The Negative Externalities of Index Funds
Steve Waldman doesn't like it when I defend passive investing. If everybody moved to a passive-investment style, he asks, then where would we be? We need active investors to make efficient markets and set prices. Passive investors, he says quite rightly, are free-riders:
Passive investors pay none of the costs of generating good investment decisions, but enjoy the benefits by free-riding on the work of others...
Advising people to buy index funds rather than select investments is akin to advising people not to vote, since the cost of voting far exceeds any individual benefit. Those who don't vote get the same government everyone else does, but at lower cost!
Steve goes even further in the comments:
It's a lot like greenhouse gasses, really. Tallying the aggregate "costs" of active investing is like enumerating the costs of reducing CO2 emissions without figuring in any kind of benefit. Advising people to go passive is like telling people to ignore their carbon footprint, because by doing so you'll come out ahead of those who conserve (you'll live in the same world, but bear fewer costs).
Scolding people not to go passive may be a fool's errand, so long as the individual cost/benefit looks good. But broad encouragement of behavior that has clear (if hard to quantify) external costs as though it were a virtue, because, hey, it won't cost you anything, strikes me as a bad idea.
Except the amount of active investing has been going up even as the amount of passive investing has been going up. When John Bogle started the Vanguard Group, the amount of active investing was a fraction of what it is today. And in most cases it makes perfect sense for small retail investors to go the passive route anyway, just because those investors don't have the kind of risk appetite needed to be an active investor.
My feeling is that we're a very, very long way from the point at which passive investments carry significant negative externalities. Already we've reached the point at which active investors front-run index changes and do all manner of year-end index arbitrage, seeking to profit from passive investors' passivity. All power to them, I say. Passive investors will always underperform the market as a whole by a little bit: they have to pay some management fees, after all. So the market as a whole actually outperforms passive investors. As long as that money's on the table, I'm not going to lose any sleep about free-riding on hedge funds doing price discovery.
- Extra Credit, Thursday Edition
- Dec 4 2008 7:08PM EST
- External Links on the NYT Home Page
- Dec 4 2008 4:40PM EST
- Jim Simons's Incentives
- Dec 4 2008 3:45PM EST
- How Does Posting Collateral Work?
- Dec 4 2008 2:02PM EST
- A Weird Argument for Index Funds
- Dec 4 2008 12:59PM EST
- Pricing Parking in Chicago
- Dec 4 2008 11:49AM EST
- A Smaller World
- Dec 4 2008 10:24AM EST
- How Can GM Bondholders be Bailed In?
- Dec 4 2008 9:45AM EST
- Viacom Datapoint of the Day
- Dec 4 2008 9:20AM EST
- Extra Credit, Wednesday Edition
- Dec 4 2008 2:55AM EST
- Spitzer vs Big Finance, Part 2
- Dec 4 2008 2:52AM EST
- The Problem With InTrade
- Dec 3 2008 5:52PM EST
- GM's Bond Restructuring Plan
- Dec 3 2008 4:44PM EST
- Harvard: Still Rich
- Dec 3 2008 12:15PM EST
- The Tyranny of the Shareholders
- Dec 3 2008 11:11AM EST
Categories
Links
- Email Felix Salmon
- Alphaville

- Marginal Revolution

- The Panelist

- FP Passport

- Overcoming Bias

- Andrew Leonard

- Barry Ritholtz

- Brad Setser

- Carbon Tax Center

- Calculated Risk

- Greg Mankiw

- Free Exchange

- Dean Baker

- Alexander Campbell

- Kash Mansori

- The Bayesian Heresy

- A Fistful of Euros

- John Quiggin

- Michael Mandel

- Lance Knobel

- Mark Thoma

- Dan Gross

- Curbed

- Streetsblog

- Chris Anderson

- Deal Journal

- MarketBeat

- DealBook

- DealBreaker

- Carl Bialik

- Michelle Leder

- Brad DeLong

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Naked Capitalism

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- Econospeak

- Fortune: Daily Briefing

- Financial Crookery










