay way over what he thinks that business is worth. Similarly, he ignores the idiot who makes the half-price, low ball offer.
I'm sorry if any of that is unhelpful, as I have enjoyed this thread.
-----------
Now, to a thought that has been raised re: 'mechanical' vs. fundamental business analysis / valuation style of investing. My opinion only (and I've shared this before):
As a systematic trader / investor (I don't care for the terms at all)...why do I actually trade this way? I've said it before, because I don't believe I'm good enough. Good enough for what? Good enough to be the person who will beat the model (note, I said the model, not the market).
I do believe (and I said this back in the 'craft' days)...that the person who can really, really pull it off...(business valuation)...that person will cream not just the market, but any systematic model I have to offer. But, I can't risk my retirement fund, betting on ME being THAT person.
I don't believe many can. I don't believe hardly anyone can. Heck, despite what impression newbies on forums get...most investors, traders or whatever...are not beating the market at all. Let alone being good enough to do it on business evaluation.
The real opportunity, in my opinion, is someone who can spot a business that should be worth $600M one day, and is currently being sold off by the idiot at $200M or whatever. The person who can do that as a thing, and not just a one off, is a very rare gem.
A (systematic) competitor to that idea might be someone who can run quant models but way out of the ordinary. Think, Medallion fund, with 39%pa over 3 decades. If you can do that, you're a rare gem. Those models are not, 'buy a 50 day breakout on a low P/E stock'(!)
I class someone who is successfully doing Buffett style valuation (or Lynch style - who seemed to show true, unexplainable alpha...or Simons statistical genius...or whatever) as better.
People using systematic models (whatever the data inputs...price, news, financial data...)...are doing so PRECISELY because they want to achieve the results that a (well developed) model is pointing towards. Which leans them towards beating the market, but at the same time are ruling themselves out of the far, far right tail.
Anyone using a discretionary approach (whether charts, hyper-quant, or business valuation)...AND...is world-class at doing that...will (and should, as a reward for effort) beat the model traders / investors.
BUT. BUT. Not one in a (hundred? thousand?) who attempt any of the above...will do so.
My message to the newer ones, searching for their own style is always...'do you want to bet that you'll be that person? Go for it'
Heck, it's hard enough for the average investor to even be a systematic model investor, let alone be a world class discretionary trader, business analyst or statistical genius.