Can a single page of a book change your investment life? We believe it can. Periodically, we highlight some of the Great Pages that have had a great impact on our investment philosophy. Today, we cheat just a bit, looking at two pages in James O’Shaughnessy’s classic “What Works on Wall Street”. O’Shaughnessy talks about why models are better at predicting outcomes than humans are.
Every other issue of the Validea Hot List newsletter examines one the investing greats behind John P. Reese’s computerized Guru Strategies. This latest issue looks at the James O’Shaughnessy’s research into the best sector for the long term.
Over the past decade or so, investors — particularly institutional investors — have focused more and more on private equity as a way to get exposure to small, potentially high-growth companies. But in a recent research paper, O’Shaughnessy Asset Management’s Chris Meredith and Patrick O’Shaughnessy explain why microcap equities in many cases are a more attractive alternative to private equity.
In a wide-ranging interview with Barry Ritholtz on Bloomberg View, quantitative investing guru James O’Shaughnessy recently talked about why human beings are such inferior prognosticators compared to computer models, what that means for investors, why stocks may well be safer than bonds over the long run, and why holding period duration is so critical.
You don’t need complicated strategies to beat the market. That’s what James O’Shaughnessy says in a recent column discussing shareholder yield (dividend yield plus buyback yield).
Investors are continually attracted tho “glamour stocks” — those popular, flashy picks that are always being talked about. But quantitative investing guru James O’Shaughnessy says history shows those exciting stocks usually lead to big trouble.