Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 86

Tim Hodgson: how a profession became an industry

Tim Hodgson has probably spent as much time as anyone in the last decade thinking and writing about investing and funds management, and his conclusions are far from flattering. With Roger Urwin, Tim set up the Thinking Ahead Group at Towers Watson in 2002, and this recently morphed into the Thinking Ahead Institute, a not-for-profit ideas forum with external sponsors that has already attracted 20 major institutions managing US$5.6 trillion in assets.

A couple of months ago, I was at the Research Affiliates conference with Tim in Los Angeles where some of the best minds in the industry, including Nobel Laureates, spent two days discussing how little we knew about markets. How do we value stocks? What value do asset consultants add? Why bother with the fees for active management? Tim presented at the Conference and shared these concerns.

I sat down for a chat with him in Sydney last week. He has not worked as a consultant at Towers Watson for many years, and he brings his ideas to his colleagues and their clients by writing research papers and making presentations.

I asked him what happens when one of his opinions, such as the merits of ‘smart beta’ rather than active management, is not in the best interests of a Towers Watson client. “If you do the right thing, it will have relevance,” he replied.

Alpha is a negative sum game

He argues an articulation of beliefs by a client or investor is the first step in the investment process. For example, it is a truism that ‘alpha is a negative sum game’. That is, the sum of all investment decisions is the market, and after fees, the active performance (the alpha) must be negative. But there are many managers both above and below the market benchmark. One belief might be that it is possible to identify the better managers, while another belief might be that outperformance cannot be done consistently over time.

Hodgson falls in the camp that identifying the best managers is very difficult, and we probably spend far too much time searching for outperformance. It’s no use recognising Warren Buffett’s skill now, you need to identify the Warren Buffett of the next 20 years. He advocates moving away from the majority allocation to active managers to perhaps 70% in various types of passive management. The market still needs active managers for efficient price discovery, but it does not need to pay the fees for so many active relative value managers.

Passive does not necessarily mean the usual cap-weighted index investing. Hodgson was an early supporter of what is now known as ‘smart beta’ but which he called ‘beta prime’ in research papers going back a decade. He supports the view that cap weighting leads to larger allocations to the most expensive stocks, and an index which weights by factors other than price can remove this drag. How have his colleagues taken this view? “It’s my job to initiate ideas. It can sometimes take a long time for them to be appreciated.” Such a move across the industry would remove over $100 billion of management fees from the estimated $350 billion paid globally at the moment, not something which many in the industry would enjoy. It will only happen through bottom-up change from asset owners, who control the mandates they offer.

Risk as permanent impairment of goals

Hodgson defines risk as “a permanent impairment of mission goals or expectations”. He believes risk models struggle in the five ways described in Figure 1. Risk management needs to find a way to overcome these tensions as investors go on a ‘journey plan’ through their lifetime. Funds should be more concerned about impacts that impair long term plans than short term Value at Risk measures or tracking errors.

He supports dynamic or tactical asset allocation, using valuation techniques that measure when markets are expensive or cheap. When I suggested it seems inconsistent to say you cannot pick good active managers but you can pick when markets are cheap, he quoted from F. Scott Fitzgerald in 1936:

“The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.”

He drew out the comparison to active versus passive investing in a fascinating way. “‘Is there aggregate added value from market timing’ is a similar question to ‘Is there aggregate added value from active investing’. Probably no to both, but we are dealing with highly complex, adaptive systems, and the answers are not simple. Which is why we always start with our beliefs.”

In other words, investing is not like practicing medicine, where an experienced surgeon can become an expert over time because the human body does not change and he knows what to expect when he goes into it. Markets change depending on the actions of others in a highly adaptive way.

We have morphed from a profession to an industry

The Thinking Ahead Group has long championed the need to focus on the ultimate beneficiary, and Hodgson riles against the self-interest of many finance executives. His colleague, Roger Unwin, has seen investment management morph from a profession to an industry. There used to be more focus on stewardship and long term perspectives.

One of his hopes for the new Institute is that by changing behaviour at the top of the investment pyramid among major asset owners, it will improve retail products and client interactions. He likes the analogy of a Formula 1 car and the research impact on the family sedan. “By having better working partnerships, we hope the investing equivalents of antilock brakes and airbags trickle down from the Institute to the end investor.”

(To read some of Tim’s most recent work on the attitudes of investment managers, see the related Cuffelinks article, “Our industry has a problem”).

 

2 Comments
Ramani
November 01, 2014

Paul, the irony of trumpeting past performance selectively (only in good years, mind) while hoping that this will be ignored is only bettered by the inveterate use of 'this does not take account of your circumstances, we are not liable, take professional advice' as an omnibus disclaimer.

Everyone you go to in finance spouts it as a primordial mantra. If you take it face value, and can make sense of it, the 'professional' you go to advises you - you guessed it - to seek professional advice. A perpetual loop if ever there was one, and a loopy one, at that.

Have you ever come across 'we are professionals, we are liable for our advice, we will take expert advice where we fall short'? No, me neither. Where are these mystery professionals hiding?

If I had the power, I would subject these worthies to a like experience when they have a medical emergency. "We are not liable, we don't know all about you, take professional advice..." This may not prove effective against the pervasive malady, but at least it will be fun! It will also mitigate our longevity concerns somewhat....

 

Leave a Comment:

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Are LICs licked?

LICs are continuing to struggle with large discounts and frustrated investors are wondering whether it’s worth holding onto them. This explains why the next 6-12 months will be make or break for many LICs.

Retirement income expectations hit new highs

Younger Australians think they’ll need $100k a year in retirement - nearly double what current retirees spend. Expectations are rising fast, but are they realistic or just another case of lifestyle inflation?

5 charts every retiree must see…

Retirement can be daunting for Australians facing financial uncertainty. Understand your goals, longevity challenges, inflation impacts, market risks, and components of retirement income with these crucial charts.

Why super returns may be heading lower

Five mega trends point to risks of a more inflation prone and lower growth environment. This, along with rich market valuations, should constrain medium term superannuation returns to around 5% per annum.

The hidden property empire of Australia’s politicians

With rising home prices and falling affordability, political leaders preach reform. But asset disclosures show many are heavily invested in property - raising doubts about whose interests housing policy really protects.

Preparing for aged care

Whether for yourself or a family member, it’s never too early to start thinking about aged care. This looks at the best ways to plan ahead, as well as the changes coming to aged care from November 1 this year.

Latest Updates

Shares

Four best-ever charts for every adviser and investor

In any year since 1875, if you'd invested in the ASX, turned away and come back eight years later, your average return would be 120% with no negative periods. It's just one of the must-have stats that all investors should know.

Our experts on Jim Chalmers' super tax backdown

Labor has caved to pressure on key parts of the Division 296 tax, though also added some important nuances. Here are six experts’ views on the changes and what they mean for you.        

Superannuation

When you can withdraw your super

You can’t freely withdraw your super before 65. You need to meet certain legal conditions tied to your age, whether you’ve retired, or if you're using a transition to retirement option. 

Retirement

A national guide to concession entitlements

Navigating retirement concessions is unnecessarily complex. This outlines a new project to help older Australians find what they’re entitled to - quickly, clearly, and with less stress. 

Property

The psychology of REIT investing

Market shocks and rallies test every investor’s resolve. This explores practical strategies to stay grounded - resisting panic in downturns and FOMO in booms - while focusing on long-term returns. 

Fixed interest

Bonds are copping a bad rap

Bonds have had a tough few years and many investors are turning to other assets to diversify their portfolios. However, bonds can still play a valuable role as a source of income and risk mitigation.

Strategy

Is it time to fire the consultants?

The NSW government is cutting the use of consultants. Universities have also been criticized for relying on consultants as cover for restructuring plans. But are consultants really the problem they're made out to be?

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.