Asset Allocators – Anne Richards

Published on
February 16th, 2016
Topic
Investment Framework, Portfolio Management, Monetary policy
Duration
21 minutes
Asset class
Equities, Bonds/Rates/Credit, Cash

Asset Allocators – Anne Richards

The Interview ·
Featuring Anne Richards

Published on: February 16th, 2016 • Duration: 21 minutes • Asset Class: Equities, Bonds/Rates/Credit, Cash • Topic: Investment Framework, Portfolio Management, Monetary policy

Anne Richards, CIO of Aberdeen Asset Management, continues the Asset Allocators series, discussing why investors often favor certain assets and disregard others, why the availability of liquidity should not always be presumed, and how tail risks are assessed as probabilities but the implications of an occurrence are often ignored.

Comments

  • my
    markettaker y.
    19 August 2018 @ 00:12
    bailed at 6 minutes. Life's too short.
  • IC
    Iain C.
    10 March 2016 @ 07:40
    4:00 - Cash: Wasn't Harry Dent predicting years ago that demographic deflationary pressure would trump QE? Followed by: it's not due to fear - it's due to fear!?
  • DS
    Dan S.
    4 March 2016 @ 15:14
    The economic probability models are based on even distribution of domain members. This is invalid. Imagine distressed members as clusters that form a strange attractor. For example, shale debt.
  • DS
    Dan S.
    4 March 2016 @ 15:06
    Say it: the model is broken and we are blind.
  • SM
    Stefan M.
    27 February 2016 @ 11:20
    Saying a lot without saying much...reason why I better manage my own money and not paying someone for getting very little / nothing...on a second thought, scary if I had my money under that "guidance"
  • DF
    Dominic F.
    26 February 2016 @ 11:31
    "You can't have your cake and eat it" Deal with it.
  • AW
    Anthony W.
    21 February 2016 @ 20:27
    It's good to hear from mutual fund asset managers. A great contrary indicator and example of what NOT to do.
  • S
    Simon .
    21 February 2016 @ 14:40
    Some good observations. Lost me on her last view though. The rise of what technological wonders? Facebook? And those big cities in China .... They would be the empty ones built with debt. No?
  • LV
    Lex V.
    20 February 2016 @ 13:16
    Good explanation of how the traditional asset management industry works, but also a great example of why it is so important to manage your own investments as the best custodian of your own money.
  • CL
    Charl L.
    19 February 2016 @ 11:38
    Negative interest rates show that risk free do not exist anymore.
  • WS
    Wes S.
    19 February 2016 @ 02:12
    ...an asset alloc. that believes the markets are totally random with no predictive value in fundamental or technical anal...helloProf. Malkiel...no conviction, no process, no analysis....no charts...
  • KC
    Kendrick C.
    18 February 2016 @ 16:03
    I would not expect any more from aberdeen. They are transferring risk to their investors and not putting money where their mouth is. Smart business structure though.
  • RH
    Richard H.
    18 February 2016 @ 01:31
    I am in awe at the clarity of thought
  • CH
    Calvin H.
    17 February 2016 @ 18:20
    This is one of several reasons why I manage my own money.
  • WB
    William B.
    17 February 2016 @ 07:08
    This was more Abstract course in how portfolio managers think. Sad for them to be so limited!,,
  • RM
    Richard M.
    16 February 2016 @ 17:52
    Great discussion of ways of expressing risk and building in protections related to that (and spot on comments regarding misguided regulations). Wonderful interview (esp. the hopeful ending!).
  • CM
    C M.
    16 February 2016 @ 17:42
    WAIT! Did she say asset prices are being manipulated, there is no risk free rate, and values are based on discounted cash flows?! This video is a snoozer. Sorry, RV.
  • PR
    Peter R.
    16 February 2016 @ 16:51
    An interesting and thoughtful view of current asset allocation issues for most retail investors (like me) Very helpful in confusion and chaos we currently find ourselves in. Thanks Anne.
  • CC
    Christopher C.
    16 February 2016 @ 13:52
    If information is the negative reciprocal value of probability and the probabilities keep being miscalculated. Then is the calculation wrong or the information wrong. Or both? Implications?

More Episodes

Chapters