The Big Picture

Transcript: Bill McNabb, Vanguard former Chairman and CEO

 

 

 

The transcript from this week’s, MiB: Bill McNabb, Vanguard former Chairman and CEO, is below.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube (audio), and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

~~~

Masters in Business Bill McNabb, former Chairman and CEO, The Vanguard Group
Host: Barry Ritholtz  |  Bloomberg Radio

(00:00:02) Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio, news. This is Masters in Business with Barry Ritholtz on Bloomberg Radio.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:00:16): This week on the podcast, another extra, extra special guest. Bill McNabb was CEO and chairman at the Vanguard Group. He had been with the firm for 30 years, helping to take them up to trillions of dollars. We’ve spoken to him a couple of times in the past.

He discusses his post-Vanguard career, the boards he’s sitting on, all the fintech startups and venture capital he’s working with. I thought this conversation was fascinating, and I think you will also. With no further ado, my sit-down with William McNabb. Bill McNabb, welcome back to Bloomberg.

BILL McNABB (00:00:55): Oh, thanks, Barry. It’s great to be here.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:00:57): So the last two times you were here, you were running Vanguard Group. I’m curious, how does a guy who rowed at Dartmouth, taught Latin and coached at the Haverford School end up running the world’s largest mutual fund company?

BILL McNABB (00:01:16): So there’s an old saying that it’s better to be lucky than smart.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:01:21): My mom used to say that to me all the time.

BILL McNABB (00:01:23): And that really did apply. I got very lucky, Barry, in terms of just opportunities that happened to come my way. And I had incredible mentors who sort of helped take those opportunities and make more of them than maybe they would’ve been otherwise. And one thing led to another.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:01:43): Huh. Really interesting. So teaching Latin and coaching, what does that teach somebody like you about leadership that you were able to apply across three decades at Vanguard?

BILL McNABB (00:01:56): Yeah, I think there were two big things, and I was very fortunate to work for somebody at Vanguard who really lived this, and I’ll come back to that in a second. But the power of “we” versus “I.” I was coaching a rowing team, and no matter how good the individual athletes were, if they didn’t really exist in order to make the boat go faster, you weren’t going to win. And we had to really get that across to people, and that collective drive for success actually is incredibly applicable in the business world. I think the other thing, maybe a little more subtle, is you lead by example. Some of the people who talk about it, they theorize, and all these fancy sayings.

I’d rather just watch somebody do what they do really well. And if they’re building good teams, just that example of how they do it is really worth emulating. I worked for Jack Brennan, as you know, and I think you’ve had Jack on here before as well. And Jack really lived that. For me, when I got to Vanguard, the “we” versus “I” was very apparent in how he was driving the firm, and no one led by example better than Jack.

And when you’ve grown up in that world as a coach and an athlete, and then you get it reinforced professionally early in your career, it becomes a way of thinking.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:03:24): Yeah. Big fan of Jack Brennan. Loved what he did. When you joined Vanguard in ’86, it was obviously a fraction of where it is today.

It was far less than a trillion dollars. And even in the mid-eighties, I mean, that was the beginning of the bull market that started in ’82. You had Peter Lynch and the Fidelity Magellan Fund. Berkshire Hathaway was on the rise, stock picking was on the rise.

I guess I could say indexing was a fringe idea. What did the firm look like back in the mid-eighties? Did you have any idea what was coming your way over the next couple of decades?

BILL McNABB (00:04:05): This is why I said it’s really better to be lucky than smart. I did not see this incredible explosion coming. What attracted me to Vanguard was I was working here in New York for what’s now JPMorgan Chase, and was getting a little frustrated with a lot of things and decided it was probably time to go. And again, one of my mentors said to me, go find a place where the values match your own.

And when I went in and interviewed with Jack Brennan and then Jack Bogle, I found, it was like, wow, this is so different. And there was tremendous appeal. And so I did it really based on gut and intuition at the time. And so when I interviewed with Jack Bogle, the funny story was, he had data pulled out, a bunch of stuff, and he’s like, we just crossed $15 billion under management and I have no idea how we’re going to get to 20.

So I don’t know why you would come here. You’re doing big things on Wall Street. And I didn’t even really have a response. And then he went on, he goes, but of course, and for the next hour and a half, I got a lecture about everything that needed to change in the asset management business.

I go home and my wife says to me, how’d it go? I said, I don’t know. I didn’t say anything. But she goes, well, what are you going to do?

And I said, well, if he offers me the job, I’m going. Because there was just something there, the passion and the drive and the really contrarian view. So the early days, look, we paid as much attention to active management as Fidelity did. So Fidelity had Peter Lynch in the Magellan Fund.

We had John Neff in the Windsor Fund. Arguably one of the two or three greatest value investors in history. And Jack himself was very much making sure that we were competitive.

Money market funds were just taking off. And we got into the money market fund wars. It’s hard for people to imagine today, but yields were 17, 18% at different times.

And Dreyfus, Fidelity and Vanguard were the three money market fund giants. We each had a couple billion dollars, but everybody was comparing yields. And so active management and the yield on the money market fund in the early days, those were like the big drivers.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:06:22): So my pet thesis, to put this into context: $15 billion in the early eighties, just about $15 trillion today. That’s just a crazy thousand-fold increase. That’s just an insane run. My theory is the late nineties, the scandals, the crashes, the analyst scandal, the accounting scandal, the IPO scandal, all one after another.

I think a lot of people just threw their hands up and said, you know what, just buy me the whole market. Let me know when I have enough to retire. Is that oversimplifying what happened?

Or is that a real factor?

BILL McNABB (00:07:00): So I would say that’s the psychological part of it. There was also the math part of it, which is on an after-tax basis, index funds beat 90% of active equities over any rolling ten-year period.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:07:15): Anything more than a decade.

BILL McNABB (00:07:16): Anything more than a decade. So if you were a long-term investor and you wanted to win, you indexed. And so it was interesting to me, as a participant in the market, I’d listen to our competitors and they’d talk, well, indexing’s having its moment, but it’s going to cycle out, and stock picking will be back any day. And the math was just overwhelming. And the real reason, and this was Jack Bogle’s, again, oversimplified discussion, but essentially if you have two big parts of the market, one that’s actively managed and one that’s passively managed, they have to add up to the market.

So the average on the active side’s going to be the market, because the index side’s going to be the market. And then you take costs into account, and all of a sudden you’ve got arithmetic working in your favor. So for us, there was this: it’s simple.

It’s easy, it’s low cost, and it works. And I think that was such a powerful thing. And our shareholders, Barry, as you know, because you’ve been a student of the game for so long, they stayed with us way longer than other investors stayed with their firms. On average, I think it was three x.

So the average duration of a relationship was three x that of the industry. That’s an incredible advantage in terms of just how you think about your business.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:08:43): So you become CEO in August ’08. Two weeks later, Lehman Brothers goes kaput. Remind us what was happening in that era. What was that transition like, stepping into the lead role just as it looks like the world is going to hell, and what was that experience like?

BILL McNABB (00:09:05): Yeah, so look, in the darkest days, I mean, everyone was questioning whether the system would survive. So different than other crises we’ve seen. People really looked at it like, will the market actually survive this? And we had a deep-seated belief it would. And so we kind of had this bifurcated way of looking at the world. Each and every day, what were we doing to better assure our investors that somewhere down the road things would get better and they had to stay the course? Like, the worst thing you could do was to panic, unless you really believed the world was going to end.

So we met twice a day, every morning and every afternoon. And we went through transaction by transaction, fund performance, everything you needed to try to assure our investors. At the same time, we knew that the world was going to be different. Regulation was going to be different, the competitive landscape was going to change, and maybe even some of the business models were going to change. And so we started laying the groundwork for all those changes.

And just to give you a couple of tangible examples, the role of advisors. So at that point in time, the independent advisor channel, which again, you’ve lived this, was a really tiny fraction of advisors. Most of it was the big brokerage firms. And they were primarily commission driven.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:10:41): Right. All transaction based.

BILL McNABB (00:10:42): All transaction based and essentially conflicted. Because the more you trade, the more money they make, and the more you trade, the more you lose from a performance standpoint. So we believed this would accelerate the move to asset-based fees and that it would be a very different model. The other one for us, we really thought this would accelerate indexing, for all the reasons that you cited earlier in terms of just, hey, it’s safe.

It’s just buy the market. And again, the math was overwhelming. Even during a downturn, stock pickers did not outperform the index.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:11:19): Which is the claim before, right? Just wait till the next downturn and you’ll see how well stock pickers have done.

BILL McNABB (00:11:25): So we started to make moves around those changes. We knew the regulations were going to change a lot. And we also knew the competitive landscape. And frankly, we didn’t get that all right.

We knew somebody would end up with iShares because Barclays Bank was under such duress. I didn’t see BlackRock doing it. I just didn’t anticipate that.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:11:50): What a great buy for them.

BILL McNABB (00:11:51): It was spectacular. It was phenomenal. One of the stories we don’t talk much about, we actually were a serious bidder on it until the regulators came in and changed the game. And then we had to back away.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:12:03): Really? How come BlackRock would be allowed and Vanguard wouldn’t?

BILL McNABB (00:12:07): We were allowed, but they wanted to pair their institutional business with the iShares franchise. We didn’t want anything to do with that institutional business, because we were all mutual fund, retail based. And again, all the credit in the world to Larry Fink and his team and BlackRock for what they did.

But it was interesting. I had a director come to me after all this, and he says, so you’re six months in the job and you come to us about doing our first acquisition ever. It’s a very large check. And over a beer sometime I can tell you about all the nuances that went into it.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:12:28): I’m looking forward to it.

BILL McNABB (00:12:46): It was pretty cool. Yeah. So what does that tell you about ETFs and this advisor channel? And we took that back, and that’s when we really went all in on ETFs and all in on really serving advisors better.

And that was a huge change.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:13:03): I want to circle back to advice and target date funds, and just stay with ’08-’09 for another moment. The first time you were on, you told a story about how you had figured out how nervous your employees were. Do you recall what I’m talking about?

Remind us of what that environment was, how it was affecting clients and staff, and what your solution to it was.

BILL McNABB (00:13:32): So all of our competitors were laying people off left and right, because transaction volumes had just gone away.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:13:40): Other than selling.

BILL McNABB (00:13:42): Other than selling, you’re right. The classic mutual fund company in those days was probably 65, 70% equity. And the equity market, peak to trough, was down 50%. So your revenue was down 35%.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:13:57): I think it was 57, 56, something like that.

BILL McNABB (00:14:00): I think like March 9th, if I recall.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:14:01): That’s what I recall, exactly right. It was identical to ’73-’74 in terms of the drawdown.

BILL McNABB (00:14:07): So our people were incredibly nervous. People were wondering. So we went to our people, and we got our board’s blessing to do this, and said, there will be no redundancies, no layoffs. All we want you to do is be flexible, and we may need you to move from one role to another, wherever the client demand is and whatever the need is. So we ended up doubling down on service and doubling down on fixing problems. Everybody has service issues.

If we had excess people, we turned them loose on those problems. And the theory was you couldn’t cut your way out of this. And if you had people nervous about their own jobs, how are they going to reassure clients that the world’s not ending? They were going to feel conflicted.

And I think it really worked.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:15:02): Everybody exhaled. Everybody took a deep breath.

BILL McNABB (00:15:05): And we went all in on educating our clients and people. Our service levels were incredible. We got a lot of positive reinforcement back from the clients. So I think strategically it was one of the most important things we did during that period.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:15:23): And then out of the depths of the financial crisis, you guys leaned hard into the advisor channel, into building your own advisor space, and then target date funds, which I believe came out of an offsite meeting around the crisis. Tell us a little bit about that redirection, expansion, and the new post-crisis direction for Vanguard.

BILL McNABB (00:15:48): So it really was, we did this very existential exercise with Jim Collins, the great business writer.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:15:59): Good to Great, is that right?

BILL McNABB (00:16:00): Good to Great. He had done the two books that were really influential on our thinking: Built to Last, how do you build a company that can be a leading company for a hundred years, and then Good to Great. And so we asked ourselves, in order to be great, we thought the first step was, what’s our why? Why do we exist?

We had a mission statement, and it was very long and a lot of adjectives and adverbs. And we took a team, and we mixed the team. It was a couple senior people, but all the way down to the front lines. And we said, come back with why. Why do we exist?

Why do we have a right to exist? And it was really simple. It was: take a stand for investors, treat them fairly, and give them the best chance for investment success. And that latter one in particular, target date funds. You do the math, we could demonstrably show that investors who went in target date funds did better than those who didn’t. Doing our own advice program, low-cost advice that’s tax sensitive, really focused on asset allocation, and very disciplined in rebalancing and not letting people, in a sense, harm themselves.

That’s where advisors add tremendous value. So build that. So these things, Barry, were in a sense logical outcomes. And the target date thing was interesting.

We had people arguing about, well, it doesn’t really take risk into account, just setting a date. And we’re like, every risk quiz I’ve ever seen gets the same answer: moderate.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:17:44): My experience has been, when you do the risk tolerance surveys with investors, what you really find out is what’s been going on in the market for the past six months. So if it’s doing great, they’re much less risk averse. And when it’s in the crapper, suddenly, no, no, I’m not an adventurous investor, I’m a low-risk investor.

BILL McNABB (00:18:02): So when we really looked at the math, those quizzes were adding no value in terms of the asset allocation decisions we were making. So we were like, just take it out, make it simple. Tell us when you’re going to retire, and that’s the fund we’re going to put you in. And again, you track all this, the performance of those funds versus unmanaged accounts in 401(k)s, it’s superior.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:18:22): There’s a reason that has become the default holding in 401(k)s. Because before that Richard Thaler-driven behavioral change was made, people would just leave money in cash, and when the market would run away, geez.

BILL McNABB (00:18:38): Guaranteed investment contracts and money market funds were the default options of choice. And I started out as guaranteed investment contract product manager at Vanguard. So I knew this world really well. And it’s funny you mentioned Thaler.

So Shlomo Benartzi and Dick Thaler did all of the seminal work on applying behavioral finance to 401(k) plans. We sponsored a lot of their research. And we actually worked with them.

And that really helped us think about automatic enrollment into 401(k) plans, automatic escalation of your contribution.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:19:10): As your salary increases.

BILL McNABB (00:19:11): As your salary increases. And then the default option being a target date fund.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:19:15): The more you can automate a process, the less opportunity there is for human bad decision making. And poor intervention.

Totally. So last two Vanguard questions before we move on. So Jack Bogle was at Vanguard pretty much your entire tenure.

What was your relationship like with him? I know he wasn’t necessarily a big fan of things like ETFs or overseas investing. Tell us a little bit about what it was like to work with Jack for 30 years.

BILL McNABB (00:19:48): Jack. I chuckle because I learned so much. One of my early roles, it was my second role at Vanguard, I sort of fell into running product development, which was really: whatever Jack thought up as a new investment product, you went and did the homework and then went and executed. So I got to work with him a lot in those early days.

He was incredibly demanding. Very fair, but incredibly demanding. And I had my share of, do I need to get my resume in order? Because he had, a lot of pen marks on a paper or whatever. But when I became CEO, I got a nice note from him right away.

And then a few months later I got like a 20-page series of things we should be thinking about. And I’d say all well thought out, about half of which I said, nah, we’re going to do something different. But he certainly was not shy. And so you’re right.

ETFs, global funds, international investing in general, he was not a huge fan. However, I had a couple of great people on my staff who just constantly went to see him and talked to him and really took his wisdom. And in the end, if you watch some of his last interviews on ETFs, he’d say, unless you do it like Vanguard does it. And he slowly moved there. I think the other thing, in international, the team in Australia, which was our biggest international presence when I retired, and I think it still is, Jack made a visit there after he’d retired, but he was still running the Bogle Research Center, and it was epic.

They talk about it still to this day, about how impactful it was to have the founder there. And he was so proud that the message was going beyond our borders.

And so, again, there was still—

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:22:12): Still no real traction in Europe, starting to lean that way. They have just such a different, I don’t know if it’s the fact that their retirements are more or less covered.

BILL McNABB (00:22:25): State driven, and the banks control everything there for the most part. Although in the UK, we’ve had a lot of success.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:22:32): The UK, yeah. It’s shifting there before everywhere else. So last Vanguard question. I recall just at the tail end of the financial crisis, you guys crossed a trillion dollars, then $2 trillion. By the time you retire, I don’t know if it was four or $5 trillion. It’s a little over five, $5 trillion. My question for you was, your first day of retirement, what was it like waking up saying, I’m not responsible for millions of investors and trillions of dollars?

BILL McNABB (00:23:05): It was big mixed emotion, Barry. So much of my career was spent in front of clients. I helped build our 401(k) business in the early days. So I got out to see employee groups on behalf of the plan sponsors.

So I probably had more direct interaction than anyone had ever had. I missed that a lot. I just had so many incredible experiences and relationships, and I missed our people. One of the great things, both Jack Bogle and Jack Brennan were so good at this, they did not like hierarchy. We didn’t have executive dining rooms and special parking places and all that kind of stuff, because we believed everybody’s job was really important.

And we all used to love to walk the floors and see what people were up to and talk to them. So I missed that, and I missed the clients. But at the same time, the team that was there, I’d worked with most of them for 25 years. I felt good about that team, and it was like, go knock it out of the park.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:24:20): You left the place in good shape. Coming up, we continue our conversation with Bill McNabb, former CEO and chairman of the Vanguard Group, talking about his new roles in the boardroom and working with startups. I’m Barry Ritholtz. You’re listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

I am Barry Ritholtz. You are listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My extra special guest this week is Bill McNabb. He is the former CEO and chairman of Vanguard. The firm now runs, I don’t know, is it $14 trillion?

Some wild number. So you step down as CEO at 60 with the firm pretty much running on all cylinders, doing great, great team.

As someone who just went through the process of succession planning, I have to ask you, how did you know it was time to step down? How do you think about doing succession correctly? There are so many examples of firms that get it wrong.

BILL McNABB (00:25:31): So one of the things about this, again, I had a great mentor on this, my predecessor Jack Brennan. Jack retired when he was, I think, 54.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:25:44): But he stayed as chairman for a few years, right?

BILL McNABB (00:25:46): Just a year. But he had run the firm for 12 years. And I couldn’t believe it when he told me he was going to do this and I was going to succeed him. And I asked him why, and he said, look, somewhere in that 10 to 12 year range, if you’ve done a decent job, people stop pushing you and they stop questioning you, because you’ve been right more than you’ve been wrong.

And he goes, that’s not healthy. And the ability to reinvent the firm or to really push for innovation gets harder, because you really need a collective wisdom to do that. And that’s where the art is, Barry. But I felt like the team was really strong.

I was seeing signs. We’d had a lot of success. So I was seeing some of those signs, and it was, okay, time to let a new generation see what they can do, and leave the place in a good spot. And then go.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:26:40): Did you set up like a detailed plan as to your retirement? Or was it just evolving organically?

BILL McNABB (00:26:47): So, a detailed plan as to how we were going to do the transition at Vanguard, and we worked really closely with our board on that. In terms of my own thing, I didn’t want to think about it. I thought I’d wait until I was out.

I had a year where I was board chair still, and I’d originally said I would do that for as long as three years. But after a year it became clear, like, the firm’s really doing great, there’s no need for this. But that year I did a ton of travel for us, all around the world, seeing clients, regulators, whomever. And I also did a lot down in DC, because there was a lot of regulatory stuff going on.

And so I had a lot of travel time. That’s when I started to think about, okay, what am I going to do at this next phase? And I describe this phase as, there’s like three parts to it. There’s family and fun, there’s governance, and then there’s what I call pay it forward: mentoring and helping develop a new cadre of leaders and so forth. And I’ve been, I won’t say systematic, but I’ve tried to be careful.

I’ve probably overcommitted a couple times in different things. But you try to feel your way through that. And the family and fun stuff are the passion things. The governance for me, I had an opportunity to co-write a book on governance with Ram Charan.

And we did the book and we talked to everybody. It was so much fun, talking to Warren Buffett about how does he think about governance. Just incredible. And Dennis Carey was the third co-author, by the way.

So I did that, and that led to co-leading the NACD’s Blue Ribbon Commission on the future of the American boardroom. And I do work with CECP, which is CEOs for Corporate Purpose, Daryl Brewster’s organization, which does incredible work on governance as well. So I had this whole sort of academic thing around governance going on, and then got the opportunity to serve on two very large public boards, where you’re on the other side.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:29:18): So let’s talk about those boards. IBM and UnitedHealth Group, two giant companies, so different, and each going through very different transformations.

How do you shift from being a CEO to being a director, and what can a board actually accomplish other than just responding to crises as they come along?

BILL McNABB (00:29:43): I think there are sort of three broad categories that the board has to lean in on. The hardest thing being an ex-CEO is you’re used to running things, and you can’t do that. There’s a line between management and governance for a reason. And so you try to be very aware of that.

But I think where you can lean in is, if you think about it at the highest level, what you’re doing is you’re allocating capital, and you’re allocating financial capital and human capital. So for us, the way we phrased it, and we did this in our book by the way, we said, look, focus on talent, focus on strategy, focus on risk. And from a governance standpoint, it all sort of boils up to those three things. And how do you help the company think through talent and culture?

Do you have the right people to execute the strategy? Most boards want to go right to strategy, but I think you’ve got to really help the CEO and the C-suite team think about that culture and think about talent. Now, the best companies do this really well. Strategy has really evolved. It used to be, I can remember doing this with the Vanguard board early in my career.

You do a strategic plan, a five-year plan, and it was all written down, and okay, this is what we’re going to do. I mean, you’ve got to be so much more agile now.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:31:25): That’s the great Mike Tyson quote: everybody has a strategy until they’re punched in the nose. It’s got to be applicable to big corporations as well.

BILL McNABB (00:31:34): So in talking about my Vanguard experience, I got it firsthand two weeks in, in 2008. Because we had a plan, and that plan, we just threw it out. And that plan was one of the coolest sets of objectives and things we were going to do differently. Completely off.

Because the world changed. The world totally changed. And so I’ve tried to bring that mentality into the boardroom. And again, I’m very lucky that the two boards I serve on think that way.

IBM has gone through a lot of transformation. Our current CEO, Arvind, he’s really brought a strategic agility into the company. And if you look at the progress the firm has made since he became CEO, it’s really very gratifying. Look, we had a big sell-off last week or two, but we’ll talk about what’s happening in the markets. I think in the long run, what we’re doing strategically makes a ton of sense.

And again, we’re trying to remain very agile.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:32:42): So let’s stay with IBM, which began as a typewriter company, right? People don’t realize how often IBM, one of the few companies that has successfully pivoted time and again, to mainframes, to PCs, and so now the pivot is to hybrid cloud, AI. When you think about all the different things they’re doing, how do you help oversee this giant business model that’s being rebuilt from the ground up?

BILL McNABB (00:33:16): Look, you try to bring what experiences you have, and you try to ask really good questions. And our board has got a breadth. When you look at the breadth in the board, different people bring different perspectives. So I think when I first came on the board, the idea was, oh, you’re going to bring a shareholder perspective, just the shareholder voice in the room.

And that’s true, but I’m also doing all this work now in the venture world. And so I’m living the AI life big time. I’m seeing the pluses and minuses and everything else. So you try to bring some of that experience.

We’ve got other people who are deep, deep, deep in different elements of technology. We’ve got other people who are really deep in terms of financial services, which is a huge part of our customer base. We’ve got some people who will push on the science. We have a former president of a major university, but her whole background was computer science.

And so when we start talking quantum, her eyes light up, and she can go toe to toe with the research team on the quantum stuff. We’re never going to know as much as the management team and the people on the ground. But if you can ask the right questions, I think that becomes really important.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:34:39): Let’s talk about your other big company board seat, UnitedHealth. I don’t know any company that’s gone through a rougher stretch due to outside forces. The CEO gets murdered, then there was the guidance issue, big leadership change, the former CEO comes back, Stephen Hemsley, and now they’re in the midst of a turnaround. What is the board’s job in an environment where it’s just one crisis after another?

And nothing that the company has necessarily done. It seems to be almost all random externalities.

BILL McNABB (00:35:16): So this is again going back to that agility thing. A lot of business writers have talked about the need for management teams to have a more venture, more startup mentality, be quick to pivot. Boards now have to be quicker to pivot. So we’ve had to pivot. We’ve had to think about leadership differently. Steve coming back, huge blessing for us that he’s ready and able and willing to do that.

One of the greatest CEOs of our time. Most people don’t know his name, but his ability to see around corners and make hard decisions and then go and execute, it’s incredible. But that wasn’t in the plan, Barry. We had to adjust pretty quickly.

And what you try to do is you try to ask the right questions. You try to probe, you try to be supportive where you need to be supportive, and you try to be challenging where you need to be challenging.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:36:19): So it’s so fascinating to me that you’re on these two giant publicly traded companies’ boards. Vanguard is mutual. They have no outside shareholders. All their mutual fund investors are effectively the owners.

There’s no stock price to worry about. How different is it stepping into this world of public company directors? It seems like such a giant shift.

BILL McNABB (00:36:48): Yeah, it is. And look, I think there are people who in a lot of ways are way more qualified than I am. And you try to be as helpful as you can be. I think the one thing that Vanguard actually really trained me well for was to think long term.

And yet at the same time, our performance was measured every day, every week, every month. So we had this ability to do both. And again, Jack Brennan, Jack Bogle really drilled that into us. And I think our team did it exceptionally well.

The biggest aha is the pressure on the quarter, right? You’re giving guidance. You’re really thinking hard about your earnings calls and so forth. That was a new thing for me.

Because again, I never had to do that. But the analogy is, long-term performance is made up of a lot of short-term performance. So I paid a lot of attention to short-term performance. I didn’t obsess over it, but I paid a lot of attention to it, because cumulatively it leads to long-term.

So I’ve had to bring that same mentality, and I’ve had to learn that here it’s a little bit different, but how to be very focused on quarter by quarter by quarter and what we’re doing and executing. But also the one part I do try to push is, let’s not forget the long term.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:38:18): So I don’t know anybody that’s either on a board or is an investor that is remotely enthusiastic about, let’s stop reporting quarterly numbers. It seems kind of absurd. But at the same time, there’s an increasing number of companies that say, we don’t know the future. We’re not going to give you guidance. That’s your job as an analyst. Our job is to run the company. Reconcile those two with us.

BILL McNABB (00:38:49): So I think the move away from quarterly reporting is, frankly, a false move. It does not accomplish anything.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:38:58): I know they tried it in the UK and it did nothing.

BILL McNABB (00:39:01): Did nothing. Could you simplify reporting? Sure. There’s things we do that don’t add any value to the investment community, and simplify it.

I actually think quarterly reporting is very important. I think transparency about what’s happening is incredibly critical. If the regulators were really serious about the issue, guidance is where they would go. They would say, okay, we’re not going to allow guidance.

What’s interesting is, and I would’ve been in that camp 10 years ago. I went into probably a hundred boardrooms my last couple years at Vanguard, because we were the largest shareholder. And people would ask, should we give guidance or not? I’d say, no, you don’t need to give guidance. What you do see, though, is there are situations where the Street gets it so wrong that you’re giving guidance to actually protect yourself from the Street getting it so wrong.

And that’s the part that I’ve had to sort of balance in my own head, because I never really understood that until I was in the boardroom. And then you see the conclusions some of the sell side in particular come to, and you’re like, whoa, that’s not even remotely true. And then you have to guide them. But look, to me, the single biggest thing we could do, whether you give guidance or not, would be to really hold companies accountable for providing long-term outlook.

So what if you took one earnings call a year? I’m making this up, but we’ve talked about this at CECP quite a bit. And you report on the quarter, but you devote it to, here’s where we are against our five-year aspirations, or our 10-year aspirations, whatever the right timeframe is. Here’s how we’re doing.

Here’s, by the way, we told you last year that five years from now we want to do X. The world’s changed a little bit. We’ve got to pivot. So we’re not going to do X, we’re going to do two X. That, to me, would be a lot more productive in terms of getting people to think long term.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:41:14): Hmm. Really interesting. Last question on the boardroom. Are you ever in a meeting where somebody that’s on the board realizes, oh my God, this is the former CEO of Vanguard.

Hey Bill, I got a question on my 401(k). How often does that come up?

BILL McNABB (00:41:33): Actually, it happened a couple times. A couple of my colleagues on different boards were actually big 401(k) clients. So we did have good chats about that, but most of these guys are pretty sophisticated.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:41:47): I can imagine.

BILL McNABB (00:41:48): They don’t need my help.

@BR 00:41:49

Coming up, we continue our conversation with Bill McNabb, former CEO and chairman of the Vanguard Group, talking about startups and the future of advice. I’m Barry Ritholtz. You’re listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. I am Barry Ritholtz. You are listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

My extra special guest this week is Bill McNabb, former CEO and chairman at the Vanguard Group, now sitting on a few boards and advising private equity, venture capital and startup firms, which is really quite the pivot, from a mutual fund guy to a VC and PE sort of guy. What attracted you to those fields and some of the younger companies that you’re advising?

BILL McNABB (00:42:49): So two things I would say. One, I had no experience in the private markets. Private markets are growing dramatically. And I just felt like I need to understand this better.

And for me that was the chance to learn something new and hopefully help while you’re doing it. But selfishly, I thought I was going to learn a lot, and I’ve been overwhelmed by how much I’ve learned and how much more I have to learn. Second, during my last couple years at Vanguard, we established a research group, and we began to talk about doing some venture investing ourselves. Not about making money or on behalf of our clients, but more just being in the ecosystem. And that all came about because we did a trip to Silicon Valley, took the whole leadership team, met with every large VC there, a bunch of their portfolio companies, and we walked away blown away by what we didn’t know about our own business and what the future might look like.

And so to me, no matter where you are in the investment arc, if you will, understanding what goes on in the startup world is, I think, just important to understanding the bigger picture. And then the last thing I’d say, and this is just a passion play. Our mission, if you boiled everything down at Vanguard, we wanted to make the world a better place for investors. I mean, we got up every morning and afternoon. I’m lucky I get to do that.

And the startups I’m working with, I believe very deeply that they have the potential to make the world a better place for investors. And if I can keep doing that for the next 20 years, I’m going to be really happy.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:44:35): So you’re a senior advisor to Venrock. Are you helping them vet startups or ideas or founders? What’s your role with a fairly well-known venture fund like that?

BILL McNABB (00:44:50): So the partner with whom I work the most is this guy named Nick Beim. He’s incredible. He just sees around corners. He’s got 25 years of experience doing this.

I learn something every time I talk to him. So Nick will get approached by a lot of different people. He will meet a lot of different people. When he gets something that’s interesting, I often get a call and it’s like, hey, would you talk to these guys and see what you think? And so you and I both have good connections with Jason Wenk at Altruist, and that’s how my—

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:45:28): A recent guest, and full disclosure, by the way, Ritholtz Wealth Management uses Altruist as a custodian. The firm’s venture arm is an investor in it. I personally am an investor in it.

I always like to get those disclosures out so nobody misunderstands what we’re talking about.

BILL McNABB (00:45:46): And I’m an investor there too. So Nick calls me after we first met and he says, there’s this guy I want you to meet, and just tell me what you think. He goes, we’ve invested. So Venrock had actually already invested in this case.

So I meet Jason and I’m like, he had me at hello, right?

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:46:05): Super impressive, right?

BILL McNABB (00:46:06): Incredibly impressive. So in the early days it was Nick, Jason, and me in the boardroom. And I would say my role there was really twofold. One was just, Jason was a student of Vanguard, and like, what did we get right?

What did we not get right? How did we think about scaling? So I tried to bring that to the discussions in the boardroom. And then very importantly, over time, Jason particularly asked me, can you just talk to some of my senior team on a regular basis?

And so I do. And that’s the mentoring part. And I think that’s a big part of what, in a sense, I’m there for. I’ve made a lot of mistakes. I’ve sort of lived a lot of different movies that they’re now going to watch and live through, and where is it relevant and where is it not relevant?

There are situations where new ideas get presented, and then I will be part of the vetting process as well. So Vanilla, which is a software product to help with estate planning. There’s Steve Lockshin, who, personally, is an incredibly brilliant planner around all this. And it’s like, let’s take his brain and codify it.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:47:35): Turn it into software.

BILL McNABB (00:47:36): Turn it into software. And I got a chance to interact. And we knew Steve a little bit from Vanguard and serving him through the investment side. We started an RIA from scratch.

So I don’t know if we’ll ever be able to compete with you, but—

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:47:56): We’re still under $10 billion, which I have to explain to family members is walking-around cash. It’s not real money.

BILL McNABB (00:48:04): It’s real money. You guys have done a great job. But what if you had a blank sheet of paper and could create a firm from scratch? So we’re going to do that.

And we’re in the process. It’s called Arca. You may have seen some of the press releases on it. I got a chance to work with two co-founders of three. There are three co-founders of the firm. Finny.

Finny’s a little different, because what Finny’s trying to do is really help firms do a better job matching prospects and clients, and turning the right prospects into the right clients. This is a huge problem in the RIA space.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:48:45): People don’t understand how important fit is. And we’ve been fortunate to build that into our process. Because it’s disruptive for someone to come in.

They’re the wrong fit, they transfer everything in. It’s so much time and effort, it’s such a lift. And then six months later everybody realizes, oh, we’ve made a mistake. And then it’s a divorce, and it’s disruptive on the way out.

BILL McNABB (00:49:09): We actually were really strict on client selection in my time at Vanguard. And so when I met two of the co-founders in particular, I talked to them a lot, and they’re describing this to me, I’m like, oh my God, I love this stuff. This is exactly how, it’s one of the most important things you learn in terms of building a great business, is that fit.

And they were thinking about things from a technology standpoint that were way beyond me. I mean, they’re a bunch of AI engineers. It didn’t exist 15 years ago, 10 years ago even. And so watching that, watching their thinking on that.

But very importantly, one of the cool things, and again, I’m getting tactical here with Finny, but it’s just interesting to me, because they developed a way, they’re going to price this in a way that aligns outcomes, much more structurally sound. So at Vanguard, one of the cool things we did was where we had active equity, for example, every active equity manager was on an incentive scheme where if they outperformed over a long period of time, we would actually pay more, and the expense ratio would go up. But we were happy with that. And, by the way, if they didn’t—

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:50:30): It goes the other way.

BILL McNABB (00:50:30): They went the other way. We’re the only firm who did that across every active equity portfolio. And we did that very early. Finny’s doing a similar concept, an analogous concept with, like, we’re not going to be your traditional SaaS company where we charge these really big seat licenses and we’re negotiating on who’s using what.

We’re going to do it all on success. If you get the right clients, we will earn more money. And if you don’t, that’s on us. That’s a really cool concept.

And so again, I got tactical there, but it makes a point that, what you’re really looking for: if they get it right, it changes the industry in a really positive way. Altruist gets it right, it changes the industry in a really positive way.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:51:18): So let’s dive down into that a little deeper, for each of those. I had always been told, hey, custody is razor-thin margins, there’s nothing you can do there. And besides Schwab and Fidelity, the giants in that space, no one’s going to take them on.

You have to be a little crazy to say, I’m going to take on the two behemoths. But Altruist has become the third largest custodian for RIAs, at least if we’re going by advisors served. I don’t know how it looks by dollar amount. What did you see when you first started talking to Jason Wenk about what has always been such a challenging, low-margin business?

BILL McNABB (00:52:06): Jason had this vision that the legacy players do a fine job, at a level. But in a sense, these businesses had become, I hate the term cash cow, but there’s not a lot of innovation, not a lot of new technology being brought to bear.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:52:25): I want to say two years ago, and I hope I’m not getting this wrong, I think it was Schwab was generating 57% of their revenue just from the cash sweep that they’re paying a few bips on, but earning three, 4% on spread.

BILL McNABB (00:52:41): Spread’s everything there. That’s exactly right. So he had this passion, and he had been an advisor. And so he’s like, what do I really want?

And so the way we thought about it was, yes, there’s custody, and we can digitize it and we can make it much more efficient. We can make it much better, lower cost, frankly, for the advisor so they can pass on value to the client. You can, though, actually make it a platform that’s more than just custody. So we introduced Hazel, which is this great tax planning capability, as you know, AI driven, and it’s taken the—

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:53:23): Everybody in my firm loves it. And PS, Jason was more than an advisor. He’s an engineer.

So he brings sort of that coder mentality to how can we use technology to make this faster, better, cheaper.

BILL McNABB (00:53:36): So the way I always envisioned the direction we’d go was, this is going to be the platform of the future for advisors, and we will make it so much easier for them to do what they need to do. And Jason’s got that engineering mentality, he’s got that drive. He’s incredibly passionate. If you look at the Altruist flywheel, it looks a lot like the Vanguard flywheel did, in terms of just this, if it works, this self-reinforcing perpetual improvement, perpetual driver of good outcomes has been created.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:54:19): What’s the old line? I think this was Jeff Bezos. Your margin is my opportunity.

That seems to be what’s happening there. Tell us a little more about Vanilla. What are they doing, and where is the disruptive opportunity there?

BILL McNABB (00:54:34): So with Vanilla, if you think about the high net worth and ultra high net worth, which is a significant amount of assets in the industry, we talk about asset allocation, we talk about cost. And at Vanguard we really talk about cost a lot. The single biggest opportunity for value add is in estate planning. I mean, you can save people millions of dollars. There’s no other category that can do that.

And Vanilla changes the experience dramatically for the advisor providing that estate planning. Rather than whiteboards and stickies and hand-drawn flow diagrams, it just gives you this incredible automated output. And I got a chance to be kind of an early pilot, because Vanguard was actually an investor in Vanilla.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:55:30): Vanguard itself. Oh, really?

BILL McNABB (00:55:32): Yep. And they were running pilots. So I raised my hand. It was the best conversation I’ve ever had with the advice team that does our family. By far.

Because it built this whole balance sheet in one place. All the family trees, if you will, were all right there, all done in an automated fashion.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:56:01): And Vanilla is a product that is not necessarily for the end investor, but the advisor in between.

It’s a little complex for the average person to just log on on their own.

BILL McNABB (00:56:12): The whole estate planning process. It really is a business. It’s really being sold to advisors.

So you’re seeing wealth management firms adopt it. So the Vanguards of the world and other big firms you would know well, bringing it in and saying, this is going to be the platform where we do estate planning.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:56:31): So I’m hearing a very consistent theme, which is all of the disruptive fintech that you’re involved with, Finny, Altruist, Vanilla, seems to be all marketed to the advisor, which is so different from what you’re doing on the board seats. Any other startups or other technologies you’re looking at, either to the advisory community or anywhere else?

BILL McNABB (00:56:59): Yeah, so I’ve been involved in a couple of others. One, there’s a company called Moment, which is some ex-Citadel guys who really are reinventing the way fixed income gets traded. And I’m not an investor there, but I like to think of myself as a friend of the firm, and Venrock is an investor there.

And so I have those conversations. Again, the theme is not dissimilar in that you’re making the world better, because they’re doing things with fixed income trading that have been done on the equity side for years. Fractional trading of bonds. They make it like that, and they’re really having a pretty significant impact.

There’s one that we’re involved in, again, I’m not an investor in this one either, but I talk to them a lot, around litigation. So that’s a little bit different. It’s my one non-investment-oriented thing.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:58:03): What’s the name of that firm?

BILL McNABB (00:58:05): Syllo.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:58:05): Okay.

BILL McNABB (00:58:06): And again, what’s really cool about them is it’s a marriage of incredible legal talent with an engineering mindset. So imagine the Jason Wenk of litigation lawyers. This is people who write code but have deep litigation experience.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:58:26): There have been a handful of funds over the past few years that literally are making investments based on litigation outcomes, class action outcomes. And they’re truly non-correlated, because the outcomes have nothing to do with the market or the economy.

It’s a really interesting space.

BILL McNABB (00:58:45): And this company will do things that, this is going to disrupt this industry as much as anything we’ve talked about. So for me, the fun part is all these entrepreneurs. You’re getting a chance to work with some of the brightest minds in the country. They’re all super passionate about what they do, and they’re incredibly talented. And you’re not going to get it all right, and some of them are going to be more successful than others.

But if you can sort of help them along a little bit with lessons learned and whatnot, it’s incredibly gratifying.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:59:28): You give them the best chance for future success. So the future of advice going forward. You’ve mentioned some of the robo-advisors like Betterment and Wealthfront, and in fact, the robo-advisor that Vanguard set up under your leadership quickly scaled up to a hundred billion plus and then kept going.

Now, by far the biggest robo in the world. But it doesn’t sound like you think that the future of advice is just going to be automated or technology. What does the future of advice look like, for both the average mom-and-pop investor who needs some help planning their retirement or paying for kids’ college, or the higher net worth that’s thinking about what am I going to do with this extra capital in terms of philanthropy or generational wealth, straight up to the multifamily offices and big numbers?

BILL McNABB (01:00:31): Look, I think there’s going to be a spectrum. I do think there will be people who go the automated way, fully automated, the original Wealthfront model, if you will. But increasingly, I’m pretty convinced that the bulk of the people, investors, are going to go with advisors where there’s a human touch. I think that human touch is incredibly important.

And so all the technological advances that we’re seeing, whether it’s Vanilla’s software planning, whether it’s the platform that Altruist is developing, whether it’s Finny’s ability to help you grow your business more effectively and organically, those things free up the advisor to do the personal stuff. And so I don’t know at Ritholtz what your average number of clients per advisor is, but let’s just say it’s a hundred, which in the industry is kind of a norm. I see no reason why somebody can’t serve 300 more effectively than they serve the hundred today with the technology that’s coming. And the reason I think it’s important to have that person is I think that the really thoughtful advisor can really prevent you from getting off the reservation.

The automated programs are great, but people can opt out of them pretty quickly. And we do see that. And again, you said the last six months are always indicative. One of the things that we didn’t talk about, but it’s incredibly troubling to me, is the over-gamification of investing that’s going on right now, and the amount of day trading. We’re back to day trading.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:02:15): I started in the nineties when that was going on. I remember the E-Trade commercials and the tow truck driver who owned an island, he just likes to help people who get flat tires. So he’s still doing it.

And it’s full circle, between the prediction markets and then all the gambling apps. We’re right back to where—

BILL McNABB (01:02:39): And you actually see it in trading volumes.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:02:43): End-of-day options, single-day options.

BILL McNABB (01:02:46): It’s not all being done by algos and hedge funds. There’s a retail element now that’s incredible. You take an S&P 100 stock that might have traded 10 million shares a day. Now it’s trading 50, 60, 70 million shares a day.

And it becomes this self-perpetuating thing. The more volatility there is, the more the day traders come in. The more they come in, the more volatility there is. And at the end of the day, you know that only the house wins there. The house will win.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:03:22): Same is true with the prediction markets, right? There’s a tiny percentage of consistent winners, and 90-something percent of people are making donations.

BILL McNABB (01:03:31): That’s right. So that’s why I think the person remains incredibly important. It was interesting, in a venture capital conference I was at, somebody asked the question, they said, do you think that all the AI and all the technology that’s coming is going to replace humans or enable humans? And I think there are places where you can say it’s replacement. It could be both.

Yeah, it could be both. I think here the majority of it’s going to be enable.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:03:58): So just to share a little bit of what we’ve been seeing, it’s not that we’re creating new information. We’re finding ways to take notes and keep a running dialogue of everything that’s going on with AI, but then access it and use it in a way that is just enormously helpful to clients. And very often, if you’re having a conversation with a client that’s an hour, you’re doing a year-end review, or maybe it’s a quarterly review or anything like that, lots of stuff goes by that you may not pick up in that moment. But if you have a tool taking notes and reviewing it and summarizing it and remembering that two years ago they said, we’d really like to buy a vacation property now that the kids are out of the house, but we’re not sure what we can afford. Hey, if you can access that and not forget it, if you have a permanent memory, not only can you successfully manage more clients, but you’re going to do a much better job of it.

And so the fear of all this job loss, I mean, it’s certainly not showing up in much of the data yet. You still have relatively low unemployment, and relatively low unemployment for people under 25, which usually runs about double the traditional U-3 unemployment. So I’m fascinated by this.

Do you recall in the mid-2010s, the assumption was, oh, these robo-advisors, they’re going to put all the humans out of business. Is this just an ongoing Luddite fear that every new technology leads to?

BILL McNABB (01:05:48): I think so. Because look, there is disruption. For sure.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:05:52): And certain jobs are going to go away.

BILL McNABB (01:05:54): Right. And when you’re in the middle of that, it’s overwhelming. But I do believe that the creation of new categories of jobs we can’t even imagine is going to continue.

I do think there are areas where the technology just allows you to do more, like you described. It’s interesting, we had an interesting thought experiment. So when the robos started, our idea was to take the best of Wealthfront technologically, but to have a certified financial planner at the end of the telephone or video screen to interface with the client. And my chief of staff, who was a twenty-something software engineer at the time, said, like, no, who needs a person?

And I said, well, how much? So we formed a little focus group. This is completely unscientific, but this is again, sometimes how I like to do things. And so we sat around and we said, so I give you $25,000, but you want a little bit of advice. They all wanted robo.

Like, I don’t want to talk to somebody. I said, it’s 150,000, which for them at the time was probably equal to a year’s pay. Four or five out of the six were like, I’ve got to have a person. Technology can be helpful, but I need to be able to talk to somebody for that amount of money.

And it really stuck with me. There is a comfort. And again, you’ve done a lot with Morgan Housel over the years. The psychology of that and that need for human interaction I think is very powerful.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:07:41): So I always hated the idea. Listen, I’m a middle-class kid from suburbia. I didn’t grow up with any money or any thoughts of an inheritance or anything like that. The idea of having a $10 million or even a $1 million minimum, I was never comfortable with. So we set up two digital platforms, one driven by Betterment, which is under a quarter million dollars.

And there is a group of advisors that come along with that. So if you are at $50,000 or $100,000 or $5,000, it doesn’t matter. There’s no minimum. If you are up to a quarter million dollars, the whole platform is digital.

Everything from the onboarding to the allocation. But there is a live human being there if you want to talk to somebody. And then the platform that we built from a quarter million to a million was based on buying BlackRock’s FutureAdvisor, which they figured out, oh, this isn’t the future of ETFs, we don’t need to own this. And so we ended up purchasing that from them.

Not only is that 250 to a million, but it also comes with a specific advisor. And as much as people say, I love the digital platform, I don’t need to deal with anybody, I just want to log on to the website or app and deal with it, as soon as there’s any volatility, they just want someone to talk them off the ledge and say, hey, it’ll be fine. We go through a 10% drawdown, I want to say it’s three times every two years, something like that.

So this is normal. And if you look at here’s how many drawdowns we’ve had over the past 20 years, they may not know that, they may not have access to that. But if a person says, hey, we can’t guarantee you that the market’s going to keep going up forever, but here’s what the history looks like, it’s just a huge comfort for people. And they can stay out of their own way.

BILL McNABB (01:09:43): Absolutely. So I think it’s really powerful. And again, thematically, certainly everything we’re working on in a lot of our startup land is exactly that. It’s taking that concept.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:09:57): Using the technology to make it faster, better, cheaper, but making sure a person is in the loop for that comfort level.

BILL McNABB (01:10:03): Faster, better, cheaper, way more personalized. Way more personalized.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:10:06): So we’ve covered so much stuff. Before I get to my favorite questions, is there anything we haven’t covered yet? I think we’re good. We touched a lot of stuff, so let’s jump to those questions.

And I’ve asked you these 10 years ago, but I want to circle back to them, see—

BILL McNABB (01:10:25): If I’m consistent.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:10:26): Right. Well, we’ll see what’s changed over the past decade. So I’m going to assume your mentors are all fairly much the same. Tell us, Jack Brennan clearly one of those people. Who were the mentors who shaped your career?

BILL McNABB (01:10:40): So Jack Brennan certainly, and I talked about that earlier, but lead by example and the power of “we” versus “I.” I had a rowing coach post-college, and his big thing to me when I was thinking about leaving New York and going to Vanguard was, find a place that matches your values and you’ll be happy. And I dedicated my last annual report at Vanguard, the Vanguard funds, a section of it to him, because that advice actually was what put me over the top in terms of, I’ve got to go to Vanguard. There were so many other mentors. One I’ll mention, though, we had a great board early in my career, and Charlie Ellis, the great author of Winning the Loser’s Game, Charlie was on our board. And Charlie was actually a real mentor to me, because when he was at Greenwich, he would come and present to us how we did competitively in the 401(k) market, and I was running that business.

So we developed a pretty good bond. Then when he came on the board, he just was always there to sort of push and prod a little bit and help shape me. And again, the way he thought about investing just absolutely resonated, obviously, with what we were doing.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:12:05): He just wrote a new book, just dropped a few months ago. He’s still active in his eighties.

BILL McNABB (01:12:10): It’s incredible. It’s incredible.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:12:13): Speaking of books, what are some of your favorites? What are you reading currently?

BILL McNABB (01:12:16): So right now I’m reading Jim Collins’ What to Make of a Life, which is very different for him. It’s not a business-oriented book. As I mentioned to you at other times, Good to Great and Built to Last, Jim Collins classics, they’re the first business books I go to. But this is, what he does is he takes lives of people we know in sort of pairs, and he just asks, what were the key events that made them do what they do?

So he uses, like, two football players from when I was growing up, Carl Eller and Alan Page, Minnesota Vikings. One of them went on to have a real drug problem and then become an incredible champion of rehabilitation and did so much for his community. The other one went on to be a Supreme Court justice in Minnesota.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:13:15): Wow.

BILL McNABB (01:13:16): And what were the key decisions? What allowed them to go from this great football career to a second act? So anyway, I’m reading that. I’m partway through it. It’s phenomenal.

And I always have a fun book or two I’m reading too. I’m still a big science fiction collector. So The Will of the Many and The Strength of the Few. It’s two parts, there’s a third one coming. Imagine ancient Rome meets The Matrix.

That’s all I’m going to say. Only a weird brain like mine could find that fascinating.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:13:48): That’s intriguing. I watched and read Project Hail Mary, written by the same author as The Martian, Andy Weir. Really fascinating book. He’s such a great writer.

BILL McNABB (01:14:01): He’s phenomenal. One of my favorites.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:14:05): Speaking of movies and videos or podcasts, what are you streaming, listening to, watching these days?

BILL McNABB (01:14:14): Not a ton. The most recent podcast was the Acquired podcast. They did a huge thing on Vanguard, mostly on Jack Bogle. It was great.

It was really, really worth doing. Ben Gilbert and his partner, they just did a fantastic job. Most of the other things, the streaming, I just rewatched, Netflix did this three-year series on the Tour de France, which I’m fascinated by as a sport, called Unchained.

And it’s really good. So that was sort of a fun one.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:14:51): Our final two questions. What sort of advice would you give to a recent college grad interested in a career in either financial advice, wealth management, or fintech startups?

BILL McNABB (01:15:06): Well, so on the latter, there’s never been a better time to start a company. With technology being as ubiquitous as it is and cheap, frankly, you can take an idea and you can build something pretty quickly without a ton of money. And then if it’s a really cool idea, there are people ready to help you and write a check. And so I’m encouraging people who have that entrepreneurial itch.

This is a great time to scratch it. Don’t wait. But think about what you’re trying to do. Don’t do it just because you want to, quote unquote, get rich. Do it because you have an idea that really matters.

And something I always apply, it’s a Jim Collins phrase, the hedgehog concept. What are you passionate about? What can you be great at? And I mean great.

And then how does it drive the economic engine? And so you want to have a passion, you want something that you truly believe you can be world class at, and economically, there’s got to be an engine that it drives. And today it’s just a great time to be doing that. If you’re going into the asset management, investment world, I think the two places that are going to be the most interesting, I continue to think the venture world’s really interesting, because, whatever anybody’s politics are, whatever, all this stuff—

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:16:37): It’s cutting edge. It’s the latest and greatest.

BILL McNABB (01:16:39): There are so many cool things going on right now, and the chance to actually go explore that and invest in that is kind of fun. But I think wealth management, I think this advice thing has got a long way to run. And if I were a young grad, rather than going into traditional asset management, I would be thinking much more about individual wealth, and how to start my own advisory firm or how to be part of a Ritholtz Wealth or something like that.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:17:17): Our final question. What do you know about the world of investing today that might have been useful back in 1986 when you first joined Vanguard?

BILL McNABB (01:17:28): Well, so much. The long term really is the way to think about things. I think even though I joined a firm that was famous for it, I don’t think my own brain was set around long term. And the ability to sustain your beliefs and your discipline over the long run is a singular differentiator.

And I’ve had the privilege of being inside of a lot of different firms, and it’s amazing how many people still don’t actually get that. So I think that, and it took me a while before I got there, so I wish I’d had it right away. Second, for me, is really pay a lot of attention to things that nobody’s talking about. And this is much harder.

So, as you know, when you started The Big Picture, I actually started every morning with reading The Big Picture, because you did a really good job curating what was out there and getting rid of a lot of stuff.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:18:36): Right. There’s a long history there, which we will discuss offline. But when Brennan said to me, hey, I’ve been a reader of your stuff, when I first met him at some large conference room lunch 20 years ago, my head exploded.

BILL McNABB (01:18:56): I might’ve been one of the people who pushed it that way. But to me it was a really important thing. And I think, like today, people aren’t talking about leverage that much. And I worry about leverage. When you look at what the hyperscalers are doing in terms of the bond market right now, and a couple of them are not net cash flow positive because of all the infrastructure that they’re building, the leverage in the system. Private credit had its moment a year ago or whatever, six months ago, and that was one you could see coming.

I worry a lot about leverage. No one’s talking about it. When I first started out, that way of thinking, that contrarianness, was not part of how I had been trained or brought up. But again, this is where Jack Bogle, Jack Brennan, John Neff, the great value investor, they were really impactful.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:20:01): I was going through an old piece I was writing and never finished, and I found some notes, and I can’t figure out whose line this is. It feels like I’m stealing it from somebody. Equity crises bruise, debt crises maim. And I’ve been unable to track that down, and it doesn’t sound like something I would’ve written.

But anytime I use something from someone, I’m usually very, very fastidious about making sure the quote is attributed correctly. But it just reminds us that leverage kills. Look at what’s going on in Korea with their three x and five x funds as those unwind. Man, they’ve had a great run, and they’ve given a ton of it back.

Because of the leverage. Bill, I could talk to you for two more hours.

Thank you for being so generous with your time. This has been utterly fascinating. We have been speaking with Bill McNabb, former chairman and CEO of the Vanguard Group, board member at IBM and UnitedHealth, senior advisor to Venrock, as well as board member and advisor to so many startups. If you enjoy this conversation, well, check out any of the 654 we’ve done over the past 12 years.

You can find those at Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, Bloomberg, wherever you get your favorite podcasts from. I would be remiss if I didn’t thank the crack team that helps put these conversations together each week. My audio engineer is Alexis Noriega. Anna Luke is my producer. Sean Russo is my researcher.

I’m Barry Ritholtz. You’ve been listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

 

~~~

 

 

 

The post Transcript: Bill McNabb, Vanguard former Chairman and CEO appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Labor Day Reads

My long weekend morning reads:

• This data has helped fight workplace discrimination for 60 years. The Trump administration plans to delete it: The move marks a fundamental shift for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Without this data, it will be much harder for the agency to identify widespread cases of discrimination in hiring and promotions, experts and former employees of the commission say. And, they warn, it will bring the Trump administration one step closer to reshaping the commission from an independent watchdog into an arm of the executive branch narrowly focused on advancing the political grievances of Donald Trump’s base. Amy Qin on the EEOC data experts say the agency can’t police hiring discrimination without. (The Guardian)

​• Labor Day on Track to Set Record at the Pump: The national average hits $4.14 — the highest ever for this time of year — with Strait of Hormuz volatility keeping crude around $90. (AAA) see also Imperialist Delusions and the Price of Fuel: Paul Krugman on the Venezuela adventure and what it’s doing at the pump. (Paul Krugman)

​• Should You Buy Alien Abduction Insurance?: Joseph Moore on the 100,000-plus Americans holding coverage — GEICO sold some, Lloyd’s underwrote 20,000, and two claims were paid. Behavioral economists would hardly be surprised. (Joseph Moore).

​• Paid Actors, AI Writing: How a New Kind of Video Business Cashed In on America’s Divided Politics: Max Tani on “William,” whose AI-scripted kitchen-table video — Mayor Mamdani Panics as Taylor Swift Triggers a $2.3 Billion Celebrity Exodus — racked up 474,000 views. (Semafor)

​• Humans Did Not Invent Art. It Was the Other Way Around: In 1940, four teenage boys chasing rumors of secret passageways near Montignac found chambers bejewelled with horses, elk, ibex, and bulls instead — Lascaux, almost perfectly preserved. (Aeon)

​• In Red States, Law-and-Order Republicans Turn Against Flock Cameras: David Ovalle on the governors of Texas and Florida moving to curtail license-plate readers, even as police say they help solve crime.. (New York Times)

USPS ‘carefully reviewing’ whistleblower claim on plan for Trump’s mail in voting order: “USPS leadership, it appears, has discarded all best practices as they speed the project to be ready for a September 1 implementation — raising questions about whether catastrophic failure would be a feature rather than a bug,” said the disclosure, prepared by Whistleblower Aid, a nonprofit organization representing the anonymous federal government official with direct knowledge of the Postal Service’s development of the new system. ​Hansi Lo Wang on the disclosure warning that Postal Service leadership “discarded all best practices” racing to a September 1 launch — “raising questions about whether catastrophic failure would be a feature rather than a bug.”  (NPR)

​• More Than Half of Americans in Their 40s Are ‘Sandwiched’ Between an Aging Parent and Their Own Children: Juliana Menasce Horowitz with Pew’s numbers on the generation squeezed from both directions. (Pew Research)

​• Behind Closed Doors, John Fetterman Shows Little Interest in the Work of a Senator: Former staffers and lawmakers describe a light daily schedule, canceled constituent meetings, skipped hearings, and a focus on conservative media ties. Poised to be a possible swing vote in a divided Congress, he churns through staff as he dodges constituents, alienates fellow Democrats and courts Israel lobby (Wall Street Journal)

​• A Little League Coach’s Advice to His Team Went Viral. Anyone Can Appreciate the Message: Cory Edwards saw the fought-off tears and finger-pointing as his Henderson, Nevada team’s run ended — and didn’t want his players going out sullen. (The Athletic)

Video of the day: Aaron Sorkin on Why AI Will Fail, Facebook & The Future of America | What I’ve Learned

Be sure to check out our Master’s in Business this week with William McNabb, former CEO and Chairman of the Vanguard Group from 2007-17. He is also an advisor to Venrock, and was an investor and advisor to Altruist, which was just sold to VG for $2 billion.


More Americans Are Identifying as Democrats Ahead of Midterms


Source: New York Times

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

The post 10 Labor Day Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Sunday Reads

Avert your eyes! My Sunday morning look at incompetency, corruption and policy failures:

​• I Rented a Car, and Within Hours, My Driver’s License Was for Sale: Dan Goodin on the breach unfolding in real time — his license is one of 153 million on a new dark-web site, with the FBI reportedly investigating. (Ars Technica)

Allies Grumble That U.S. Is Hindering Global Economic Growth: At a summit meant to showcase President Trump’s economic policies as a model for the world, Europeans complained about tariffs and the war with Iran. (New York Times)

Gambling Sweeps Across Another Industry. Welcome to the Future of Trading Cards. The Derek Jeter–founded Arena Club sees “a new era of collecting.” Some see yet another instance of gambling taking over an American tradition. (Barron’s)

​• Inside the Perimenopause Industrial Complex: Kate Knibbs on the alliance of tech startups, MAHA operatives, and actual medical experts that made millennial women the new face of hormone therapy. (Wired)

​• The Plot to Steal Venezuela’s Oil: Paul Krugman on America’s mostly well-deserved ugly reputation in Latin America — dictators supported, democracies overthrown, Marines sent in on behalf of corporations. (Paul Krugman)

​• The Rise and Fall of Agent Civilizations: The whole OpenAI/Hugging Face story in plain English. Dwarkesh Patel on the three consecutive secret AI civilizations that got started, got wiped out, and reemerged over three months at OpenAI. (Dwarkesh Patel.

The Deadly Legacy of HIV Truthers. Even as the medical community reached a consensus that HIV caused AIDS, a counter-movement was emerging, claiming that HIV didn’t exist, or that the virus existed but was harmless. The symptoms of AIDS, according to some of these people, were actually caused by HIV therapies themselves. To this day, some people continue to believe that HIV is a hoax. Charlie Jane Anders on the counter-movement that claimed HIV didn’t exist or was harmless — and the people who believe it to this day. (Gizmodo)

Trump Is in Open Revolt Against the Constitution. The president’s plot to subvert the integrity of the midterm elections looks like this. Issue a rule requiring states to give lists of mail-in voters to the Postal Service if their citizens hope to receive mail-in ballots. Knowing that this is a blatantly unconstitutional seizure of the states’ prerogative to run their own elections, count on a federal court to block the rule. Then challenge the injunction, arguing — under the Supreme Court’s “Purcell principle” — that it is too late to make any adjustments to voting procedures, and that the new rules should be treated as the status quo. Then hope that the Supreme Court accepts the argument that the new rules are the status quo and therefore can’t be blocked. ​ Jamelle Bouie traces the plot’s mechanics, down to the bet on the Supreme Court’s Purcell principle. (New York Times)

The framing of Chris Duncan Part One: “You won’t believe the videotape we have.” Radley Balko begins a three-part series on the wrongful conviction of Jimmie “Chris” Duncan, drawing on 20 years of his own reporting and material cut from The Cadaver King and the Country Dentist. (The Watch)

Navy not returning to damaged Bahrain base ‘anytime soon,’ top officer says: The Navy’s highest-ranking officer told sailors during a town hall on Monday that it would be a while before the service would return to its main logistics hub in the Middle East after it was heavily damaged early in the Iran war. (Navy Times)

Video of the day: Murdering 60 Minutes – Full Film

Be sure to check out our Master’s in Business next week with William McNabb, former CEO and Chairman of the Vanguard Group from 2007-17. He is also an advisor to Venrock, and was an investor and advisor to Altruist, which was just sold to VG for $2 billion.

 

In 2026, global investment in clean energy and related infrastructure reaches USD 2.2 trillion

Source: International Energy Agency

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

~~~

To learn how these reads are assembled each day, please see this.

 

The post 10 Sunday Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

MiB: Bill McNabb, Vanguard former Chairman and CEO



 

 

This week, I speak with William “Bill” McNabb. He’s the former chairman and CEO of Vanguard and now sits on the board at UnitedHealth, IBM, Axiom, and Altruist. We discuss his 30+ years at Vanguard and his career after leaving the company, working in the boardroom and with startups in fintech and more.

He explains how Vanguard ran from under a trillion dollars before the financial crisis to over $13.3 trillion today. Bill also emphasizes the power of “We” versus “I” at the corporation level. We also discuss his corporate governance book, “Talent, Strategy, Risk: How Investors and Boards Are Redefining TSR.”

A list of his current reading/favorite books is here; A transcript of our conversation is available here Tuesday.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube (audio), and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business next week with Seth Bernstein, CEO of AllianceBernstein and Head of Asset Management of Equitable Holdings, the 69% owner AB. The firm manages $905.5B. Previously, he spent 32 years at JPMorgan Chase, where he eventually became the Global Head of Managed Solutions & Strategy at JPAM, responsible for all discretionary assets for Private Banking clients, and Global Head of Fixed Income & Currency. He eventually became CFO of JPM’s Investment Management & Private Banking division.

 

 

 

Current Reading/Favorite Books

 

Authored Book

 

 

Books Barry Mentioned

 

The post MiB: Bill McNabb, Vanguard former Chairman and CEO appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Weekend Reads

Three-day weekend! Pour yourself a mug of Danish Blend coffee, grab a seat outside, and get ready for our longer-form weekend reads:

How to build a cancer vaccine, and whether they will work this time: Typical cancer vaccines are vaccines given to you when you have cancer. These have been worked on for forty years, and have largely failed. But there is something in the air these days. If you really try, you can feel it too. There is optimism afoot in cancer vaccines. Really, there may be optimism afoot in cancer at large. ​Abhishaike Mahajan of Dyno Therapeutics with a deep dive on the intersection of machine learning and immunotherapy. (Seeds of Science)

What if America Went Completely Dark? The power grid relies on thousands of aging, hand-built transformers. If enough fail, the blackout could last years. Jim Tankersley from the Asheville G-20, where a summit meant to showcase Trump’s economic policies as a model became a venue for European complaints about tariffs and the Iran war. (New York Times) see also Is This the Future of America? Massive AI infrastructure is being built out across the US. But if you want to know what the data center occupation looks like, visit Loudoun County, Virginia, where that future arrived 20 years ago. (The Verge)

​• Anthony Scaramucci Thinks He Can Save America. I Hopped in His Lamborghini to Hear Him Out.: Jack Holmes rides a Huracán past the Golden Pear in Southampton — home of the $22 breakfast burrito — while the Mooch holds forth. The former White House communications director says he wants to own his bad bets, from Donald Trump to Sam Bankman-Fried. At his summer house—and around town in his Huracán—Anthony Scaramucci makes his case to Vanity Fair for how to fix this country for the working class. (Vanity Fair)

The ‘reverse Kindleberger Trap’: reasons to worry about the next financial crisis: A US crisis is very likely to be associated with a capital outflow, rather than a capital inflow, with the result that the dollar could weaken substantially against other currencies. (Chatham House)

No Car? No Problem: An East Coast Odyssey by Train, Ferry and Bus: A self-described transit romantic set out to visit prime summer destinations using only public transportation. Would getting there really be half the fun? (New York Times)

• Using legal loopholes and executive power, Trump is remaking Washington The president’s ballroom and other projects are racing the courts and the clock, as the GOP-led Congress largely sits silent.  Dan Diamond on the ballroom exchange — “Sir, this is the White House, you’re the president of the United States. You can do anything you want.”  (Washington Post) ​see also Who Approves Trump’s Washington Makeover Projects?: Elena Shao on the green-lit ballroom and the projects still stalled. (New York Times)

All Wired Up: Spurred on by this paper-induced memento mori—or maybe just in an attempt to avoid my collection being too entrenched in the ’70s—I recently picked up a complete 1995-1997 run of Wired magazine. While I’m a regular reader of present-day Wired, I knew very little about the magazine’s early years, as they coincided with my toddlerhood. What became clear after flipping through these older issues was that above all, 1990s Wired is an index fossil for a period when the science and techology industry was still culturally marginal—tech’s own toddlerhood, essentially. In these early years, the field was experimental and eccentric. It was a community of hackers and artists rather than multi-billionaires on super-villainous yachts; a moment when no one would ever think to describe themselves as a nerd aspirationally. (Casual Archivist)

​• What Makes the Most Expensive Paintings So Expensive?: Jackie Wullschläger on Klimt’s Lady in Gold, bought by Ronald Lauder for $135 million in 2006 — then the record for any painting — and bound for the Met in 2028. (Financial Times)

A Mysterious Kidney Disease Has Arrived in Texas: The condition, linked to heat on a warming planet, is affecting immigrants from Central America and Mexico. As scientists race to track the growing epidemic, its victims have been driven further into the shadows. (Texas Monthly)

The Plays of Shakespeare Rehabilitating Richard. We’ve gotten to know William Shakespeare’s Richard III pretty well by now. But who was the real Richard when he was at home? That question has been raising eyebrows and hackles for at least 400 years.  (Analog-Antiquarian)

Video of the day: Death Cab for Cutie: Tiny Desk Concert

Be sure to check out our Master’s in Business next week with William McNabb, former CEO and Chairman of the Vanguard Group from 2007-17. He is also an advisor to Venrock, and was an investor and advisor to Altruist, which was just sold to VG for $2 billion.

 

AI Data Centers & Our Communities

Source: Brockovich AI Data Center Reporting

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

~~~

To learn how these reads are assembled each day, please see this.

 

The post 10 Weekend Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

Nobody Knows Anything, Rate Expectations Edition

 

 

Heading out the door for the Labor Day weekend, with blue skies and 85° temperatures, I had to share a chart. It’s from the San Francisco Federal Reserve (via Torsten Slok of Apollo) and shows Wall Street expectations for Federal Reserve rate action.

It’s the perfect explainer for why forecasts tend to be so inaccurate.

As you can see, as recently as February 2026, market participants expected a series of ongoing rate hikes—a simple extrapolation from the prior trend.

Then the war began sending food and energy prices higher.

But the Middle Eastern adventure was promised to be short and indeed already over, so the next set of expectations were flat. A few months later, the “short military operation” turned into a war; inflation remained sticky, and expectations were for modestly higher rates.

Now we are six months into a war that shows no signs of ending, voters are angry, and a bad actor is in control of the Strait of Hormuz, with the likelihood of an ongoing tax on Middle Eastern oil. Once again, expectations were adjusted upwards, and now we see “higher for longer” as the consensus.

Unless, of course, something else unanticipated occurs…

Forecasts are for the most part simple extrapolations of the status quo or the current trend; they also fail to include random or unanticipated events – the kind that happens all the time in the economy, markets, and geopolitics.

When you stumble across a forecast that turned out to be more or less correct, it usually means nothing happened, and the extrapolation proved to be randomly correct.1 

But most of the time, $h*t happens: wars break out, Pandemics occur, terror attacks happen, new technology comes along and fails or succeeds, and governments fail to fund their annual budgets or wildly overspend their fiscal limits.

The parade of endless random events derails even the most thoughtful of predictions. A year is simply too short a time to guarantee that the dominant secular trend asserts itself, and too long a period to avoid random events.

 

 

 

Previously:
The Folly of Forecasting (June 7, 2005)

Nobody Knows Anything (Archive)

 

 

Source:
Productivity -Driven Growth Confronts Elevated Inflation
Huiyu Li
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, September 3, 2026

 

__________

1. Please note that I said randomly correct — that is not he same as being prescient.

 

The post Nobody Knows Anything, Rate Expectations Edition appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Friday AM Reads

My end-of-week morning reads:

​• Job Postings Show Early Signs of AI Automation Impact: The Dallas Fed finds the automation signal starting to show up in the listings data. (Dallas Fed)

The Death of the Safe Haven: How to Fix Your Bond Strategy as Yields Rise: The rise in U.S. Treasury yields is creating opportunities—along with serious portfolio risks. (Barron’s)

The Cost of Being Warren Buffett: He turned 96 years old a few days ago, on 30th August 2026. He bought his first stock at the age of 11, which means he has now spent about 85 years at this game, and at 96 he is still the man most of us in this business measure ourselves against. It felt like a good moment to sit down and think about him once more. ​Safal Niveshak on what the compounding machine gave up along the way.  (Safal Niveshak)

​• Data Center-Related Investments Available Across Most Asset Classes: Bailey McCann on the $580 billion invested in data centers in 2025 — set to be eclipsed by the $750 billion hyperscalers plan to spend this year — and the ways investors can participate. (Chief Investment Officer)

​• A $40 Billion ETF Shuffle Helps Foreign Investors Dodge US Taxes: Every three months like clockwork, investors pull $40 billion or more from a BlackRock ETF and park it in a near-identical twin — flipping funds to avoid dividends and the 30% tax that comes with them. (Bloomberg)

Why the Flock Backlash Has Gotten So Intense: The sudden anger about these cameras seems to reflect more than just wariness about the surveillance system (The Atlantic)

Who Approves Trump’s Washington Makeover Projects? The Supreme Court gave a green light to the new White House ballroom, but several of the president’s other Washington projects remain stalled .(New York Times)

​• This El Niño Will Be Unlike Any in the Past Eight Decades: Joshua Partlow on the box scientists have drawn in the middle of the Pacific — two-thirds the size of China — and the anomalies its buoys are recording. (The Atlanticsee also El Niño Is Now Stronger Than at Any Point in the Last 1,000 Years, Study Finds: Jacek Krywko on “one more warning sign of what we’re facing in a warmer world.” (Ars Technica)

• Why is it so hard to give away my dad’s brain? Scientists need fresh samples to research new treatments. But the donor process is an odyssey. ​Courtney E. Martin on the most emotionally taxing three-way call since junior high — navigating the urgency and bureaucracy of brain donation. (Vox)

​• By Dropping a Sledgehammer, Adam Silver Squares Off Against the NBA’s Richest Owner: He was a terribvle CEO; he is an even worse professional team owenr. Five takeaways from the league’s punishment of the Clippers over the Kawhi Leonard cap-circumvention scandal. (Yahoo Sportssee also Report of the Independent Investigators Concerning the LA Clippers and Kawhi Leonard: The full Wachtell Lipton summary report (PDF). (Wachtell Lipton).

Video of the day: What Happens When Everything Is for Sale?

Be sure to check out our Master’s in Business next week with William McNabb, former CEO and Chairman of the Vanguard Group from 2007-17. He is also an advisor to Venrock, and was an investor and advisor to Altruist, which was just sold to VG for $2 billion.

 

Hospital prices increased 3X overall inflation rates, closely followed by college costs and child care

Source: “How Much, Doc?”

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

 

The post 10 Friday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

Lessons from Victor Niederhoffer’s Life

 

 

I have been fascinated by Victor Niederhoffer for decades.

I first learned about him in a New Yorker piece titled “The Blow-Up Artist;” I was intrigued by his unique strategies and by his tendencies to repeatedly crash and burn. That led me to have him on the podcast in 2017, after a recent crash, rebuilding, and crash (again) for the third time. He passed away this past summer, and I thought it was worth sharing some background.

Between when he was booked to appear on the show at Bloomberg and the actual recording date in 2017, the 3rd crash occurred. To his credit, he honored his commitment and showed up. This, despite his being clearly and deeply distraught. I’ve never told the podcast story while he was alive, but now that he has shuffled off this mortal coil, he won’t be offended.

I began with innocuous background questions – about his education, squash and teaching – and was surprised by his responses. From the very first question, it was obvious that he was not OK. Whatever I would ask would be greeted by a loud and heavy sigh, followed by a lengthy pause – and then a thoughtful response.

This pattern — question, sigh, pause, response — occurred after every single query. Some pauses were long; some were longer. The producer was in my ear the whole time, yelling, “This is awful, none of it is usable, let’s tap out.”

But I waved her off. I KNEW that this was going to be valuable… It was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to hear a legendary trader discuss his career and own his own errors. I recall we recorded for over 90 minutes, maybe closer to two hours. In its raw form, the pauses would have made for terrible radio – too much dead air. But I also suspected it would be incredibly valuable.

The only way to make it usable was to edit out all of the pauses and blank spaces.1 What was left was 54 minutes of me trying to urge him on, and Victor telling stories from memory. It was not smooth or slick, but it was important.

RCM Alternatives2 wrote up a lovely history of Victor and the lessons we can learn from his career, presented below:

The Lessons of Victor Niederhoffer

Being right is a luxury good. Solvency is a necessity. Path dependency is the most underrated concept in finance — the sequence of returns matters as much as the returns.

Your risk tolerance is irrelevant; your clearing broker’s is the one that counts. You can have diamond hands all day. Refco doesn’t care about your hands. When the margin clerk calls, you’re not a Chicago PhD with a seventeen-year record — you’re a line item getting hit at whatever the screen says. Leverage doesn’t just amplify losses. It hands the exit decision to somebody else.

A long winning streak isn’t proof of safety. Sometimes it’s the measurement of hidden risk. Sharpe sees the volatility of returns. It doesn’t see the shape of the tail. Make a nickel ninety-five times and lose ten bucks once, and Sharpe will call you Warren Buffett right up until the ambulance arrives. Same movie as LTCM. Same movie as XIV in February 2018. Same movie most cycles.

Know which bet you’re actually making. Vic used the same instrument for both legs in 1997, on two continents, for the same underlying reason. If you’re a contrarian expressing it through short options, you own the view and the funding risk and the convexity — all at once, all pointing the same direction. Size for the trade you have, not the one you’d describe on a call.

Drifting into areas where you don’t have much expertise is about as red as flags get. Vic’s own words. A short-horizon statistical trader made an illiquid, levered, fundamental EM bet partly on the basis of cigarette-butt length. When the edge tightens and the capital’s still there, the pull toward finding risk somewhere new is enormous. That’s usually where the body’s buried.

Nobody sets a stop-gain. This is his best line, from a 2010 Slate interview, and almost nobody quotes it: “If they go to Vegas with $10,000, they say I’m not going to spend more than $5,000. But they never say, ‘Hey, when I win a certain amount, that’s when I’m going to quit.’ I’d had this incredible string of successes where I made 50, 100 percent, year after year… but I didn’t take account of this. I didn’t have a stop-gain, if you will.” Every risk framework in the industry is built around losses. His diagnosis was that the winning is what got him.

And the footnote nobody mentions. After 1997 he sued the CME in federal court in Illinois, on behalf of his customers, alleging floor traders colluded to mark options against him at far above market prices to force him out. The exchange settled. He distributed the entire settlement to his clients without deducting a dollar for the substantial legal fees he’d run up. That’s not a risk lesson. That’s a character lesson, and it’s worth more than most of the risk lessons.

All of these are hugely insightful rules for anyone trading professionally.

That first rule is a thing of literary beauty: “Being right is a luxury good. Solvency is a necessity. Path dependency is the most underrated concept in finance

For me personally, there is an even bigger takeaway from his professional experiences, and it’s this: If you set the course record on the straightaway but crash into the wall at the first turn, your record for the course does not count.

 

 

Previously:
MIB: Victor Niederhoffer on Making and Losing Fortunes (September 19, 2017)

 

Sources:
Right, But Not Solvent: The Lessons of Victor Niederhoffer
Attain Alternatives Blog , September 2, 2026

The Blow-Up Artist
By John Cassidy
The New Yorker, October 8, 2007

Blowing Up: How Nassim Taleb turned the inevitability of disaster into an investment strategy.
By Malcolm Gladwell
The New Yorker, April 15, 2002

 

__________

1. Bloomberg noted when it was published, “Edited for length and clarity,” but that doesn’t begin to explain what it was like fighting through those pauses during the actual recording process…

2. I found this article via a Google alert — the piece quotes me; I found it so compelling it was worth excerpting.

 

 

The post Lessons from Victor Niederhoffer’s Life appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Thursday AM Reads

My morning reads:

AI at 70: 14 lessons from a lifetime of boom and bust: Adrian Cox of Deutsche Bank Research on seven decades of artificial intelligence cycles. (Deutsche Bank Research)

Global Debt Is Slumping But It’s Nothing Like the 2022 Rout: The difference is scale. While the latest pullback has driven yields to multi-year highs in the world’s biggest markets, the move is just a fraction of the one seen in late 2022. Global government bond yields have risen 17 basis points on a rolling 20-day cumulative basis, compared with 62 basis points back then, data compiled by Bloomberg show. On a peak-to-trough basis, bonds have lost 4.2% this year — a far cry from the 23% plunge seen in 2022.(Bloomberg) see also The Bond Market Issues World Leaders a Failing Grade Nothing in this week’s G-20 suggested an end to the deficits, inflation and geopolitical disruptions that are roiling investors. (Wall Street Journal)

Welcome, Mr. Chairman Kevin Warsh’s speech at Jackson Hole was the introduction to the Fed Chair we deserved. In two weeks, the real work begins. ​Claudia Sahm grades Kevin Warsh’s Jackson Hole speech — the one he needed to give, from the AI open (100% human-written, she checked) to his seven principles of monetary policy. (Claudia Sahm)

Companies Plow Tariff Refunds Into Price Cuts, Appealing to Stretched Consumers: E.l.f. Beauty, Walmart and Tractor Supply are among the companies dropping prices to boost sales. ​ (Wall Street Journal)

• Vanguard Struck with Altruist Take-Out After Schwab and Fidelity Zapped It with ETF ‘Platform’ Fees: RIABiz on the $4.6 billion acquisition analysts say could redraw the competitive landscape for RIA custody — a sleeping monster awakened, with a massive “Vanguard effect” to follow. Waking a sleeping monster that could redraw the competitive landscape for RIA custody. (RIABiz)

​• Why the Flock Backlash Has Gotten So Intense: David A. Graham on a corporate name that evokes both the cameras and a flock of sheep protected by a watchful shepherd — and why the shepherd metaphor stopped working. (The Atlantic)

​• The Logistics Nightmare Facing U.S. Warships: John Ismay on how Iranian attacks upended the Navy’s Middle East supply chain — a typical carrier’s 5,000 crew members need up to four meals a day, and the ships being kept in the region indefinitely. (New York Timessee also Navy Not Returning to Damaged Bahrain Base ‘Anytime Soon,’ Top Officer Says: CNO Adm. Daryl Caudle levels with displaced sailors. (Navy Times)

• ​There’s No Place Like Group Chats: My old friends and I have ended up scattered across different states, in different time zones, but we’ve made our own neighborhood inside the black and blue bubbles of our phones. Hanif Abdurraqib on old friends scattered across states and time zones who built their own neighborhood inside the black and blue bubbles of their phones. (New Yorker)

​• What We Know About Autism — and How to Treat It — Could Change After New UCSF Study: Jason Fagone on researchers fusing AI with new molecular techniques to map autism spectrum disorder in unprecedented detail. (San Francisco Chronicle)

An Anvil Just Landed on David Zaslav’s Head: Acme-grade plans produce Acme-grade backfires. (Slate)

Video of the day: How A Student’s Question Saved This NYC Skyscraper

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business interview this weekend with William McNabb, former CEO and Chairman of the Vanguard Group from 2007-17. He is also an advisor to venture firm Venrock, and was an investor and advisor to Altruist, which was just sold to VG for $2 billion.


Private-construction-Data-centers-vs.-everything-else


Source: Census table via ChatGPT.

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

 

The post 10 Thursday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

$150 Trillion Global Economy (2030)

 

 

I am a sucker for infographics like these:

In 2025, Global GDP hit an all-time high of $118.4 trillion — about $14,406 per person worldwide.

To reach $150T by 2030 — 26.7% higher than where we are now — would require 4 years of gains averaging 4.86%. Any combination of nominal growth plus inflation gets us there. 3% annual GDP growth with a 2% inflation rate hits $150T in 2030.

China, which was half of the US GDP not too long ago, is now 68.9% of our economy’s size; Europe, at $37 trillion, is about the same size as the United States’ economy.

$150 trillion is not a reach, and at current growth and inflation rates, if sustained, the world would reach $300 trillion sometime in 2044…

 

 

 

Source:
World Economic Outlook via Visual Capitalist

 

The post $150 Trillion Global Economy (2030) appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Wednesday AM Reads

My mid-week morning reads:

‘Rich Dad Poor Dad’ self-help author Robert Kiyosaki is $1.2 billion in debt: report. The self-help guru who has made a fortune preaching the secrets of financial success — has amassed a staggering $1.2 billion in debt tied to his sprawling real-estate investments, according to a report. ​riel Zilber on the 79-year-old guru who preaches the secrets of financial success while touting his own ten-figure real-estate debt as strategy. (New York Post)

​• 10 Brutally Honest Predictions on the Future of AI: Ted Gioia on why you could get more reliable information from tarot cards — 95% of AI pilot programs failed, and 86% of the public now distrusts AI. (The Honest Broker)

•  The Sudden Unraveling of Wall Street’s Momentum Trade: The S&P 500 Momentum Index is down more than 9% since July 1 against the S&P 500’s 2.8% gain — the “self-fulfilling prophecy” of betting on rising winners has turned into a losing game  for investors who banked on its success. (Wall Street Journal)

Happy birthday to the First Index Investment Trust Witness the FIITnes. Fifty years ago today, the Vanguard Group of Investment Companies launched its first passive index-tracking fund. It was an infamously terrible, horrible, no good, very bad launch. Today, it manages an astonishing $1.7tn — more than most sovereign wealth funds. ​Robin Wigglesworth on Vanguard’s first passive index fund, now an astonishing $1.7 trillion — more than most sovereign wealth funds. (Financial Times)

​• Data Centers Are Driving an Alarming Gas Power Expansion in the US: There’s no clearer sign of the data center boom than rampant gas projects that have been proposed or that are already under construction. Molly Taft on new Global Energy Monitor research showing gas-fired power in development for data centers has nearly doubled in less than a year. (Wired)

​• Florida May Be Showing Us the Great Senior Short-Sale Before It Arrives Everywhere: Mike Hathorne on a housing market that can be short of homes and still have too many of the wrong homes for the households coming next. (Mike Hathorne)

A War That Won’t End Is Complicating the Fed’s Next Move: A Fed governor says the central bank should act if inflation doesn’t improve soon, while Bessent says Fed should look past high energy prices. ​(Wall Street Journal)

​• Hegseth’s Pentagon Lurches off the Rails: Tom Nichols on the price of nominating a TV host who topped out as a National Guard major to run the Defense Department. (The Atlanticsee also Dan Driscoll’s Parting Shot: The Army secretary told Trump about problems in the Army and his friction with Hegseth, then resigned. (The Atlanticsee also The Generals Are Worried: A leak of a recent report suggests that even Hegseth loyalists can’t keep ignoring how depleted American reserves are. (Slate)

​• Forbidden Planet: Was Pluto’s 2006 Demotion a Big Mistake?: Since it was stripped of planetary status, Pluto’s defenders have been fighting the decision – and they’re only getting more passionate. Tim Dowling revisits the vote that cost the ninth planet its title. (The Guardian)

​• Keep Chasing That Bird: The Oral History of ‘Coyote vs. Acme’: The Looney Tunes movie finally hits theaters after its controversial shelving three years ago — the story of how it got out from under the anvil. (The Ringer)

Video of the day: OnlyFans: How an $8B Cash Machine Got Stripped Bare

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business with David Booth, Founder, Chairman, and former CEO of Dimensional Funds Advisors. DFA just crossed $1 trillion dollars, and has become the largest active equity ETF manager. Booth’s new book is “Stay Calm: Learn to Embrace Uncertainty in Investing and Life.”

America is still missing the Electric Revolution

Source: Noahpinion

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

The post 10 Wednesday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

Transcript: David Booth, Dimensional Fund Advisors founder and chairman

 

 

The transcript from this week’s, MiB: David Booth, Dimensional Fund Advisors Founder & Chairman, is below.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube (video), YouTube (audio), and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

~~~

MASTERS IN BUSINESS:  David Booth
Founder & Chairman, Dimensional Fund Advisors

Bloomberg Radio — Transcript

ANNOUNCER (00:00:02): Bloomberg Audio Studios. Podcasts. Radio. News.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:00:07): This week on the podcast — what can I say? Legendary investor and founder of Dimensional Funds, David Booth, talks about his entire career, his philosophy, philanthropy, how he helped build DFA into a trillion-dollar fund, and why people refuse to just manage what they can and stay calm in the face of volatility and market events. I thought the conversation — and the book, Stay Calm — was fascinating, and I think you will also. David Booth, welcome back to Bloomberg.

DAVID BOOTH (00:00:53): Well, thanks for having me. It’s always a pleasure.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:00:56): I was gonna say the same — it’s always a pleasure. I know your background, but I’m gonna assume a lot of listeners may not be familiar with it, so I wanna start by going all the way back to your college and grad school education. You get a bachelor’s in economics from the University of Kansas, then you get a master’s degree focused in business, and then you go to the University of Chicago for a PhD. That very much sounds like academia was the future.

DAVID BOOTH (00:01:27): It really was, in the sense that, like a lot of kids, when you’re in college or even high school, you think, boy, I’d like to be a professor — ’cause that’s all you know.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:01:38): And it’s a great job. You’re on a campus, it looks like fun.

DAVID BOOTH (00:01:42): Back in those days, it was a good profession. I mean, there is a thrill of teaching kids, seeing the light go on. Kind of the same thing we have in business, when you have a client and finally —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:01:59): When they get it.

DAVID BOOTH (00:02:00): When they get it, you know, it’s very cool.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:02:03): So at Chicago, you pivot from a PhD to an MBA, and eventually you become the assistant, researcher, TA to some young professor who was not that much older than you — Gene Fama. Tell us a little bit about what led to that pivot.

DAVID BOOTH (00:02:19): Well, the backdrop is, in that period of time — the late sixties, early seventies — that’s when finance really emerged as a science, and it has continued to evolve, even today. And by that I mean, for something to be a science, you need testable hypotheses — don’t worry, I’m not getting too heavy into this. And before 1960, they just didn’t have the data to test things out. So in the early sixties, the University of Chicago developed this research-quality database, CRSP. The CRSP data started in 1926, and they’ve updated it, so now we have over a hundred years of data.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:03:05): When did Chicago first roll that out?

DAVID BOOTH (00:03:08): About ’63. Fama, my mentor and Nobel laureate in 2013, was in the PhD program at Chicago when Jim Lorie and Larry Fisher developed this database, and they turned it over to Gene and said, look, do some papers, do something with this data. So he had a head start on everybody, and for the next 20 years he was the most cited academic —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:03:38): Still one of the most cited academics.

DAVID BOOTH (00:03:40): Maybe the most ever, really, in finance.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:03:44): First mover advantage, for sure. So around the time you finish your PhD, Fama’s Efficient Market Hypothesis — that thesis was starting to gain traction, at least in academia, if not yet on Wall Street. Tell us a little bit about what was so attractive about EMH.

DAVID BOOTH (00:04:06): Well, it was incredibly exciting. First, let me just make a slight correction — I actually didn’t get a PhD.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:04:12): Right — you were working on your PhD, and then you got an MBA.

DAVID BOOTH (00:04:16): Yeah. And eventually I decided the world would be better served if Gene Fama did research and I tried to apply the ideas, rather than the other way around. So I walked into his office one day and said, look, I think I’d like to leave the program. So he calls up Mac McQuown out at Wells Fargo in San Francisco. Mac was in charge of applying quantitative methods for the bank, and one of the areas he worked on was investing. Mac had always wanted one of his students, so he recommended me, and Mac and I hit it off, and he invited me to come work for them. And so I decided to leave the program.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:04:57): So, the first job — did you ever get your MBA, by the way?

DAVID BOOTH (00:05:00): I got the MBA on the way out. They gave me an MBA.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:05:03): That was nice — that was a good investment on their part. You worked for Mac at Wells Fargo, right? In San Francisco. I didn’t realize you were on the West Coast for a while.

DAVID BOOTH (00:05:13): Right. I mean, this is the early seventies, so it was still kind of a Haight-Ashbury kind of thing.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:05:20): For sure. So Mac is the guy who’s often credited with creating the first version of an index fund. I think, if memory serves, it was for an institutional client’s pension or something like that.

DAVID BOOTH (00:05:33): Yeah, right. It was Samsonite.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:05:35): Samsonite, that’s right. Walk us through that. What was it like?

DAVID BOOTH (00:05:40): It turns out it was really pivotal in the history of finance, for a couple of reasons. One is, in doing all this research in finance, the fundamental question became: if you can’t outguess the market, how are you supposed to invest? Most people grow up thinking — and back in those days, everybody thought — that investing was about trying to pick the next winner stock, and time markets, and that sort of thing. And beginning in the mid-sixties, all of a sudden, with this burst of data, they could examine things like: are the professional managers that try to outguess the market worth the cost? And they’ve been doing this research for years, and there’s no compelling evidence that they’re worth the cost. In fact, I think the most practical assumption for all your readers is that the professional investors don’t seem to be able to beat the market. And that has a profound implication. And in fact — we can get around to more of the personal story — my parents grew up in the Great Depression and then fought World War II and so forth, and never had much money. But they never invested in public markets, ’cause they thought of themselves as outsiders, and the insiders would make all the money and just take advantage of them. So they never invested, and they had a little tougher time in retirement than they probably should have.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:07:18): And to be fair, the history before the post-World War II era was — they weren’t so wrong.

DAVID BOOTH (00:07:26): That’s right, they weren’t so wrong. So now, that’s the breakthrough. One of the implications of the new science is that the outsiders can do as well as the insiders — maybe better, once fees are considered — ’cause you can buy market portfolios very easily and very inexpensively now, and the pros don’t seem to be able to beat that.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:07:45): Well, the data on the pros — it doesn’t matter if you’re looking at Morningstar or SPIVA or DALBAR or any of the annual studies — is that in any given year, less than half of professionals beat the index. And I think that’s net of fees.

DAVID BOOTH (00:08:02): In fact, just yesterday there was a front-page article in The Wall Street Journal — only 27% last year.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:08:11): In the last 12 months. It was a particularly bad year, because one sector dominated, and if you didn’t have exposure to that sector, you badly lagged. Then the year before, the sector didn’t dominate. So you had to pick the sector, time it right, and stay invested.

DAVID BOOTH (00:08:25): Of course, if you do all of that, you don’t need our help.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:08:28): That’s exactly right. So Mac creates the first index fund — or one of the first. I’m curious, was there much of a reaction or any pushback from Wall Street, or did it just kind of slip by unnoticed?

DAVID BOOTH (00:08:43): No, there was a huge pushback. It was stuff they didn’t want to hear. I mean, they’d been claiming for years — oh yeah, we can beat the market, we can do 15 or 20% regardless of markets — all these claims. It turned out, unfortunately, they couldn’t be backed up by the data. That’s a very powerful lesson in developing arguments: if you have data and the other side doesn’t, it’s kind of an —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:09:09): Unfair fight.

DAVID BOOTH (00:09:10): Unfair fight. But it gets into a lot of issues we’ll cover as to why I’m still out trying to deliver that message.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:09:20): It’s so hard to believe. So let’s talk a little bit about that message. You and some of your Chicago classmates — Rex Sinquefield is one, and he had worked on an S&P 500 index fund at American National Bank. And then Larry Klotz was also a Chicago —

DAVID BOOTH (00:09:39): No — we worked together at A.G. Becker.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:09:42): And that was also in Chicago — in Chicago, but not the university. Right. And then Mac basically helped fund this: hey, we wanna apply everything we learned at Chicago and express the insights of Fama in an investible thesis. Right?

DAVID BOOTH (00:09:59): And the interesting thing there was that there were really two avenues being explored simultaneously. We had one group that I worked in, and we used as our primary outside consultants Fischer Black and Myron Scholes.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:10:14): More Nobel laureates.

DAVID BOOTH (00:10:16): Two more. It turns out, in working on our project, they developed the Black-Scholes option pricing model, for which Myron became a Nobel laureate — Fischer, unfortunately, had passed away, so he didn’t get it. The idea of our group was: okay, we accept that Michael Jensen and the work of others says these pros can’t seem to beat the market — so what are you supposed to do? By then we’d developed quite a bit of the science, and one idea, based on the models at the time — sounds silly now — was, well, if you have a portfolio that has a higher beta than the market, it should outperform.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:10:58): What does that mean — you’re just taking on more risk?

DAVID BOOTH (00:11:01): You’re just taking on more risk. That’s one way to beat the market: take more risk, but still being diversified. So that was the Samsonite account. They figured out a way of creating a higher-beta portfolio. Basically, they would start out with equal positions in all the stocks — they bought equal dollar amounts — and a portfolio like that should have a somewhat higher beta. Let me just refresh people’s memory: the market has a beta of one. So if you fluctuate more than the market, you have a beta greater than one, and if you fluctuate less than the market, your beta is less than one. And if you have a higher beta, you should outperform — that was the thinking. Incredibly naive. And we were kind of geeky back then.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:11:55): I think you guys are still a little geeky.

DAVID BOOTH (00:11:57): Still — well, yeah, I’ve learned to kind of appreciate that, actually. So that was one of the groups. The other group at Wells was the trust department. Mac hired somebody to head up trust investments, and he wanted to do an S&P 500 index fund.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:12:21): Still early seventies or so?

DAVID BOOTH (00:12:22): Yeah, still.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:12:24): So this is decades before BlackRock, years before Vanguard. This is very, very early.

DAVID BOOTH (00:12:30): So that’s what they wanted to do. And we go, look, as a scientist, you wouldn’t do an index fund. But I think it was some marketing genius who came in and said, no, you want an S&P 500 index fund — everybody can understand that, you can track the index. And here again, the pros don’t seem to be able to beat that index, so you can at least get the index return.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:12:53): Can’t get alpha if you’re not at least getting beta, right?

DAVID BOOTH (00:12:56): Yeah, right. So now, those are two different points of view. And the reason I emphasize that is that the S&P 500 index fund idea took off. That group left and changed hands a couple of times, and now that’s the cornerstone of BlackRock.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:13:14): It worked its way eventually to Barclays, and then BlackRock bought that whole business. And what are they — 14, 15 trillion, something like that?

DAVID BOOTH (00:13:22): No, I mean, it’s phenomenal success. I’m not arguing.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:13:27): And they basically proved the point: hey, it’s really hard to beat the market.

DAVID BOOTH (00:13:31): Beat the market, yeah. So hats off to them. Now, keep in mind — let’s go back to the other group, the one that I was working on that really became the basis for Dimensional. Eventually our group ended up irritating the trust department enough that they got rid of us.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:13:47): So this was you, Rex —

DAVID BOOTH (00:13:49): No, Rex wasn’t there at the time.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:13:50): He wasn’t? So who was the initial group?

DAVID BOOTH (00:13:53): Well, Rex was part of the initial group of Dimensional, sorry. And we brought people in to help us out — the first two people we talked to were Gene Fama, my mentor, on the research side, and Mac McQuown, who by that time had left Wells as well. Then we pulled together the other leading academics we worked with — people like Merton Miller, the 1990 Nobel laureate, and Myron Scholes, ’97, along with Fama.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:14:27): So out of all of this, the first fund that you launched when DFA began in Brooklyn was a small cap — or micro cap — strategy.

DAVID BOOTH (00:14:37): Right. We were the first people to use “small cap” as a term, meaning smaller companies.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:14:41): And this was based on some of Fama’s initial factors — small seemed to have persistent performance attributes.

DAVID BOOTH (00:14:50): Yeah — that was documented about 10 years later. So here we are, in some ways flying blind. We had a compelling argument, because in 1981, if you looked at large institutional investors, they weren’t holding the stocks of smaller companies in any meaningful way. So if you wanna be diversified, you want large and small, not just large.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:15:11): So was that the pitch to institutions? Small cap will diversify against the rest of your holdings?

DAVID BOOTH (00:15:18): Right. And so we got our first clients with that. So we’re off and running with a small cap fund, we had clients, and in talking to Fama, he goes, well, you know, we have a student here that did his PhD dissertation on just what you’re looking at — Rolf Banz. Rolf had done a study breaking down stocks on the New York Stock Exchange into size quintiles, largest to smallest, and the smallest quintile outperformed all the others by quite a bit over time. So, putting my marketing hat on, I think we’ll define small to be the smallest quintile of companies on the New York Stock Exchange — Mama didn’t raise a complete idiot here, you know. So that was how we got started. And there really wasn’t a counterargument, ’cause people couldn’t say, oh, I’ve got that covered — they knew they didn’t have small cap covered. So what we were able to do is provide access to small companies, and that’s really the basis of Dimensional. And about 10 years later, Fama, along with his colleague Ken French, developed this multifactor model. Back when I was at Wells, we just had the single factor, beta. So now we had a couple more factors.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:16:39): So Fama-French started with three, then it was five, and arguably there are just hundreds, most of which are tiny.

DAVID BOOTH (00:16:46): Yeah, most of which are tiny. And they kind of collapse to —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:16:51): Five to seven is plenty.

DAVID BOOTH (00:16:53): Well, three is plenty. We really have four or five now. But you get your big bang out of the first one, the market —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:17:01): The beta.

DAVID BOOTH (00:17:02): The beta. And the second factor, say value versus growth — that picks up a lot, not as much as the first. And then you get into size — small, that adds a little. Then you can add — pretty soon it’s just diminishing marginal utility, like everything in life.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:17:19): Quality, momentum — as you work your way down, each generates less and less of a bang. But what’s so fascinating to me is nobody had taken the approach that, hey, there is plenty of quantitative data to back this up, here is a testable thesis, a falsifiable thesis, and we can express these ideas in a portfolio. That, to me, was what set the launch of Dimensional apart from everybody else. Am I stating that correctly?

DAVID BOOTH (00:17:50): You got it. That’s it. And it shows you how powerful an idea it was, ’cause here we are starting a firm — we have no track record, I’m the first portfolio manager, I’d never managed stocks or even bought stocks before, and we’re operating outta my spare bedroom in downtown Brooklyn Heights. So you figure, how can you pull that off? Well, you can pull it off if the idea itself is so profound and backed up with incredible research. That’s hard to refute.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:18:28): So here’s the key question. Given how powerful that is — but at the time, fairly novel — what do you think Wall Street just missed about index investing? Because clearly there’s a financial opportunity, right? Whether or not your particular fund at the moment is selling performance and active selection, no one else looked at this and said, hey, there’s a business to be had here.

DAVID BOOTH (00:18:56): Well, back in those days — and fortunately this is changing now — basically nearly all financial services were distributed through commission salesmen. So Wall Street — basically, if you have a commission broker managing your money, I dunno what you’re gonna do, but you’re gonna be trading a lot, I can assure you. And if there’s anything that all this research pointed to, it’s that you don’t wanna trade a lot. Trading is a negative expected outcome, kind of like gambling in Vegas. But that’s the cornerstone of Wall Street. So they go, what do you mean, you’re telling me I shouldn’t be trading a lot? You’re ripping my eyes out. This can’t be true. And you go, hey, look, all I can tell you is we have logic, reason, and empirical evidence on our side. You have no data — all you have is bluster on your side. And over the long haul we’re winning, but it’s taken 50 years.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:19:54): Hard to make somebody understand something when their income is depending on them not understanding it, to paraphrase.

DAVID BOOTH (00:20:02): Right. And if you don’t have data to support it, then all you’re doing is bluster. And look, Wall Street firms in those days were very good at shoving product down people’s throats.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:20:13): Oh, for sure. I would tell you they’re still pretty good at it.

DAVID BOOTH (00:20:17): Well, I’m softening up, because along the way there was a development — an incredible development, almost as important as the development of the science — the fee-only financial advisor, which we started working with in the late 1980s.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:20:36): We are gonna get to that question. I wanna stay with Fama’s insights and your ability to express them in a portfolio. The fascinating thing about DFA to me is that it’s not simple market-cap-based indexing. The approach that you embraced early on was: how can we express something that’s a combination of what indexing would eventually become, married to a systematic, factor-based investing strategy?

DAVID BOOTH (00:21:12): Right. And by the way, early on, even going back to the days at Wells, we had these two groups — you know, you ought to index — and then the scientists saying, no, you can do better than indexing. And that’s 45 years — that’s been our message. As a scientist, you wouldn’t index, for a lot of reasons. One is you’re putting a constraint on yourself: I want to track an index. Constraints cost — in economic terms, that’s costly, and we can get into where the cost is. The other part of it is the silly way that index funds have to behave.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:21:54): Because of the announcements of additions and deletions — they telegraph it, right?

DAVID BOOTH (00:21:58): Telegraphed. Standard & Poor’s — if they add a new stock into their S&P 500 index today, it’ll go in at tonight’s closing price. If you are an S&P 500 index fund manager, then you want to buy that stock today at tonight’s closing price.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:22:15): Even though you know it’s gonna run up in anticipation.

DAVID BOOTH (00:22:18): Right — and even though you know that every other S&P 500 index fund manager out there is also gonna want that stock at tonight’s close. So that’s where — and probably all sciences are this way — there’s the science, and there’s the art of the science. You go to medical doctors, let’s say. They all study the same textbooks; well, some of ’em are just better at execution than others. And that’s what we’re talking about here. The simplest of all ideas: if you’re trying to buy a stock at the same time everybody else is, that’s probably not a good trade. Intuition would tell you that. And I think our most recent study shows that the runup is about 4% — when it goes into the index, the index pays about 4% more than a fair price.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:23:11): And the flip side is, the deletions have a tendency to outperform the S&P over something like 12 or 24 months. Same thing — people sell in advance, and by the time it’s actually deleted, it’s appreciably cheaper, and maybe that becomes a value.

DAVID BOOTH (00:23:28): Well, let me give you the downside of our approach, which is you have to have a certain amount of trust in the manager, because we’re not slavish. I mean, with indexing, you know exactly what they track — the gosh darn index. That’s what they said — that’s all they said they would do. And our idea is saying, look, we will use a little flexibility, a little bit of human judgment along the way. Not a lot — not like the old days of wild stock picking —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:23:56): Throwing darts.

DAVID BOOTH (00:23:57): Darts, or whatever. But we’ll use a little bit of judgment, and that requires you to have a little confidence in our ability to execute. So when we started, a lot of people said, look, how do we know you can execute? Because when you go out and buy or sell, you’re gonna be trading against professional investors. They think they have undiscounted information, if you will — something special, special knowledge — and you don’t. Okay, well, it turns out there’s a flip side to that, which is: if you’re an active manager and you think you know something special, you also realize the half-life of that is really short. Minutes, probably.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:24:43): Today it’s probably milliseconds.

DAVID BOOTH (00:24:45): Probably milliseconds. So if you wanna get rid of a stock, you want to get rid of it right now — at least by the end of the day. And so we come along, and we’re kind of indifferent. We buy 10,000 stocks — you know, on any given day, we don’t buy all 10,000 of ’em. We focus a lot on what’s trading easily that day. Even a small company stock, 20% of the time it trades a lot.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:25:12): In other words, you can use execution and volatility as a source of better pricing.

DAVID BOOTH (00:25:17): Better pricing, yeah. And that’s worked out over 45 years — the first 45 are the toughest, I realize. But still, people slap their forehead — that’s hard to believe, that there’s this professional money manager out there trading against you. It’s not that we take advantage of them. We provide liquidity, and our clients get the benefit of providing that service.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:25:47): And by providing liquidity, it means you’re willing to be a buyer at times when many other people are not.

DAVID BOOTH (00:25:54): But we’re not gonna pay retail for that stock. I mean — if you can talk to me, can you do something for me on the price?

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:25:59): Take a little something off. Really, really interesting. Coming up, we continue our conversation with David Booth, founder and chairman of Dimensional Fund Advisors, talking about his brand-new book, Stay Calm: Learning to Embrace Uncertainty in Investing and Life. I’m Barry Ritholtz. You’re listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:26:17): I’m Barry Ritholtz. You are listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My extra special guest today is David Booth. He is the founder and chairman of Dimensional Fund Advisors. His new book is out — probably by the time you’re hearing this — Stay Calm: Learning to Embrace Uncertainty in Investing and Life. So I wanna sum up the book in a sentence, and then we’re gonna really delve into it: “Uncertainty isn’t something to fear — it’s where possibility lives.” Ooh. Explain that.

DAVID BOOTH (00:26:59): That is a good question. Every now and then, you know, you write something down —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:27:02): By the way, I have a dozen fantastic quotes, and I’m gonna try and click through all of them.

DAVID BOOTH (00:27:07): No, it’s funny, ’cause you write it, and then you forget you wrote it, and then you go back and look at it and go, hey —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:27:11): That’s not bad.

DAVID BOOTH (00:27:12): That’s not bad, yeah. And let me tell you about a breakthrough that happened to us about 10 years ago. We realized that there are a lot of parallels between investing and your life experiences, and a lot of that has to deal with how you deal with uncertainty. You know, as you grow, you learn how to deal with uncertainty, and what you realize is uncertainty is what creates opportunity. If there were no uncertainty, you wouldn’t have the ability to progress. So it’s not about eliminating uncertainty — it’s about managing uncertainty. That’s true in life, and the reason I bring that up is ’cause that’s also true in investing. If there were no uncertainty — in other words, if all investing was riskless —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:28:12): I got some 10-year Treasuries at three and a half percent that you can hold and barely keep up with inflation.

DAVID BOOTH (00:28:19): Well, if there were no uncertainty in investing, every investment would have the same return — the riskless return, whatever that is. So in investing as well, it’s uncertainty that creates opportunity. And once people start to realize that, we go — let’s go back: how do you deal with uncertainty? Well, first off, you realize that life is not totally predictable. I mean, think back 20 years ago. Could you have predicted where you are today, or where you’ll be 20 years from now?

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:28:57): Nobody in December 2019 was predicting a pandemic the next year — in a market that would scream higher. You could show it in every annual forecast we see — and we’ll talk a little bit about predictions in a minute — but the future is inherently unknowable.

DAVID BOOTH (00:29:13): And so embrace that uncertainty. That’s what gives us the opportunity in life and investing.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:29:20): So what do you say to people who are investors — hey, uncertainty creates opportunity — but how does the average mom-and-pop investor live through the regular 15, 20, 25% drawdowns we see all the time in equity markets?

DAVID BOOTH (00:29:41): Well, the quick answer to that is stay calm — that’s why we call it that; it’s the name of the book. So let me give you an example of the fundamental problem we have with helping people stay invested. Let’s say bad news comes into the market — the pandemic, or a particular stock. And then you look at the stock or the market and you see it’s down 20% or whatever, and you go, holy cow, I gotta get out. There’s bad news and the market and things are dropping — that is human nature. What we’d like to have people think is: look, okay, the pandemic — bad news — came into the market, and the market’s down 20 or 30%. And people were saying, what are we supposed to do? What do you think is gonna happen? I go, hey, look, I don’t know what’s gonna happen — and anybody that thinks they can predict what’s gonna happen, I’d be a little suspicious about. But here’s what I believe will happen: people aren’t just gonna sit there and take it. Kind of the cornerstone of all of my belief in markets and how they work is human ingenuity. That’s what ends up bailing us out. When bad things happen, you don’t just sit there and take it in life — you figure out how to get back on track. And I go, so here we have the pandemic that’s hit — that’s a big smash in the mouth to these firms. They’re not just gonna sit there and take it. They’ll figure out how to get back on track. They’ll try something new and different, and along the way there’ll be winners and losers, and I dunno who the winners will be and the losers. But what I do believe is that effort, that human ingenuity, will likely get us back on track faster than most people think. Which is what happened.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:31:38): We saw that during the financial crisis. The pandemic was less than a quarter — down 34% — and from that end of the first quarter in 2020, the S&P was up 69% for the rest of the year.

DAVID BOOTH (00:31:52): Unbelievable. So that’s what we’re getting at. I mean, what was going on — and this is what I get back to: what do you tell people to get through the tough times? Go back to first principles. Okay, we have the pandemic, and there were all kinds of forecasts, but the consensus, I remember at the time, was it’s likely to be a two- or three-year kind of phenomenon. And so the market’s down about 20 or 30%. That seems about right to me. I mean, I don’t know.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:32:22): So in other words, it’s already in the price, and trying to act in response to something everybody knows seems like a waste of time.

DAVID BOOTH (00:32:29): Yeah. I learned that really in the late nineties. I was on an investment committee — I used to sit on investment committees; I don’t anymore, other than our own. And the chairman of that investment committee went around the world. This was 1998 — I dunno if you remember —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:32:47): Sure — Long-Term Capital Management. I was on a trading desk. I remember that vividly.

DAVID BOOTH (00:32:51): Right. And you had the Russian default, you had the Asian contagion. He goes around the world — the chairman of the committee — and eventually talks about all the problems around the world, and he concludes: so why should we invest in stocks at all? And I said, well, you know, I think you’ve characterized what was going on in these different countries. Okay. But I think all you’ve done is explain why the market’s down 35%. And he goes, ah — and we stayed invested, and of course we were amply rewarded. So if people could just go through first principles — and by that I mean: bad news comes into the market, they look and they say, aha, the stock is down, now I want to get out ’cause I’m stressed. If we can get them to change their opinion and say, look, the market’s down — I mean, the price is down quite a bit — and that’s probably about right, given the bad news that we have, then: therefore, I need to stay invested. I was thinking the other day, if I come out with a second book, maybe I’ll call it Stay Invested. So we’d have Stay Calm and Stay Invested.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:33:57): I think your second book should be named What Would Gene Fama Say?

DAVID BOOTH (00:34:01): There you go.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:34:02): If the market’s down 30%, what would Fama say? He’d say, it’s in the price. And just sit there and relax and stay calm.

DAVID BOOTH (00:34:09): And that’s the science, you know.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:34:11): That’s really interesting. So you mentioned some forecasts and predictions. Another aspect of the book is: plan, don’t predict. You can’t foresee the future, so making decisions based on predictions — you’re essentially engaging in wishful thinking.

DAVID BOOTH (00:34:30): Well, that’s right. I mean, you need to have a plan for going forward in life and investing, but don’t waste the time on trying to predict the unpredictable. Markets are unpredictable — that’s why the pros can’t beat the market, ’cause markets are unpredictable. And yet over the long haul — if you go back, we haven’t talked about the history, but a hundred years of returns that covers the Great Depression, World War II, the Korean War, high inflation, the Great Financial Crisis, the pandemic — through all of that, 10% a year. I think a lot of what I do now, particularly talking to students, is talk about the miracle of the stock and bond markets. These public markets are truly miracles.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:35:19): Really, really fascinating. Here’s another thesis that I think is really very, very insightful: control what you can, manage what you can’t. You can’t control crashes, recessions, interest rates, or any of that century of terrible events — but you can manage yourself, your allocation, your ongoing saving. Discuss that a little bit.

DAVID BOOTH (00:35:44): Well, that’s right. In terms of dealing with it — it’s all about managing uncertainty. So control what you can, and manage what you can’t — manage the uncertain part as best you can. Hey, you can’t eliminate it, but you can manage it.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:35:59): And by managing it, you’re talking about having a financial plan and sticking to it, continuing to dollar-cost average into it. Like, there are things within your control — that’s what you should be managing. And the things outside of your control, just accept. You can’t control what the Fed does, or what’s happening in the Straits, or who moves.

DAVID BOOTH (00:36:20): Yeah. A lot of people, they make portfolio decisions based on their forecast of what the market’s gonna do. That’s a waste of time. You wanna pay attention to what’s going on, because over your lifetime there are gonna be situations when you need to change your investment policy around — but it’s not based on what’s going on in the market. You need to change — you know, you get a new job, you wanna retire, you have a family. All these things can cause you to invest differently. But at every point, you want to have a long-term plan in place and manage to that. So you can’t control the stock market. You can control how much risk you take, basically. There are two basic decisions as you go down the path. First is the split: how much do you have in stocks at all, versus relatively riskless assets like a money market fund or a bond. So you get that right. And then the second part is, to the extent you’re investing in stocks, buy the whole market. That makes you as good as the insiders — people that think of themselves as outsiders. That’s another miracle of markets: right now you have it, unlike my parents, who never had that available to ’em. Now everybody has access. The market is good for everyone.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:37:40): So let’s talk a little bit about financial media, which you write extensively about in the book. Another quote of yours: “Modern financial media is designed to capture your attention, presenting commentary, stories and expert forecasts that are nothing more than distracting noise.”

DAVID BOOTH (00:38:00): Yeah, that’s right. I mean, today, undoubtedly, we have a lot more data thrown at us than ever before. I don’t know that we have a lot more meaningful information, but we have a lot more data, that’s for sure. And so it’s important these days for people to think critically — always go back to first principles. This year in particular, there’s been a lot of anxiety. We have, you know, some wars, we have all kinds of things —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:38:28): Tariffs.

DAVID BOOTH (00:38:30): Any number of things you could be anxious about. But I tell people, look — do you think you have more anxiety today, or people have more anxiety today, than during the Great Depression, or during, say, World War II, when it looked like we were losing at first? Those were real, serious anxieties. So I’m not making light of the anxiety, but what the hundred years of data shows us is the market does a really good job of pricing all that uncertainty and the risks.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:38:59): So another quote in the same section: “In investing, success often comes not from doing more, but from tuning out more.” So I have to share this with you, ’cause every time I write “tune out the noise,” I get a ton of pushback. Hey, you can’t just ignore all this. You can’t tune it out. It’s really difficult, and just telling people to tune out the noise is a waste of time. What’s your argument back?

DAVID BOOTH (00:39:29): Well, first, I’m glad to see you get your share of that — just like I do. I go: basically, what we’ve outlined is you want to have sensible portfolios — on the equity side, buy the whole market. And the market does a great job of pricing. So all the anxieties that you can express — and there are plenty of things to be concerned about; I’m not making light of ’em at all — that’s why the prices are doing whatever it is they’re doing. And so, unless you’re faster than the market, unless you think you’re smarter than the market, you just have to assume that whatever it is you’re concerned about, it’s already been priced in. You’re too late. By the time you get a certain piece of information, the market’s already reflected it.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:40:22): It’s already in the price.

DAVID BOOTH (00:40:24): It’s already in the price. You’re too late.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:40:26): So this quote might be one of the most profound things I read in the book — you read it and you’re like, wow, that’s really insightful; at least that was my response: “This isn’t a book about how to invest. It’s a book about how to think about investing. It’s not about picking stocks; it’s about taking stock of what really matters.” Ooh. Right? I mean —

DAVID BOOTH (00:40:52): That’s an example of — you go back and reread it, and I’m like, I wrote that? That’s really, really good. That’s not bad.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:40:58): No, that’s damn fine. And it’s because you are implying, hey, this is about securing your family’s future — but it’s not just about money, it’s about all the things that really matter.

DAVID BOOTH (00:41:12): Well, yeah. We have a segment in there about what true worth is about, rather than true wealth. My parents I describe as being wealthy — they just didn’t have much money. So you want to focus on what’s really important to you.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:41:33): “The quiet dividend of patient compounding, in both life and investing.”

DAVID BOOTH (00:41:38): Yeah. I mean, one of the first things you’ll learn about in finance is the magic of compounding. If you get that 10% return, it means your portfolio doubles every seven years. And you double it six times if you have a 42-year horizon — that’s six seven-year periods. And life is the same way. You are the result of the effects of the compounding of decisions that you’ve made in life all the way through. And maybe that’s where wisdom comes from — the compounding of the effects of decisions.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:42:21): Really, really interesting. I really enjoyed the book — Stay Calm: Learning to Embrace Uncertainty in Investing and Life. Coming up, we continue our conversation with David Booth, author of Stay Calm and founder of Dimensional Fund Advisors, talking about philosophy and philanthropy. I’m Barry Ritholtz. You’re listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:42:41): I’m Barry Ritholtz. You are listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My extra special guest today is David Booth. He is founder and chairman of Dimensional Fund Advisors and author of the new book, Stay Calm: Learning to Embrace Uncertainty in Investing and Life. So I wanted to talk a little bit about both your philosophy — and how it developed — and philanthropy. We’ll circle back to philanthropy in a minute, but let’s talk a little bit about Dimensional. You guys didn’t want to participate in ETFs for a long time, ’cause you preferred to offer your products through advisors to investing customers. What was the idea of working through the advisor side of it, as opposed to marketing directly to Main Street?

DAVID BOOTH (00:43:42): Well, first off, in any business, the marketing is a big component. Now, you have to understand, we’re starting outta my brownstone — in my apartment. It wasn’t like we had a big marketing machine, and we didn’t know anything about selling to the retail public. We did know institutional investors, and so our first clients were large — typically pension funds, insurance companies, sovereign wealth funds. That was the first eight years or so; that was who we talked to. And then one day Dan Wheeler came along. He was a financial advisor in Sacramento —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:44:29): In California, right. I know the name.

DAVID BOOTH (00:44:32): And he said, I’d like to have access to your funds. Now, at that time it was kind of unusual for a firm like ours to get big institutions to invest in a mutual fund, but we had created a mutual fund, and because they were institutional clients, our fees were very low — institutionally priced. And so it made it ideal for a fee-only financial advisor — a fee-only advisor being one where we don’t pay them any money and they don’t pay us. I mean, it’s strictly arm’s length.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:45:10): What year was that, with Wheeler?

DAVID BOOTH (00:45:12): About 1989.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:45:15): So that was long before advisors had taken over from stockbrokers. The fiduciary side of the business was still relatively tiny.

DAVID BOOTH (00:45:27): It was tiny. But these were highly energized financial advisors. I mean, typically the advisor would have come from a wirehouse and felt really dirty about themselves — and I’m just repeating what they told me.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:45:40): Oh no, I’ve heard it a million times.

DAVID BOOTH (00:45:42): And to see this approach, which is based on science — you have all the data you could ever want backing up what we do, and you could come up with a sensible investment approach that undoubtedly would work over the long haul —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:46:00): It feels good. I had someone leave a wirehouse to become an advisor, and I asked them why — this is, I don’t know, the early two thousands. And I’ll never forget the line I was told: they’re called brokers because they make their clients broker. And I’m like, wow — talk about feeling like, I gotta get out of this side of the street.

DAVID BOOTH (00:46:22): Yeah. It doesn’t have to be that way. But to observe — the ability to beat the market is such a narrow advantage that it takes an incredible firm. I mean, we’re a professional manager, and we can do things that a retail client can’t do — and it has nothing to do with picking stocks, let’s keep in mind, but dealing through market mechanisms: the way you trade, securities lending, so on and so forth. There are things we can do, but the margins are very, very slim. The idea that somebody way down the food chain — a broker at a retail firm — would have some of that magic is hard to accept.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:47:12): So when you guys began working with advisors, it wasn’t to design portfolios. The advisor was there essentially to keep the client from abandoning their portfolio and getting in the way of compounding.

DAVID BOOTH (00:47:26): Yeah, absolutely. One of our advisors said it right. He said, you know, I don’t have clients with investment problems, I’ve got investments with client problems.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:47:38): That’s a great line.

DAVID BOOTH (00:47:39): But the difference between the two is education. And we’ve always sold through education — we bring people in for seminars and stuff. And the book — I mean, that’s why you would do the book — is to help people better understand how markets work, so they will be more confident that they can have a good investment experience.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:48:00): You guys have done a good job on the education side. I’m kind of curious if that’s the reason why you stayed out of ETFs for so long. And for people who are trying to put this in context: DFA launched in 1981, in 2020 was your first ETF, and today you are the largest active ETF issuer in the country. So why leave all that money on the table for 40 years?

DAVID BOOTH (00:48:30): Well, I don’t know — must have been a pandemic, you know, something. Anyway — no, it’s because early on, our advisors said they didn’t need the ETF. The beauty of a regular mutual fund is you go in at net asset value at the end of the day. That’s about as clean as you can come up with. If you buy an ETF, you’re buying it in the open market, and for some people that’s a little scary.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:48:58): Whatever the open market cost might be, the offset of the tax advantage has to wildly outweigh it. In a non-qualified account, ETFs are vastly superior to a mutual fund most of the time, for that tax reason.

DAVID BOOTH (00:49:14): Well, to a conventional mutual fund, I agree with you. But we’ve been able to use —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:49:19): Use a dual class.

DAVID BOOTH (00:49:20): Yeah. We’ve been able to eliminate a lot of the tax advantage of ETFs.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:49:28): By the way, you and Vanguard seem to be the leaders in that space, for having an ETF and a mutual fund essentially track the same holdings.

DAVID BOOTH (00:49:39): And now, coming out this summer and into the fall, we are innovating even more. Right now, we have mutual funds and ETFs that do the same thing — two pools of money doing the same thing. The SEC has given us approval to merge those two, so it’ll just be one pool of assets with two ways of accessing it.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:50:04): Two different wrappers, same pool of money.

DAVID BOOTH (00:50:06): Same pool of money. So that will take away the argument — you don’t have to worry about it anymore.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:50:14): That’s really good. Isn’t that cool?

DAVID BOOTH (00:50:17): That actually speaks to how science is developing. It’s not like we sit on our hands — we’re continually trying to work through things and become more efficient.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:50:29): So let’s talk about another philosophical belief from you guys that I’m fascinated by. People have had a hard time wrapping their heads around: is DFA an indexer? Are they an alpha chaser? And the way I kind of explained it to myself was: no — when you look at traditional indexers, they’re just using one factor of the many Fama-French factors, and what Dimensional has said is, hey, we’re going to use three, four, five factors. So we are indexers, plus the next four factors on the list. Is that a fair philosophical breakdown?

DAVID BOOTH (00:51:10): Yeah, that’s part of what we do — exactly that. And there are some people that don’t want to have a bias towards value or small cap, and for those we have kind of plain vanilla funds too, that aren’t biased. But in both cases, it’s about execution. We talked about how an index fund has to trade in a bizarre sort of way — and we don’t do that. We apply that thinking to all the funds. So that, here again, what we’re trying to do is apply the science, and by the way we structure portfolios, we think we can do better than index providers. And then secondarily, the way we trade, relative to the way index funds trade — that’s true in everything we do. But then, some clients like to have a small cap bias, some don’t. It’s their money — we try to come up with whatever they think is sensible.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:52:20): So let’s talk a little bit about philanthropy, ’cause I know part of the book discusses legacy, and you’ve been very involved philanthropically. A decade ago you signed the Giving Pledge, and — I go back two decades — right around the time of the financial crisis, you made a gift in ’08 to the University of Chicago’s business school, which I think was the largest gift ever in the country, or to Chicago, at that time: $300 million. And now it’s the Chicago Booth School of Business. Tell us a little bit about what motivated a gift of that size to that recipient, and what are your thoughts 20 years later?

DAVID BOOTH (00:53:04): Well, okay, first lemme just say it was kind of funny. The announcement for that was made in November of 2008 — like, the week after Obama got elected for the first time. And so there was a big announcement at the school — they said, big announcement coming tonight, free food, come on in — and they thought it had something to do with Obama. He’s a Chicago guy. So that’s when they announced that the school’s name was changing.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:53:35): Which, by the way, wasn’t a requirement of your gift. You argued against it.

DAVID BOOTH (00:53:40): Well, I didn’t argue against the Obama part.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:53:42): I heard through several people that you pushed back initially.

DAVID BOOTH (00:53:46): Well, I pushed back a little bit, but not a lot. What happened was, I approached the dean of the business school and said, you know, it’s time for payback here — for what the university has done for me, and the faculty. And not only training me in school, but then following up over the years — over the now decades, 45 years. You know, we’ve had five Nobel laureates work very closely with us; all of ’em have been significant directors of our mutual funds or the company, Fama being a founder as well. It’s time for me to pay back, and it’s gotta be a big chunk of what I have. So this is what I’m willing to do. And the dean looks at it and goes, you know, we were thinking about naming the school, and we weren’t asking for nearly this much — we’ll name the school after you. I go, okay, well, whatever. But it was about me wanting to feel good about me.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:54:46): Well, you feel a sense of obligation to the University of Chicago ’cause of everything they gave you. Undergraduate and pre-PhD, MBA — you were at Kansas, and you gave them a similar number last year: $300 million to the University of Kansas athletics program. Why focus on sports there? What’s so significant about Kansas athletics? ‘Cause, by the way, as a school, they’ve been doing pretty good.

DAVID BOOTH (00:55:18): Oh yeah, yeah.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:55:19): Athletics-wise.

DAVID BOOTH (00:55:20): Yeah. Well, first off, Lawrence, Kansas, where the University of Kansas is, is my hometown. I went to Lawrence High School and then the University of Kansas. So, with all the relatives, it’s in my blood. And for a big state school like that, what’s really important is to have a great, competitive athletic program. I mean, I know the arguments — some people go, you know, they’re not so sure about that —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:55:51): It doesn’t hurt their marketing, their ability to recruit professors, students. It makes the town better. I mean, it just multiplies across everything, regardless of how you feel about big football in college.

DAVID BOOTH (00:56:06): Right. But I happen to love it, and I particularly love college basketball. Kansas has always been really good at basketball, and it’s getting better in football. And then with NIL — a little dollop of NIL coming down the pike —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:56:20): Name, image, likeness. Get some money to the students.

DAVID BOOTH (00:56:24): To the students. So it puts great financial pressure on the schools, and it’s difficult for a state school to have a big budget for athletics when their professors are making what they’re making. So it’s important for private money — for alums and whatever — to step up in order to help them be successful.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:56:53): And I’m gonna assume that this isn’t the end of your academic gifts — you’re gonna be doing other stuff in the future, and obviously the Giving Pledge is a part of that. But I have to ask about a purchase you made in 2010, which is: you bought Naismith’s original document of, essentially, here are the rules of basketball — this is where basketball was invented. And I think you paid over $4 million for it, and then you gave it to the University of Kansas athletic department. Explain — tell us about that.

DAVID BOOTH (00:57:30): Well, it was really kind of an interesting auction. James Naismith invented basketball in 1891 — if you think about it —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:57:40): The peach crate.

DAVID BOOTH (00:57:41): Yeah, the whole thing. It’s the only major sport that I can think of where we know who invented it. It was a class assignment for him in school, at the YMCA in Springfield, Massachusetts. So the rules stayed in the family, and as things happen over time, they just decided that they wanted to sell it. So I decided — here again, basketball is so important; if you live in Lawrence, Kansas, you realize that the rules of basketball, those two typewritten pages, need to be in Lawrence, Kansas. ‘Cause Naismith, after he invented the game, goes to teach at Kansas for 40 years; he’s buried in Lawrence. So I realized that —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:58:31): Perfect match.

DAVID BOOTH (00:58:32): Match — had to buy it. So it started off, they thought it would go for about $2 million, but along the way — I was bidding over the phone, and there was somebody else bidding over the phone, and it kept ratcheting up, and I ended up paying about four and a half million. The person on the other end of the phone was David Rubenstein.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:58:52): Get out! Oh, that’s hilarious.

DAVID BOOTH (00:58:53): Your Bloomberg —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:58:55): Co-host — fellow host. That’s amazing. Did you explain eventually to him why you bought it and why it went to Kansas?

DAVID BOOTH (00:59:03): No — once I paid for it, it was announced who bought it. So he sent me an email the next day saying, hey, I think I cost you some money. Which is funny. So we still have a good chuckle about that.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (00:59:18): So, the last piece of philanthropy I have to ask about before we get to our favorite questions: you’re known as an avid art collector. If you go down — I don’t know what river that is in Texas, but I’ve been on that boat — you can see some of your sculptures right from the river, if you’re in a boat. You’ve endowed a conservation center at the Museum of Modern Art, and — as opposed to just donating a sculpture or a painting — you’re essentially helping them preserve their entire collection in perpetuity. Tell us a little bit about that.

DAVID BOOTH (00:59:55): Well, I mean, preserving your patrimony is important for any country, and art is such a big deal, and MoMA is such a great museum —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:00:06): Spectacular collection.

DAVID BOOTH (01:00:08): Spectacular.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:00:08): Of which, like, 3% is displayed at any time. It’s an enormous, enormous collection.

DAVID BOOTH (01:00:18): It’s complicated. So I’ve sat on the board there for about 10 years now, and it’s just really been tremendously exciting. And then I endowed the conservation lab, because conservation is easy to overlook. But taking care of, particularly, modern art — which could be some fiberglass or something — who knows what kind of stuff goes into it —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:00:41): To say nothing about how paint decays, how canvas, paper — all that stuff is problematic over time.

DAVID BOOTH (01:00:51): In the old days, conservation was probably somebody kind of having a couple sips of alcohol and dabbing some paint on a painting and trying to clean it, or whatever. That’s changed. Now it’s incredibly sophisticated — you take X-rays of the painting or whatnot, you study the chemistry of it. So I’ve headed up that conservation committee for quite a while now. It’s very exciting to see what they’ve done to maintain the art.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:01:21): Huh, really interesting. All right — I only have you for a couple more minutes, and you and I can continue this conversation in Southern California, in Huntington Beach, in a few weeks. For now, let’s jump to our favorite questions that we ask all of our guests, starting with: tell us about the mentors who helped shape your career. And I have a pretty good idea who they are.

DAVID BOOTH (01:01:44): Well, no, that’s right. Let’s just start with the Nobel laureates: Merton Miller and Gene Fama, Myron Scholes, Bob Merton and Doug Diamond. Kind of an impressive group of characters.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:01:56): That’s a Murderers’ Row right there.

DAVID BOOTH (01:01:58): Murderers’ Row, yeah. Then you had Mac McQuown, who really started indexing —

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:02:06): And he really was the initial — was he the first check into DFA?

DAVID BOOTH (01:02:11): No, he was a founder. In fact, more importantly — besides investing in the funds, he helped us raise the money, the risk capital, for the firm. And then I always have to throw in my parents. I mean, it ties into what True Wealth was about. They never had much money, but they were wealthy — they had figured out what life was about.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:02:40): Huh — really, really interesting. Let’s talk about books, in addition to yours. What are some of your favorites? What are you reading currently?

DAVID BOOTH (01:02:48): Well, I just finished 1929, Andrew Ross Sorkin’s new book. That’s very, very interesting.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:02:54): That is on my nightstand — it’s up in a few books in my queue.

DAVID BOOTH (01:02:59): Then, in the last couple years, the book I’ve really liked a lot was Paris 1919 by Margaret MacMillan. And she takes us through what became known as the Treaty of Paris. When the Armistice was signed at the end of World War I — that’s just when all kinds of crazy things happened, because the Ottoman Empire collapsed, the Russian Empire collapsed, the Austro-Hungarian Empire collapsed. So you had to create new countries all over the place — all through Central Europe and the Middle East. It took about six months to develop the Treaty of Paris. The first five or so, they didn’t do much, and then all of a sudden, the last month, they just got together. I don’t know if they could have done much better, but it was pretty chaotic.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:03:51): Really interesting. I’m gonna add that to my list. Tell us — are you streaming anything? What do you do to relax? Podcasts, movies — what entertains you?

DAVID BOOTH (01:04:02): Well, I mean, your podcast. But — no, we have a new season of Ted Lasso, which I’m really all over.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:04:09): My wife and I are waiting for there to be more than three or four in the queue. It’s just too frustrating to watch one a week.

DAVID BOOTH (01:04:16): By the way, he’s a KU alum as well.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:04:18): Yes, yes — I knew that.

DAVID BOOTH (01:04:20): And we have any number of series. You know, what happened was, when the pandemic hit and we couldn’t go out much, I watched more TV in that two-year period than I ever watched before — or since.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:04:34): Same — absolutely the same. I was mentioning the other day that 6:30 is the new 7:30. It used to be, if you tried to make a dinner reservation around 7 or 7:30, it was the toughest reservation to get. And now it seems the hard reservation to get is 6 or 6:30. And it’s not just that we’re aging and heading towards the early bird special. I think people want to go to dinner and then come home and watch whatever it is — Ted Lasso or Lioness or Yellowstone, whatever their thing is. It’s so funny you say that, but the pandemic was absolutely the most TV I’ve watched in my life.

DAVID BOOTH (01:05:15): Yeah, right.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:05:16): Our final two questions. I think this book offers a lot of interesting advice, but I want to ask you specifically: for a recent college grad who is interested in a career in either investing or wealth management or anything along those lines, what sort of advice would you give them about building a career?

DAVID BOOTH (01:05:39): Well, first off, I don’t give advice — but here are some thoughts. First are the thoughts that probably everybody will tell you: figure out where you have some skill — some comparative advantage or competitive advantage — and what you are passionate about. So marry those two things, passion and skill, and work really hard. Now, the part that I don’t think is emphasized enough is: by the time you get outta school, you’ve developed a set of values — your personal set of values. Pay attention to that. So find something you’re passionate about, that you have a skill in, that kind of maps into your values — and pay attention to those values, and don’t deviate from them in pursuit of just a short-term job. I mean, when you get outta school — like when I got outta school, most people, you’re just lucky to find any good job. But over time, you kind of iterate towards what you think is really valuable.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:06:57): Good advice — or good insight; I know you don’t like to call it advice. Our final question: what do you know about the world of markets and investing today that might’ve been useful back in 1981, when you were first launching Dimensional Funds?

DAVID BOOTH (01:07:16): Well, I think one of the big things there is that I didn’t realize how difficult it would be to persuade people about this new way of thinking about investing. I mean, because I’m sitting there — of course, I’m totally wound up with all the University of Chicago stuff. I have all the science, the data and so forth. I go, once you explain that to people, they’ll flock to it. You know, I’ve been doing this for 55 years. People don’t flock to new ideas just based on new research or new ideas. You have to soak the ground down around ’em, let ’em sink into it. So I guess if I’d known how hard it was, I don’t know if I would’ve pursued it. But I think we’re getting close. So now I’m at the phase where it’s exciting to explain all this stuff to people, ’cause they’re starting to respond to it, and I really find it great.

BARRY RITHOLTZ (01:08:10): You’re getting close — keep at it. Eventually you’ll convince a few people. David, thank you for being so generous with your time. This has been absolutely delightful. We have been speaking with David Booth. He is the founder and chairman of Dimensional Funds and the author of Stay Calm: Learning to Embrace Uncertainty in Investing and Life. I would be remiss if I didn’t thank the crack team that helps put this conversation together each week: Alexis Noriega is my video producer, Sean Russo is my researcher, Anna Luke is my podcast producer. And before I say so long, I just want to thank Alexis for being a fantastic video producer and helping to put this podcast into the world of YouTube and videos. She’s departing to take a full-time gig — that’s a big promotion for her, and we wish her the best of luck going forward. I’m Barry Ritholtz. You’ve been listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

 

~~~

 

 

 

The post Transcript: David Booth, Dimensional Fund Advisors founder and chairman appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Tuesday AM Reads

Welcome to September! Kick the month off right with your morning reads:

Higher Yields Are a Boon for Muni Bond Buyers: The rise in bond yields has been a good news/bad news story. For the U.S. Treasury, the increase has been disquieting and has elicited an extraordinary scheme to double its buying of long-term maturities to boost their prices and suppress their yields. Hilltop’s Tom Kozlik on municipal yields hitting some of their most compelling levels in years — and unlike Treasuries, munis still reward investors for extending maturities. (Barron’s)

• How Much Is the Iran War Costing Americans?: John Cassidy on why a proper calculation must take in much more than just the military costs. (New Yorker) see also How the War in Iran Is Redrawing the Global Energy Map: Coco Liu on what six months of disrupted Middle Eastern production and a contested Strait of Hormuz have done — chiefly, pushing governments and consumers toward renewables. (Bloomberg)

​• ‘A Roth IRA on Steroids’: Wealthy Americans Find Another Tax-Free Way to Invest: On the tax-free vehicle one adviser calls “a Roth IRA on steroids for people who can afford it and want to leave it to their heirs.” Private-placement life insurance contracts allow unlimited investments to grow tax-free. (Wall Street Journal)

​• America’s Next Grocery Shock Is Brewing: Erica Pandey on the forces piling up beyond beef, coffee, and chocolate — expensive grain, soaring fertilizer, and more.  (Axios)

• Scott Bessent Takes On Bond Vigilantes in $32tn Treasury Market: George Steer on the Treasury’s plan, which stunned Wall Street, to “at least double” its purchases of long-term government bonds — dismissed by investors as a “band-aid on a bullet hole” amid a $40tn debt burden and smouldering inflation. (Financial Timessee also What Is Scott Bessent Doing With the $32tn Treasury Market — and Will It Work?: Claire Jones on the former financier’s sternest test yet. (Financial Times)

​• The Online Shopping Trend Where You Buy Nothing: Itika Sharma Punit on South Korea’s “dopamine sites,” where the pleasure comes from browsing, curating, and tracking — not from a delivery. (Rest of World)

How Paris swapped cars for bikes – and transformed its streets: Under Anne Hidalgo – mayor for 12 years until last week – the French capital added bike lanes, cut traffic and reclaimed public space, but not without resistance (The Guardian)

​• These Generals Fought for Israel. Now They See ‘Jewish Terrorism’ as the Threat.: Ronen Bergman on the growing number of former Israeli generals, intelligence officials, and prime ministers accusing West Bank settlers of ethnic cleansing with government support. “Once a society behaves this way, that society is doomed.” (New York Times)

​• Your Brain May Not Actually “Make” Decisions: Indiana University’s Tom James on why the perceive-then-decide sequence we all imagine may be very different from what actually happens inside the brain. (ScienceDaily)

​• How Arena Club and Fanatics Are Turning Baseball Cards Into Online Casinos: Derek Jeter, fresh off his Hall of Fame induction, became the face of a startup that digitizes pack-ripping — turning an age-old hobby into something that resembles online gambling. (Barron’s)

Video of the day: I Tracked Down the Company Ruining Fruit

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business with David Booth, Founder, Chairman, and former CEO of Dimensional Funds Advisors. DFA just crossed $1 trillion dollars, and has become the largest active equity ETF manager. Booth’s new book is “Stay Calm: Learn to Embrace Uncertainty in Investing and Life.”

Earth’s oceans just broke a heat record. The implications will be massive

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

 

The post 10 Tuesday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.