What poker, Buffett, and Federer have to do with investing

© 2013 CBS Interactive Inc.. The first difference is that when playing poker, the competition is only the players at your table. Those costs include research expenses, other fund expenses, bid-offer spreads, commissions, market impact costs and taxes (for taxable accounts). To help understand the difference the following analogy from my 2011 book “The Quest for Alpha” is offered. All Rights Reserved.

The bottom line is that the nature of investing results in a much higher level of competition than does poker, and with investing, it’s a negative sum game due to expenses. On the other hand poker is a game of skill and the best poker player will win in the long run. As an analogy, I would play the stock market if I was Warren Buffett. Their quest for alpha generates incremental expenses. In terms of individual skills, Andy Roddick has a better serve, Andy Murray has a better backhand, Fernando Gonzalez has a better forehand, Rafael Nadal has a better baseline game and is considered a superior player on clay, Radek Stepanek has a better net game and David Ferrer is faster. It is as if the market were a huge, relatively low-cost, continuous polling mechanism that records the updated votes of millions of investors in continuously changing current prices. Until I am certain that I am, or have advice from, the best in the game, I’ll take a pass on the entertainment account.”

The quest for alpha is a game played on a different field

Here is another way to think about the quest for superior investment performance: “The potential for self-cancellation shows why the game of investing is so different from, for example, chess, in which even a seemingly small advantage can lead to consistent victories. In other words, unless you see Warren Buffett when you look in the mirror, it’s a game you’re not likely to win.

(Money Watch) My post of September 09 was on the value/need investors have for an entertainment account. The level of competition is of an entirely different variety in the world of investing. The entity you are competing against is the entire market and the accumulated information discovered by all the participants and reflected in prices.”

Image courtesy of Flickr user slgckgc

Roger Federer is the greatest tennis player of his era and perhaps the greatest ever. One reader offered the following comment: “As I see it there are different types of gambling. If you are better than your opponents, no problem. Today, Nadal and Djokovic are battling for that spot.)

Let the greats play the game

Each investor, using the market to serve his or her own self-interest, unwittingly makes prices reflect that investor’s information and analysis. Investing is more like poker. I am not Warren Buffett, nor are most who claim to be. His stats have since changed. Investment managers trying to outperform are not engaged in a zero-sum game. The market is too vast and too informationally efficient.”

While the competition for Roger Federer is other individual players (just as it is at the poker table), the competition for investment managers is the entire market. In light of this mechanism, for a single investor (in the absence of inside information) to believe that prices are significantly in error is almost always folly. If that had been the case, Federer would not have produced the same results.

The world of investing presents a different situation. It would be as if each time Federer stepped on the court he wore a pair of ankle weights while his opponent had no such handicap.

Rubinstein is making the point that the competition for an investment manager is not other individual investment managers, but is instead the collective wisdom of the market — Adam Smith’s famous “invisible hand.” As author Ron Ross points out in “The Unbeatable Market”: “The quest for market-beating strategy boils down to an information-processing contest. I will only play in poker games when I am the best player. But what is important to understand is Federer’s competition is other individual players. Investors implicitly lump the market with other arenas of competition in their experience.” Rex Sinquefield, former co-chairman of DFA, put it this way: “Just because there are some investors smarter than others, that advantage will not show up. (Note, at the time I wrote the book, Federer was the clear number one player in the world. Public information should already be embedded in prices.

When Federer plays tennis (or poker, unless he is playing at a casino which takes its cut from every hand) he is engaged in a zero-sum game — either he wins the match or his opponent does. With as much as 80 to 90 percent of the trading done by institutional investors, it is difficult to think of a large enough group of victims to exploit in order to generate alpha, especially after considering the costs of the efforts — bringing us to the next important point (which presents another difference between investing and poker).

While I think the analogy of poker to investing is interesting, there are important differences between the two that renders the analogy inappropriate. Any time gambling involves conceding odds to the house, I’ll pass unless the stakes are truly immaterial. Yet, Federer is the best player.. The combination of these two factors results in the requirement of a much greater advantage in terms of skill to expect to win the investment game in the long term — the only term that matters. The difference is why we don’t see persistence of outperformance of investment managers. To understand the difference, we need to understand how securities markets set prices.

Dr. No one would consider it luck he won a record 17 Grand Slam singles titles. Mark Rubinstein, Professor of Applied Investment Analysis at the Haas School of Business at the University of California at Berkeley, provided the following insight:

It is important to understand that the results of any m88 game are more dependent on the skill level of the competition than on the skill of the individual competing. In the world of investing, the competition is indeed tough. It would be as if each time Federer stepped on the court he faced an opponent with Andy Roddick’s serve, Andy Murray’s backhand, Rafael Nadal’s baseline game, and so on

Click This Link http://www.thai-m88.com

Josh Abbott

Josh Abbott

Elise is an extreme hockey fan and born again sports hobbyist who has just entered the world of online sports betting. He has tried and tested various online sports betting systems and reviews them on her website, Arbitrage Betting http://www.bajaburrito.info.
Josh Abbott

Leave a Reply