Welcome to Hogville!      Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Ichan Slams ETFs

Started by HawgWild, December 22, 2016, 12:08:38 pm

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

HawgWild

December 22, 2016, 12:08:38 pm Last Edit: December 22, 2016, 12:29:52 pm by HawgWild
Heard an interesting interview with Carl Ichan today on CNBC. He said there "was a dangerous amount of money dammed up in ETFs" and called them "blind investing". He is not a fan.

BigBrandonAllenFan

ETF's are in place for true "day traders".

More stale money is tied up in mutual funds than ETF's, probably 100 times the amount of ETF's.  I am ever amazed how people I work with (basically all of them), that can't even tell you what their mutual fund account balance is, or even remember what funds they are invested in.  I am amazed by that..

 

HawgWild

I'm pretty sure Ichan doesn't dabble in day trading.

BigBrandonAllenFan

Quote from: HawgWild on December 22, 2016, 01:25:42 pm
I'm pretty sure Ichan doesn't dabble in day trading.

True that, Hawgwild.  Apparently, ETF's create some sort of disadvantage to his financial structure.  Otherwise, he wouldn't be talking them down.

ricepig

Quote from: HawgWild on December 22, 2016, 01:25:42 pm
I'm pretty sure Ichan doesn't dabble in day trading.

No, Carl likes to own individual stocks/companies and be an active trader. You can't fault his ways, though, he's been very successful.

BigBrandonAllenFan

Quote from: ricepig on December 22, 2016, 01:42:52 pm
No, Carl likes to own individual stocks/companies and be an active trader. You can't fault his ways, though, he's been very successful.

He has a knack for market timing.  Guys like him can actually increase the value of a stock with lump sum buys, then he pulls the plug and sells and leaves everyone else with the subsequent drop.

But it is legal.  I wish I had that kind of monetary clout.

HawgWild

He twice mentioned "a 25 year old" at the EPA shouldn't be telling a refinery what they can and cannot do. I guess someone at CVR must have had a run in with one.

He's also not a fan of hedge funds. He was talking about "incentives" to change what they do. The interviewer said it sounded like "regulations" to him. Sounded like semantics to me.

ricepig

Quote from: BigBrandonAllenFan on December 22, 2016, 01:50:57 pm
He has a knack for market timing.  Guys like him can actually increase the value of a stock with lump sum buys, then he pulls the plug and sells and leaves everyone else with the subsequent drop.

But it is legal.  I wish I had that kind of monetary clout.

I wouldn't necessarily call it market timing. He'll buy a stake in a company and usually put someone on the board or management to improve it. It's not like he buys something one day, it pops, and the he gets out. The vast majority of his positions are long term and the other shareholders have amble opportunity to book their profit.

BigBrandonAllenFan

Quote from: ricepig on December 22, 2016, 02:16:40 pm
I wouldn't necessarily call it market timing. He'll buy a stake in a company and usually put someone on the board or management to improve it. It's not like he buys something one day, it pops, and the he gets out. The vast majority of his positions are long term and the other shareholders have amble opportunity to book their profit.

He has long term money, and he has short term play money.  I thought he made his initial pile of money playing short term.  Maybe I'm wrong.

HawgWild

Bloomberg has part one of a two part article titled "The Worst Case Scenario for Passive Investing" in today's edition --> https://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/articles/2017-08-28/the-worst-case-scenario-for-passive-investing-part-I

Apparently, as indexing increases so does volatility. A BoA report points "out that while the market overall seems smooth at the moment, there has been a recent spike in the volatility of stocks that are owned largely by ETFs and index funds, probably because of liquidity. With fewer shares to trade, once more are locked up in ETFs and index funds, even small trades could cause bigger price swings. In the six months ending in May, Bank of America found that the average volatility of the 100 most passively owned stocks tripled to 45 percent above the rest of the market."

Interesting read.