In 1988, the Wall Street Journal, the U.S. daily finance, offered a handful of portfolio managers to compare their performance with that of a basket of stocks chosen lan? ant darts randomly at a stock quote. What was the balance? In 61 cases out of 100 managers prevailed against the “portfolio of chimpanzees.”

Andrew Clare, professor at the Cass Business School in London, began in 2012 a further study on the subject. His work, published Monday, April 15, shows that by choosing fa? Weight actions are random in a portfolio, we get better results than trying to balance the lines fa? We “intelligent”.

43 years studied

The study, based on data collected every month in the United States between 1968 and 2011, repeated this procedure random ten million times for each of the 43 years studied, says the researcher. In conclusion, almost all of the ten million-fund managers chimps performed better than capitalization weighted indices.

Andrew Clare, professor at the Cass Business School in London, began in 2012 a further study on the subject. His work, published Monday, April 15, shows that by choosing fa? Weight actions are random in a portfolio, we get better results than trying to balance the lines fa? We “intelligent”.

In other words, beyond the choice of titles (and their number), the value of a manager is null. “We conducted a computer simulation of selecting and weighting a random sample of 1 000 shares, which amounts to evaluate the capacity of a chimpanzee on investment on the market,” says Clare.

43 years studied

The study, based on data collected every month in the United States between 1968 and 2011, repeated this procedure random ten million times for each of the 43 years studied, says the researcher. In conclusion, almost all of the ten million-fund managers chimps performed better than capitalization weighted indices.

e-mail: support@fit-life.kz;

при поддержке TopasNew24.com и статей.