Why invest in anything else than index funds?

In the short term, you definitely can beat the market, with margin trading you definitely can too. Over the longer term, it becomes much harder.

And frankly, you're never going to value a company better than the big funds, so why bother trying? Sit back and relax with your index funds or ETF.

>>2483030
thats exactly how I perceive it, however I still can't figure out where the catch is and why people bother with doing anything else (except love for hazard)

>>2482988

Because index funds guarantee only a mediocre return.

If you're savvy and know how to hunt for bargains, it's possible to do much better. But it requires concentrated effort.

Most people are lazy slobs with no discipline.

>>2483115
How do you pick up on value which isn't priced in yet, especially if you don't do this as a job? And how do you keep on doing that, year after year? I hold no horse in this race, it just seems index seems best overall.

People like Warren Buffet (who frequently beats the market) actively look into the actual businesses they invest in. There's also the psychological aspect of people maybe knowing that Buffet is invested in a company therefore they too invest, further driving prices up.

>>2483115
thats where I would be afraid: I mean, f index based value investing still can give you only so much of assurance, and you can't really predict the future value

yes but DON'T fall for what's going to happen when everyone switches to index funds
>muh smart beta
>muh factor investing
>muh small value premium
DO NOT CHASE RETURNS

>>2483115
>most people
if by most you mean everyone that doesn't fall into:
>over the course of a lifetime the number of people who can safely say they beat the market can be counted on your hands
then yes I agree

by the way faggots, the proposition of investing isn't meant to make you rich and anyone who says so is either trying to make money off of you or is a delusional speculator themselves

>>2483379
How would you "value invest" in index funds? If you're talking about something like the S&P 500 weighted ETF it is already doing that for you.

>>2483433
I.E., it's a scattershot at the S&P500, there is no use in looking at each company's fundamentals

>>2483433
nah, was talking about >>2483115 's 'hunt for bargains', which sounds to me no more than hazard

>>2483416
>>the proposition of investing isn't meant to make you rich

Don't you mean "isn't meant to make you rich quick"?

I see it as a preservation of capital if done wisely and then adding in compounding it does make you rich(er). Of course you have to make more money to make that happen

>>2483451
>>sounds to me no more than a hazard

I think it's a matter of making as informed a decision as possible as to whether a given company provides/sells a valuable service/product and then asking whether or not it will still remain as valuable in the future.

I think that's the thing about investing in index funds- you have a stake in the winners for sure, but you also have a stake in the losers. If you're smart/lucky you could probably pick a sector or two that does well or is going to do well, and then weigh whether or not the exposure is risky

Investing originally began as a way to start an organisation which would receive cash inflows, at a rate greater than outflows. I get that this has been lost, to some extent, over time.

>>2483181
>How do you pick up on value which isn't priced in yet, especially if you don't do this as a job?

You really don't, unless you are interested enough in studying fundamentals that you do it for a dozen+ hours per week in your spare time.

>>2483549
The problem is, wall street have already done that, and they've already put their money in place, therefore pricing in the value to the market share price before I can get there.

>>2482988
what if the market were to consistently go down the next 4-8 or even 30 years?

its not like it hasn't happened before .
there is no assurance with anything in investing even government bonds fluctuate in value and price.

indexing is a naive ,ignorant and overly optimistic
, not to mention painstakingly slow, approach to investment.

why not just hold your money in a bank CD?
there is 0 risk if your deposit is insured.

>>2483675
The argument here though is whether or not stock picking would be better or worse than just following an index. In a downturn, as you mention, would you believe stock picking would outperform an index return. Or would the very lowering of the general prices of stocks (which is what causes the index to fall) make stock picking perform just as badly?

>>2483675
Oh wait, having read the OP, maybe stock picking vs index funds wasn't the argument. Regardless, diversifying across many asset types would always be a good idea.

File: images.jpg (5KB, 141x123px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 141x123px

lol subtle nocoiner thread,
you guys can still drop your boomer investments and invest in some altcoins, but remeber your time is running out because more and more normies are getting awared about BTC

>>2482988
Because the index fund meme is now inflating the whole market into one giant overvalued bubble with boomer's retirement money? Just because they showed good numbers since 2008 (gee, I wonder why), there is no reason for index funds to be shilled so hard as the end-all, be-all of investing.