= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
MartinB comments on Financial incentives don't get rid of bias? Prize for best answer. - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (124)
There's a strong case for the weak EMH, in that managed funds consistently underperform index funds. Some managed funds outperform in a given year, but the can't reproduce these results year by year, implying that they just got lucky.
and/or that they use bad incentives. public held corporations usually get outperformed by family owned entities due to better long term planability. Even Managers optimize for whatever they get payed by.
Really? Robin linked to a paper suggesting that firms floated on the stock markets have better management than family-owned firms.
As I recall, Robin also linked to a paper pointing out that very large companies underperform. Family-owned firms tend to not become that large; I wonder if that undoes the going public effect.
We may be running into problems with the ambiguity of 'outperform'; clearly dis-economies of scale aren't going to allow family run firms to become larger than public ones, for example.