WEBVTT - Interview With Jack Bogle: Masters in Business (Audio)

0:00:03.240 --> 0:00:07.600
<v Speaker 1>This is Masters in Business with Barry Ridholts on Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:08.440 --> 0:00:10.200
<v Speaker 1>I know I say this every week that I have

0:00:10.280 --> 0:00:14.480
<v Speaker 1>a very special guest, but this week I really have

0:00:15.160 --> 0:00:20.160
<v Speaker 1>an extra very special guest. His name is Jack Bogel

0:00:20.400 --> 0:00:24.160
<v Speaker 1>and he is the founder of the Vanguard Group and

0:00:24.239 --> 0:00:29.320
<v Speaker 1>the inventor of the Index Fund. Did I oversell that

0:00:29.360 --> 0:00:32.400
<v Speaker 1>this is a special guest or not? Um, let me

0:00:32.479 --> 0:00:35.160
<v Speaker 1>tell you a little bit about how this date came

0:00:35.200 --> 0:00:40.840
<v Speaker 1>about and what made this so interesting and weird and unusual. First,

0:00:41.280 --> 0:00:45.839
<v Speaker 1>I'm in chasing Jack Bogel for literally years, and he

0:00:45.920 --> 0:00:49.240
<v Speaker 1>doesn't travel much. He's a home body. He lives near

0:00:49.880 --> 0:00:54.240
<v Speaker 1>the Vanguard headquarters. He's not much for coming into Manhattan

0:00:54.600 --> 0:00:58.520
<v Speaker 1>and and recording something like this. Uh. But we did

0:00:58.560 --> 0:01:02.080
<v Speaker 1>the interview with Chairman of Vanguard, Jack Brennan about a

0:01:02.160 --> 0:01:05.039
<v Speaker 1>year and until almost two years ago, and that went

0:01:05.120 --> 0:01:08.280
<v Speaker 1>really well. And then last year we did just about

0:01:08.280 --> 0:01:10.800
<v Speaker 1>a year ago, we did the interview with Bill McNabb,

0:01:10.920 --> 0:01:16.399
<v Speaker 1>he's the current CEO of Vanguard Group. And I started

0:01:16.400 --> 0:01:19.600
<v Speaker 1>poking and prodding and asking, Hey, when can I sit

0:01:19.640 --> 0:01:21.520
<v Speaker 1>down with Jack? When can I sit down with Jack?

0:01:22.200 --> 0:01:27.679
<v Speaker 1>And finally I just said we're willing to come to

0:01:27.840 --> 0:01:30.679
<v Speaker 1>Pennsylvania and meet with you guys, And they said, oh,

0:01:30.720 --> 0:01:34.240
<v Speaker 1>if that's the case, come on down. So you'll hear

0:01:34.280 --> 0:01:37.040
<v Speaker 1>when we sit and talk with Jack. This was not

0:01:37.400 --> 0:01:41.959
<v Speaker 1>the usual interview, partly because he's just a force of nature.

0:01:42.160 --> 0:01:48.480
<v Speaker 1>And you know, I try and balance between guiding the

0:01:48.520 --> 0:01:53.760
<v Speaker 1>conversation to the specific questions we have and and keeping

0:01:53.960 --> 0:01:57.960
<v Speaker 1>us on track to cover a variety of topics and subjects.

0:01:57.960 --> 0:02:00.880
<v Speaker 1>And you could pretty much tell when I give up

0:02:00.960 --> 0:02:04.160
<v Speaker 1>about three or four questions in and just say, Jack

0:02:04.200 --> 0:02:07.120
<v Speaker 1>Bogel is a force of nature. I'm just gonna have

0:02:07.160 --> 0:02:09.880
<v Speaker 1>a conversation with him and let it go. A little

0:02:09.919 --> 0:02:12.760
<v Speaker 1>background on on the day. This was a couple of

0:02:12.800 --> 0:02:17.919
<v Speaker 1>thursdays ago, and we basically left the New York area

0:02:18.080 --> 0:02:20.760
<v Speaker 1>ungodly early, I want to say about four thirty quarter

0:02:20.840 --> 0:02:25.240
<v Speaker 1>to five, drove down to Pennsylvania. Actually we left so

0:02:25.280 --> 0:02:28.680
<v Speaker 1>early we beat all the traffic, not only around New York,

0:02:28.760 --> 0:02:31.840
<v Speaker 1>we got there before the pen the traffic from Philadelphia.

0:02:32.440 --> 0:02:36.120
<v Speaker 1>Um so, I had my first cracker barrel experience, having

0:02:36.280 --> 0:02:39.120
<v Speaker 1>having a breakfast at a cracker barrel, which apparently is

0:02:39.639 --> 0:02:43.959
<v Speaker 1>very common outside of downstate New York. It was quite delicious.

0:02:44.040 --> 0:02:48.840
<v Speaker 1>We get to the Vanguard campus about an hour early,

0:02:49.040 --> 0:02:51.839
<v Speaker 1>spend some time in their galley. Get at Vanguard, it's

0:02:51.880 --> 0:02:56.240
<v Speaker 1>it's the staff for crew. The cafeteria is a galley,

0:02:56.280 --> 0:02:59.760
<v Speaker 1>it's got all these these nautical themes. And we're finally

0:03:00.000 --> 0:03:05.000
<v Speaker 1>showed into a small conference room off of Jack's office.

0:03:05.760 --> 0:03:10.240
<v Speaker 1>And he's you'll hear during the interview, he's eighty six

0:03:10.320 --> 0:03:13.680
<v Speaker 1>years old. He is sharp as attack, smart as a whip.

0:03:13.760 --> 0:03:17.400
<v Speaker 1>His voice is still very strong, very powerful. And any

0:03:17.480 --> 0:03:20.720
<v Speaker 1>pretense I had of following a script and trying to

0:03:20.760 --> 0:03:25.240
<v Speaker 1>ask specific questions pretty much went out the window. Uh

0:03:25.320 --> 0:03:27.640
<v Speaker 1>So you'll hear me wrestling in the beginning some of

0:03:27.639 --> 0:03:31.200
<v Speaker 1>the questions. You'll hear me trying to keep him on

0:03:31.240 --> 0:03:34.360
<v Speaker 1>our original script. And and I, you know, ten minutes

0:03:34.400 --> 0:03:38.920
<v Speaker 1>into this conversation, it's pretty clear, Hey, this is a

0:03:38.920 --> 0:03:42.240
<v Speaker 1>bucking bronco, just just trying not to get kicked in

0:03:42.280 --> 0:03:47.120
<v Speaker 1>the head. Keep feeding him questions based on wherever he goes,

0:03:47.320 --> 0:03:50.400
<v Speaker 1>Just follow him and take it to where it goes.

0:03:50.520 --> 0:03:55.400
<v Speaker 1>And all told, I thought this was really a fascinating conversation.

0:03:55.760 --> 0:03:58.800
<v Speaker 1>He sat with us for ninety minutes. He was supposed

0:03:58.800 --> 0:04:01.680
<v Speaker 1>to go to lunch with someone else. I'm pointing to

0:04:01.720 --> 0:04:04.040
<v Speaker 1>my watch. He's waving me off like I'm telling him

0:04:04.080 --> 0:04:06.520
<v Speaker 1>not to steal home, and he's coming in. He doesn't care,

0:04:06.840 --> 0:04:08.960
<v Speaker 1>and so it ran a little long by the time

0:04:09.000 --> 0:04:12.080
<v Speaker 1>we back out. Some of the other stuff you'll hear.

0:04:12.120 --> 0:04:16.520
<v Speaker 1>This is a substantive, lengthy conversation. If you are at

0:04:16.520 --> 0:04:21.120
<v Speaker 1>all a Vanguard fan, a Bogel head, an Index fan,

0:04:21.720 --> 0:04:24.040
<v Speaker 1>you're going to have a field day with this. I

0:04:24.080 --> 0:04:26.479
<v Speaker 1>had to set this up because really it was such

0:04:26.520 --> 0:04:29.760
<v Speaker 1>an exciting experience for me to spend ninety minutes with

0:04:29.839 --> 0:04:33.680
<v Speaker 1>the man, the legend. Here it is my conversation with

0:04:33.720 --> 0:04:40.320
<v Speaker 1>the one the Only Jack Bogel. This is Masters in

0:04:40.360 --> 0:04:44.479
<v Speaker 1>Business with Barry Ridholts on Bloomberg Radio. I know I

0:04:44.560 --> 0:04:47.000
<v Speaker 1>say this every week that I have a special guest,

0:04:47.520 --> 0:04:51.080
<v Speaker 1>but this week I have a super special guest, the

0:04:51.120 --> 0:04:56.280
<v Speaker 1>one the Only Jack Bogel, founder and Chairman emeritus of

0:04:56.320 --> 0:05:00.360
<v Speaker 1>the Vanguard Group, essentially the creator of the world world's

0:05:00.440 --> 0:05:04.960
<v Speaker 1>first index mutual fund for individuals in nineteen seventy five.

0:05:05.480 --> 0:05:08.480
<v Speaker 1>I could read your CV which will essentially take up

0:05:08.560 --> 0:05:11.919
<v Speaker 1>the entire show. There's so much stuff to to talk

0:05:11.960 --> 0:05:15.640
<v Speaker 1>about with you. You are a legend in the industry

0:05:15.680 --> 0:05:19.400
<v Speaker 1>and maybe the person who has had the single biggest

0:05:19.440 --> 0:05:24.400
<v Speaker 1>impact on investing of anyone. But let's just start from

0:05:24.400 --> 0:05:29.960
<v Speaker 1>that beginning undergraduate thesis. You're in college in Princeton in

0:05:30.120 --> 0:05:34.960
<v Speaker 1>nineteen fifty nineteen fifty one, and you're thinking about why

0:05:35.120 --> 0:05:39.400
<v Speaker 1>do actively managed funds, why do so many of them

0:05:39.440 --> 0:05:42.760
<v Speaker 1>underperform the market? How did that come about for a

0:05:42.839 --> 0:05:46.320
<v Speaker 1>college to well? Came about by a great accident, and

0:05:46.400 --> 0:05:49.320
<v Speaker 1>that is I was majoring in economics. I was looking

0:05:49.320 --> 0:05:51.560
<v Speaker 1>for a subject for my senior thesis, which is a

0:05:51.640 --> 0:05:56.320
<v Speaker 1>requirement still at Princeton, sixtensive, extensive document. Mine turned not

0:05:56.400 --> 0:05:58.520
<v Speaker 1>to be maybe a hundred and thirty five forty pages,

0:05:59.160 --> 0:06:01.919
<v Speaker 1>and I didn't know what to write about. But I

0:06:01.920 --> 0:06:03.520
<v Speaker 1>wanted to write about something that no one had ever

0:06:03.560 --> 0:06:07.560
<v Speaker 1>written about before. And they're in December ninety nine, I

0:06:07.600 --> 0:06:10.120
<v Speaker 1>was reading Fortune magazine, which I did as part of

0:06:10.120 --> 0:06:14.880
<v Speaker 1>my economics background, just voluntarily, and there was an article

0:06:14.920 --> 0:06:18.040
<v Speaker 1>called Big Money in Boston and it was about the

0:06:18.120 --> 0:06:23.000
<v Speaker 1>mutual fund industry. I described this tiny industry, uh maybe

0:06:23.240 --> 0:06:26.320
<v Speaker 1>two and a half billion dollars for the industry as

0:06:26.360 --> 0:06:29.760
<v Speaker 1>tiny but contentious, and I said, well, you know, I'm

0:06:29.839 --> 0:06:33.760
<v Speaker 1>kind of tiny and I'm kind of contentious, so I'll

0:06:33.760 --> 0:06:36.600
<v Speaker 1>write about it. And I wrote the thesis enabled me

0:06:36.640 --> 0:06:40.960
<v Speaker 1>to graduate with high honors from Princeton. Very pretty good job.

0:06:41.920 --> 0:06:44.600
<v Speaker 1>Not a great thesis, but not bad for somebody a

0:06:44.680 --> 0:06:47.760
<v Speaker 1>year out of his teens. Let me let me push

0:06:47.800 --> 0:06:51.720
<v Speaker 1>back at you and say, that was an incredibly insightful thesis.

0:06:52.400 --> 0:06:55.599
<v Speaker 1>The insight that you derived at a very young ages

0:06:56.200 --> 0:07:00.000
<v Speaker 1>the cost of all this active management. They were unable

0:07:00.080 --> 0:07:04.360
<v Speaker 1>to overcome that bogey even to today. What should really

0:07:04.360 --> 0:07:07.720
<v Speaker 1>be so obvious to everybody. Lots of folks still haven't

0:07:07.720 --> 0:07:10.720
<v Speaker 1>seemed to figure that out. So what makes me stop

0:07:10.760 --> 0:07:13.480
<v Speaker 1>and pause and and ask you this question, how did

0:07:13.560 --> 0:07:17.240
<v Speaker 1>you ever come to that conclusion at such a young

0:07:17.320 --> 0:07:22.040
<v Speaker 1>age without the universe of information we have available to

0:07:22.160 --> 0:07:24.920
<v Speaker 1>us today. Well, to begin with, the thesis title was

0:07:25.080 --> 0:07:28.960
<v Speaker 1>the economic role of the investment company, and the overall

0:07:29.080 --> 0:07:33.720
<v Speaker 1>of the overriding and focus of that thesis was mutual

0:07:33.840 --> 0:07:38.120
<v Speaker 1>funds are there to serve investors. Put the investors first.

0:07:38.160 --> 0:07:41.920
<v Speaker 1>And I talked about reducing sales loads, reducing management fees,

0:07:42.400 --> 0:07:46.960
<v Speaker 1>and focusing on investing and non marketing things of that nature,

0:07:47.440 --> 0:07:50.280
<v Speaker 1>and that's what the industry in my in my formula

0:07:50.320 --> 0:07:52.520
<v Speaker 1>and would have to do to reach its great potential.

0:07:53.240 --> 0:07:56.080
<v Speaker 1>And I did not actually, to be very clear on this,

0:07:56.600 --> 0:07:59.520
<v Speaker 1>I did not assemble any data. But I looked at

0:07:59.560 --> 0:08:03.720
<v Speaker 1>about team leading mutual funds and look at their records,

0:08:03.880 --> 0:08:08.240
<v Speaker 1>and without adding and dividing and getting averages, it was

0:08:08.320 --> 0:08:10.560
<v Speaker 1>very clear that very few of them, if any at

0:08:10.560 --> 0:08:14.880
<v Speaker 1>that time, could could outperform the SMP five index. So

0:08:14.920 --> 0:08:19.280
<v Speaker 1>it was basically anecdotal. Although this industry in those days

0:08:19.840 --> 0:08:23.040
<v Speaker 1>it was very much a commodity in a way kind

0:08:23.040 --> 0:08:27.120
<v Speaker 1>of commodity. The major funds of those days we're just

0:08:27.240 --> 0:08:32.520
<v Speaker 1>basic basically buying long lists of blue chip stocks. You

0:08:32.520 --> 0:08:35.760
<v Speaker 1>could call them Dow Jones industrial average funds or later,

0:08:35.760 --> 0:08:38.520
<v Speaker 1>because the SMP wasn't very enough well known then you

0:08:38.520 --> 0:08:40.800
<v Speaker 1>could call them standard and poorst kind of funds. They

0:08:40.800 --> 0:08:44.960
<v Speaker 1>were down the middle. They had fluctuations, very similar volatility,

0:08:45.080 --> 0:08:49.079
<v Speaker 1>very similar to the index. So even back in the

0:08:49.160 --> 0:08:54.960
<v Speaker 1>late forties early fifties, mutual funds were closet indexers. Sure, absolutely, huh,

0:08:55.320 --> 0:08:58.480
<v Speaker 1>that's quite that's quite fascinating. So let's fast forward a

0:08:58.520 --> 0:09:02.319
<v Speaker 1>little bit. So now you working as chairman of Wellington's

0:09:02.320 --> 0:09:06.480
<v Speaker 1>management company. And long story short, you said the most

0:09:06.559 --> 0:09:09.880
<v Speaker 1>unwise decision of your career. You do a merger doesn't

0:09:09.880 --> 0:09:13.679
<v Speaker 1>work out and they end up um breaking it down

0:09:13.760 --> 0:09:17.480
<v Speaker 1>from from uh lieutenant to private so to speak, and

0:09:17.760 --> 0:09:21.440
<v Speaker 1>not less than private, less than private. And you wanted

0:09:21.480 --> 0:09:23.880
<v Speaker 1>to run a fund and they said, well, you know,

0:09:23.960 --> 0:09:27.079
<v Speaker 1>because of this M and A, we don't want you

0:09:27.200 --> 0:09:29.400
<v Speaker 1>running an active fund. If you want to put together

0:09:29.679 --> 0:09:32.800
<v Speaker 1>how did how did the index come out of that?

0:09:32.800 --> 0:09:36.000
<v Speaker 1>That job change? Okay, well, let me say my first

0:09:36.080 --> 0:09:39.520
<v Speaker 1>job and I was thirty five years old and Mr Morgan,

0:09:39.520 --> 0:09:42.520
<v Speaker 1>the founder of Walter L. Morgan, the founder of Wellingcoln,

0:09:43.000 --> 0:09:45.960
<v Speaker 1>called me into his office. Wellington was in trouble. Wellingcoln

0:09:46.000 --> 0:09:49.280
<v Speaker 1>Fund was in trouble, its performance was slipping, and Wellington

0:09:49.360 --> 0:09:52.120
<v Speaker 1>Management Company was in trouble because we were basically a

0:09:52.200 --> 0:09:55.920
<v Speaker 1>one product if you will company up conservative balanced fund.

0:09:56.440 --> 0:09:58.800
<v Speaker 1>We were, for the want of a better metaphor, the

0:09:58.960 --> 0:10:04.640
<v Speaker 1>bagel of the mutual fund industry, the the hard, not sweet,

0:10:05.320 --> 0:10:11.679
<v Speaker 1>um nutritious safe choice in the biggest balance fund in

0:10:11.720 --> 0:10:17.680
<v Speaker 1>the industry, and people stopped buying bagels and started buying

0:10:18.160 --> 0:10:21.040
<v Speaker 1>if you will donuts. We came into the go go era.

0:10:21.640 --> 0:10:25.959
<v Speaker 1>So all these fancy growth funds I powered buying stocks

0:10:25.960 --> 0:10:29.280
<v Speaker 1>that had no investment, no intrinsic investment merit at all.

0:10:29.440 --> 0:10:31.960
<v Speaker 1>This is the mid to late sixties, the nifty fifty

0:10:32.040 --> 0:10:35.520
<v Speaker 1>and that sort of just the go go era and

0:10:35.600 --> 0:10:38.400
<v Speaker 1>the go goes came and the go goes win. But

0:10:38.520 --> 0:10:42.800
<v Speaker 1>if you're in the bagel business and nobody is buying bagels,

0:10:42.800 --> 0:10:45.920
<v Speaker 1>and the balance fund share of industry sales actually dropped

0:10:45.920 --> 0:10:49.160
<v Speaker 1>to one percent, and so I had to do something,

0:10:49.200 --> 0:10:51.560
<v Speaker 1>and Mr Morgan told me to do it, and I

0:10:51.600 --> 0:10:54.400
<v Speaker 1>talked to a couple of firms about merging, and then

0:10:54.440 --> 0:10:57.320
<v Speaker 1>I came across this firm in Boston and it had

0:10:57.320 --> 0:10:59.200
<v Speaker 1>a fund called I Vest Fund, one of the go

0:10:59.200 --> 0:11:03.080
<v Speaker 1>go funds that a They had some apparently bright young

0:11:03.120 --> 0:11:06.200
<v Speaker 1>managers that I had kind of common cause with, and

0:11:06.240 --> 0:11:08.839
<v Speaker 1>they had a pension business. So we got the new

0:11:08.880 --> 0:11:11.840
<v Speaker 1>managers that would save Wellington Fund. We got the go

0:11:11.920 --> 0:11:14.720
<v Speaker 1>go fund that we needed to stay in business, and

0:11:14.760 --> 0:11:16.319
<v Speaker 1>we got into a new business that we thought we

0:11:16.360 --> 0:11:19.480
<v Speaker 1>could be very successful. It was from words of one syllable,

0:11:19.559 --> 0:11:23.920
<v Speaker 1>two syllables, brit I'm Barry Riholts, You're listening to Masters

0:11:23.920 --> 0:11:27.840
<v Speaker 1>in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My extra special guest today

0:11:28.000 --> 0:11:32.080
<v Speaker 1>is Jack Bogel. He is the founder of Vanguard Group

0:11:32.240 --> 0:11:37.440
<v Speaker 1>and essentially the inventor of the index funds. Jack, we

0:11:37.440 --> 0:11:43.680
<v Speaker 1>were speaking earlier about how a crisis at Wellington, which

0:11:43.840 --> 0:11:47.360
<v Speaker 1>was the predecessor you worked at to the Vanguard Group,

0:11:47.600 --> 0:11:51.360
<v Speaker 1>actually led to the creation of the Vanguard Group. Tell

0:11:51.440 --> 0:11:53.680
<v Speaker 1>us how that came about. Okay, Well, let's start with

0:11:53.720 --> 0:11:56.600
<v Speaker 1>the fact that in doing this merger, which I was

0:11:56.640 --> 0:12:00.040
<v Speaker 1>eager to do, I gave up too many votes in

0:12:00.080 --> 0:12:03.840
<v Speaker 1>the company and so when everything fell apart, the market

0:12:03.840 --> 0:12:08.840
<v Speaker 1>went down. Uh, and so on. Right at the market

0:12:08.840 --> 0:12:11.400
<v Speaker 1>was going down in seventy four, it would be to

0:12:11.480 --> 0:12:17.280
<v Speaker 1>climb the happy partners um fragmented and there were four

0:12:17.280 --> 0:12:19.360
<v Speaker 1>of them, and there was one of me, and they

0:12:19.360 --> 0:12:21.560
<v Speaker 1>had packed the board of directors. I was I was

0:12:21.559 --> 0:12:24.600
<v Speaker 1>never very political, and they fired me. The guys that

0:12:24.640 --> 0:12:27.880
<v Speaker 1>had caused this catastrophe, fired the one that was trying

0:12:27.920 --> 0:12:32.080
<v Speaker 1>to avoid it. And so I was out of a job.

0:12:33.000 --> 0:12:35.599
<v Speaker 1>So what could I do. I could go try and

0:12:35.840 --> 0:12:37.880
<v Speaker 1>find work for another firm. I had a young family

0:12:37.880 --> 0:12:40.920
<v Speaker 1>living here. I didn't want to move. I was very

0:12:40.920 --> 0:12:44.000
<v Speaker 1>angry about what happened, of course, but you know what

0:12:44.240 --> 0:12:47.720
<v Speaker 1>is is. And so I decided my best chance was

0:12:47.760 --> 0:12:50.599
<v Speaker 1>to talk to the directors of the Wellington Fund, this

0:12:50.760 --> 0:12:55.320
<v Speaker 1>fund so badly heard the ash the diamond and arn't crown,

0:12:56.080 --> 0:13:00.600
<v Speaker 1>and say, look, the management company has fired me, but you,

0:13:00.600 --> 0:13:04.800
<v Speaker 1>you're a slightly different group, can keep me. And we'll

0:13:04.800 --> 0:13:07.200
<v Speaker 1>tell the management company what to do. We will be

0:13:07.240 --> 0:13:09.880
<v Speaker 1>in charge of the administration of the fund, ending necessary

0:13:09.880 --> 0:13:12.320
<v Speaker 1>to make it work, and we'll be in charge of

0:13:12.559 --> 0:13:15.079
<v Speaker 1>praising the advisor and taking whatever steps we want. Will

0:13:15.080 --> 0:13:18.640
<v Speaker 1>be independent of the advisor. And uh I wanted to

0:13:18.679 --> 0:13:21.360
<v Speaker 1>take over distribution too, but the directors wouldn't go along

0:13:21.400 --> 0:13:26.360
<v Speaker 1>with that. So we became a little administrative company. And

0:13:26.559 --> 0:13:29.280
<v Speaker 1>uh I wanted to glamorous name. So I found the

0:13:29.320 --> 0:13:34.360
<v Speaker 1>name Vanguard. When I first learned about We go from Wellington,

0:13:35.200 --> 0:13:39.760
<v Speaker 1>the the the land battles of the Napoleonic Wars, the

0:13:39.840 --> 0:13:42.960
<v Speaker 1>Duke of Wellington, the naval battles of the Napoleonic War,

0:13:43.400 --> 0:13:46.160
<v Speaker 1>and there's Lord Nelson at the Battle of the Nile,

0:13:46.360 --> 0:13:49.800
<v Speaker 1>one of the most complete, the most complete naval victory

0:13:49.840 --> 0:13:53.839
<v Speaker 1>in history to this day. Uh and Uh, he writes

0:13:53.880 --> 0:13:57.080
<v Speaker 1>to this dispatch that I see from the deck of HMS.

0:13:57.160 --> 0:14:00.160
<v Speaker 1>Vanguard his flagship, and that sounds like a great name

0:14:00.240 --> 0:14:05.199
<v Speaker 1>for a for a company, perfect perfect from Wellington Funds.

0:14:05.240 --> 0:14:08.440
<v Speaker 1>How did you actually form the Vanguard Group. Well, the

0:14:08.520 --> 0:14:11.280
<v Speaker 1>idea was that the funds would create a new company

0:14:11.400 --> 0:14:15.200
<v Speaker 1>that they owned, they would capitalize. Capitalization was very small

0:14:15.480 --> 0:14:17.920
<v Speaker 1>and I'm gonna guess maybe two hundred and fifty thousand dollars.

0:14:17.960 --> 0:14:20.880
<v Speaker 1>This is a very small company at that point. Actually,

0:14:21.200 --> 0:14:23.320
<v Speaker 1>the total assets of the funds were down and around

0:14:23.640 --> 0:14:28.040
<v Speaker 1>one point five billion. So we capitalized the fund and

0:14:28.040 --> 0:14:30.760
<v Speaker 1>and Welling and Management Company had to take it because

0:14:30.800 --> 0:14:33.040
<v Speaker 1>the directors of the funds were in charge of the

0:14:33.080 --> 0:14:36.960
<v Speaker 1>contracts with Welling and So you really backed George your

0:14:36.960 --> 0:14:39.800
<v Speaker 1>way back into the company after they had fired you

0:14:39.880 --> 0:14:42.680
<v Speaker 1>as chairman. Well, yes, I think that's a fair statement.

0:14:42.720 --> 0:14:45.880
<v Speaker 1>But techno, from a technical standpoint, I'd been the chairman

0:14:45.880 --> 0:14:48.400
<v Speaker 1>of the Welling and Fund all along Gotch so I

0:14:48.400 --> 0:14:50.720
<v Speaker 1>have the same old continuity that I had going back

0:14:50.760 --> 0:14:54.080
<v Speaker 1>to nineteen just post merger. They this was a bactor.

0:14:54.200 --> 0:14:57.440
<v Speaker 1>So how do you go from that to the Vanguard Group. Well,

0:14:57.640 --> 0:14:59.600
<v Speaker 1>we put a name in the company because we had,

0:14:59.760 --> 0:15:01.920
<v Speaker 1>I think get than those days, maybe a dozen funds,

0:15:02.160 --> 0:15:04.960
<v Speaker 1>and we didn't want a dozen separate companies to manage.

0:15:05.360 --> 0:15:07.960
<v Speaker 1>So we had to have a core or central company

0:15:08.040 --> 0:15:12.320
<v Speaker 1>and UH that would pool resources of all the funds

0:15:12.480 --> 0:15:15.800
<v Speaker 1>and provide all the services. And we had allocation methods

0:15:15.800 --> 0:15:20.760
<v Speaker 1>between the funds. And it was all good until we

0:15:20.920 --> 0:15:25.280
<v Speaker 1>decided to take over distribution, which was our Let me,

0:15:25.320 --> 0:15:26.920
<v Speaker 1>I'm a little bit ahead of myself. Let me let

0:15:26.920 --> 0:15:29.720
<v Speaker 1>me go back and say to the first thing. We

0:15:29.720 --> 0:15:32.240
<v Speaker 1>were not allowed to go into the business of investment management,

0:15:32.560 --> 0:15:34.560
<v Speaker 1>that was theirs. We were not allowed to go into

0:15:34.600 --> 0:15:37.240
<v Speaker 1>the business that was there as being willing that was there.

0:15:38.000 --> 0:15:41.040
<v Speaker 1>The active side you couldn't do and we couldn't. We

0:15:41.080 --> 0:15:44.760
<v Speaker 1>couldn't go into management. We didn't distinguish between active and

0:15:44.800 --> 0:15:47.680
<v Speaker 1>passive and those days not In those days, there weren't

0:15:47.720 --> 0:15:51.240
<v Speaker 1>an index, right, So so if you couldn't go into management,

0:15:51.400 --> 0:15:53.920
<v Speaker 1>how are you able to set up the Vanguard five hundred?

0:15:54.480 --> 0:15:59.440
<v Speaker 1>Wouldn't be patient? Okay? So um, we were not allowed

0:15:59.480 --> 0:16:02.200
<v Speaker 1>to go into this retribution because that was welling consfunction too.

0:16:02.480 --> 0:16:05.680
<v Speaker 1>So we had this little administrative company looking over however,

0:16:05.960 --> 0:16:09.360
<v Speaker 1>had the legal responsibility and the board responsibility to look

0:16:09.400 --> 0:16:12.240
<v Speaker 1>over the advisor and distributor. So we were in charge.

0:16:12.960 --> 0:16:15.600
<v Speaker 1>And so my first I knew a company that was

0:16:15.640 --> 0:16:18.560
<v Speaker 1>an administrative company was not going to be anything for me.

0:16:19.200 --> 0:16:21.800
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I like the administration. I know how well

0:16:21.800 --> 0:16:24.720
<v Speaker 1>it has to be done, shareholder record keeping and all that,

0:16:25.600 --> 0:16:27.320
<v Speaker 1>but that's just not the kind of challenge I was

0:16:27.360 --> 0:16:30.440
<v Speaker 1>looking for. And any company that's going to succeed, it's

0:16:30.480 --> 0:16:32.120
<v Speaker 1>going to have to control the kind of funds he

0:16:32.160 --> 0:16:35.040
<v Speaker 1>wants to they want to run, the kind of distribution

0:16:35.120 --> 0:16:37.360
<v Speaker 1>they want to have, who will buy the funds, who

0:16:37.440 --> 0:16:40.400
<v Speaker 1>will sell them, things of that nature. So we have

0:16:40.440 --> 0:16:44.000
<v Speaker 1>a company that's just in this little administrative box, and

0:16:44.040 --> 0:16:46.920
<v Speaker 1>I'm thinking, let's do something. So at the very first

0:16:46.920 --> 0:16:49.440
<v Speaker 1>board meeting of the new company, after we got an

0:16:49.520 --> 0:16:53.560
<v Speaker 1>organized I say we gotta started index fund. And the

0:16:53.640 --> 0:16:56.960
<v Speaker 1>directors say you're not allowed to get new investment management.

0:16:57.640 --> 0:17:02.040
<v Speaker 1>And I say, this fund isn't man aged, and believe

0:17:02.040 --> 0:17:05.960
<v Speaker 1>it or not, they bought it. So in other words,

0:17:06.400 --> 0:17:08.840
<v Speaker 1>you describe the index fund as just, hey, it's the

0:17:08.880 --> 0:17:13.560
<v Speaker 1>five largest companies in America. There's no manager, nobody's in charge.

0:17:13.640 --> 0:17:18.600
<v Speaker 1>It's just it's an unmanaged broad index, and they said, oh,

0:17:18.720 --> 0:17:21.520
<v Speaker 1>go do that. They said, well, I won't say was

0:17:21.600 --> 0:17:24.440
<v Speaker 1>that easy, but that was the final decision. I get

0:17:24.520 --> 0:17:27.000
<v Speaker 1>the sense from from what you've described that they would

0:17:27.080 --> 0:17:30.320
<v Speaker 1>kind of let's let's let Jack go do that. He'll

0:17:30.359 --> 0:17:33.000
<v Speaker 1>be out of our hair. It'll keep them busy and fine,

0:17:33.400 --> 0:17:35.960
<v Speaker 1>won't cause anybody trouble. I think you're pretty much on

0:17:36.040 --> 0:17:39.480
<v Speaker 1>the mark. This week on Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio,

0:17:39.680 --> 0:17:43.440
<v Speaker 1>I have an extra special guest. His name is Jack Bogel.

0:17:43.840 --> 0:17:47.560
<v Speaker 1>He is the founder of the Vanguard Group, the inventor

0:17:47.960 --> 0:17:51.200
<v Speaker 1>of the index funds, and author of far too many

0:17:51.280 --> 0:17:55.520
<v Speaker 1>books to mention. I've been speaking with Jack here in

0:17:55.640 --> 0:17:59.840
<v Speaker 1>the headquarters of of Vanguard and just outside the conference

0:18:00.000 --> 0:18:03.840
<v Speaker 1>and we were sitting on the wall is a frames

0:18:04.040 --> 0:18:10.400
<v Speaker 1>prints and on that print it says stamp out index funds. Jack,

0:18:10.680 --> 0:18:13.960
<v Speaker 1>What on earth does that mean? That means Wall Street

0:18:13.960 --> 0:18:16.800
<v Speaker 1>couldn't make any money out of index funds, and so

0:18:16.920 --> 0:18:19.800
<v Speaker 1>Wall Street didn't like it. We had an initial initial

0:18:19.840 --> 0:18:22.560
<v Speaker 1>public offering. I went all over New York so many

0:18:22.640 --> 0:18:25.600
<v Speaker 1>times to try and find underwriters and finally got the

0:18:25.720 --> 0:18:31.240
<v Speaker 1>four largest retail underwriters, pH Dan Winter Reynolds. Uh forget

0:18:31.480 --> 0:18:34.280
<v Speaker 1>who the other one was Reynolds. Okay, they were the

0:18:34.280 --> 0:18:36.000
<v Speaker 1>biggest guys in the business, and they said, we can

0:18:36.040 --> 0:18:37.880
<v Speaker 1>do a hundred and fifty million dollars with this great

0:18:37.920 --> 0:18:42.360
<v Speaker 1>new idea. They did eleven million dollars, so so less

0:18:42.400 --> 0:18:45.159
<v Speaker 1>than ten. And they came in to see me when

0:18:45.200 --> 0:18:48.080
<v Speaker 1>the underwriting was over and said, you know, I said

0:18:48.119 --> 0:18:49.879
<v Speaker 1>to them, look, we can't even buy around lots of

0:18:49.920 --> 0:18:52.920
<v Speaker 1>five And they said, well, why don't we just give

0:18:52.920 --> 0:18:54.520
<v Speaker 1>everybody their money back and pull it? And I said,

0:18:54.520 --> 0:18:57.760
<v Speaker 1>are you kidding me? We have the world's first index fund.

0:18:58.520 --> 0:19:00.920
<v Speaker 1>And it's the world's first index fund. Period. You have

0:19:00.960 --> 0:19:04.479
<v Speaker 1>to say, retail a lot of institutional hold at the beginning.

0:19:04.760 --> 0:19:07.960
<v Speaker 1>It's the world's first index mutual fund, no question about that.

0:19:08.760 --> 0:19:12.920
<v Speaker 1>And amazing and so it got nowhere, It went nowhere fast,

0:19:13.040 --> 0:19:17.920
<v Speaker 1>eleven million dollar launched. What year was that that was in, right,

0:19:18.840 --> 0:19:22.639
<v Speaker 1>eleven million dollars and everybody laughed and nobody thought there

0:19:22.720 --> 0:19:25.879
<v Speaker 1>was any future to index funds. That's exactly right. That

0:19:26.119 --> 0:19:29.760
<v Speaker 1>that's just astonishing. Well, you had incredible foresight to say,

0:19:30.400 --> 0:19:33.280
<v Speaker 1>and it makes sense that the four largest retail shops

0:19:33.320 --> 0:19:36.240
<v Speaker 1>would want to participate in this because this is a simple,

0:19:36.320 --> 0:19:40.359
<v Speaker 1>easy way for their retail client to get exposure to

0:19:40.440 --> 0:19:45.320
<v Speaker 1>the market, fast, easy, relatively inexpensive. It should have except

0:19:45.720 --> 0:19:48.200
<v Speaker 1>that when the client buys this fund, it's to be

0:19:48.280 --> 0:19:51.920
<v Speaker 1>held forever. They don't trade it, and the fund doesn't

0:19:51.960 --> 0:19:54.680
<v Speaker 1>do any trading. There's no brokerage business generated by the

0:19:54.760 --> 0:19:57.560
<v Speaker 1>fun So this was not a happy moment for Wall Street,

0:19:58.080 --> 0:20:00.359
<v Speaker 1>and they looked at it, I think as a some

0:20:00.520 --> 0:20:03.800
<v Speaker 1>kind of the beginning of a of a communicable disease,

0:20:04.520 --> 0:20:06.280
<v Speaker 1>and it had to it had to be stamped out.

0:20:07.080 --> 0:20:09.240
<v Speaker 1>The Center for Disease Control had to come in and

0:20:10.160 --> 0:20:12.679
<v Speaker 1>did they really perceive you as a threat or did

0:20:12.720 --> 0:20:15.920
<v Speaker 1>they kind of laugh it off? And yeah, yeah, best

0:20:15.960 --> 0:20:18.359
<v Speaker 1>of luck with that, Jack. Yeah, I'd say pretty much

0:20:18.440 --> 0:20:20.600
<v Speaker 1>that way. Although we did a couple of years ago

0:20:21.119 --> 0:20:23.160
<v Speaker 1>for one of the funds anniversaries. We all got together,

0:20:23.240 --> 0:20:26.800
<v Speaker 1>but the underwriters, all four underwriters, and all four underwriters

0:20:26.880 --> 0:20:29.760
<v Speaker 1>and their lawyers and our lawyer lawyer singular. We only

0:20:29.800 --> 0:20:33.040
<v Speaker 1>had one on those days. And they're all good people,

0:20:33.119 --> 0:20:36.040
<v Speaker 1>you know, I don't uh. Then we all do our

0:20:36.080 --> 0:20:38.040
<v Speaker 1>best in this life in very different ways of work.

0:20:38.359 --> 0:20:40.960
<v Speaker 1>So it worked out well. It had to start, and

0:20:41.040 --> 0:20:44.720
<v Speaker 1>it did start. So here's the question that I could

0:20:44.840 --> 0:20:49.359
<v Speaker 1>ask you. Forty plus years later, Vanguard is now running

0:20:49.480 --> 0:20:53.960
<v Speaker 1>three point something trillion dollars. Four trillion is not that

0:20:54.119 --> 0:20:57.840
<v Speaker 1>far off in the distance, an enormous success, one of

0:20:57.920 --> 0:21:02.400
<v Speaker 1>the single largest asset managers in the world. How come

0:21:02.720 --> 0:21:06.800
<v Speaker 1>nobody ever said, hey, those guys are onto something, we

0:21:06.840 --> 0:21:09.439
<v Speaker 1>should be a competitor to them. How did how did

0:21:09.520 --> 0:21:12.320
<v Speaker 1>that never come up anywhere along the lines? Well, the

0:21:12.400 --> 0:21:16.080
<v Speaker 1>answer is so simple. Index funds have a real problem.

0:21:17.119 --> 0:21:22.160
<v Speaker 1>All the damn money goes to the investors, right, Managers

0:21:22.200 --> 0:21:25.119
<v Speaker 1>can't take anything they're not managing well, but you're taking

0:21:25.359 --> 0:21:29.040
<v Speaker 1>ten or fifteen basis points and on trillions of dollars,

0:21:29.440 --> 0:21:32.440
<v Speaker 1>that's not nothing. Well, nobody expected to get the trillions

0:21:32.480 --> 0:21:35.760
<v Speaker 1>of dollars, believe me, not an eleven million. But but okay,

0:21:35.840 --> 0:21:38.639
<v Speaker 1>in seventy four or seventy six, it's eleven million. But

0:21:38.880 --> 0:21:42.080
<v Speaker 1>by the time you get to the mid ninety nineties,

0:21:43.000 --> 0:21:45.800
<v Speaker 1>you're hundreds of billions of dollars, and then I think

0:21:45.880 --> 0:21:50.200
<v Speaker 1>you hit a trillion? Was it late nineties? So even

0:21:52.720 --> 0:21:56.920
<v Speaker 1>didn't anybody say, hey, those guys in Pennsylvania they have

0:21:57.040 --> 0:22:00.240
<v Speaker 1>a trillion dollars, Why don't we do what they're doing. Well,

0:22:00.359 --> 0:22:03.200
<v Speaker 1>it's a p it's a problem. And then eventually the

0:22:03.240 --> 0:22:05.800
<v Speaker 1>big guys had to Fidelity had to have They were

0:22:05.920 --> 0:22:09.399
<v Speaker 1>dragged kicking and screaming in indexing and they have to

0:22:09.440 --> 0:22:12.320
<v Speaker 1>be competitive on price. They can still make all the

0:22:12.400 --> 0:22:15.200
<v Speaker 1>money they want, and it's an awful lot on the

0:22:15.280 --> 0:22:17.760
<v Speaker 1>actively managed funds. So it's kind of a lost leader

0:22:17.800 --> 0:22:21.400
<v Speaker 1>for Fidelity. And what about others Black Rock and American

0:22:21.480 --> 0:22:25.080
<v Speaker 1>Century and all these other entities swab offers and index.

0:22:25.119 --> 0:22:30.840
<v Speaker 1>It seems everybody offers some version of uh, the SMPI index. Yeah. Well,

0:22:30.880 --> 0:22:33.159
<v Speaker 1>t ro Price is a good example. They have a

0:22:33.240 --> 0:22:35.959
<v Speaker 1>hidden index fund. They don't talk much about it. It's

0:22:36.040 --> 0:22:41.440
<v Speaker 1>kind of expensive. Basis points relatives are five and it's

0:22:41.480 --> 0:22:43.560
<v Speaker 1>a kind of a sideball thing so they can get

0:22:43.560 --> 0:22:47.200
<v Speaker 1>into the retirement market. This has become a marketing business,

0:22:47.800 --> 0:22:53.600
<v Speaker 1>and right now we're seeing this tremendous change in people

0:22:53.680 --> 0:22:57.120
<v Speaker 1>who realizing the importance of low cost and a long

0:22:57.240 --> 0:22:59.680
<v Speaker 1>term focus. And if you just keep those two things

0:22:59.720 --> 0:23:03.280
<v Speaker 1>in mind, you will never do anything but own a

0:23:03.400 --> 0:23:06.960
<v Speaker 1>broad market index and hold it forever. I'm Barry Ridholtz.

0:23:07.040 --> 0:23:10.359
<v Speaker 1>You're listening to masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My

0:23:10.680 --> 0:23:14.200
<v Speaker 1>extra special guest this week is Jack Bogel. He is

0:23:14.280 --> 0:23:18.479
<v Speaker 1>the founder of the Vanguard Group, inventor of the index funds,

0:23:19.080 --> 0:23:22.639
<v Speaker 1>author of numerous books. Let's jump right back into the

0:23:22.760 --> 0:23:27.080
<v Speaker 1>issue of costs and how they impact investors. You're known

0:23:27.400 --> 0:23:31.040
<v Speaker 1>as the person who created the index fund but really,

0:23:31.240 --> 0:23:34.800
<v Speaker 1>which do you think is more important, the passive indexing

0:23:35.080 --> 0:23:38.120
<v Speaker 1>or the fact that it's so low cost Well, it's

0:23:38.280 --> 0:23:40.520
<v Speaker 1>it's pretty clear to me that passive indexing is the

0:23:40.560 --> 0:23:43.159
<v Speaker 1>more important because I'm going to define costs in a

0:23:43.240 --> 0:23:45.960
<v Speaker 1>couple of different ways here. One is the expense ratio.

0:23:46.840 --> 0:23:50.840
<v Speaker 1>And our funds index funds probably average about ten basis points.

0:23:50.920 --> 0:23:54.760
<v Speaker 1>Are managed funds probably average about thirty five, So there's

0:23:54.800 --> 0:23:56.960
<v Speaker 1>not that big a difference. The industry is up around

0:23:57.160 --> 0:23:59.920
<v Speaker 1>a hundred and twenty on an unweighted basis And when

0:24:00.000 --> 0:24:02.359
<v Speaker 1>you talk about basis points, the basis point is just

0:24:02.480 --> 0:24:06.119
<v Speaker 1>a percentage of So a hundred basis points is one percent.

0:24:06.280 --> 0:24:09.600
<v Speaker 1>Ten basis points is one tenth of one percent. If

0:24:09.640 --> 0:24:12.960
<v Speaker 1>you're averaging ten basis points, that's a very very inexpensive.

0:24:13.240 --> 0:24:19.840
<v Speaker 1>It's five five basis points, that's very inexpensive. That is

0:24:20.359 --> 0:24:24.240
<v Speaker 1>really inexpensive. But that's because we have a mutual company

0:24:24.720 --> 0:24:27.640
<v Speaker 1>owned by its shareholders and don't have to deliver profits.

0:24:27.880 --> 0:24:30.600
<v Speaker 1>And think about this for Eminent Parry, that the profit

0:24:30.680 --> 0:24:34.440
<v Speaker 1>margins in this business can easily run to be So

0:24:34.560 --> 0:24:37.400
<v Speaker 1>if you've got a one percent expense ratio, you're making

0:24:37.480 --> 0:24:41.760
<v Speaker 1>fifty basis points on the top. So you're you're actually

0:24:41.800 --> 0:24:45.560
<v Speaker 1>operating at fifty which is probably not too bad because

0:24:45.680 --> 0:24:48.680
<v Speaker 1>very few people have the scale that we have developed,

0:24:49.200 --> 0:24:52.359
<v Speaker 1>have the technology that we've developed, have the efficiency that

0:24:52.400 --> 0:24:56.679
<v Speaker 1>we've developed. And also I don't think this is self serving,

0:24:57.560 --> 0:25:01.200
<v Speaker 1>have the blie pulpit that we have. You know, imagine

0:25:01.320 --> 0:25:04.919
<v Speaker 1>Fidelity coming into this business. Describe I described that as

0:25:05.119 --> 0:25:07.760
<v Speaker 1>drag kicking and screaming to the business. So here we

0:25:07.880 --> 0:25:10.800
<v Speaker 1>have kicking and screaming over here, and here we have

0:25:11.480 --> 0:25:16.080
<v Speaker 1>missionary zeal, the bullied pulpit, bind this is the way,

0:25:16.480 --> 0:25:19.119
<v Speaker 1>this is the new way. And you have an entire

0:25:19.359 --> 0:25:24.600
<v Speaker 1>universe of evangelists amongst the advisor community who have drunk

0:25:24.640 --> 0:25:27.639
<v Speaker 1>the kool aid and say, hey, low cost indexing is

0:25:27.680 --> 0:25:31.800
<v Speaker 1>the way to go. Following the financial crisis, it seems

0:25:32.320 --> 0:25:34.960
<v Speaker 1>like Vanguard was sucking up all the money in the

0:25:35.080 --> 0:25:38.800
<v Speaker 1>room and everybody else wasn't also run it also ran

0:25:39.600 --> 0:25:43.040
<v Speaker 1>are events like the Great Financial Crisis? Does that sort

0:25:43.080 --> 0:25:46.760
<v Speaker 1>of shake people out of their false belief and send

0:25:46.800 --> 0:25:50.399
<v Speaker 1>them in the direction of hey, these missionaries. Turns out

0:25:50.480 --> 0:25:53.160
<v Speaker 1>these guys are right. Well, you're certainly right in a sense.

0:25:53.240 --> 0:25:56.160
<v Speaker 1>It's it's not easy to read. But what happens when

0:25:56.200 --> 0:25:58.479
<v Speaker 1>the market goes way down and went down fifty rough

0:25:59.680 --> 0:26:03.560
<v Speaker 1>into on he seven nine, and all these managers that says,

0:26:03.760 --> 0:26:07.040
<v Speaker 1>we'll manage your money for you. The shareholder has kind

0:26:07.080 --> 0:26:10.240
<v Speaker 1>of led to expect that they will anticipate this and

0:26:10.359 --> 0:26:12.920
<v Speaker 1>not let it happen to them. And they may not

0:26:13.359 --> 0:26:16.800
<v Speaker 1>directly communicate that, but if someone says, well, i'm you know,

0:26:16.880 --> 0:26:19.639
<v Speaker 1>I'm pretty smart, I'm a smart manager, you would expect

0:26:19.880 --> 0:26:22.080
<v Speaker 1>the down market they would do a good bit better

0:26:22.160 --> 0:26:25.080
<v Speaker 1>than the market. Well, of course to begin when they can't,

0:26:25.640 --> 0:26:28.160
<v Speaker 1>because some do, when some don't. They're all average together,

0:26:28.320 --> 0:26:30.239
<v Speaker 1>and how you're picking one over the other you never

0:26:30.320 --> 0:26:32.600
<v Speaker 1>know in advance. You can only guess. And what good

0:26:32.680 --> 0:26:36.040
<v Speaker 1>is that? Yeah, exactly, so the down markets do help that,

0:26:36.600 --> 0:26:39.280
<v Speaker 1>But it's also this wave of you know, there's not

0:26:39.320 --> 0:26:43.639
<v Speaker 1>an economics course there's not an MBA course, and in

0:26:44.040 --> 0:26:49.920
<v Speaker 1>investing or finance that doesn't say basically, indexing is the way.

0:26:50.720 --> 0:26:55.760
<v Speaker 1>It's the data that matters. It's the data and it's

0:26:55.800 --> 0:26:58.400
<v Speaker 1>gonna so instead of I mean, usually if you look

0:26:58.440 --> 0:27:00.840
<v Speaker 1>back and see a fund that's done well, you can

0:27:00.880 --> 0:27:02.879
<v Speaker 1>pretty much conclude it will not do well in the future.

0:27:03.200 --> 0:27:06.480
<v Speaker 1>Everything reverts to the mean. The index does not. It

0:27:06.600 --> 0:27:09.680
<v Speaker 1>continues to give you your share of the market return.

0:27:10.560 --> 0:27:13.320
<v Speaker 1>And when you look at the numbers, I mean. One

0:27:13.400 --> 0:27:18.080
<v Speaker 1>of my favorite constructions is, uh, the index fund gives

0:27:18.119 --> 0:27:23.639
<v Speaker 1>you the advantage of long term compounding of returns while

0:27:24.400 --> 0:27:30.520
<v Speaker 1>eliminating the tyranny of long term compounding. Of course, So

0:27:31.320 --> 0:27:34.240
<v Speaker 1>think about it this way. Let's assume the stock market

0:27:34.280 --> 0:27:37.320
<v Speaker 1>gives a seven percent return over your life over thirty

0:27:37.400 --> 0:27:41.280
<v Speaker 1>years or over fifty years um. If you get to

0:27:41.320 --> 0:27:45.920
<v Speaker 1>seven percent, each dollar goes up three times. If you

0:27:46.040 --> 0:27:49.240
<v Speaker 1>get five percent, that would be the seven percent less

0:27:49.240 --> 0:27:53.200
<v Speaker 1>the industry's typical two percent all in cost, you get

0:27:53.240 --> 0:27:58.040
<v Speaker 1>ten dollars, So ten dollars versus thirty dollars difference. So

0:27:58.160 --> 0:28:02.240
<v Speaker 1>you put up the capital, you took of the risk,

0:28:03.080 --> 0:28:05.960
<v Speaker 1>and you got thirty three of the return. As I

0:28:06.040 --> 0:28:08.120
<v Speaker 1>say to people, if that strikes she was a good

0:28:08.160 --> 0:28:11.800
<v Speaker 1>deal by all means, do it. So. Morning Star once

0:28:11.960 --> 0:28:14.920
<v Speaker 1>famously did a study which I'm sure to this day

0:28:15.280 --> 0:28:20.040
<v Speaker 1>they regret, and the study they became, you know, famous

0:28:20.160 --> 0:28:24.480
<v Speaker 1>for their Star rankings of mutual funds. And I've written

0:28:24.480 --> 0:28:26.800
<v Speaker 1>about this. You could google this, people can find this.

0:28:27.440 --> 0:28:31.640
<v Speaker 1>Someone internally did a study and said, if you don't

0:28:31.720 --> 0:28:35.000
<v Speaker 1>have access to morning Star data, but you just looked

0:28:35.040 --> 0:28:38.600
<v Speaker 1>at a single data point across the universe of mutual funds,

0:28:39.120 --> 0:28:40.920
<v Speaker 1>what would be the most helpful. Would it be the

0:28:41.040 --> 0:28:43.840
<v Speaker 1>track record, would it be the manager would it And

0:28:43.920 --> 0:28:46.400
<v Speaker 1>it turned out that if you forgot about everything else

0:28:47.320 --> 0:28:51.160
<v Speaker 1>and only picked the lowest cost funds, that generated the

0:28:51.320 --> 0:28:56.760
<v Speaker 1>highest returns going forward. So how that makes me ask

0:28:56.840 --> 0:29:03.239
<v Speaker 1>the question how important are keeping slow two investors? Well,

0:29:03.280 --> 0:29:06.520
<v Speaker 1>when you give the statement that it's only cost that matters,

0:29:06.960 --> 0:29:09.880
<v Speaker 1>I'm inclined to say, as the kids would say, Barry, duh,

0:29:12.160 --> 0:29:15.280
<v Speaker 1>it's it seems obvious after the fact, But for the

0:29:15.480 --> 0:29:20.240
<v Speaker 1>longest periods of time people, So let's let me digress

0:29:20.280 --> 0:29:23.239
<v Speaker 1>and talk a little bit about hedge funds. While all

0:29:23.320 --> 0:29:26.360
<v Speaker 1>this money is flowing a vanguard over the past decade

0:29:26.400 --> 0:29:29.640
<v Speaker 1>since the financial crisis, you guys went from a trillion

0:29:29.720 --> 0:29:33.200
<v Speaker 1>to over three trillion. The other segment of the market

0:29:33.400 --> 0:29:37.280
<v Speaker 1>that attracted a ton of money was the hedge fund industry,

0:29:37.360 --> 0:29:42.000
<v Speaker 1>which charges two percents forget five basis points two percent

0:29:42.160 --> 0:29:46.320
<v Speaker 1>of the assets under management, plus of the profits. And

0:29:46.440 --> 0:29:50.680
<v Speaker 1>they also scaled up across ten thousand funds to three

0:29:50.800 --> 0:29:55.000
<v Speaker 1>trillion dollars. How do you explain, despite the obvious duh,

0:29:55.400 --> 0:29:58.280
<v Speaker 1>how do you explain so much money flowing to a

0:29:58.360 --> 0:30:03.360
<v Speaker 1>group with such high expand well, greed, the buyer's greed

0:30:03.400 --> 0:30:06.000
<v Speaker 1>and perhaps even the manager's greed because those are very

0:30:06.080 --> 0:30:09.920
<v Speaker 1>high costs. But people are looking for a better way.

0:30:10.680 --> 0:30:12.320
<v Speaker 1>You know, it's pretty easy. I've done a lot of

0:30:12.360 --> 0:30:13.800
<v Speaker 1>work on this. You may have read some of it

0:30:14.120 --> 0:30:16.280
<v Speaker 1>to forecast what the stock market return is going to

0:30:16.360 --> 0:30:20.440
<v Speaker 1>be within reasonable magnitudes over time, not not in a

0:30:20.520 --> 0:30:25.280
<v Speaker 1>year by year, but over decades. And uh so you

0:30:25.400 --> 0:30:27.680
<v Speaker 1>know where you're gonna be roughly in the stock market.

0:30:27.680 --> 0:30:30.760
<v Speaker 1>And you say a pension pan, and pension plans are

0:30:30.840 --> 0:30:33.520
<v Speaker 1>very heavy part of the of the hedge fund business

0:30:33.720 --> 0:30:35.960
<v Speaker 1>because they don't have to worry about the high taxes

0:30:36.000 --> 0:30:39.560
<v Speaker 1>generated by by hedge funds. And uh so they say

0:30:39.600 --> 0:30:42.600
<v Speaker 1>we've got to have more, and someone coast comes and

0:30:42.680 --> 0:30:46.080
<v Speaker 1>shows them their past record and guess what they put

0:30:46.160 --> 0:30:49.560
<v Speaker 1>the S and P five shame. Of course they wouldn't

0:30:49.560 --> 0:30:52.440
<v Speaker 1>show you the record if they didn't. So a little

0:30:52.440 --> 0:30:55.320
<v Speaker 1>survivorship bias built into that, You sure that, well, the

0:30:55.400 --> 0:30:59.640
<v Speaker 1>survivorship bias build into it. But most of all, there's

0:31:00.040 --> 0:31:03.000
<v Speaker 1>it ignores the fact of life in this business. It's

0:31:03.080 --> 0:31:08.760
<v Speaker 1>everywhere reversion to the mean. Biblically put Barry, the last

0:31:08.800 --> 0:31:11.480
<v Speaker 1>shall be first, on the first shall be last. And

0:31:11.600 --> 0:31:14.360
<v Speaker 1>it happens to hedge funds, it happens to mutual funds.

0:31:14.920 --> 0:31:18.720
<v Speaker 1>It is basically a fundamental law. Seven fat years, seven

0:31:18.800 --> 0:31:21.000
<v Speaker 1>lean years, and there's no way around it. Yeah, the

0:31:21.120 --> 0:31:23.680
<v Speaker 1>number of years may differ, but you've got it all right. Well,

0:31:23.800 --> 0:31:26.760
<v Speaker 1>you reference the Bible and and that that phrase that

0:31:26.840 --> 0:31:30.080
<v Speaker 1>always stayed with me. Um. So let's let's stick with

0:31:30.200 --> 0:31:36.800
<v Speaker 1>the issue of um of indexing for now. And I

0:31:36.920 --> 0:31:40.320
<v Speaker 1>want to quote something that Charlie Ellis had wrote. Charlie

0:31:40.680 --> 0:31:44.200
<v Speaker 1>was not only on the board of the Vanguard Group,

0:31:44.240 --> 0:31:47.440
<v Speaker 1>a board of directors, but he was also an advisor

0:31:47.520 --> 0:31:50.840
<v Speaker 1>to the Yale Endowment Fund, and he wrote a wonderful

0:31:50.880 --> 0:31:55.000
<v Speaker 1>book called Winning the Loser's Game, and he he also

0:31:55.080 --> 0:31:59.840
<v Speaker 1>advocates that individuals should stick with simple indexing, which leads

0:31:59.880 --> 0:32:03.959
<v Speaker 1>me to a question, how many indices should the average

0:32:04.000 --> 0:32:09.960
<v Speaker 1>invest your own? Well, very very few is as symboled

0:32:10.000 --> 0:32:12.200
<v Speaker 1>to that answer to that question. You need a broad

0:32:12.280 --> 0:32:15.680
<v Speaker 1>stock index, and you need a broad out bond index,

0:32:15.800 --> 0:32:18.760
<v Speaker 1>because I'm convinced that everybody should have a little anchor

0:32:18.840 --> 0:32:21.480
<v Speaker 1>to winward when these bad times come, if for no

0:32:21.600 --> 0:32:26.120
<v Speaker 1>other reason, to protect themselves and getting emotional and behaving

0:32:26.200 --> 0:32:29.880
<v Speaker 1>badly and selling out their portfolios at market bottoms. So

0:32:30.240 --> 0:32:33.320
<v Speaker 1>leaving aside the allocation between stocks and bonds, you can

0:32:33.400 --> 0:32:35.800
<v Speaker 1>buy a bond index fund, and you're gonna buy a

0:32:35.840 --> 0:32:38.560
<v Speaker 1>total stock market index fund, and you're gonna buy the

0:32:38.560 --> 0:32:42.760
<v Speaker 1>Standard and Poors five index fund, and that's basically of

0:32:42.840 --> 0:32:47.280
<v Speaker 1>the market. The You would think that the that the

0:32:47.640 --> 0:32:50.440
<v Speaker 1>total stock market would be a better bet because it's

0:32:50.480 --> 0:32:53.440
<v Speaker 1>more diversified in the S and P five. But we're

0:32:53.440 --> 0:32:55.160
<v Speaker 1>in a time right now and I don't know if

0:32:55.200 --> 0:32:58.280
<v Speaker 1>this is durable or not. Nobody does. Where the large

0:32:58.320 --> 0:33:01.440
<v Speaker 1>companies are doing better than the small, So the great,

0:33:01.560 --> 0:33:06.560
<v Speaker 1>Mr Buffett, and does his he's leaving his wife the

0:33:06.680 --> 0:33:11.760
<v Speaker 1>state in the s and Vanguard SNP fix fund. He

0:33:11.880 --> 0:33:14.440
<v Speaker 1>has a bet with some hedge fund managers. He's winning,

0:33:14.560 --> 0:33:17.400
<v Speaker 1>he's winning the bet. He's not winning it, he's killing.

0:33:17.600 --> 0:33:21.280
<v Speaker 1>He's absolutely way way ahead. They actually had to create

0:33:21.360 --> 0:33:23.720
<v Speaker 1>derivatives for this bet. This is a real bet with

0:33:23.840 --> 0:33:26.160
<v Speaker 1>millions of dollars at risk on it, and he looks

0:33:26.680 --> 0:33:29.120
<v Speaker 1>it's a runaway. Nobody's else is even in second. Well,

0:33:29.160 --> 0:33:32.240
<v Speaker 1>he's got a year ago. This is that's right. It

0:33:32.240 --> 0:33:35.600
<v Speaker 1>will be a decade after the financial crisis, the hedge fund.

0:33:35.680 --> 0:33:37.120
<v Speaker 1>For those of you who may not be familiar with

0:33:37.200 --> 0:33:40.640
<v Speaker 1>the infamous bet, a bunch of hedge fund managers were

0:33:41.000 --> 0:33:44.520
<v Speaker 1>um arrogant enough to bet Warren Buffett that they could

0:33:44.520 --> 0:33:48.200
<v Speaker 1>outperform the SNP five. He took that bet and it's

0:33:48.400 --> 0:33:51.480
<v Speaker 1>not even close. It's it's really an amazing story. I

0:33:51.520 --> 0:33:55.320
<v Speaker 1>didn't realize we're only a year away from the final

0:33:55.480 --> 0:33:59.360
<v Speaker 1>outcome of that uh bet. And it's it's theoretically possible

0:33:59.400 --> 0:34:03.719
<v Speaker 1>they can win, but really mathematically it's it's highly improbable

0:34:03.760 --> 0:34:09.080
<v Speaker 1>that anything can happen. However, I can see that Jack Bogel.

0:34:09.160 --> 0:34:11.439
<v Speaker 1>Thank you so much for being so generous with your time.

0:34:11.560 --> 0:34:15.120
<v Speaker 1>This has been absolutely fascinating. For those of you who

0:34:15.160 --> 0:34:18.800
<v Speaker 1>are interested in hearing the conversation, continue be sure and

0:34:18.920 --> 0:34:21.200
<v Speaker 1>check out our podcast extras, where we keep the tape

0:34:21.320 --> 0:34:24.560
<v Speaker 1>rolling and continue chatting. You can check out my daily

0:34:24.640 --> 0:34:27.120
<v Speaker 1>column on Bloomberg View dot com or follow me on

0:34:27.239 --> 0:34:31.760
<v Speaker 1>Twitter at Ritolts. I'm Barry Ritolts. You're listening to Masters

0:34:31.800 --> 0:34:35.799
<v Speaker 1>in Business on Bloomberg Radio. Welcome back to the podcast. Jack.

0:34:35.880 --> 0:34:37.640
<v Speaker 1>Thank you so much for doing this. This has really

0:34:37.719 --> 0:34:42.279
<v Speaker 1>been tremendously fascinating. It was worth the drive to Pennsylvania

0:34:42.440 --> 0:34:47.759
<v Speaker 1>to come come see you. Um, I'm I'm absolutely fascinated

0:34:48.280 --> 0:34:52.520
<v Speaker 1>by everything you've accomplished. So we've talked a little bit

0:34:52.560 --> 0:34:56.480
<v Speaker 1>of the advantages of indexing for equities, and you mentioned

0:34:56.560 --> 0:35:01.640
<v Speaker 1>bond funds. There have been some pretty reasonable academic arguments

0:35:02.200 --> 0:35:06.240
<v Speaker 1>that you could do okay with active management with bond

0:35:06.320 --> 0:35:09.360
<v Speaker 1>funds because there's such a universe of choices. It's not

0:35:09.640 --> 0:35:13.840
<v Speaker 1>just treasuries, but it's treasuries and its corporates and its municipalities.

0:35:14.160 --> 0:35:16.440
<v Speaker 1>How do you feel about about bond funds? Do you

0:35:16.560 --> 0:35:20.000
<v Speaker 1>just own abroad? Um? Index of bond funds, or do

0:35:20.120 --> 0:35:23.759
<v Speaker 1>you look at active management and bonds and say, well,

0:35:23.840 --> 0:35:27.280
<v Speaker 1>maybe there's some value added there. Well, as a group,

0:35:27.360 --> 0:35:30.759
<v Speaker 1>bond managers cannot win because they are the market and

0:35:30.880 --> 0:35:33.160
<v Speaker 1>so they will as a group capture the market return.

0:35:33.239 --> 0:35:35.960
<v Speaker 1>There's just no question about this. And charging as they

0:35:36.040 --> 0:35:40.200
<v Speaker 1>do probably in the mutual fund business, probably sixty basis points,

0:35:40.200 --> 0:35:43.160
<v Speaker 1>seventy basis points. They just don't have a fighting chance

0:35:43.480 --> 0:35:48.240
<v Speaker 1>over the bond fund index. Now that index has some issues,

0:35:48.360 --> 0:35:51.840
<v Speaker 1>as they say, And I started the first bond in

0:35:51.920 --> 0:35:59.920
<v Speaker 1>next fund, by the way, years ago, yeah, thirty years ago,

0:36:00.440 --> 0:36:03.160
<v Speaker 1>and it's done just fine, met the test of competition.

0:36:03.960 --> 0:36:06.600
<v Speaker 1>But I'm not I think we can do better in

0:36:06.719 --> 0:36:09.040
<v Speaker 1>bond in next thing than the bond than the bond

0:36:09.080 --> 0:36:11.720
<v Speaker 1>in next the way it's constructed, because it's about sevent

0:36:12.640 --> 0:36:18.400
<v Speaker 1>treasuries and mortgage backed good mortgage backed government backed instruments,

0:36:19.000 --> 0:36:22.640
<v Speaker 1>and I think most investors should not have seventy in

0:36:22.719 --> 0:36:26.440
<v Speaker 1>the super safe category. I think something like thirty is

0:36:26.480 --> 0:36:28.640
<v Speaker 1>pretty good. So it should be a better assortment of

0:36:28.760 --> 0:36:31.920
<v Speaker 1>risk that potentially is generating more returns and as long

0:36:31.920 --> 0:36:35.360
<v Speaker 1>as you're holding it for decades, the short term volatility

0:36:35.440 --> 0:36:38.759
<v Speaker 1>is irrelevant. Yeah, Well, the the one that I have

0:36:38.960 --> 0:36:43.120
<v Speaker 1>to use myself is our intermediate intermediate term bond index fund.

0:36:43.520 --> 0:36:46.160
<v Speaker 1>It has it's just as volatile or as non volatile,

0:36:46.239 --> 0:36:49.360
<v Speaker 1>because that has the same duration or average maturity. And

0:36:49.840 --> 0:36:53.640
<v Speaker 1>but it's about thirty governments and it is the same

0:36:53.680 --> 0:36:56.160
<v Speaker 1>in every other respect. So if it has a higher yield,

0:36:57.000 --> 0:37:02.920
<v Speaker 1>the yield and a bond as today yield correlation with

0:37:03.280 --> 0:37:05.080
<v Speaker 1>the RETURNI you're gonna get in the next ten years,

0:37:05.560 --> 0:37:07.880
<v Speaker 1>so you might as well take advantage of it. And

0:37:07.960 --> 0:37:10.440
<v Speaker 1>I'd say particularly, I mean, yes, it's a little riskier,

0:37:10.920 --> 0:37:14.640
<v Speaker 1>but today people are dying for income, dying for income,

0:37:15.280 --> 0:37:17.799
<v Speaker 1>and to reach a little bit, you know, I don't

0:37:17.800 --> 0:37:20.160
<v Speaker 1>believe in big reaching for yield at all. Well, that

0:37:20.280 --> 0:37:22.879
<v Speaker 1>certainly was was a cluse of problems in the last

0:37:22.920 --> 0:37:26.840
<v Speaker 1>financial crisis. Everybody who reached for yields and said, I

0:37:27.000 --> 0:37:29.840
<v Speaker 1>understand this is subprime, but the rating agencies tell me

0:37:30.320 --> 0:37:32.320
<v Speaker 1>it's triple A, so I'm gonna hold my nose. And

0:37:32.400 --> 0:37:34.360
<v Speaker 1>by this didn't work out that way. It did not

0:37:34.480 --> 0:37:38.719
<v Speaker 1>work out well, to say the least. So so I

0:37:38.800 --> 0:37:41.360
<v Speaker 1>didn't realize you had created the first bond in next funds,

0:37:41.440 --> 0:37:45.160
<v Speaker 1>so we have we have bond indexes, which you would

0:37:45.200 --> 0:37:47.640
<v Speaker 1>like to see have a little more risk and uh

0:37:48.680 --> 0:37:51.800
<v Speaker 1>a little less of the super safe size we've already discussed,

0:37:52.600 --> 0:37:56.040
<v Speaker 1>uh the equity side. Let's let's talk a little bit

0:37:56.440 --> 0:37:59.800
<v Speaker 1>about some of the hot buzzwords that are going around today.

0:38:00.280 --> 0:38:02.600
<v Speaker 1>And I'm curious, as I already know what you ranch

0:38:02.680 --> 0:38:05.040
<v Speaker 1>is gonna be, but I feel obligated to ask before

0:38:05.080 --> 0:38:06.759
<v Speaker 1>we get to that, Can I just say one thing? Sure?

0:38:07.080 --> 0:38:14.640
<v Speaker 1>We also started in about nineteen, well in seven, to

0:38:14.800 --> 0:38:17.480
<v Speaker 1>broaden our index base from the S and P five hundred,

0:38:17.520 --> 0:38:20.560
<v Speaker 1>we started the bond in next fun. We then started

0:38:21.120 --> 0:38:23.239
<v Speaker 1>I realized that there was a certain attractiveness to owning

0:38:23.280 --> 0:38:25.480
<v Speaker 1>the whole market, so we started something called the extended

0:38:25.520 --> 0:38:27.759
<v Speaker 1>market in the next fun. How many holdings were in

0:38:27.840 --> 0:38:33.160
<v Speaker 1>that well probably um right in. It varies amazingly, but

0:38:33.280 --> 0:38:37.560
<v Speaker 1>probably right now because the Wilshire five thousand is something

0:38:37.640 --> 0:38:40.360
<v Speaker 1>like thirty stocks. It's it's even less than then it

0:38:40.440 --> 0:38:44.000
<v Speaker 1>got up to seventh, believe it or not. Late nineties, yeah, well,

0:38:44.040 --> 0:38:46.200
<v Speaker 1>we were cranking out a lot of new companies before

0:38:46.320 --> 0:38:49.759
<v Speaker 1>we realized that pets dot com wasn't a sustainable thing. Exactly.

0:38:50.400 --> 0:38:55.040
<v Speaker 1>So I also had an idea that growth might do

0:38:55.200 --> 0:38:58.200
<v Speaker 1>better than value for the for for young people investing

0:38:58.600 --> 0:39:01.240
<v Speaker 1>on a dollar averaging basis wouldn't be that much riskier,

0:39:01.840 --> 0:39:04.480
<v Speaker 1>and when they retired they might want an income fund.

0:39:04.920 --> 0:39:07.879
<v Speaker 1>So I I divided the SMP into two. As soon

0:39:07.920 --> 0:39:11.200
<v Speaker 1>as the SMP did that, I started a growth index

0:39:11.239 --> 0:39:14.000
<v Speaker 1>fund half of the SMP and a value index fund

0:39:14.040 --> 0:39:16.440
<v Speaker 1>the other half. It didn't work out very well. I mean,

0:39:16.440 --> 0:39:19.040
<v Speaker 1>it worked out fine from performance standpoint. Where we found

0:39:19.800 --> 0:39:21.839
<v Speaker 1>is the money poured into growth when growth was doing

0:39:21.920 --> 0:39:24.280
<v Speaker 1>well at the wrong time, out of growth and into value.

0:39:24.840 --> 0:39:27.239
<v Speaker 1>So you know, sometimes we may I think we've got

0:39:27.320 --> 0:39:29.880
<v Speaker 1>to be very aware of creating things that we know

0:39:30.120 --> 0:39:32.920
<v Speaker 1>investors are going to use badly. So we don't know,

0:39:33.040 --> 0:39:34.400
<v Speaker 1>we don't tell them what to use and how to

0:39:34.520 --> 0:39:38.160
<v Speaker 1>use it, but it happens, and it's a responsibility of us,

0:39:38.239 --> 0:39:41.399
<v Speaker 1>the sponsor, to do that. So that raises a really

0:39:41.520 --> 0:39:47.719
<v Speaker 1>significant question, which is how important is investor behavior to

0:39:47.880 --> 0:39:51.719
<v Speaker 1>long term returns and what can the average investor do

0:39:52.520 --> 0:39:56.640
<v Speaker 1>to make sure that they don't shoot themselves in the foot. Well,

0:39:56.840 --> 0:40:00.759
<v Speaker 1>the first thing to do is don't chase performance and

0:40:01.239 --> 0:40:03.520
<v Speaker 1>don't I have some salesman or you reading the paper

0:40:03.640 --> 0:40:05.400
<v Speaker 1>for that man, or I need to blame the salesman

0:40:05.480 --> 0:40:07.799
<v Speaker 1>for this says, here's a new manager on a new

0:40:07.880 --> 0:40:09.720
<v Speaker 1>fund and it's really doing great, or an old manager

0:40:09.800 --> 0:40:11.840
<v Speaker 1>and the fund is doing great, and this fund is

0:40:11.840 --> 0:40:15.560
<v Speaker 1>a great twenty year record. Turn away from that, because

0:40:15.600 --> 0:40:18.040
<v Speaker 1>it's next twenty years aren't going to be anywhere near

0:40:18.080 --> 0:40:20.880
<v Speaker 1>as good as its past. There are plenty of examples that,

0:40:20.960 --> 0:40:23.080
<v Speaker 1>with all due respect them on friends up in Boston.

0:40:23.360 --> 0:40:27.759
<v Speaker 1>Fideliti's Magellan Fund was a star fund for roughly twenty years.

0:40:27.840 --> 0:40:31.239
<v Speaker 1>Fantastic Peter Lynch and then his one of his successors

0:40:31.320 --> 0:40:34.840
<v Speaker 1>did really well. Peter Lynch was a superstar performer. And

0:40:34.920 --> 0:40:37.000
<v Speaker 1>then what happened well with a tiny little fund too,

0:40:37.120 --> 0:40:39.560
<v Speaker 1>don't forget that. And the fund that wasn't even offered

0:40:39.600 --> 0:40:42.120
<v Speaker 1>to the public for five or six years. Oh yeah,

0:40:43.160 --> 0:40:46.200
<v Speaker 1>we all have our little secrets, and uh so I

0:40:46.280 --> 0:40:48.800
<v Speaker 1>think overrated. But Peter Lynch was certainly a good manager.

0:40:48.920 --> 0:40:50.800
<v Speaker 1>But you know, his principle of you know, if you

0:40:50.880 --> 0:40:53.200
<v Speaker 1>see a product you liked by the stock, you know,

0:40:53.280 --> 0:40:56.640
<v Speaker 1>makes no rational sense, I'm sorry to say. And Peter

0:40:56.880 --> 0:41:01.759
<v Speaker 1>Lynch also at Madelon Magellan Funds. Hey Day said, in

0:41:01.880 --> 0:41:05.759
<v Speaker 1>words of one syllable in Barns, most investors would be

0:41:05.800 --> 0:41:09.120
<v Speaker 1>better off in an index fund. Was that barrens? I

0:41:09.160 --> 0:41:11.520
<v Speaker 1>know I read that from him, and that's not a concession,

0:41:12.000 --> 0:41:15.080
<v Speaker 1>that's the truth. Well, you have him saying that, you

0:41:15.160 --> 0:41:17.320
<v Speaker 1>have Warren Buffett saying that. We have a number of

0:41:17.400 --> 0:41:22.279
<v Speaker 1>people David Swinson, Swinson at the Yel Endowment, he's another one. Um,

0:41:23.600 --> 0:41:30.319
<v Speaker 1>it's amazing that people push against this because it's long

0:41:30.480 --> 0:41:33.320
<v Speaker 1>term in boring and there's nothing to talk about. And

0:41:33.520 --> 0:41:35.800
<v Speaker 1>but I guess shouldn't. That leads to the next question,

0:41:36.120 --> 0:41:39.600
<v Speaker 1>should investing be long term and boring? If you want

0:41:39.640 --> 0:41:42.759
<v Speaker 1>to have a comfortable retirement, Believe me, you'll be less

0:41:42.800 --> 0:41:44.600
<v Speaker 1>bored in your retirement. If you've got plenty of money,

0:41:45.760 --> 0:41:47.719
<v Speaker 1>You'll you'll be you'll be so on board. If you

0:41:47.760 --> 0:41:49.680
<v Speaker 1>don't do it that you'll have to go back to work.

0:41:50.120 --> 0:41:52.799
<v Speaker 1>So let me ask you about some of the hot

0:41:52.840 --> 0:41:55.960
<v Speaker 1>buzzwords that are out there and investing these days. And again,

0:41:56.080 --> 0:41:57.800
<v Speaker 1>this is a cheap because I'm pretty sure I know

0:41:57.920 --> 0:42:01.040
<v Speaker 1>what your answers are, but I feel obligated to ask this.

0:42:01.800 --> 0:42:06.280
<v Speaker 1>So your index funds are basically put together by market

0:42:06.360 --> 0:42:10.160
<v Speaker 1>cap waiting. But now there's something called smart beta, which

0:42:10.480 --> 0:42:14.160
<v Speaker 1>is different ways of assembling an index that don't rely

0:42:14.360 --> 0:42:17.760
<v Speaker 1>on cap waiting. What do you think of the idea

0:42:17.800 --> 0:42:23.520
<v Speaker 1>of smart beta? Smart beta is stupid? Okay, that's why, Well,

0:42:23.560 --> 0:42:26.280
<v Speaker 1>I mean I didn't say that's that's what Nobel laureate

0:42:26.480 --> 0:42:31.359
<v Speaker 1>Bill Sharp says. I just quoted him. And the reason

0:42:31.440 --> 0:42:34.399
<v Speaker 1>it is just think about this for a minute. It's

0:42:34.480 --> 0:42:37.200
<v Speaker 1>it's another form of active management to begin with. But

0:42:37.480 --> 0:42:41.480
<v Speaker 1>if smart beta is good, and that that means it

0:42:41.600 --> 0:42:47.120
<v Speaker 1>beats the index, then dumb beta this does even worse

0:42:47.160 --> 0:42:50.680
<v Speaker 1>than the index. Right, so smart and dumb are different.

0:42:50.960 --> 0:42:52.480
<v Speaker 1>But why are people going to be dumb if it's

0:42:52.520 --> 0:42:55.160
<v Speaker 1>so easy to be smart? It's just another claim that

0:42:55.360 --> 0:43:00.560
<v Speaker 1>I can do this better now. Happily, after Isdom Tree

0:43:00.600 --> 0:43:05.239
<v Speaker 1>and and Rob Arns fund came out a decade ago,

0:43:05.360 --> 0:43:07.920
<v Speaker 1>his fund is now more than ten years old. What

0:43:08.160 --> 0:43:13.120
<v Speaker 1>happened and the answer is essentially nothing. His fund beat

0:43:13.320 --> 0:43:16.000
<v Speaker 1>the S and P five hundred, but I think thirty

0:43:16.040 --> 0:43:20.640
<v Speaker 1>basis points, but it was more Votel and therefore it's

0:43:20.640 --> 0:43:24.360
<v Speaker 1>sharp ratio. The relationship relationship between risk and reward. I

0:43:24.440 --> 0:43:27.280
<v Speaker 1>don't hold me to the numbers. But the sharp ratio

0:43:27.440 --> 0:43:29.359
<v Speaker 1>of I mean, I mean his guests here, I won't

0:43:29.400 --> 0:43:31.799
<v Speaker 1>be too far off the sharp ratio of the five

0:43:32.160 --> 0:43:34.759
<v Speaker 1>of us like forty one. On the sharp ratio of

0:43:35.680 --> 0:43:40.359
<v Speaker 1>Arns fund was thirty six. So he lost. He had

0:43:40.440 --> 0:43:42.920
<v Speaker 1>ten years to prove it. Now maybe he'll prove it

0:43:42.960 --> 0:43:45.600
<v Speaker 1>the next ten years. Who can say, But why would

0:43:45.640 --> 0:43:48.399
<v Speaker 1>that be, I mean, where's all the brain power. He's

0:43:48.400 --> 0:43:49.840
<v Speaker 1>a very smart guy, by the way, one of the

0:43:49.880 --> 0:43:52.200
<v Speaker 1>smartest guys in this business. He was a four guest

0:43:52.239 --> 0:43:54.120
<v Speaker 1>on the show, one of our earliest guests. He's a

0:43:54.239 --> 0:43:58.160
<v Speaker 1>delightful gentleman. I always enjoy his company. UM And it

0:43:58.320 --> 0:44:03.319
<v Speaker 1>was really an in nightful thought to say, let's think

0:44:03.360 --> 0:44:08.279
<v Speaker 1>of different ways to put together UM, to put together indexes.

0:44:08.480 --> 0:44:13.000
<v Speaker 1>But your position is this isn't after fees, after everything else.

0:44:13.600 --> 0:44:16.120
<v Speaker 1>Once you now you risk adjusted, you look at all

0:44:16.160 --> 0:44:20.640
<v Speaker 1>this volatility, your your conclusion is this just isn't worth it. Well, then,

0:44:20.680 --> 0:44:22.480
<v Speaker 1>even if you look at absolute returns, it's like a

0:44:22.520 --> 0:44:25.600
<v Speaker 1>thirty basis points better over ten years. Now, that's not trivial.

0:44:26.200 --> 0:44:29.320
<v Speaker 1>But when he has essentially the same portfolio as the

0:44:29.400 --> 0:44:32.960
<v Speaker 1>index fund with different waitings, you can't expect anything to

0:44:33.040 --> 0:44:36.040
<v Speaker 1>be too different. So I think it's it's over sold.

0:44:36.800 --> 0:44:40.640
<v Speaker 1>Jeremy Siegell of Wisdom Trade described this as a new

0:44:40.719 --> 0:44:43.440
<v Speaker 1>Copernican view of the world. Everybody had it wrong, and

0:44:43.520 --> 0:44:45.759
<v Speaker 1>Copernica said, oh, by god, that son is in the

0:44:45.840 --> 0:44:49.200
<v Speaker 1>middle and the new sun is smart Beta can't be

0:44:50.080 --> 0:44:52.960
<v Speaker 1>because we're all as a group average. And if they

0:44:53.000 --> 0:44:55.640
<v Speaker 1>are these smart guys over there, there are dumb guys

0:44:55.680 --> 0:44:59.000
<v Speaker 1>over there. Smart and dumb both also net net. When

0:44:59.040 --> 0:45:01.920
<v Speaker 1>you're buying smart day, you're really buying a distribution of

0:45:02.120 --> 0:45:04.840
<v Speaker 1>really smart guys, really average guys, really dumb guys, and

0:45:04.960 --> 0:45:08.160
<v Speaker 1>you don't know who's who across all the smart beta funds.

0:45:08.239 --> 0:45:10.200
<v Speaker 1>You know, and then think about this one step further.

0:45:11.160 --> 0:45:16.440
<v Speaker 1>The index essentially guarantee the dollar value index essentially guarantees

0:45:16.480 --> 0:45:20.840
<v Speaker 1>you the return that will investors share. So that's written

0:45:20.960 --> 0:45:25.719
<v Speaker 1>stone etched in stone. Uh, smart Beta may do a

0:45:25.760 --> 0:45:29.200
<v Speaker 1>little better, may do a little worse. What's the point

0:45:29.239 --> 0:45:32.440
<v Speaker 1>of taking the risk when the guarantee of getting the

0:45:32.520 --> 0:45:36.360
<v Speaker 1>market return is right at your hand? Why would you speculate?

0:45:36.800 --> 0:45:39.080
<v Speaker 1>Why would you speculate on maybe this guy can do

0:45:39.160 --> 0:45:41.640
<v Speaker 1>it better. And believe me, some of these smart beta

0:45:41.719 --> 0:45:44.120
<v Speaker 1>funds will for a short period of times will do it,

0:45:44.520 --> 0:45:46.800
<v Speaker 1>and some of them won't. I mean, that's the nature

0:45:46.840 --> 0:45:49.200
<v Speaker 1>of the beast. I've described it as why do you

0:45:49.239 --> 0:45:53.040
<v Speaker 1>want to romance alpha and forsake beta when beta is

0:45:53.080 --> 0:45:57.279
<v Speaker 1>a short thing. So that's smart beta. Let me ask

0:45:57.360 --> 0:45:59.520
<v Speaker 1>you about something else that I suspect they know to

0:45:59.640 --> 0:46:04.160
<v Speaker 1>your know your answers. This year commodities have gold especially

0:46:04.239 --> 0:46:07.200
<v Speaker 1>has had a huge bounce back. We sort of tremendous

0:46:07.280 --> 0:46:11.760
<v Speaker 1>commodity run from the early two thousands until two thousand eleven.

0:46:12.239 --> 0:46:16.520
<v Speaker 1>What are your thoughts on things like commodity funds, gold,

0:46:16.960 --> 0:46:22.640
<v Speaker 1>and uh energy for for investors? No, no, and no no.

0:46:22.960 --> 0:46:25.920
<v Speaker 1>Let's repeat this in case those of you missed Gold. No,

0:46:26.360 --> 0:46:30.480
<v Speaker 1>commodity funds, no oil funds. No tell us why? Okay,

0:46:30.520 --> 0:46:32.560
<v Speaker 1>well oil is it commins I'm pick of oil as

0:46:32.600 --> 0:46:35.880
<v Speaker 1>a commodity now and then is think about what a

0:46:35.920 --> 0:46:39.160
<v Speaker 1>stock is? Okay. Stock has an internal rate of return

0:46:39.640 --> 0:46:41.799
<v Speaker 1>and it's composed of the earnings growth in the divin

0:46:41.880 --> 0:46:44.560
<v Speaker 1>end yield. When you buy it, it's there. If the

0:46:44.600 --> 0:46:47.440
<v Speaker 1>stock goes up and down, that return is there. It

0:46:47.480 --> 0:46:50.440
<v Speaker 1>has an underlying internal rate of return. You have a

0:46:50.600 --> 0:46:53.520
<v Speaker 1>discounted cash flow from the future. You're buying an existing

0:46:54.080 --> 0:46:56.640
<v Speaker 1>business that's gonna generate revenue and profits and you get

0:46:56.680 --> 0:46:59.520
<v Speaker 1>to participate in that. Now, take a bond, It has

0:46:59.560 --> 0:47:03.839
<v Speaker 1>an intern return equal to the interest coupon that you're

0:47:03.840 --> 0:47:06.000
<v Speaker 1>going to get over the next ten years or twenty

0:47:06.080 --> 0:47:10.080
<v Speaker 1>five years, whatever the case may be. Commodities have no

0:47:10.600 --> 0:47:13.640
<v Speaker 1>internal rate of return, and there's a cost of storage

0:47:13.680 --> 0:47:16.120
<v Speaker 1>and security for things like gold or royal. So when

0:47:16.160 --> 0:47:19.520
<v Speaker 1>you buy a unit of gold, why do you buy

0:47:19.560 --> 0:47:22.000
<v Speaker 1>it because you think you can sell it to somebody

0:47:22.320 --> 0:47:25.879
<v Speaker 1>for a higher price. That is the definition of speculation.

0:47:26.719 --> 0:47:29.560
<v Speaker 1>That's the classic greater full theory. You may have paid

0:47:29.600 --> 0:47:31.799
<v Speaker 1>a lot, but someone will pay more. And well, I mean,

0:47:31.840 --> 0:47:33.239
<v Speaker 1>you may be right, by the way, and there's no

0:47:33.320 --> 0:47:34.960
<v Speaker 1>reason you can't be right, but that just means the

0:47:35.000 --> 0:47:37.680
<v Speaker 1>other guy is wrong. And you don't know, as you

0:47:37.760 --> 0:47:39.719
<v Speaker 1>as the investor, you don't know which of those two

0:47:39.800 --> 0:47:42.480
<v Speaker 1>parties you're gonna be five years from that. And another

0:47:42.600 --> 0:47:45.080
<v Speaker 1>thing when you mentioned gold, is it brings to mind

0:47:45.200 --> 0:47:49.320
<v Speaker 1>is everybody used to talk about gold. Forbes magazine highlighted

0:47:49.360 --> 0:47:51.799
<v Speaker 1>in all their reviews for years and years when they

0:47:51.880 --> 0:47:54.799
<v Speaker 1>picked the best funds, gold funds, gold funds. And then

0:47:54.880 --> 0:47:57.040
<v Speaker 1>we we had the boom and gold and then we

0:47:57.120 --> 0:48:00.080
<v Speaker 1>had the collapse and nobody started talking about No, you

0:48:00.120 --> 0:48:03.800
<v Speaker 1>talked about gold. Now we have another boom and everybody's

0:48:03.840 --> 0:48:07.439
<v Speaker 1>talking about gold. Then gold collapses last year, nobody's talking

0:48:07.480 --> 0:48:10.719
<v Speaker 1>about gold. Now gold is up this year. Everybody. This

0:48:10.840 --> 0:48:14.120
<v Speaker 1>is metaphorically speaking, everybody's talking about gold. You know, don't

0:48:14.160 --> 0:48:17.360
<v Speaker 1>pay any attention to gold. I mean, it would not

0:48:17.560 --> 0:48:20.759
<v Speaker 1>be stupid. I wouldn't do it, but it would not

0:48:20.840 --> 0:48:23.560
<v Speaker 1>be stupid to have a very small position in gold

0:48:24.120 --> 0:48:29.759
<v Speaker 1>as a hedge against worldwide hyper inflation. Maybe five I

0:48:29.800 --> 0:48:32.359
<v Speaker 1>wouldn't do any more than that, But I don't think

0:48:32.400 --> 0:48:36.280
<v Speaker 1>you should do that. But it's at least defensible because

0:48:36.320 --> 0:48:40.120
<v Speaker 1>you're you have a specific goal in mind, and it's insurance.

0:48:40.160 --> 0:48:43.400
<v Speaker 1>You're paying a five percent insurance on the remote possibility

0:48:43.440 --> 0:48:46.360
<v Speaker 1>of global hyper inflation. But if you're wrong, it's a

0:48:46.480 --> 0:48:49.399
<v Speaker 1>giant five percent drag on your portfolio for the next

0:48:49.480 --> 0:48:52.799
<v Speaker 1>few decades. And that's huge. That is well, you guys

0:48:52.840 --> 0:48:55.480
<v Speaker 1>are talking about five basis points. This is five hundred

0:48:55.520 --> 0:48:59.560
<v Speaker 1>basis points. That's a tremendous, tremendous drag. Let's talk a

0:48:59.600 --> 0:49:02.359
<v Speaker 1>little bit it and by the way, I'm pretty much

0:49:02.400 --> 0:49:05.839
<v Speaker 1>what I expected you to say about commodities. Let's let

0:49:05.880 --> 0:49:07.920
<v Speaker 1>me find two things to talk to you about that

0:49:07.960 --> 0:49:11.000
<v Speaker 1>I'm gonna have to push back a little bit. One

0:49:11.719 --> 0:49:15.239
<v Speaker 1>is e t fs exchange traded funds. I know you're

0:49:15.320 --> 0:49:18.360
<v Speaker 1>not a big fan of them, but lots of investors

0:49:18.440 --> 0:49:22.160
<v Speaker 1>fund it's a very inexpensive, simple way to get exposure

0:49:22.239 --> 0:49:25.680
<v Speaker 1>to the S and P five hundred or whatever asset

0:49:25.760 --> 0:49:28.960
<v Speaker 1>class they want. Why are you not a big fan

0:49:29.040 --> 0:49:33.960
<v Speaker 1>of ETFs? Well, I'll start with little anecdote. A wonderful

0:49:34.000 --> 0:49:37.040
<v Speaker 1>guy named Nathan Most came to visit me right in

0:49:37.120 --> 0:49:40.000
<v Speaker 1>my office upstairs here at Vanguard, and he said, I

0:49:40.080 --> 0:49:42.480
<v Speaker 1>have a great idea for you. We I want to

0:49:42.520 --> 0:49:45.560
<v Speaker 1>start the first exchange traded mutual fund and have Vanguards

0:49:45.640 --> 0:49:48.120
<v Speaker 1>my partner there. I was I could have not only

0:49:48.200 --> 0:49:50.759
<v Speaker 1>created the first index mutual fund, but the first e

0:49:50.880 --> 0:49:56.480
<v Speaker 1>t F. And I said, Nate, no way, because the

0:49:56.600 --> 0:49:59.279
<v Speaker 1>description that you got from from Nathan, or at least

0:49:59.280 --> 0:50:02.279
<v Speaker 1>their first day later on. Now you can trade the

0:50:02.480 --> 0:50:05.520
<v Speaker 1>S and P five hundred all day long in real time.

0:50:06.360 --> 0:50:09.359
<v Speaker 1>And I would say, that's what kind of a nut

0:50:09.480 --> 0:50:11.520
<v Speaker 1>would want to do that. I mean, there must be

0:50:11.600 --> 0:50:13.719
<v Speaker 1>better things to do than that in this life. But

0:50:13.800 --> 0:50:17.000
<v Speaker 1>in any event, it's the trading idea. When my idea

0:50:17.040 --> 0:50:21.000
<v Speaker 1>of indexing broad market indexing by the SNP five and

0:50:21.200 --> 0:50:24.280
<v Speaker 1>hold it forever, what war is said to be warned?

0:50:24.640 --> 0:50:27.920
<v Speaker 1>Warren Buffett's favorite holding period is forever. So so the

0:50:28.040 --> 0:50:32.439
<v Speaker 1>idea of an SMP five hundred funds that if you're gonna,

0:50:32.440 --> 0:50:34.800
<v Speaker 1>if you're gonna do that exposure, you're better doing it

0:50:34.880 --> 0:50:38.799
<v Speaker 1>with the low cost mutual funds than an index funds. UH.

0:50:38.880 --> 0:50:41.080
<v Speaker 1>Then in UH E t F so there is no

0:50:41.239 --> 0:50:45.880
<v Speaker 1>temptation to trade intra day or to play around that.

0:50:46.120 --> 0:50:47.920
<v Speaker 1>That's not what you think people should be doing with

0:50:48.000 --> 0:50:50.239
<v Speaker 1>their time or not. But let's let's examine the E

0:50:50.320 --> 0:50:52.759
<v Speaker 1>t F business for just a minute. And that is

0:50:52.840 --> 0:50:55.040
<v Speaker 1>if you look at E t F s all the

0:50:55.080 --> 0:50:56.520
<v Speaker 1>big ones. Man, I can't look at all of them,

0:50:56.600 --> 0:51:00.200
<v Speaker 1>but the big ones, particularly in the normal ones uh

0:51:00.719 --> 0:51:03.920
<v Speaker 1>or about seventy by financial institutions, they're trading them in

0:51:03.920 --> 0:51:07.960
<v Speaker 1>the marketplace. The spider, the S and P five UM

0:51:08.920 --> 0:51:14.280
<v Speaker 1>E t F spider is the most widely traded stock

0:51:14.440 --> 0:51:18.879
<v Speaker 1>in the world every day, And if you look further

0:51:19.600 --> 0:51:21.359
<v Speaker 1>this year, which is a little more bottle than most

0:51:21.480 --> 0:51:25.600
<v Speaker 1>years so far, the dollar volume of trading in e

0:51:25.760 --> 0:51:28.720
<v Speaker 1>t f s is the same size as the dollar

0:51:28.840 --> 0:51:33.160
<v Speaker 1>volume of trading and common stocks. Unbelievable because common stocks

0:51:33.200 --> 0:51:37.280
<v Speaker 1>are worth about twenty three trillion dollars and the spiders

0:51:37.280 --> 0:51:40.239
<v Speaker 1>are worth about two. So spiders are turning over it

0:51:40.719 --> 0:51:42.920
<v Speaker 1>three thousand percent a year and stocks are turning over

0:51:43.040 --> 0:51:46.040
<v Speaker 1>it two a year or something like that. So they're

0:51:46.080 --> 0:51:49.680
<v Speaker 1>trading instruments owned by large institutions. I mean, look at

0:51:49.680 --> 0:51:52.719
<v Speaker 1>the spider head and it says institutions, here's what you

0:51:52.840 --> 0:51:55.440
<v Speaker 1>need to trade. I mean, it's practically verbatim from the

0:51:55.960 --> 0:51:59.279
<v Speaker 1>It's just it may be irrelevant, but I don't think

0:51:59.320 --> 0:52:01.279
<v Speaker 1>in the long run that has anything to do with

0:52:01.320 --> 0:52:03.880
<v Speaker 1>the mutual fund business or individual And it certainly shouldn't

0:52:03.920 --> 0:52:06.960
<v Speaker 1>have anything to do with individuals, because why would you

0:52:07.160 --> 0:52:11.040
<v Speaker 1>as an individual want to trade against these giant institutions

0:52:11.080 --> 0:52:14.840
<v Speaker 1>who do nothing but use this as a either trading

0:52:14.880 --> 0:52:17.839
<v Speaker 1>tool or a hedging tool or whatever it is you're saying.

0:52:17.880 --> 0:52:21.279
<v Speaker 1>This is not a playground for individuals to step into

0:52:21.520 --> 0:52:24.440
<v Speaker 1>and that looks like it's roughly seventy percent of the business.

0:52:24.920 --> 0:52:27.560
<v Speaker 1>And you know, I don't need even to criticize it.

0:52:27.600 --> 0:52:29.799
<v Speaker 1>It's kind of irrelevant when you get to the other

0:52:31.080 --> 0:52:32.640
<v Speaker 1>of the business. And I may be a little often

0:52:32.719 --> 0:52:38.240
<v Speaker 1>my percentages here, but they're individuals, and you know, something

0:52:38.360 --> 0:52:40.920
<v Speaker 1>like two thirds of them are using e t F

0:52:41.080 --> 0:52:43.960
<v Speaker 1>to trade, and one third of them that would be

0:52:44.000 --> 0:52:45.960
<v Speaker 1>ten pc of the total. All the e t F

0:52:46.080 --> 0:52:49.399
<v Speaker 1>market are using them, buying and holding them and maybe

0:52:49.520 --> 0:52:52.280
<v Speaker 1>using them. You know, we have it's a funny technical

0:52:52.360 --> 0:52:54.719
<v Speaker 1>thing in this business. But you know, if you want

0:52:54.760 --> 0:52:56.520
<v Speaker 1>to put it in a thousand dollars a month into

0:52:56.560 --> 0:52:58.480
<v Speaker 1>a van guard fund and then you want to take

0:52:58.520 --> 0:53:00.319
<v Speaker 1>out five thousand dollars at the end of the year

0:53:01.160 --> 0:53:05.839
<v Speaker 1>and buy Christmas presents whatever you might want. Um, it's

0:53:05.920 --> 0:53:07.880
<v Speaker 1>very difficult to do that here because we don't like

0:53:08.040 --> 0:53:10.400
<v Speaker 1>buying and selling at the same time. You can do

0:53:10.520 --> 0:53:13.080
<v Speaker 1>it with our e t s very easily. It's a

0:53:13.160 --> 0:53:16.840
<v Speaker 1>certain market place there of people who aren't traders, but

0:53:17.000 --> 0:53:19.760
<v Speaker 1>like the flexibility ETFs had, and I have no problem

0:53:19.800 --> 0:53:23.040
<v Speaker 1>with that. The other the other part of the problem, however,

0:53:23.200 --> 0:53:25.959
<v Speaker 1>the e t F problem, is there is this huge

0:53:26.000 --> 0:53:29.160
<v Speaker 1>amount in number, not so much in assets, of funds

0:53:29.200 --> 0:53:32.239
<v Speaker 1>that are doing things that no intelligent investor would ever do.

0:53:33.120 --> 0:53:35.480
<v Speaker 1>Triple leverage and you can bet every day whether the

0:53:35.560 --> 0:53:38.640
<v Speaker 1>markets going up or down. Isn't that grand? Not only

0:53:38.719 --> 0:53:42.239
<v Speaker 1>triple leveraged up, but inverse triple averaged. As long as

0:53:42.280 --> 0:53:44.000
<v Speaker 1>you know whether the market's going up or down during

0:53:44.040 --> 0:53:46.480
<v Speaker 1>the day, you're gonna make a fortune. Who who knows

0:53:46.600 --> 0:53:48.359
<v Speaker 1>what the market's going to go up any or down

0:53:48.400 --> 0:53:50.480
<v Speaker 1>any given day? Well, I guess these smart people that

0:53:50.680 --> 0:53:53.120
<v Speaker 1>have these funds, but they all have both of them,

0:53:53.760 --> 0:53:56.400
<v Speaker 1>that's right. They don't compete with each other. And there

0:53:56.400 --> 0:53:58.520
<v Speaker 1>are a whole lot of other wacky things. I mean,

0:53:58.640 --> 0:54:00.839
<v Speaker 1>I don't think US and invest there's you. I'm sure

0:54:00.840 --> 0:54:03.720
<v Speaker 1>you're gonna come to this, should be buying individual foreign

0:54:04.200 --> 0:54:08.440
<v Speaker 1>non US. So let's let's ask that question. A lot

0:54:08.520 --> 0:54:13.720
<v Speaker 1>of the academic data says that if you're diversified internationally,

0:54:14.440 --> 0:54:17.400
<v Speaker 1>parts of the world are sometimes doing better than the US,

0:54:17.440 --> 0:54:19.839
<v Speaker 1>and sometimes the US is doing part of the world.

0:54:19.960 --> 0:54:23.240
<v Speaker 1>If we want to really be diversified, you need US

0:54:23.400 --> 0:54:27.080
<v Speaker 1>and not just have an overwhelming home country bias UH

0:54:27.360 --> 0:54:32.439
<v Speaker 1>developed world X US and then emerging markets. What's wrong

0:54:32.480 --> 0:54:36.000
<v Speaker 1>with having a smattering of those in your portfolio so

0:54:36.200 --> 0:54:40.040
<v Speaker 1>that you get to take advantage of the growth of

0:54:41.200 --> 0:54:45.600
<v Speaker 1>the Pacific RIM in China and South America and etcetera. Well,

0:54:45.640 --> 0:54:48.040
<v Speaker 1>the question is is an advantage? I mean, tell someone

0:54:48.120 --> 0:54:49.960
<v Speaker 1>to put all their money in Brazil two years ago

0:54:50.400 --> 0:54:52.680
<v Speaker 1>because somebody who put in all their money in China

0:54:52.840 --> 0:54:56.080
<v Speaker 1>year ago. Isn't an advantage or is it just you know,

0:54:56.200 --> 0:54:58.000
<v Speaker 1>kind of a little bubble going on in those Well,

0:54:58.040 --> 0:55:00.759
<v Speaker 1>but you're not picking individual countries. You're gonna have a

0:55:00.840 --> 0:55:07.080
<v Speaker 1>broad index of international companies, and therefore it should theoretically

0:55:07.480 --> 0:55:10.680
<v Speaker 1>the gain should offset the losses and then some and

0:55:10.760 --> 0:55:13.640
<v Speaker 1>so you have exposure elsewhere. You're not a big fan

0:55:13.719 --> 0:55:16.680
<v Speaker 1>of that, Well, I'm not. And and the reason goes

0:55:16.760 --> 0:55:19.320
<v Speaker 1>back to when I started to think about it seriously

0:55:19.680 --> 0:55:25.040
<v Speaker 1>writing my book bogelon Mutual Funds. Back in Bogel on

0:55:25.480 --> 0:55:27.800
<v Speaker 1>Mutual Funds, let's see what I have here. I have

0:55:28.400 --> 0:55:31.000
<v Speaker 1>common sense on mutual funds that probably says something very

0:55:31.040 --> 0:55:32.960
<v Speaker 1>similar to this. But this is a little more recent,

0:55:33.640 --> 0:55:36.800
<v Speaker 1>so I said, tenth edition forward by David Swinson. So

0:55:36.920 --> 0:55:40.280
<v Speaker 1>when you say recent, this came originally came out almost

0:55:40.320 --> 0:55:44.760
<v Speaker 1>fifteen years ago. Right, the original was in nineteen seventeen

0:55:44.800 --> 0:55:47.880
<v Speaker 1>years ago. Interestingly enough, I'll get back to the other

0:55:47.920 --> 0:55:51.239
<v Speaker 1>subject in a second, But interestingly enough, the first book

0:55:51.280 --> 0:55:56.080
<v Speaker 1>came out at a market high and the second and

0:55:56.160 --> 0:55:58.480
<v Speaker 1>the second book came out of the market low. And

0:55:58.640 --> 0:56:01.799
<v Speaker 1>I would hardly change one word in the whole second edition.

0:56:02.440 --> 0:56:06.560
<v Speaker 1>I reprinted it verbatim and then Mark put red Nantucket

0:56:06.640 --> 0:56:08.640
<v Speaker 1>read for any changes that took place in the book.

0:56:08.800 --> 0:56:11.840
<v Speaker 1>Now in the tenth edition, that's that's used. After the

0:56:11.960 --> 0:56:14.840
<v Speaker 1>financial crisis, you could see some of the changes that

0:56:14.880 --> 0:56:18.440
<v Speaker 1>were made, but they're really very modest. You really didn't

0:56:18.520 --> 0:56:20.960
<v Speaker 1>change any of the themes in this. You just kind

0:56:21.000 --> 0:56:24.719
<v Speaker 1>of fleshed it out post crisis. It worked. Indexing worked

0:56:24.760 --> 0:56:26.680
<v Speaker 1>in the good market, indexing worked in the not so

0:56:26.840 --> 0:56:30.040
<v Speaker 1>good market, and and court low cost worked in the

0:56:30.080 --> 0:56:32.080
<v Speaker 1>good market and not so good and also in they're

0:56:32.120 --> 0:56:35.000
<v Speaker 1>not so good market. It has to So getting back

0:56:35.040 --> 0:56:39.919
<v Speaker 1>to I said in my first book, Uh, look, US

0:56:40.000 --> 0:56:42.960
<v Speaker 1>companies got half of their revenues. This is true now

0:56:43.000 --> 0:56:45.240
<v Speaker 1>at least a little bit less than half of the revenues,

0:56:45.239 --> 0:56:48.120
<v Speaker 1>and alter their earnings from outside the U S we

0:56:48.400 --> 0:56:50.880
<v Speaker 1>you have an international portfolio, why do you want a

0:56:51.000 --> 0:56:55.160
<v Speaker 1>larger one? And then I say, take a look at

0:56:55.239 --> 0:57:00.920
<v Speaker 1>what comprises that international portfolio. Your largest invest is Japan,

0:57:01.200 --> 0:57:04.400
<v Speaker 1>Your second largest investment is the UK, Your third largest

0:57:04.440 --> 0:57:07.920
<v Speaker 1>investment is France. Now, if returns are developed out of

0:57:08.040 --> 0:57:12.160
<v Speaker 1>national economic strength, does anybody think that the UK and

0:57:12.280 --> 0:57:15.040
<v Speaker 1>Japan and France were gonna do better than the US

0:57:15.400 --> 0:57:18.920
<v Speaker 1>in the next ten fift twenty years. I can't imagine it.

0:57:19.680 --> 0:57:21.880
<v Speaker 1>And now I may be wrong. I'm not saying this

0:57:22.040 --> 0:57:26.880
<v Speaker 1>is written in stone, but that's for that'st of the money.

0:57:27.400 --> 0:57:29.840
<v Speaker 1>So if people knew they were putting forty of their

0:57:29.880 --> 0:57:33.400
<v Speaker 1>international money, so called international non us is a better

0:57:33.480 --> 0:57:38.960
<v Speaker 1>formulation in Great Britain, France and and the Japan. I

0:57:39.040 --> 0:57:42.000
<v Speaker 1>mean when every one of those economies has real problems.

0:57:42.720 --> 0:57:46.120
<v Speaker 1>The French don't work very hard, the Japanese have a

0:57:46.120 --> 0:57:51.360
<v Speaker 1>structured and deeply aging economy, overburdened by future retirement claims,

0:57:51.880 --> 0:57:55.800
<v Speaker 1>terrible demographics, and they're a great exporter. But then they

0:57:55.880 --> 0:57:57.959
<v Speaker 1>have issues. And Britain doesn't know what's going to happen

0:57:58.240 --> 0:58:01.480
<v Speaker 1>if they do the the exit from the European Community,

0:58:01.520 --> 0:58:02.840
<v Speaker 1>and or do they know what's going to happen if

0:58:02.840 --> 0:58:05.480
<v Speaker 1>they stay in So what would happen if a sharp

0:58:06.480 --> 0:58:10.720
<v Speaker 1>upstart company let's call them Vanguard, says, here's a broad

0:58:11.200 --> 0:58:14.880
<v Speaker 1>international index that's fairly evenly weighted. It's not just these

0:58:14.960 --> 0:58:18.880
<v Speaker 1>three countries. Might that change your perspective or do you

0:58:19.000 --> 0:58:22.440
<v Speaker 1>still think, Hey, you get plenty of the SNP five hundred.

0:58:22.520 --> 0:58:25.520
<v Speaker 1>Half the revenue comes from overseas. That's all the overseas

0:58:25.800 --> 0:58:30.320
<v Speaker 1>exposure anyone really needs. I don't like the idea because

0:58:30.360 --> 0:58:33.200
<v Speaker 1>you would have as much and I don't know Honduras

0:58:34.120 --> 0:58:36.440
<v Speaker 1>as you do in in Great Britain. It wouldn't make

0:58:36.480 --> 0:58:40.280
<v Speaker 1>any sense. Uh So, But to make matters worse, when

0:58:40.280 --> 0:58:44.880
<v Speaker 1>I made this statement in we now have twenty two

0:58:44.960 --> 0:58:48.800
<v Speaker 1>years of history, right, how was the prediction? And the

0:58:48.880 --> 0:58:51.840
<v Speaker 1>answer is that don't hold me to the exact numbers,

0:58:52.520 --> 0:58:55.800
<v Speaker 1>but that the U S portfolio is up about say seven,

0:58:57.680 --> 0:59:01.640
<v Speaker 1>and the non use portfolios up about two. So the

0:59:01.800 --> 0:59:05.200
<v Speaker 1>US is still winning versus the international. So I committed

0:59:05.240 --> 0:59:10.120
<v Speaker 1>the elements in very I was right now, I want

0:59:10.120 --> 0:59:11.760
<v Speaker 1>to be very clear in this. Does that mean I

0:59:11.800 --> 0:59:14.480
<v Speaker 1>will be equally right in the future. I can't imagine it.

0:59:15.000 --> 0:59:17.760
<v Speaker 1>You think eventually, I mean reversion comes in. Yeah, and

0:59:17.840 --> 0:59:20.520
<v Speaker 1>eventually those two positions will reverse. The US Well, I

0:59:20.600 --> 0:59:23.280
<v Speaker 1>don't think they will reverse, but I don't think that

0:59:23.400 --> 0:59:26.200
<v Speaker 1>spread is is a durable spread. And then the reason

0:59:26.240 --> 0:59:29.040
<v Speaker 1>I don't think that reverse is we have this fabulous

0:59:29.080 --> 0:59:32.280
<v Speaker 1>economy here. I mean, yes, it has problems, but probably

0:59:32.360 --> 0:59:34.800
<v Speaker 1>less problems than any country in the world, no doubt

0:59:34.800 --> 0:59:38.160
<v Speaker 1>about that. And my favorite quote is this is the

0:59:38.360 --> 0:59:42.720
<v Speaker 1>cleanest shirt in a dirty hamper. Sure, exactly right. And well,

0:59:42.760 --> 0:59:44.840
<v Speaker 1>I mean I'd say was even cleaner than that. We're

0:59:44.960 --> 0:59:49.240
<v Speaker 1>number one in innovation and technology. Uh, We're not number

0:59:49.280 --> 0:59:53.360
<v Speaker 1>one an entrepreneurship. We're still a great manufacturing company, all

0:59:53.440 --> 0:59:56.000
<v Speaker 1>not as great as we are, and we still have

0:59:56.680 --> 1:00:00.360
<v Speaker 1>you know, all these new companies being started, existing companies

1:00:00.400 --> 1:00:04.200
<v Speaker 1>being run more and more efficiently and more than anything else,

1:00:04.360 --> 1:00:06.360
<v Speaker 1>or at least as much as all that. We have

1:00:06.520 --> 1:00:10.200
<v Speaker 1>great institutional structure in this country. We have legal protections,

1:00:10.280 --> 1:00:13.280
<v Speaker 1>we have courts, we have laws, and no one's going

1:00:13.320 --> 1:00:16.640
<v Speaker 1>to take your stock away from you confiscated overnight, and

1:00:17.520 --> 1:00:20.720
<v Speaker 1>shareholder rights are as good as any country in the world,

1:00:20.760 --> 1:00:22.840
<v Speaker 1>maybe with the exception of I don't think they do

1:00:22.880 --> 1:00:25.520
<v Speaker 1>any better but they don't do any worse. Probably Switzerland

1:00:25.560 --> 1:00:28.200
<v Speaker 1>and Great Britain would be the two big competitors. Now

1:00:28.280 --> 1:00:30.840
<v Speaker 1>you see, you see what happens in China, your stocks

1:00:30.920 --> 1:00:32.960
<v Speaker 1>may not be your stocks. It's very hard to be

1:00:33.560 --> 1:00:36.800
<v Speaker 1>forget as a as a local, as an international investor.

1:00:37.200 --> 1:00:40.000
<v Speaker 1>It's very hard to be an investor in China if

1:00:40.080 --> 1:00:42.640
<v Speaker 1>you don't know, am I gonna be able to ever

1:00:42.800 --> 1:00:45.680
<v Speaker 1>cast this out? Or maybe there's going to be a

1:00:45.760 --> 1:00:48.840
<v Speaker 1>vacation period where no sales for the next month, as

1:00:48.880 --> 1:00:51.640
<v Speaker 1>we saw last year. Yeah, and let me add to

1:00:51.720 --> 1:00:54.680
<v Speaker 1>this that these and just about everybody says I'm wrong,

1:00:54.800 --> 1:00:56.960
<v Speaker 1>by the way, but everybody said I was wrong with

1:00:57.040 --> 1:00:58.960
<v Speaker 1>an index. I was gonna say. That's only gonna make you.

1:00:59.160 --> 1:01:01.360
<v Speaker 1>That's only gonna make you double down and think you're right,

1:01:01.400 --> 1:01:04.120
<v Speaker 1>because there's a track record of people predicting you're gonna

1:01:04.120 --> 1:01:07.760
<v Speaker 1>be wrong, and they've all they've all proven themselves false.

1:01:08.160 --> 1:01:09.960
<v Speaker 1>So but let me just say one more thing. In

1:01:10.000 --> 1:01:13.480
<v Speaker 1>international just think what would you would have done if

1:01:13.520 --> 1:01:16.360
<v Speaker 1>you had an internationally waited or a non use waited

1:01:18.200 --> 1:01:22.919
<v Speaker 1>in when you had fifty percent, that is to say,

1:01:23.040 --> 1:01:26.800
<v Speaker 1>five percent of your money in Japan, right when the

1:01:26.920 --> 1:01:30.800
<v Speaker 1>NIK was forty six thousand or something like that. No

1:01:30.880 --> 1:01:34.760
<v Speaker 1>one was talking this way then, but that could happen again.

1:01:35.480 --> 1:01:38.160
<v Speaker 1>And I don't think he should be subject to these

1:01:38.320 --> 1:01:41.240
<v Speaker 1>funny speculative booms that can take place in other countries.

1:01:41.800 --> 1:01:44.880
<v Speaker 1>I just can't imagine that there will be a significant

1:01:44.920 --> 1:01:49.000
<v Speaker 1>advantage in international companies over US companies. I'm not talking

1:01:49.000 --> 1:01:53.000
<v Speaker 1>about stocks now, I'm talking about companies and economies over

1:01:53.040 --> 1:01:55.240
<v Speaker 1>the US. Now, look, I could be wrong on this,

1:01:55.320 --> 1:01:57.480
<v Speaker 1>and if you think I'm wrong, go buy all the

1:01:57.520 --> 1:02:00.680
<v Speaker 1>international and non US stocks you want, and non US

1:02:00.720 --> 1:02:04.320
<v Speaker 1>stock index by individual countries. I wouldn't do any of that.

1:02:05.400 --> 1:02:09.360
<v Speaker 1>And what we didn't even mention the currency side of things.

1:02:09.440 --> 1:02:14.200
<v Speaker 1>How significant is currency fluctuations to UH to this sort

1:02:14.240 --> 1:02:17.920
<v Speaker 1>of international exposure if you're domicile t here in the US,

1:02:18.560 --> 1:02:24.000
<v Speaker 1>what what kind of currency currencies here? Well, that that

1:02:24.160 --> 1:02:26.160
<v Speaker 1>is an issue because the dollar has been very strong,

1:02:26.960 --> 1:02:30.920
<v Speaker 1>and it won't be strong forever because international trade has

1:02:30.920 --> 1:02:33.560
<v Speaker 1>a way of balancing out. When the dollar is strong,

1:02:33.680 --> 1:02:36.200
<v Speaker 1>the trade balances change and all that. So I don't

1:02:36.200 --> 1:02:38.840
<v Speaker 1>think you should count on a good strong dollar forever.

1:02:39.080 --> 1:02:42.400
<v Speaker 1>So won't won't won't impact it. Let's let's talk UM,

1:02:42.560 --> 1:02:44.680
<v Speaker 1>but I want to talk a little more about Vanguard.

1:02:45.160 --> 1:02:49.120
<v Speaker 1>But before we get to that, to two last questions

1:02:49.160 --> 1:02:52.280
<v Speaker 1>about indexing. The first is is there any sort of

1:02:52.400 --> 1:02:56.680
<v Speaker 1>active management you would favor, you know, Vanguard about of

1:02:56.800 --> 1:02:59.560
<v Speaker 1>the assets here or an active managed funds. What do

1:02:59.680 --> 1:03:03.840
<v Speaker 1>you think about having a small slug of someone's portfolio

1:03:04.160 --> 1:03:07.880
<v Speaker 1>in something that might not be a passive index. Well,

1:03:08.400 --> 1:03:11.080
<v Speaker 1>let me give you this very important background about our

1:03:11.080 --> 1:03:13.760
<v Speaker 1>actively managed funds, and this is what I've been saying

1:03:13.800 --> 1:03:19.320
<v Speaker 1>since we started Vanguard in nineteen seventy four. I want

1:03:19.400 --> 1:03:24.000
<v Speaker 1>our active management, actively managed funds to have returns that

1:03:24.120 --> 1:03:28.320
<v Speaker 1>are relatively predictable, relative predictability relative to their group. There

1:03:28.640 --> 1:03:31.680
<v Speaker 1>they're group like large cap value funds, a long term

1:03:31.720 --> 1:03:36.360
<v Speaker 1>municipal mound funds, whatever it might be. UM, and the

1:03:36.560 --> 1:03:40.760
<v Speaker 1>idea would be look at those funds and not don't

1:03:40.840 --> 1:03:43.320
<v Speaker 1>get too far out of line so you'll have an

1:03:43.360 --> 1:03:45.840
<v Speaker 1>average perform if you if you have six managers, there's

1:03:45.840 --> 1:03:48.520
<v Speaker 1>where the multi manager thing comes from. If you have

1:03:48.640 --> 1:03:51.520
<v Speaker 1>six managers, the idea that they will do about the

1:03:51.560 --> 1:03:54.240
<v Speaker 1>same as another as your competitive group with sixty managers

1:03:54.880 --> 1:03:57.520
<v Speaker 1>is almost guaranteed to do the same So what's so

1:03:57.640 --> 1:03:59.920
<v Speaker 1>good about that? What's so good about that is we

1:04:00.080 --> 1:04:02.000
<v Speaker 1>think we have a one and a half percent to

1:04:02.120 --> 1:04:07.160
<v Speaker 1>two cost advantage through lower expenses, lower turnover, no sales loads,

1:04:07.600 --> 1:04:09.240
<v Speaker 1>and we should win by a point and a half

1:04:09.280 --> 1:04:13.720
<v Speaker 1>a year, not on brilliance, but on cost. So let's guarantee. Now,

1:04:13.880 --> 1:04:16.160
<v Speaker 1>let me just give you the punch line here. If

1:04:16.200 --> 1:04:19.520
<v Speaker 1>you win, what's so good about one over ten years,

1:04:19.800 --> 1:04:23.840
<v Speaker 1>you have a higher return that that's tremendous. So I

1:04:24.040 --> 1:04:28.520
<v Speaker 1>previously interviewed your CEO and chairman, Bill McNabb and one

1:04:28.560 --> 1:04:31.840
<v Speaker 1>of the comments he had made is that he still

1:04:32.000 --> 1:04:37.200
<v Speaker 1>felt there was room to squeeze costs lower. You guys

1:04:37.240 --> 1:04:40.080
<v Speaker 1>are three and a half trillion dollars. Is there a

1:04:40.280 --> 1:04:42.800
<v Speaker 1>floor on how low costs can go or are you

1:04:42.920 --> 1:04:48.680
<v Speaker 1>eventually gonna run out of efficiencies? Well, we have yet

1:04:48.720 --> 1:04:52.600
<v Speaker 1>to squeeze cost lower because our costs go up and

1:04:52.760 --> 1:04:55.720
<v Speaker 1>up and up. But as a percentage, you can squeeze

1:04:55.720 --> 1:04:59.880
<v Speaker 1>a little lower on a per well dollar invested basis

1:05:00.520 --> 1:05:03.960
<v Speaker 1>certainly wane to disagree with our CEO, but it's not

1:05:04.120 --> 1:05:07.680
<v Speaker 1>we're squeezing, but we're the captive of the market. If

1:05:07.720 --> 1:05:10.320
<v Speaker 1>the market goes way down, our expense ratio is going

1:05:10.440 --> 1:05:13.400
<v Speaker 1>to go up. There's no way we could squeeze enough

1:05:13.440 --> 1:05:17.960
<v Speaker 1>out of our expenses if we had less assets. So

1:05:18.200 --> 1:05:21.280
<v Speaker 1>we should be very careful about expenses, and we are.

1:05:21.680 --> 1:05:24.840
<v Speaker 1>I think we're managed in a very strong way, but

1:05:25.840 --> 1:05:29.640
<v Speaker 1>we're The expense ratio is a combination of something we

1:05:29.680 --> 1:05:32.560
<v Speaker 1>can control more or less how much we spend, and

1:05:32.680 --> 1:05:34.680
<v Speaker 1>something we can't control at all, the level of the

1:05:34.720 --> 1:05:39.680
<v Speaker 1>stock market. So the expense ratio is a mystery. And

1:05:40.120 --> 1:05:43.240
<v Speaker 1>whether Gupp or Dad, now, if it goes way down,

1:05:43.480 --> 1:05:46.720
<v Speaker 1>it's gonna mean we have very good markets. That sounds great.

1:05:46.960 --> 1:05:52.240
<v Speaker 1>Can indexing ever get too big or can indexing ever

1:05:52.440 --> 1:05:55.360
<v Speaker 1>take over the market as some people have alluded, or

1:05:55.600 --> 1:05:58.720
<v Speaker 1>is there a place for a combination of indexing and

1:05:58.880 --> 1:06:03.280
<v Speaker 1>active managers in the actual marketplace? Well, it's not in

1:06:03.320 --> 1:06:06.520
<v Speaker 1>the nature of things that in indexing could be of

1:06:06.560 --> 1:06:10.000
<v Speaker 1>the market. If it were, we would have chaos. There

1:06:10.000 --> 1:06:12.600
<v Speaker 1>will be no evaluations, there'll be no liquidity, there'll be

1:06:12.680 --> 1:06:15.960
<v Speaker 1>no enny. So what are the chances that indexting get

1:06:16.080 --> 1:06:21.240
<v Speaker 1>to zero? Right now? It's I think I had of

1:06:21.280 --> 1:06:24.080
<v Speaker 1>the total market of the mutual fund industry, of the

1:06:24.120 --> 1:06:29.360
<v Speaker 1>equity mutual fund industry, and so it means that that

1:06:30.280 --> 1:06:34.600
<v Speaker 1>hunk of business is in broadly stated, just removed from

1:06:34.640 --> 1:06:38.720
<v Speaker 1>the turnover level. So it's a turnover we're in the

1:06:38.800 --> 1:06:42.960
<v Speaker 1>end market were indexed, the turnover would go to I

1:06:43.080 --> 1:06:46.920
<v Speaker 1>came into this business when turnover was and everything was fine.

1:06:47.880 --> 1:06:50.680
<v Speaker 1>It's gonna take a long time to get the fifty percent,

1:06:50.760 --> 1:06:53.560
<v Speaker 1>a long long time and maybe never gets there. So

1:06:53.720 --> 1:06:55.720
<v Speaker 1>when you put reality in the face of the theory

1:06:55.880 --> 1:06:59.600
<v Speaker 1>that if everybody indexes uh, then then it's going to

1:06:59.680 --> 1:07:02.720
<v Speaker 1>be it's just it's just not gonna happen. But the

1:07:02.800 --> 1:07:05.920
<v Speaker 1>other thing is people follow this statement by saying, if

1:07:06.000 --> 1:07:08.400
<v Speaker 1>the market gets more and more indexed, then it will

1:07:08.400 --> 1:07:11.120
<v Speaker 1>be less efficient and we'll be able to beat it

1:07:11.200 --> 1:07:17.080
<v Speaker 1>more easily. No, unequivocally, no, some will beat it, some

1:07:17.280 --> 1:07:20.480
<v Speaker 1>will lose to it if they If the market is

1:07:21.200 --> 1:07:23.960
<v Speaker 1>is less efficient and the and the winners and the

1:07:24.040 --> 1:07:29.360
<v Speaker 1>losers will average the market returned, there's no way around that.

1:07:29.800 --> 1:07:32.280
<v Speaker 1>So that leads me to a quote of yours, and

1:07:32.600 --> 1:07:34.400
<v Speaker 1>I have to ask you about it because I find

1:07:34.480 --> 1:07:38.960
<v Speaker 1>it's fascinating. You once wrote the stock market is a

1:07:39.160 --> 1:07:45.480
<v Speaker 1>giant distraction to the business of investing. Explain well, investing

1:07:46.080 --> 1:07:49.680
<v Speaker 1>is about the long term, and investing is about earning

1:07:49.800 --> 1:07:52.959
<v Speaker 1>what I call the investment return, which is the divin

1:07:53.040 --> 1:07:55.320
<v Speaker 1>end yield when you go into the stock market and

1:07:55.400 --> 1:07:59.080
<v Speaker 1>the earnings wrote that follows. That's investment return. The market

1:07:59.160 --> 1:08:02.160
<v Speaker 1>return is also as a speculative return, and that is

1:08:02.680 --> 1:08:05.160
<v Speaker 1>is the price earnings multiple of the evaluations high or

1:08:05.200 --> 1:08:07.520
<v Speaker 1>low when you come in, and if they're high, they're

1:08:07.560 --> 1:08:10.800
<v Speaker 1>going to detract from that return, and evaluations are low

1:08:11.280 --> 1:08:12.920
<v Speaker 1>and they're going to add to that return because the

1:08:13.000 --> 1:08:16.719
<v Speaker 1>low will the in in the valuations. The price earnings

1:08:16.840 --> 1:08:21.479
<v Speaker 1>multiple reverts to the mean perfectly. It's about what today.

1:08:22.400 --> 1:08:24.439
<v Speaker 1>Although it's a little bit higher than this today because

1:08:24.479 --> 1:08:28.479
<v Speaker 1>the market's a little bit isn't hardly inexpensive, but the

1:08:28.600 --> 1:08:30.600
<v Speaker 1>reality is it's just about the same level it was.

1:08:32.200 --> 1:08:35.519
<v Speaker 1>So we had ups and downs, booms bust. In the

1:08:35.600 --> 1:08:38.640
<v Speaker 1>long run, speculative return is zero. So concentrate on the

1:08:38.760 --> 1:08:43.080
<v Speaker 1>investment return. Forget the speculative return, which is very difficult

1:08:43.120 --> 1:08:46.560
<v Speaker 1>to predict, and just get with business can give you

1:08:47.160 --> 1:08:50.400
<v Speaker 1>now if you look every day, you're apt to do something.

1:08:51.160 --> 1:08:55.160
<v Speaker 1>And one of my basic rules is don't do something,

1:08:55.280 --> 1:08:58.120
<v Speaker 1>just stand there and if you've been doing that this year,

1:08:58.200 --> 1:08:59.640
<v Speaker 1>I think you're a lot better off. This is a

1:08:59.720 --> 1:09:02.320
<v Speaker 1>tough years, so far, not that bad. I mean, you

1:09:02.640 --> 1:09:05.360
<v Speaker 1>think the SMP is off about three and a half percent,

1:09:05.439 --> 1:09:08.560
<v Speaker 1>it's really nothing. And although you think it was the

1:09:08.640 --> 1:09:12.760
<v Speaker 1>end of the world, uh so, it's Don't let the

1:09:12.840 --> 1:09:17.559
<v Speaker 1>stock market moves distract you. They are a tale told

1:09:17.600 --> 1:09:21.040
<v Speaker 1>by an idiot. These moves, daily moves, hourly been minute

1:09:21.040 --> 1:09:24.760
<v Speaker 1>by minute moves, a tale told by an idiot, full

1:09:24.800 --> 1:09:28.400
<v Speaker 1>of sound and furious, signifying nothing. I have a bunch

1:09:28.479 --> 1:09:32.160
<v Speaker 1>of questions that I ask all of my guests, but

1:09:32.320 --> 1:09:36.840
<v Speaker 1>they're all specific to each individual because they're so um

1:09:38.320 --> 1:09:42.160
<v Speaker 1>so so detailed. So who are your early mentors? I

1:09:42.240 --> 1:09:45.599
<v Speaker 1>know in one of your books you mentioned somebody, Uh

1:09:45.720 --> 1:09:49.720
<v Speaker 1>you thank somebody who you had mentioned in uh the

1:09:49.800 --> 1:09:53.439
<v Speaker 1>earlier part of of the conversation, Who do you think

1:09:53.520 --> 1:09:58.040
<v Speaker 1>of as as mentors? Well outside of my teachers. By

1:09:58.400 --> 1:10:01.160
<v Speaker 1>my first real grown up meant tour was a guy

1:10:01.240 --> 1:10:04.200
<v Speaker 1>named Jim Harrington who was a graduate student and engineer

1:10:04.240 --> 1:10:07.479
<v Speaker 1>at Princeton University, and he was running the Athletic Ticket

1:10:07.520 --> 1:10:11.400
<v Speaker 1>Association ticket office. And when he stopped doing that, he

1:10:12.320 --> 1:10:13.720
<v Speaker 1>pulled me out of the crowd and asked me to

1:10:13.800 --> 1:10:15.800
<v Speaker 1>run in for him. So I learned how to do

1:10:15.920 --> 1:10:18.200
<v Speaker 1>a job, and I learned how to do it with integrity,

1:10:18.360 --> 1:10:19.920
<v Speaker 1>and I learned how to do it with on time.

1:10:20.400 --> 1:10:23.360
<v Speaker 1>I learned how to do it with keeping my emotions

1:10:23.400 --> 1:10:27.120
<v Speaker 1>out of it. This is just selling tickets to Princeton

1:10:27.200 --> 1:10:32.160
<v Speaker 1>students forts basketball, baseball, whatever it might be, particularly football,

1:10:32.439 --> 1:10:35.360
<v Speaker 1>And that was a seminal experience to you and helped

1:10:35.400 --> 1:10:38.240
<v Speaker 1>form your your own character. He had just a great

1:10:38.320 --> 1:10:41.120
<v Speaker 1>sense of business values and like all engineers he was

1:10:41.479 --> 1:10:43.439
<v Speaker 1>you know, they kind of go step by step right.

1:10:43.600 --> 1:10:45.679
<v Speaker 1>Sometimes it's not a lot of exciting, but it's always

1:10:45.800 --> 1:10:49.400
<v Speaker 1>right structured, organized, and and you're dealing with a lot

1:10:49.479 --> 1:10:53.599
<v Speaker 1>of money. And sure, what Princeton Stadium is how many people?

1:10:53.760 --> 1:10:56.760
<v Speaker 1>That's ah, that was the old Palmer Stadium that held

1:10:56.840 --> 1:11:00.280
<v Speaker 1>fifty people, right, and now it's I almost double that size.

1:11:00.320 --> 1:11:03.040
<v Speaker 1>It's it's huge. No, we went way down. We're about

1:11:04.120 --> 1:11:06.280
<v Speaker 1>the other direction, okay, and we can't fill it now.

1:11:06.360 --> 1:11:09.400
<v Speaker 1>We used to. Every every game I worked was a sellout, right,

1:11:09.600 --> 1:11:11.200
<v Speaker 1>that was back in the day. So that was really

1:11:11.439 --> 1:11:15.400
<v Speaker 1>quite an education. Um, you dedicated common sense on mutual

1:11:15.479 --> 1:11:19.040
<v Speaker 1>funds to Walter Morgan, who was he in your in

1:11:19.160 --> 1:11:21.919
<v Speaker 1>your pantheon, Well, he was the greatest of my mentors.

1:11:22.000 --> 1:11:25.559
<v Speaker 1>He hired me. Uh he read my thesis out of Princeton.

1:11:26.160 --> 1:11:28.200
<v Speaker 1>He wrote, I think a little bit over the top

1:11:29.000 --> 1:11:31.920
<v Speaker 1>that Mr bogel knew more than he did about them

1:11:32.000 --> 1:11:35.120
<v Speaker 1>than we did about the mutual fund industry. And so

1:11:35.280 --> 1:11:38.479
<v Speaker 1>he liked it. And he was a Princetonian himself, class

1:11:38.520 --> 1:11:41.960
<v Speaker 1>of nineteen twenty, and I was the class of nineteen

1:11:42.000 --> 1:11:45.280
<v Speaker 1>fifty one, and I watched him work. He was very

1:11:45.360 --> 1:11:48.799
<v Speaker 1>much a renaissance man, interested in investing, interested in marketing,

1:11:49.080 --> 1:11:51.760
<v Speaker 1>probably less interested in the detail of the business share

1:11:51.760 --> 1:11:54.360
<v Speaker 1>older record keeping it stuff which was so much simpler

1:11:54.439 --> 1:11:57.360
<v Speaker 1>those days, but also a renaissance man in terms of

1:11:57.479 --> 1:12:03.000
<v Speaker 1>his interest. He was um outdoorsman, hunter, a fisherman, things

1:12:03.040 --> 1:12:05.600
<v Speaker 1>that I that I don't do at all. And but

1:12:05.720 --> 1:12:09.280
<v Speaker 1>he had a high sense of standards, and he they

1:12:09.280 --> 1:12:12.960
<v Speaker 1>said at the beginning, and uh turned the company over

1:12:13.000 --> 1:12:15.120
<v Speaker 1>to me when I was thirty five years old. So

1:12:15.200 --> 1:12:17.000
<v Speaker 1>I must have had an awful lot of confidence in me,

1:12:17.560 --> 1:12:19.920
<v Speaker 1>and I saved Welling and fund finally for him after

1:12:20.000 --> 1:12:23.960
<v Speaker 1>the catastrophe, I described earlier. We told Wellington Management Company

1:12:24.120 --> 1:12:26.880
<v Speaker 1>how we wanted to run and they've been running it

1:12:26.960 --> 1:12:29.160
<v Speaker 1>that way ever since. I've been much more focus on

1:12:29.280 --> 1:12:33.320
<v Speaker 1>income and income stocks and less focus on growth stocks,

1:12:33.800 --> 1:12:36.479
<v Speaker 1>and it's worked out. We had a whole renaissance of

1:12:36.520 --> 1:12:38.760
<v Speaker 1>the Welling and Fund, and he saw a lot of that,

1:12:39.400 --> 1:12:42.479
<v Speaker 1>and he was he he died, but the year that

1:12:42.560 --> 1:12:45.160
<v Speaker 1>book came out, and a little bit before, but I

1:12:45.200 --> 1:12:47.760
<v Speaker 1>had shown him the title page with his name on.

1:12:47.920 --> 1:12:50.360
<v Speaker 1>He was very pleased and very pleased with the revival

1:12:50.439 --> 1:12:54.080
<v Speaker 1>and renaissance of his wonderful Welling and Fund. I felt

1:12:54.080 --> 1:12:57.360
<v Speaker 1>I had a moral obligation save it. So what about

1:12:57.479 --> 1:13:03.040
<v Speaker 1>other investors who hasn't influence your thought process, your philosophy,

1:13:03.920 --> 1:13:07.840
<v Speaker 1>perhaps not your approach to investing, but what other investors

1:13:07.920 --> 1:13:13.120
<v Speaker 1>have colored your worldview? Well, you certainly start with Benjamin Graham.

1:13:14.360 --> 1:13:18.800
<v Speaker 1>He's the basically ground zero and the intelligent investor. His

1:13:18.880 --> 1:13:20.960
<v Speaker 1>book I happened to like the fourth edition, which is

1:13:21.040 --> 1:13:24.120
<v Speaker 1>much more into into the I think it was nine

1:13:24.400 --> 1:13:28.200
<v Speaker 1>seventy four, has much more about mutual funds and things

1:13:28.240 --> 1:13:31.320
<v Speaker 1>of that nature. And he's very clear on that, and

1:13:31.840 --> 1:13:36.720
<v Speaker 1>so he would certainly be one um Mr Morgan Um

1:13:37.640 --> 1:13:39.720
<v Speaker 1>Mr Brin had a couple of associates, Joe Welsh, the

1:13:39.760 --> 1:13:42.760
<v Speaker 1>president of the company, and Andy Young, his lawyer, very quick,

1:13:43.360 --> 1:13:47.000
<v Speaker 1>quick witted, smart guy, and they all saw something in me.

1:13:47.640 --> 1:13:50.800
<v Speaker 1>I don't know what it was that gave them confidence

1:13:51.120 --> 1:13:54.000
<v Speaker 1>that I had the judgment to do the job. And another,

1:13:54.080 --> 1:13:57.040
<v Speaker 1>interestingly enough, another one of my great mentors was the

1:13:57.080 --> 1:13:58.880
<v Speaker 1>man who when I came on the investment company is

1:13:58.920 --> 1:14:01.160
<v Speaker 1>two board of governors. He was the chairman. His name

1:14:01.240 --> 1:14:05.040
<v Speaker 1>was d. George Sullivan and he was executive vice president

1:14:05.120 --> 1:14:09.840
<v Speaker 1>of Fidelity. Oh really, and we had a great relationship.

1:14:10.439 --> 1:14:13.760
<v Speaker 1>That's fascinated And so he would have been you know,

1:14:14.560 --> 1:14:16.599
<v Speaker 1>if people have confidence in you, they bring out your

1:14:16.640 --> 1:14:20.040
<v Speaker 1>best and he really did, and Mr Morgan did, and

1:14:20.200 --> 1:14:24.040
<v Speaker 1>Mr Welsh did, Andy Young did, and so that those

1:14:24.080 --> 1:14:28.200
<v Speaker 1>would be the big names I think, both as mentors

1:14:28.240 --> 1:14:32.080
<v Speaker 1>and investors. Let's let's talk about books. You've written your

1:14:32.160 --> 1:14:37.040
<v Speaker 1>fair share of books. Who's what other authors books being

1:14:37.160 --> 1:14:40.479
<v Speaker 1>on investing or what have you have you enjoyed? What

1:14:40.640 --> 1:14:43.400
<v Speaker 1>what books would you recommend to people? Well, I've already

1:14:43.439 --> 1:14:47.519
<v Speaker 1>mentioned The Intelligent Investor by Graham. Intelligent Investor by Graham.

1:14:48.040 --> 1:14:50.000
<v Speaker 1>I think Bert Malkiale, who's a friend of ours and

1:14:50.240 --> 1:14:53.160
<v Speaker 1>friend of mine and former foreign director here for many

1:14:53.360 --> 1:14:56.000
<v Speaker 1>many years, I know, really the best director we've ever

1:14:56.120 --> 1:14:59.519
<v Speaker 1>had outside director. His random walked down Wall Street was

1:15:00.000 --> 1:15:05.560
<v Speaker 1>aided every couple of years is another. UM. David Swinson's

1:15:05.600 --> 1:15:11.559
<v Speaker 1>book On for the Individual Investor is really superb. Peter

1:15:11.640 --> 1:15:15.760
<v Speaker 1>Bernstein's Against the Gods just I just read that over

1:15:15.800 --> 1:15:19.160
<v Speaker 1>the holidays, fantastic book. Well, he was a very gifted man.

1:15:19.200 --> 1:15:21.680
<v Speaker 1>We were very close Peter and I, and we had

1:15:21.720 --> 1:15:24.760
<v Speaker 1>our little disagreements here and there, but overall we were

1:15:24.800 --> 1:15:28.479
<v Speaker 1>on the same team. And then Bill Bernstein Four Pillars

1:15:28.520 --> 1:15:31.639
<v Speaker 1>of Investment Wisdom is A is A is a wonderful book,

1:15:32.479 --> 1:15:35.599
<v Speaker 1>and there aren't. It's hard me to go a lot,

1:15:35.720 --> 1:15:37.720
<v Speaker 1>a lot beyond that, to be honest with you. Well,

1:15:37.760 --> 1:15:40.200
<v Speaker 1>that's that's a great starting list right there. You can

1:15:40.280 --> 1:15:44.240
<v Speaker 1>certainly do worse than any of those half dozen books. UM,

1:15:44.640 --> 1:15:48.800
<v Speaker 1>we've talked a lot about how you've changed the industry

1:15:48.920 --> 1:15:52.560
<v Speaker 1>since you began way back in in the sixties and seventies.

1:15:53.200 --> 1:15:56.800
<v Speaker 1>How else has the industry changed that you think is

1:15:56.840 --> 1:15:59.360
<v Speaker 1>either for the better or for the worst. What what

1:15:59.560 --> 1:16:04.639
<v Speaker 1>stands out as to how finance has evolved over those

1:16:04.800 --> 1:16:08.000
<v Speaker 1>those years. I think when I came into this industry,

1:16:10.240 --> 1:16:12.639
<v Speaker 1>it was a much better industry than it was thereafter,

1:16:13.280 --> 1:16:16.120
<v Speaker 1>the big part of that change was in the go

1:16:16.280 --> 1:16:18.720
<v Speaker 1>go era, when we had this idea. We went from

1:16:18.800 --> 1:16:23.559
<v Speaker 1>investment committees prudent investment committees buying blue chip stocks. Two

1:16:23.640 --> 1:16:30.880
<v Speaker 1>portfolio managers comments uh and not stars, comments that burn

1:16:30.960 --> 1:16:33.840
<v Speaker 1>out and their ashes drift gently down to earth. And

1:16:33.960 --> 1:16:37.680
<v Speaker 1>that's happened to so many, so many comment managers. I mean,

1:16:37.760 --> 1:16:40.160
<v Speaker 1>you could hardly lose count, you wonder. I mean, the

1:16:40.240 --> 1:16:44.640
<v Speaker 1>real the real superstars just don't stay there, you know.

1:16:44.680 --> 1:16:46.760
<v Speaker 1>I always just to wish Bill Miller, well, he beat

1:16:47.080 --> 1:16:49.439
<v Speaker 1>He's a leg mason. He beat the market, I think

1:16:49.479 --> 1:16:52.160
<v Speaker 1>sixteen years in a row, and every time I saw him,

1:16:52.520 --> 1:16:55.200
<v Speaker 1>I'd say good luck, good luck in the future. I

1:16:55.320 --> 1:16:59.080
<v Speaker 1>liked them. My wishes of good luck didn't do any

1:16:59.200 --> 1:17:03.320
<v Speaker 1>good at all. He very famously imploded and went from

1:17:03.439 --> 1:17:07.120
<v Speaker 1>the literally the top performing fund to the bottom one

1:17:07.200 --> 1:17:11.040
<v Speaker 1>percent following the financial crisis. What had worked for him

1:17:11.120 --> 1:17:14.600
<v Speaker 1>previously just eventually stopped working, and he got caught in

1:17:14.680 --> 1:17:17.479
<v Speaker 1>a lot of paper that turned out to be not

1:17:17.640 --> 1:17:19.880
<v Speaker 1>worth what he thought it was well in an earlier area.

1:17:19.960 --> 1:17:25.320
<v Speaker 1>Remember Gerald CSI ran Fideliti Capital Fund and he had

1:17:25.400 --> 1:17:27.240
<v Speaker 1>the best record in the business. He goes out and

1:17:27.280 --> 1:17:31.360
<v Speaker 1>starts his own fund and Manhattan Fund gets a huge underwriting.

1:17:31.400 --> 1:17:33.200
<v Speaker 1>It was four a million dollars. Nobody ever seen anything

1:17:33.280 --> 1:17:35.880
<v Speaker 1>like that in this business, that to the old days.

1:17:36.520 --> 1:17:39.599
<v Speaker 1>And it had after ten years of operation, the worst

1:17:40.080 --> 1:17:43.920
<v Speaker 1>record in the mutual fund industry. And you know, I

1:17:44.080 --> 1:17:47.519
<v Speaker 1>tell people, when you think about the nature of securities markets,

1:17:47.920 --> 1:17:50.720
<v Speaker 1>its gifts as difficult to be last as it is

1:17:50.800 --> 1:17:54.879
<v Speaker 1>to be first. What was his name about that? That's amazing?

1:17:54.960 --> 1:17:57.120
<v Speaker 1>What was his name again? Gerald Side t s A

1:17:57.240 --> 1:18:00.640
<v Speaker 1>I T S A great um. So some of my

1:18:01.240 --> 1:18:06.840
<v Speaker 1>my last few questions. You've mentioned a lot of things

1:18:06.920 --> 1:18:09.639
<v Speaker 1>have changed since nineteen fifty one. What do you see

1:18:09.680 --> 1:18:13.439
<v Speaker 1>as changing in the future. I guess I'd say, not

1:18:13.640 --> 1:18:16.760
<v Speaker 1>to beat the phrase to death, reversion to the mean.

1:18:16.880 --> 1:18:20.040
<v Speaker 1>I see the industry going back to its roots. Uh,

1:18:20.400 --> 1:18:22.840
<v Speaker 1>much more of a fiduciary focus, I hope. So I'm

1:18:22.960 --> 1:18:25.880
<v Speaker 1>very much in favor of the fiduciary rule. Although someone

1:18:25.880 --> 1:18:27.840
<v Speaker 1>else is gonna have to work out the details. It

1:18:27.840 --> 1:18:30.920
<v Speaker 1>seemed to make it difficult to operate and uh, but

1:18:31.320 --> 1:18:34.000
<v Speaker 1>it shouldn't make it difficult to operate because all you

1:18:34.120 --> 1:18:37.400
<v Speaker 1>have to do is ask yourself as an advisor, one question, Hey,

1:18:37.520 --> 1:18:39.400
<v Speaker 1>is this in the client's best interest? And if the

1:18:39.439 --> 1:18:42.960
<v Speaker 1>answer is no, you can't do it. It's much simpler

1:18:43.439 --> 1:18:47.600
<v Speaker 1>than the complicated suitability rules which have all sorts of

1:18:48.439 --> 1:18:51.639
<v Speaker 1>ifs and thens and clauses best interests of the client.

1:18:51.800 --> 1:18:54.360
<v Speaker 1>Yes you can do it, No you can't. What could

1:18:54.400 --> 1:18:56.559
<v Speaker 1>be What could be easier? When you unfortunately need kind

1:18:56.600 --> 1:18:59.080
<v Speaker 1>of documentation how you're doing things and all that. It

1:18:59.240 --> 1:19:02.400
<v Speaker 1>is a little borious because we have to have you know,

1:19:02.479 --> 1:19:05.280
<v Speaker 1>a lot of lawyers work on this, and you and

1:19:05.400 --> 1:19:08.040
<v Speaker 1>I have the spirit of fiduciary duty and they've got

1:19:08.120 --> 1:19:09.960
<v Speaker 1>to get to the letter of it. And it's it's

1:19:10.000 --> 1:19:12.559
<v Speaker 1>more complex than it ought to be, but it's coming.

1:19:13.240 --> 1:19:15.760
<v Speaker 1>And you know, with so many funds being flashes in

1:19:15.840 --> 1:19:20.920
<v Speaker 1>the pan, investors are going to learn by their own experience.

1:19:21.560 --> 1:19:23.200
<v Speaker 1>You know, I was told this was a great fund,

1:19:23.640 --> 1:19:25.880
<v Speaker 1>and it was a great fund for two days and

1:19:26.000 --> 1:19:29.200
<v Speaker 1>that was the end of it. Uh. And we overestimate

1:19:29.240 --> 1:19:32.479
<v Speaker 1>our own ability to pick funds and stocks. We over

1:19:32.600 --> 1:19:36.440
<v Speaker 1>overestimate the ability of our managers to do better consistently,

1:19:36.880 --> 1:19:39.280
<v Speaker 1>and if people just got the idea of reversion of

1:19:39.280 --> 1:19:41.680
<v Speaker 1>the mean again and again and again. You know the

1:19:42.160 --> 1:19:44.040
<v Speaker 1>we were looking at some data the other day, Barry,

1:19:44.680 --> 1:19:48.040
<v Speaker 1>and if you're in the top quartile for a given

1:19:48.120 --> 1:19:51.599
<v Speaker 1>five year period, only fifteen percent of you are going

1:19:51.640 --> 1:19:54.040
<v Speaker 1>to be in the top quartile in the next five

1:19:54.120 --> 1:19:58.320
<v Speaker 1>year period. And if you're in the bottom quartile of

1:19:58.400 --> 1:20:00.679
<v Speaker 1>you will be in the top quartile the next period.

1:20:01.360 --> 1:20:04.360
<v Speaker 1>And over time, that sort of returns don't help help anybody.

1:20:04.360 --> 1:20:07.160
<v Speaker 1>I think was Howard Marks who said, if you're consistently

1:20:07.240 --> 1:20:10.240
<v Speaker 1>in the top over time, that puts you in the

1:20:10.320 --> 1:20:12.840
<v Speaker 1>top ten percent. But you have to be consistent. You

1:20:12.960 --> 1:20:17.160
<v Speaker 1>can't be a shooting star, outperforming, under performing, out performing

1:20:17.240 --> 1:20:20.040
<v Speaker 1>under performing. You have to be uh top forty. But

1:20:20.120 --> 1:20:24.879
<v Speaker 1>he runs a distress bond funds not not necessarily a stick.

1:20:25.160 --> 1:20:26.720
<v Speaker 1>Let me let me add this, if my name, what

1:20:26.880 --> 1:20:29.960
<v Speaker 1>is the objective of the individual investor. It's to have

1:20:30.080 --> 1:20:34.680
<v Speaker 1>a lifetime of investing. Investing for a lifetime. And for

1:20:34.800 --> 1:20:37.360
<v Speaker 1>a young investor, believe it or not, twenty five year

1:20:37.400 --> 1:20:41.280
<v Speaker 1>old investor has a seventy year life expectancy, seventy years,

1:20:41.280 --> 1:20:44.120
<v Speaker 1>they're gonna be nine, probably be a hundred. So what's

1:20:44.120 --> 1:20:46.840
<v Speaker 1>the best way to invest for seventy years. If a

1:20:46.920 --> 1:20:50.479
<v Speaker 1>mutual fund manager lasts for seven years, that's the average,

1:20:50.880 --> 1:20:53.800
<v Speaker 1>You're gonna have ten of them. The average fund goes

1:20:53.800 --> 1:21:00.240
<v Speaker 1>out of business every um, every decade, every decade. Excuse me, really,

1:21:00.280 --> 1:21:02.720
<v Speaker 1>it's that high. That's amazing. And then the new the

1:21:02.760 --> 1:21:06.120
<v Speaker 1>new guy comes in and sweeps clean. Managers get fired.

1:21:06.640 --> 1:21:10.679
<v Speaker 1>There is no way, none, zero, that if you own

1:21:10.800 --> 1:21:13.560
<v Speaker 1>three or four mutual funds, which is typical, there is

1:21:13.680 --> 1:21:16.360
<v Speaker 1>no way that over seventy years you have even a

1:21:16.479 --> 1:21:19.640
<v Speaker 1>fighting chance to beat the market. And if you do

1:21:19.760 --> 1:21:22.680
<v Speaker 1>the index fund, I guarantee you that you will have

1:21:22.760 --> 1:21:26.120
<v Speaker 1>the same non manager seventy years from now as the

1:21:26.200 --> 1:21:29.320
<v Speaker 1>non manager you have today. So that raises a really

1:21:29.400 --> 1:21:33.800
<v Speaker 1>interesting question, which happens to be coincidentally one of my

1:21:33.960 --> 1:21:37.320
<v Speaker 1>last two questions. What advice would you give to a

1:21:37.439 --> 1:21:42.679
<v Speaker 1>millennial or a kid just graduating college today beginning their career.

1:21:42.800 --> 1:21:44.800
<v Speaker 1>What would you tell them about what they should do

1:21:44.880 --> 1:21:49.120
<v Speaker 1>with their career and what would you tell them about investing? Well,

1:21:49.200 --> 1:21:51.080
<v Speaker 1>people have to find their own way in this life,

1:21:51.200 --> 1:21:53.839
<v Speaker 1>and I've I've talked to a number of groups at Princeton,

1:21:54.760 --> 1:21:58.559
<v Speaker 1>one on religion and business and one on ethics and business,

1:21:58.600 --> 1:22:01.160
<v Speaker 1>two separate groups. And one is a small seminar and

1:22:01.200 --> 1:22:03.400
<v Speaker 1>one of a large lecture course. And I get that

1:22:03.520 --> 1:22:06.280
<v Speaker 1>kind of lecture. Should I not go into the financial business?

1:22:06.640 --> 1:22:09.479
<v Speaker 1>And I say no, go into the financial business and

1:22:09.560 --> 1:22:12.040
<v Speaker 1>make it better than it is today. You know, I don't.

1:22:12.280 --> 1:22:14.360
<v Speaker 1>People have to find their own way in this life.

1:22:14.479 --> 1:22:16.960
<v Speaker 1>I had to find my own way, Barry, you have

1:22:17.080 --> 1:22:20.040
<v Speaker 1>defined your own way, a lot of bumps along the way.

1:22:20.720 --> 1:22:23.000
<v Speaker 1>You gotta have a little resilience. You've got to be

1:22:23.040 --> 1:22:25.680
<v Speaker 1>able to take defeat and turn into victory. I think

1:22:25.720 --> 1:22:29.680
<v Speaker 1>that's what I've done, maybe a little bit. And and

1:22:31.080 --> 1:22:35.160
<v Speaker 1>so it's this, This field is going to shrink hugely.

1:22:35.680 --> 1:22:38.160
<v Speaker 1>There's no question about that. It already has just since

1:22:38.280 --> 1:22:41.240
<v Speaker 1>oh nine, no doubt about it. The combination of technology

1:22:41.920 --> 1:22:46.040
<v Speaker 1>and the knowledge and the spread of this disease called

1:22:46.080 --> 1:22:50.439
<v Speaker 1>indexing is not going to go away. It's habit forming,

1:22:50.520 --> 1:22:55.280
<v Speaker 1>it's catching, it's contagious, it's spreading. And and my final question,

1:22:55.360 --> 1:22:58.080
<v Speaker 1>and I'm I'm I feel awful that it's a ninety

1:22:58.120 --> 1:23:00.720
<v Speaker 1>minutes is already up I'd like to continue you going

1:23:00.800 --> 1:23:03.720
<v Speaker 1>for another ninety minutes. What is it that you know

1:23:03.840 --> 1:23:07.439
<v Speaker 1>about investing today that you wish you knew when you

1:23:07.600 --> 1:23:11.880
<v Speaker 1>started in nineteen fifty one. Well, I'd say quite a bit.

1:23:12.000 --> 1:23:13.800
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I I was on the Welling and Fund

1:23:13.840 --> 1:23:16.439
<v Speaker 1>Investment Committee, and I saw how what hard it was

1:23:16.520 --> 1:23:18.400
<v Speaker 1>to beat the market. I wouldn't have told you that

1:23:18.560 --> 1:23:21.960
<v Speaker 1>back in n and I worked for a long time

1:23:22.000 --> 1:23:24.639
<v Speaker 1>with John Neff, who had many, many years of success

1:23:25.240 --> 1:23:28.200
<v Speaker 1>in beating the market. But he's an exception, and even

1:23:28.360 --> 1:23:31.760
<v Speaker 1>his record and in later years deteriorated. But then he mean,

1:23:31.800 --> 1:23:34.280
<v Speaker 1>he hadn't gonna. He's not running wins. Your funny ran

1:23:34.360 --> 1:23:36.439
<v Speaker 1>it for thirty years, I think, But he's not gonna.

1:23:36.439 --> 1:23:39.320
<v Speaker 1>He's not running it anymore. So managers come and go.

1:23:40.160 --> 1:23:44.439
<v Speaker 1>So I'd say things like the power of compounding, the

1:23:44.520 --> 1:23:50.240
<v Speaker 1>beauty of keeping costs low, uh, the need to ignore

1:23:50.320 --> 1:23:54.920
<v Speaker 1>the market, they need to do something. Are all things

1:23:54.960 --> 1:23:58.160
<v Speaker 1>that have and and the difficulty. This is a very

1:23:58.439 --> 1:24:02.080
<v Speaker 1>very hard business, this business investment management. And then in

1:24:02.160 --> 1:24:04.960
<v Speaker 1>the long run, we're all average, we're below our averages

1:24:05.040 --> 1:24:09.479
<v Speaker 1>my thesis suggested, below the market averages. And so I

1:24:09.560 --> 1:24:12.880
<v Speaker 1>don't think it's easy, don't think you're smarter than anybody else.

1:24:13.560 --> 1:24:17.320
<v Speaker 1>Just get in the middle, get costs out, and don't

1:24:17.400 --> 1:24:23.640
<v Speaker 1>peek John Boggle, this has been a fascinating conversation. I

1:24:23.840 --> 1:24:26.720
<v Speaker 1>again thank you so much for being so generous with

1:24:26.920 --> 1:24:30.479
<v Speaker 1>your time. If you enjoy this conversation, you could look

1:24:30.560 --> 1:24:33.320
<v Speaker 1>up an Inch or down an Inch on Apple iTunes

1:24:33.360 --> 1:24:36.200
<v Speaker 1>and see the other eighty or so of these that

1:24:36.320 --> 1:24:40.360
<v Speaker 1>we've had. UH. Be sure and check out uh all

1:24:40.400 --> 1:24:43.520
<v Speaker 1>the rest of our our chats. They are really quite fascinating.

1:24:43.920 --> 1:24:46.960
<v Speaker 1>I have to thank Mike bat Nick, my head of research,

1:24:47.360 --> 1:24:50.839
<v Speaker 1>for helping to put together all these questions, my producer

1:24:51.000 --> 1:24:54.800
<v Speaker 1>and engineer Charlie Vollmer for dragging himself out of bed

1:24:54.880 --> 1:24:57.519
<v Speaker 1>at an undoddly hour in the morning to drive here

1:24:58.120 --> 1:25:02.479
<v Speaker 1>to Malvern, Pennsylvania to in guard UH mother ship. Jack.

1:25:02.560 --> 1:25:05.280
<v Speaker 1>Thank you again so much. This has been absolutely fascinating.

1:25:05.640 --> 1:25:08.960
<v Speaker 1>Great to be wayy to marry. Good luck. M