The Dark Side of Passive Investing
Speed read
- Passive management is an appealing concept
- But this approach also comes with serious flaws
- Active investors can benefit from factor premiums
Should passive investing be encouraged, for the time being, or are we perhaps already at a point where discouraging passive investing would actually be more appropriate? In this article,1 we argue that, at the very least, the proponents of passive investing should seriously address the broader implications of their approach.
First, they should acknowledge that large-scale active investing is a prerequisite for passive investing, as well as for an efficient allocation of capital. Second, they should describe how large-scale passive and large-scale active investing can coexist in a macro-stable equilibrium. Third, they should identify who should invest actively in this equilibrium, as well as their own roles and responsibilities.
These considerations might be called the sustainability dimension of passive investing. Interestingly, investors increasingly demand that the companies in which they invest adhere to sustainable business models. Perhaps the sustainability of their own investment philosophy ought to be put to at least the same level of scrutiny.
1Blitz, D.C., 2014, ‘The dark side of passive investing’, The Journal of Portfolio Management.
I agree to the Robeco Disclaimer and the collection and use of my personal data by Robeco, for the purposes for which such data is collected and used as set out in the Privacy Policy, including for the purpose of direct marketing of Robeco products or services.
Your data will be treated with utmost care and will not be passed on to third parties.
