This Guardian article commits the sin it calls out in the first sentence

bostonerimus

Here is a funny Guardian article about James Anderson of Baillie Gifford and his criticism of earnings reports and macro-economics BS. I share his skepticism for financial headlines, but I'm also skeptical of almost everything else he says. The funny thing is that after reporting Anderson's distain for "earnings reports" in one paragraph it gives an earnings report for Scottish Mortgage Investment Trust in the very next. The fetish for league tables and reporting performance as long as it is positive alpha is irresistible.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/may/13/fund-management-irretrievably-broken-james-anderson-outgoing-baillie-gifford-star-investor

Prism

Yes, although the long term results are relevant to the story, last years returns in isolation are not. Neither of which gives you much to work on for the future.

quirkydeptless

bostonerimus said:

Here is a funny Guardian article about James Anderson of Baillie Gifford and his criticism of earnings reports and macro-economics BS.

........

kidmugsy

Anderson's strategy fitted well with his investment career - decades of sinking interest rates and, since the Global Financial Crisis, incontinent government and central bank behaviour.  Good for him.  Will his strategy work for the next several decades?  Lord knows. Perhaps he's got out at the perfect time.

Most investment management does seem to be baloney.  If you don't think you can pick a successful active manager then largely invest in trackers.  If you do think you can pick a successful active manager then please tell the rest of us how to do it.

I'm glad to learn that I'm not the only person to dislike Buffet's folksiness.

talexuser

He could just have been lucky with Tesla and Amazon etc at the right time. Since he's retiring and won't be in charge for the next ten years we'll never know. Still Woodford was very good for twenty plus years before it all went off the rails.

Eco_Miser

Picking a successful active manager is just a matter of jumping on an already rolling bandwagon. The tricky part is knowing when to jump off again.

Safety warning: jumping on or off non-metaphorical moving bandwagons can be hazardous to your health.

Mis-timing jumping on or off metaphorical bandwagons can be dangerous to your wealth.

bostonerimus

Eco_Miser said:

Picking a successful active manager is just a matter of jumping on an already rolling bandwagon. The tricky part is knowing when to jump off again.

Safety warning: jumping on or off non-metaphorical moving bandwagons can be hazardous to your health.

Mis-timing jumping on or off metaphorical bandwagons can be dangerous to your wealth.

Yes, nicely put. Managers like Terry Smith are certainly providing a lot of market beating gains for a lot of people, but it's knowing what to do when the bubble starts to deflate or, worst case, quickly bursts that is critical. The manager stars get all the headlines and money flows into their accounts, I'd like to see articles about underperforming active managers and have their strategies analyzed. There might be something to be learned from the failures, but I bet in most cases there will be sensible rationales for the choices and things just didn't quite work out...