저자: GrowthePiggyBank채널진행자 · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 마이클 배리의 인덱스 펀드 버블 주장은 과장되었으며 패시브 투자는 여전히 합리적 선택이다. 배리의 주장 1: 가격 발견 왜곡. 패시브 자금 유입이 주식·채권 가격을 왜곡한다는 주장. 진행자는 패시브 펀드는 매매 빈도가 낮아 거래량의 약 5%에 불과하며, 가격 발견은 액티브 트레이더가 담당한다고 반박(Vanguard 2018 리서치 인용). 배리의 주장 2: 유동성 리스크. 소형·중형주에 자금이 몰려 하락장에서 대량 매도 시 가격이 급락할 수 있다는 주장. 진행자는 장기 패시브 투자자는 단기 변동에 매도하지 않으므로 설득력이 약하다고 봄. 배리 주장의 근거 비판: CDO와 서브프라임 비교는 복잡성 면에서 부적절하며 선정적 의도라고 평가. 패시브 자금 비중: 미국 내 패시브 펀드가 운용자산의 약 절반을 차지하나 실제 매매 비중은 작다는 점을 강조. 시사점: 패시브 투자 성공에는 감정 통제와 재정 규율이 필요하며, 금융위기 이후에 투자를 시작한 사람들은 아직 큰 하락을 겪어보지 않았다는 점을 교훈으로 제시. 진행자 전망: 패시브 투자는 FIRE 운동에 적합한 저비용·단순 투자 수단이라는 입장을 유지.
다듬은 글
hey guys it's down here and welcome back to my channel in today's video I'm going to talk in a ways that anyone can understand some recent criticisms that were directed towards index funds by Michael burry and his concerns that index funds are a bubble now I'm also going to talk about why I think his concerns are misguided and explain why I think index funds are still a solid choice to grow your wealth and cheap early financial independence so Michael burry recently did an interview with Bloomberg where he was sharing his concerns that index funds are causing a bubble if you don't know who Michael burry is he is well known in the financial world for having predicted the housing bubble back in 2018 and he made a fortune betting on the housing betting against the housing market you may also know him as the guy who was portrayed by Christian Bale in the popular 2015 would be called the big short if he has seen some other videos you know I'm a big proponent of low-cost passive simple index investing which is probably by far the most popular investment for the fire movement which stands for financial independence retire early so any criticism of index funds or ETFs coming from somebody as well-regarded and as brilliant as Michael burry is something that I think is worth considering in this interview has main criticism I think can be summed up in two points the first one is price distortion and the second point is liquidity risk so his first criticism starts in this paragraph index fund inflows are now distorting crisis for stocks and bonds in much the same way that CDO purchases did for subprime mortgages more than a decade ago so how exactly does he think index funds distort these prices well he goes into detail in a later paragraph he says passive investing has removed price discovery from the equity markets the simple theses and the models that get people into sectors factors indices or ETFs and mutual funds and mimicking those strategies these do not require the security level analysis that is required for true price discovery I am posting a link to this interview down in the description below so then you can read it on your own time you are interested and while you're down there be sure to drop a like to support this video and my channel and as well as if you haven't subscribed already be sure to subscribe so that you don't miss on any new videos to help you grow your wealth and achieve financial independence so let's first talk about what is price discovery as it relates to the stock market so simply put price discovery is the process in which you go about to figure out what is the price or value of a company so you may be thinking well what does that exactly look like well here's how you can picture it every morning thousands of Wall Street professionals go to work to analyze thousands of companies to figure out what is the truth value of those companies once these analysts and traders are able to figure out what they think a company is actually worth they'll go ahead and look at the stock price and determine if it's undervalued or overvalued or fair value and then they'll decide whether to buy sell or wait it out so this is what you would call actively trading these experts are actively trying to find it opportunities and the price gaps in the stock market to make money so what Barry is saying is that the passive investing for example like buying into the S&P 500 index fund right means you're not doing any price discovery at all in a sense you're just buying the stocks of 500 companies in the S&P 500 without any thought for what their true prices are so there's no expert or an analyst behind the index fund letting you know whether or not you're overpaying for the phone company or under paying for the company and just as a side note in regards to his reference to CDOs or collateral debt obligations and their connection to subprime mortgages that is a very different situation than index fund investing and the stock market or the bond market without getting sucked down this rabbit trail CDOs can be extremely complex investments whereas I think even a fifth grader can understand in index funds and how they work so the connection that he's trying to make I think is a bit of a stretch and I feel like his motive for even mentioning it in the first place in this interview is sensational than anything else really to hark back to the emotions and the fears and the in the chaos and the craziness of the last financial crisis so going back to what burry is saying so if you follow his logic what basically is saying is that the massive amount of money that is in passive index funds in ETs have gone so large and nobody's thinking about the prices that they're paying for these companies and by blindly buying massive amounts of stock of companies that are listed in whatever index you're basically inflating their stock price beyond what they're actually worth and therefore index investing is causing a bubble now burry is absolutely right in that passive index funds and ETFs have grown tremendously over the last two decades we're now at least in the United States passive funds make up close to half of all assets under management CNBC had published this article about passive investing back in March and I suspect now that it's probably closer to 50% and if you look at this chart down here it shows just how much passively managed funds have grown as a percentage of the market from 2009 to 2018 but the truth is and this is the key detail that I think you need to realize that even though passive index funds and ETFs make up a bigger proportion of assets than ever before they only make up a tiny fraction of all trading activity and trading is what determines price in fact a Vanguard research paper from 2018 states that because index strategies have low turnover and trade at the margin across the large list of securities their impact on trading activity is minimal figure eight which I'm popping up here shows that the portfolio management activity of indexing makes up about 5% of daily trading volume on US exchanges the research paper continues to say other market participants including but not limited to retail investors high-frequency traders and pension funds account for the vast majority of training volume active participants play the dominant role in security trading, thereby facilitating price discovery so just because the amount of money in passive index funds and ETFs has grown so much does not mean that prices are being distorted by these funds because they don't buy and sell stock positions all that frequently compared to actively managed funds if you think about it and for this we can take a S&P 500 index fund as an example the only time it would need to buy or sell is when a company is added or dropped from the S&P 500 index and periodically when changes in the market value of the companies requires adjustments in the market value weightings this is also true of index ETFs and if you're not familiar with what ETFs are and how they're different from index funds I recommend watch this video up here where I break down the differences and similarities in a way that anyone can understand basically ETF trading volume is almost always the buying and selling of ETF fund units not the funds actual stock positions so in fact the Vanguard research paper that I had just mentioned they lay out the facts and the date on this so I'll link to that paper it down in the description so you can go and take a look at it if you're interested in more details so the bottom line is this the argument that passive investing is distorting stock prices doesn't make sense because passive funds trade so little really the reality is that price discoveries being done by active traders is still alive and well and they're not gonna go away anytime soon if ever with cheaper alternatives to the traditional brokerage account like and M1 finance or RobinHood active trading is more accessible than ever before to just look anyone with the phone and internet connection all you have to do is do a quick search on YouTube to find just about everyone and their moms posting videos on how their RobinHood account is the best thing since sliced bread all this goes to say that as long as some people somewhere think that they can beat the market active trading will always exist alongside passive investing and those active traders will by their very nature keep actual prices as close to the true prices in most cases if you think about it there can never be a situation where passive investors make 100 percent of the trades if that were true and all stocks were bought and sold blindly by passive investors and nobody was doing price discovery the opportunities to take advantage of the market would be so abundant and easy that everyone would just rush into active training to profit off of the laziness and/or the ignorance of passive investors so there will always be a balance between passive investors and active traders at all times where that balance is is really hard to say but I do like mr money mustache is response to a question of how many active investors does it take to balance the market he writes if actively managed funds start consistently outperforming index funds on average across the entire industry then we have reached a point of peak indexing and you should switch to a good low fee active fund to summarize passive investing does not distort stock prices because most trading is done by active investors who through their price discovery keep the market in check alright so moving with the liquidity risk so in the article here is the paragraph that details his criticism which i think is a bit unnecessarily convoluted so I'm not going to read it here but basically what he is saying is that because there's so much money invested into small and medium-sized companies that don't trade very often if there's a downturn in which there's a mad rush to sell the prices of these companies will tank and therefore everyone will lose a lot of money I think this argument pretty weak because long-term passive investors don't really sell I mean they are passive for a reason these people buy index funds and ETFs regardless of the short-term price fluctuations and frankly there's a lot more interesting and volatile assets out there to play that game than boring index funds and ETFs so if you were part of fire movement you don't have any intention of selling due to these big pricings so I think there is a bit of a misconception on Michael Burry's part about the type of people who buy into a passive index funds and ETFs but you know maybe there are people who who are buying into a passive investing without thinking through what they exactly signed up for and so only time will tell if they have the stomach to ride out those major losses especially during a recession or a really volatile market especially for some of the younger folks who have never experienced a full-blown recession or double digit losses I think there's a lesson to be learned in what Michael burry is saying in that succeeding as a passive investor requires a great deal of emotional self-control and financial discipline and for some of us who have only been investing since after the last financial crisis I don't think we've truly been tested and how much we believe in this passive investing bandwagon if you enjoyed this video be sure to drop a like down below I'd really appreciate it and be sure to share with a friend if you think they'll find it useful in any way don't forget to subscribe to my channel so that you don't miss on any new videos to help you grow your wealth and achieve early financial independence thanks for watching and I'll see you guys next time
Comments 0