Fra et interessant indlæg på notoriske Dealbreaker, Don’t Do It, CalPERS!, om hvad vi stiller op, når der ikke er flere tilbage til at sikre, at enkeltaktier er prissat korrekt, fordi alle bare køber markedsporteføljen:
Financial markets exist to allocate capital to its most productive uses.
One use of capital that may not be all that productive is allocating capital, so it’s understandable that rich sophisticated capital-allocators like CalPERS would allocate less capital to the business of allocating capital. Why spend so much money on external active manager fees when they turn out not to be that good at active management? Just index, right?
But then, of course, if you’re not allocating capital to its most productive uses, who is?
I mean, I’m not, obviously. And lots of retail investors aren’t either: the popularity of index funds is based on the very sensible assumptions that (1) not many people can reliably beat the market and (2) those who can tend to sell their services to fancy institutions like CalPERS, not retail schlubs.
Interesserede læsere kan fordybe sig nærmere i denne klassiske problemstilling: Grossman-Stiglitz-paradokset.