> Not surprising considering a monkey throwing darts at the S&P 500 will outperform the best analysts in the world.
The best analysts/managers in the world are pulling consistent 30-50% returns over the past 20-30 years. See Citadel hedge fund for example (and not the HFT Citadel Securities).
The problem is, these “profits” are taken by the analysts and managers by way of incentive and performance fees, thus leaving the passive investor/LP with barely break-even risk adjusted returns.
It’s possibly similar to the “tout” phenomenon in sports betting. Guys that can actually beat the books at a good clip aren’t usually selling that info, they’re using it to enrich themselves.
Citadel is generally a bad example to use, as it’s exceptionally likely their performance is at least partially due to tax shuffling shenanigans and other regulatory violations. One can infer this because it’s exceptionally unlikely for them to have that performance even as an outlier using legitimate means
Do you not understand the concept of high frequency trading? Citadel is a market maker, there is nothing sinister or shady about how they make money. It’s all done in accordance with the law and reported quarterly.
It’s based on the fact that their reported returns are so absurdly far on the long-tail of being an outlier as to suggest there is more to it than “they’re just good.” I don’t know for sure—but it’s close enough that I’d bet a lot of my own 7-figure net worth on it.
Also, I only know of WSB from articles I’ve read: your implication is rude and uncharitable at best.
