u/MyLifeOfficial

T212 has limits on the max number of stocks you can own depending on the stock.

If you've ever reached that limit and wanted to buy more but couldn't, what stock was it?

I have always liked the value investing principles and I try to apply them in my investing. Big fan of Graham, Buffett, Munger, Lynch and many many others.

However, as we all know, value investing, or shall we say, Classical Value Investing has not worked for quite some time when compared to NASDAQ and the S&P500. Furthermore, a lot of the stocks that have been discussed here have done very poorly; NOVO, LULU, PYPL, ZTS etc.

A lot of Value Investing funds have shut up shop (Michael Burry closed his fund Q4 2025, and there's others). This also happened over the last few years for money managers who used to specialise in shorting companies, because they kept losing while betting on what they think should be a logical outcome (e.g. of shorting stocks like CVNA, and there's a few others of those sorts of stocks).

Looking back at the statistic that 98% of active fund managers do not beat the S&P500 over a period of 10+ years after accounting for fees. There's almost no chance that the average Joe, on average, actively trading, has beat the S&P500 index.

It just goes to show, that the market is pretty much efficient. Whatever the theoretical reasoning may be as to why (e.g. the reasons behind the efficient market hypothesis) - those aren't really relevant. What is relevant, is that the market is highly, highly efficient and it is doubtful that most value investors, momentum investors, or whatever can beat the index over time.

The paradox is that if everyone was value investing, then I'm not sure what the outcome would be. Although I guess we're headed in that direction, with over 50% of global, and between 50% to 60% of the US funds being under passive rather than active management.

It appears to me that the S&P500, is the biggest, real world example, tested over time, that the market is efficient and most, if not all of us, should just be passively investing, even though it is boring and intellectually unstimulating. We should be focusing our energies on earning a living, spending time doing what we like, and when it comes to investing, not try and find 'bargains', but just invest in a Low Cost S&P500 Index Fund (which is of course, what Buffett also recommends).

The S&P500 Index is simply the correct and the most efficient and rational strategy to invest personal savings over the long term, surely, and is this not the ultimate evidence that the market is very, very efficient at allocating capital?