I think your evolution on your perspective of Buffett is very well stated. Buffett curates the image of a helpful, folksy, "investing is 1+1=2" grandpa, but the full truth about investing and Buffett as documented in a book like Snowball is far more complicated. Buffett's single minded focus and fierce competitiveness is less widely known and masked.
I am a Buffett fan, and Your description of Buffett as a "Human Alien👽" is 100% spot on!
The drive, the twist, the obsession and the discipline and consistency have no equal. Roger Lowenstein grasped well in "The making of an American Capitalist": he is tough. The only fact that he's able to tell you that decades of investing have been like a walk in the park, that's another unique strenght. Happy Birthday, Mr. B.
Be like Buffett means find your own way to tap dance to work and find your own "Joy of Investing".
Buffett was happy with 10 thousnd dollars, happy with 100k just as he is now with 100 billion. I started from the get-go memorizing chapter 8 and 20 of the "Intelligent Investor". The rest was Life.
Exactly! Tap dancing to work can mean investing/building a business. But for many it's something else and they have to reframe the lessons from Buffett's life a little. And other than the jet he didn't spend much time on the hedonic treadmill.
Im always surprised as many pro investors only skimmed the surface in studying Buffett. They barely just know the common portrait that everybody knows and the most famous deals. Buffett World is pretty much deeper..
Today I learned something! Great way to start a new day! Thanks, in particular, for providing the link to first ever video format tv interview by Buffett in 1962.
The point about enjoying what you're analyzing is key, in my view. We have to consider all the factors involved, not just "what's the best stock/business right now". Especially if you're going to be doing this for decades!
This is a good piece, nice job! I would however argue that a lot of pain has been brought to individual investors by these legendary PMs as they have made it look easier than what really is. From the 90s, so many texts on Buffet&Co have tried to send a message that anyone can really beat the market and I think the financial community encouraged that view even though the data does not point in that direction . A big part of the financial industry lives on selling the idea to investors that they can beat the market and spot the next 100x baggers even though that is usually not the case. Even when you look at professional investors, alpha is mostly a mirage and certainly not persistent. Professional investors who spend their lives working on stocks, studying companies are literally killing themselves for a 0,5% alpha per annum which eludes them or simply evaporates after a few years of overperformance. So I would argue that, for 99.9% of the people (professionals included), picking stocks has to be considered an activity whose main objective is certainly not beating the market...
Yes, most people are better off not picking stocks. Many great track records were achieved in markets with completely different conditions - higher nominal returns (higher rates), less competitive. I think there is value in studying the principles and stories of great investors - but it's not in copying specific methods (looking for a formula to beat the market..), nor should one expect to replicate their returns.
Regarding investing in what you’re interested in … I think it is more than a preference. It is essential because most people are not going to be motivated to research companies they are not interested in thoroughly enough to gain any unique or actionable insights. You have to be excited about it to engage fully in the process.
Excellent write up, thanks for sharing Frederik! Couldn't agree more about the community aspect of this art. Great writing style too, keep them coming!
I wish more individual investors would take Liberty's view. Investing is the best way to make sense of the world and the best motivator for getting to the truth of what's going on. Obviously making, and crucially, not losing money is the goal, but the SPY as a benchmark for most investors is probably a bad one.
In general, as more and more assets have become passively managed, the index has drifted to greater concentration. That combined with various regulatory tailwinds have all but usurped the role of price discover. In the words of Keynes
"A conventional valuation which is established as the outcome of the mass psychology of a large number of ignorant individuals is liable to change violently as the result of a sudden fluctuation of opinion due to factors which do not really make much difference to the prospective yield; since there will be no strong roots of conviction to hold it steady."
Interesting article, very well written! However I do not see why the SPX should not be a benchmark for investors. At the end of the day your next best choice, apart from being able to create alpha from individual stocks, is allocating capital either in a fund (good luck finding persistent alpha) or in the market. We may argue about the specific index to choose (personally I think the MSCI World is better balanced), but I do not really see why one should discard passive vehicles given that they, usually, tend to give better results than pros and amateurs picking individual stocks. Saying that ETFs are distorting the market and therefore active investors cannot outperform or that passive vehicles are disrupting the role of markets in allocating capital does not really sound right to me.
This is a really thoughtful piece - the type of thing that's worth reading a few times.
Back from your break with a bang!
Thank you!
I think your evolution on your perspective of Buffett is very well stated. Buffett curates the image of a helpful, folksy, "investing is 1+1=2" grandpa, but the full truth about investing and Buffett as documented in a book like Snowball is far more complicated. Buffett's single minded focus and fierce competitiveness is less widely known and masked.
I am a Buffett fan, and Your description of Buffett as a "Human Alien👽" is 100% spot on!
Agree. His public image is carefully cultivated - which is another lesson from his life. More to come :)
The drive, the twist, the obsession and the discipline and consistency have no equal. Roger Lowenstein grasped well in "The making of an American Capitalist": he is tough. The only fact that he's able to tell you that decades of investing have been like a walk in the park, that's another unique strenght. Happy Birthday, Mr. B.
So good!
Excellent piece.
Thanks, Birgir!
Excellent info and thanks for the sharing useful insights
Be like Buffett means find your own way to tap dance to work and find your own "Joy of Investing".
Buffett was happy with 10 thousnd dollars, happy with 100k just as he is now with 100 billion. I started from the get-go memorizing chapter 8 and 20 of the "Intelligent Investor". The rest was Life.
Exactly! Tap dancing to work can mean investing/building a business. But for many it's something else and they have to reframe the lessons from Buffett's life a little. And other than the jet he didn't spend much time on the hedonic treadmill.
Im always surprised as many pro investors only skimmed the surface in studying Buffett. They barely just know the common portrait that everybody knows and the most famous deals. Buffett World is pretty much deeper..
Today I learned something! Great way to start a new day! Thanks, in particular, for providing the link to first ever video format tv interview by Buffett in 1962.
Thank you, Sachin. I love that interview. So different to see him still young.
The point about enjoying what you're analyzing is key, in my view. We have to consider all the factors involved, not just "what's the best stock/business right now". Especially if you're going to be doing this for decades!
Agree and longevity/tenacity is a good point. Buffett being the best example. Just started reading your Complete Financial History. Well done!
Thank you very much!
Interesting and inspiring post. I would also add to the desire of learning the intense desire to succeed.
Yes, absolutely.
This is a good piece, nice job! I would however argue that a lot of pain has been brought to individual investors by these legendary PMs as they have made it look easier than what really is. From the 90s, so many texts on Buffet&Co have tried to send a message that anyone can really beat the market and I think the financial community encouraged that view even though the data does not point in that direction . A big part of the financial industry lives on selling the idea to investors that they can beat the market and spot the next 100x baggers even though that is usually not the case. Even when you look at professional investors, alpha is mostly a mirage and certainly not persistent. Professional investors who spend their lives working on stocks, studying companies are literally killing themselves for a 0,5% alpha per annum which eludes them or simply evaporates after a few years of overperformance. So I would argue that, for 99.9% of the people (professionals included), picking stocks has to be considered an activity whose main objective is certainly not beating the market...
Yes, most people are better off not picking stocks. Many great track records were achieved in markets with completely different conditions - higher nominal returns (higher rates), less competitive. I think there is value in studying the principles and stories of great investors - but it's not in copying specific methods (looking for a formula to beat the market..), nor should one expect to replicate their returns.
Regarding investing in what you’re interested in … I think it is more than a preference. It is essential because most people are not going to be motivated to research companies they are not interested in thoroughly enough to gain any unique or actionable insights. You have to be excited about it to engage fully in the process.
I agree and that's the challenge. It's easy to fall into the trap of trying to be someone else/following another investor's path.
As in music you study the greats to find your own voice and style, otherwise it's not gonna work
Excellent write up, thanks for sharing Frederik! Couldn't agree more about the community aspect of this art. Great writing style too, keep them coming!
Thanks, Sudobh!
I wish more individual investors would take Liberty's view. Investing is the best way to make sense of the world and the best motivator for getting to the truth of what's going on. Obviously making, and crucially, not losing money is the goal, but the SPY as a benchmark for most investors is probably a bad one.
Agree, his comments really stuck with me. It's a great way to learn about the world and human nature.
Hi Hunter, why do you think the SPX is a bad benchmark for most investors?
Discussed at some length here: https://lewisenterprises.substack.com/p/like-a-pro
In general, as more and more assets have become passively managed, the index has drifted to greater concentration. That combined with various regulatory tailwinds have all but usurped the role of price discover. In the words of Keynes
"A conventional valuation which is established as the outcome of the mass psychology of a large number of ignorant individuals is liable to change violently as the result of a sudden fluctuation of opinion due to factors which do not really make much difference to the prospective yield; since there will be no strong roots of conviction to hold it steady."
Interesting article, very well written! However I do not see why the SPX should not be a benchmark for investors. At the end of the day your next best choice, apart from being able to create alpha from individual stocks, is allocating capital either in a fund (good luck finding persistent alpha) or in the market. We may argue about the specific index to choose (personally I think the MSCI World is better balanced), but I do not really see why one should discard passive vehicles given that they, usually, tend to give better results than pros and amateurs picking individual stocks. Saying that ETFs are distorting the market and therefore active investors cannot outperform or that passive vehicles are disrupting the role of markets in allocating capital does not really sound right to me.