Skip Navigation
 

Stupid Humans Vs. The Computer

My latest blog

Is It Right To Reclaim Bank Charges?

Published in Investing Strategy on 17 May 2007

You can let a human look after your money, or a computer. Which do you think will make you richer? (The word 'stupid' might give you a clue.)

Although many of Milton Friedman's ideas shaped world economies, they've often been radical. Even last year, at the age 94 and just a few months before he died, the influential economist recorded a podcast for the Library of Economics and Liberty. In it he said, amongst other things, that we should fix currencies and replace the committee that sets the Bank of England Base Rate with robots.

Well, that's what I wish he said, if only for comedy value. But what he actually said was only one step away: he said replace the committee with computers.

He's not the only one that, in some instances, rates computers above people when it comes to money matters. One of my favourite subjects is that of stupid humans vs. the computer when investing in shares.

If you don't choose shares yourself, you have two basic choices. You can choose a managed fund, which has a human running it. He or she will select shares for you and invest the money you contribute to the fund on your behalf.

Alternatively, you can choose an index tracker. These invest in all the shares in an index, such as the FTSE 100 or FTSE All Share, and then the fund's value goes up and down with that index. As it's simply tracking the index, no humans make any decisions, so a computer can do all the work.

I urge you to take a look at our guide to index trackers, particularly the section Index Trackers vs Managed Fund? All the data The Fool has come across over the years has shown that three out of four, eight out of ten and even nine out of ten managed funds fail to beat index trackers!

This means that there are some funds that beat index trackers, but past performance usually has no bearing on future performance, and so far we have seen no reliable and proven way to choose managed funds that will outperform the market.

The next question is: 'Do you need to outperform?' The stock market as a whole has done very well over time, regardless of the performance of individual shares. In fact, it has provided good returns for most of the past 130 years. It has its ups and downs, of course, but provided you're willing to invest for the long-term you can expect to do well.

I admit that there are massive limits to technology. The Motley Fool isn't keen on technical analysis, for example, where computer programs analyse data and charts to tell you when to buy and sell shares. But these programs are making decisions based on rules created by...? Yup, stupid humans!

> More about Index Trackers.
> An alternative to index trackers: Exchange Traded Funds.
> You can buy trackers within a convenient tax-free ISA. We have a few in our ISA centre, but you can find even more if you do your own research!

Share & subscribe

Comments

The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool. If you spot any comments that are unsuitable hit the flag to alert our moderators.

perrytoo 07 Apr 2008, 7:34am

Past performance is no guide to future good performance, but it's often a very good guide to future bad performance, particularly where there are high charges. I'm a big fan of ETFs.

Silveraven 07 Apr 2008, 12:06pm

Fundamental to the argument for trackers and against managed funds is the charges involved. What most Motley Fool articles fail to mention is that if investing through 'fund supermarkets' like Interactive Investor, the managed funds' charges are slashed to usually just 1 or 1.5%, instead of the 4% full rate that the Fool generally quotes. Yes it's more than the average tracker, plus there's an initial charge too of usually 1%, but it would be interesting to see whether the trackers continue to win 9 out of 10 times using these reduced charges that are easily available (but maybe not at the Fool).
Another little gripe I have is how the Fool seems to be pushing Legal & General trackers - I've been with them for years and I have no complaints but the tracker that has out-performed the rest is the FTSE 250, but you'll have to go elsewhere, like HSBC, to get that one because L&G don't offer it. It would seem that the Fool is not being rigourous in offering the best info here due to their partnership with L&G. Fair enough in a way but a little more transparency would be nice. And yes, the FTSE 250 is considered to involve more risk but since it's inception seems to have performed very well cf. other FTSE indices like the 100 and all-share.

MikeGG1 07 Apr 2008, 4:41pm

Following on from Silveraven's comments, the problem with FTSE100 trackers is that every 3 months there is a revamp of the included companies with 2 or 3 leaving and the same number joining. There are sometimes discrepancies between leaving and joining if there has been a takeover or demerger.

Each quarter, the FTSE100 tacker has to sell those shares it holds of the companies leaving, usually at a discount because all the other FTSE100 trackers are having to do the same. This discount creates a loss to the tracker fund.

Likewise, they have to buy the shares of the newcomers at a premium because of the other trackers, creating a further loss for the tracker.

The FTSE250 has the same problem at both ends but spread over more than twice as many companies so has a reduced problem percentagewise. However, there is more takeover activity in this group, which boosts its gains.

A FTSE350 tracker has an even lower loss effect because it has the FTSE100 group plus the FTSE250 and therefore only has the bottom end of the FTSE250 to consider which is a very much smaller percentage of the total fund.

An All-Share tracker does not have this problem at all apart from the occasional promotions from AIM. However, there are very few investment houses, apart from L&G, with a big enough fund to buy sufficient shares to reflect the index. Most have to choose a few companies from each sector so that they are invested in the appropriate percentages for each sector and hope that they have chosen wisely.

Iniq 17 Apr 2008, 9:08am

I share MikeGG1's enthusiasm for FTSE all-share trackers, especially the HSBC one available through Hargreaves Lansdown at an annual charge of just 0.25%.

Join the conversation

Instructions

Line breaks are converted automatically.

You may use the following tags in your post: <b>bold</b>, <i>quoted text</i>. All other tags will be removed from your post.

Hello stranger

To add your own comment, please login.

Not yet registered? Register now.