“Your points are a good argument for diversification across multiple asset classes. As an argument against indexing, I think they are rather anemic.”
Not surprising.
You already have a belief system, confirmed by recency bias and supported by the support of hundreds of billions of Central Bank dollars that are preventing serious declines.
This will work until it no longer works. Up until that time, your bias will be reconfirmed. You will be pleased with your gains.
If very fortunate, the Central Banks and (in the final stages) the IMF will be able to keep it up for a couple more years tops.
Unfortunately, investors like you will no longer have the skills to use a steering wheel. After that, many people will remember too late that asset preservation means something as they lose most of what they have. Not 10%. Most, meaning far more than half.
May you not be among them. I do encourage you to stop back and update your thread when we reach that point.
As for diversification among asset classes... Just when you need diversification to help the most, if fails the worst. They all die like rats in a corner.
Either you will eventually learn to steer, or you will hire someone to do so. The alternative is unthinkable.
Forbes has a recent article that says managers are stealing 70 per cent from money market funds.
LOL. Please tell me you are joking. There have been innumerable studies done going back to the 1950’s ALL of whom consistently demonstrate that long term, actively managed portfolios overwhelmingly tend to underperform their respective indices. Jack Bogle has been writing on this subject since at least the 1970’s. Recency bias my @$$.
It sounds like you have been drinking deep from the well of the Ausrtian School’s Kool-Aid. The problem is that these same predictions of global economic collapse and a hyperinflationary inferno have been around since at least the early 1930’s. And it hasn’t materialized.