Portfolio management jobs

[kwagga]

Must be the most overrated job in the world.

[THRESHOLD]

BUT have a look at the text books for the Portfolio Management module at London University. Just be sure to bring your maths major.

[kwagga]

I have been looking at some books, old UP ones my brother in law used to study from. Honestly, technology have taken the fun out of math in a big way. You don't need to know 95% of the stuff they teach in these textbooks.

[kwagga]

Common sense, access to good research and interpretaion of financial results can get you very far in managing your own portfolio.

[THRESHOLD]

Unless you want the job (in the UK) In South Africa we have more sophisticated means of establishing competence. They do not involve maths, language, logic and other nonsense like that

[Rams]

portfolio management is easy if you managing other peoples money...its purely mechanical and you get paid even if the portfolio is doing badly...imagine getting paid for a bad years work!

[THRESHOLD]

I will say this though - and it's not in keeping with my usual cynical stance - but: these guys do not set out to lose money. They have their reputations to consider; it goes against the grain for most people to fail at their jobs;s the institution they work for want performance to attract clients. AND at the end of the day - they will lose their jobs if they don't perform. So - given the poor overall performance - one has to believe that when huge sums are involved - it simply is not that easy to make money.

[THRESHOLD]

I will say this though - and it's not in keeping with my usual cynical stance - but: these guys do not set out to lose money. They have their reputations to consider; it goes against the grain for most people to fail at their jobs;s the institution they work for want performance to attract clients. AND at the end of the day - they will lose their jobs if they don't perform. So - given the poor overall performance - one has to believe that when huge sums are involved - it simply is not that easy to make money.

[topgun]

lol...so true. We have established a whole new management paradigm with startling results...for some...

[Rams]

the susutainability of the company is not dependant on portfolio performance but the layers of fees charged so why should non-performance be a big deal...the portfolio manager gets paid for getting people into the portfolio and thats where the income for the company is generated.

[THRESHOLD]

That is simply not true! If you don't perform - people take their money elsewhere. OR they don't come to you in the first place. How else can they attract money. Track record is practically Everything! That's why they publish lists of comparative performance for unit trusts In the newspaper - for people to COMPARE.

[Rams]

2 problems...1.the investor is duped by past performance and 2.when he moves his portfolio elsewhwere, he gets duped by past performance again! And we know past performance is just a matter of luck and thats why it cant be replicated for the investor becos luck only comes one in a while.But there are plenty of suckers out there to make the company rich!

[THRESHOLD]

? There is only PAST performance! The future is an unknown! And this still means that manAger must perform. And it allows for the fact that investord DO move there funds in pursuit of performance.

[Rams]

churning...and who makes more money..churn until one fund manager gets lucky? manage your own money :you cant do any worse than fund managers!

[THRESHOLD]

That is not the point of this argument though. Anyway, most people do not have the skill or the funds to do this (or think they dont.) Most people don't trust the market. They save by way of a fund: Pension, RA (Provident, Endowment and other incidental.) (UNIT TRUSTS aside.) There are huge tax advantages offered as an incentive to do it this way. All of these funds must be managed: - this is where the fund management COMPANIES really make their money - and this is where most of the problems arise. I can assure you that internal managers are required to perform - but mostly for the benefit of their employer. This does not help the investor in any way - BUT that is not the argument here. The fund managers are assessed for performance.

[Rams]

but it seems we in agreement!

[THRESHOLD]

Nope - I maintain that performance is critical! BUT not necessarily to the benefit of of the client though (and there we seem to agree.)