Thank you for this list of great articles regarding value investing. This comment is not necessarily linked only to this last article. I have been trying to be a value investor for the past three months (;P), and I'm facing some challenges. First of all, I didn't find one person I couldn't convince that value investing is the best long-term strategy. However, I'm often struggling to know if there is a bubble: Are properties in Paris a bubble? (people are still ready to pay high rents to live in Paris) Are cryptos a bubble? (there is a real intrinsic value in XPR replacing swift). Second, in a symmetric information world, if people evaluate investments the same way, there is theoretically an equilibrium "profitability/risk/liquidity(/impact)" that arises. So, to "beat the market", you might need either: an asymetric information, a better way of evaluating value, a better acceptance of risk/illiquidity/damage, luck. What do you think about it? (it might lead to more comments from me '^^)
Hello Nicolas,
Thank you for this list of great articles regarding value investing. This comment is not necessarily linked only to this last article. I have been trying to be a value investor for the past three months (;P), and I'm facing some challenges. First of all, I didn't find one person I couldn't convince that value investing is the best long-term strategy. However, I'm often struggling to know if there is a bubble: Are properties in Paris a bubble? (people are still ready to pay high rents to live in Paris) Are cryptos a bubble? (there is a real intrinsic value in XPR replacing swift). Second, in a symmetric information world, if people evaluate investments the same way, there is theoretically an equilibrium "profitability/risk/liquidity(/impact)" that arises. So, to "beat the market", you might need either: an asymetric information, a better way of evaluating value, a better acceptance of risk/illiquidity/damage, luck. What do you think about it? (it might lead to more comments from me '^^)