A Quote by Merton Miller

Of course. I favor passive investing for most investors, because markets are amazingly successful devices for incorporating information into stock prices.
I favour passive investing for most investors, because markets are amazingly successful devices for incorporating information into stock prices.
Many of us economists who believe in efficiency do so because we view markets as amazingly successful devices for reflecting new information rapidly and, for the most part, accurately.
Strong credit markets give companies borrowing options to boost their stock prices while making bearish investors scramble to close out trades before losing any more money, both of which then push the stock market even higher and continue the self-reinforcing bullish cycle.
Stock prices are likely to be among the prices that are relatively vulnerable to purely social movements because there is no accepted theory by which to understand the worth of stocks....investors have no model or at best a very incomplete model of behavior of prices, dividend, or earnings, of speculative assets.
There is a natural tendency for investors to devote a significant majority of their time to finding new ideas. After all, uncovering great companies selling at great prices is the lifeblood of successful investing. But in the never-ending quest for the next great idea, investors often give short shrift to their existing investments.
I believe that good investors are successful not because of their IQ, but because they have an investing discipline. But, what is more disciplined than a machine? A well-researched machine can make many average investors redundant, leaving behind only the really good human investors with exceptional intuition and skill.
When all feels calm and prices surge, the markets may feel safe; but, in fact, they are dangerous because few investors are focusing on risk.
Most investors are pretty smart. Yet most investors also remain heavily invested in actively managed stock funds. This is puzzling. The temptation, of course, is to dismiss these folks as ignorant fools. But I suspect these folks know the odds are stacked against them, and yet they are more than happy to take their chances.
Everybody has some information. The function of the markets is to aggregate that information, evaluate it and get it incorporated into prices.
So everybody has some information. The function of the markets is to aggregate that information, evaluate it, and get it incorporated into prices.
Money and prices and markets don't give us exact information about how much our suburbs, freeways, and spandex cost. Instead, everything else is giving us accurate information: our beleaguered air and watersheds, our overworked soils, our decimated inner cities. All of these provide information our prices should be giving us but do not.
Too often, the public can fall into the trap of investing when stock prices are rising, not dropping.
Unless an investor has access to “incredibly high-qualified professionals,” they “should be 100 percent passive - that includes almost all individual investors and most institutional investors.
Many investors seem to have forgotten a hard reality: There are frequent periods when stock markets don't do much.
If you expect to be a net saver during the next 5 years, should you hope for a higher or lower stock market during that period? Many investors get this one wrong. Even though they are going to be net buyers of stocks for many years to come, they are elated when stock prices rise and depressed when they fall. This reaction makes no sense. Only those who will be sellers of equities in the near future should be happy at seeing stocks rise. Prospective purchasers should much prefer sinking prices.
Once again, stock markets have been threatened with extinction for almost 75 years, and I have found that stock markets are harder to kill than roaches.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!