Why isn't Jim Simons richer than Warren Buffett?

Maybe Buffet's "star" has dimmed?

BRK.AvsSPY.PNG
 
Last edited:
There are many ways to measure wealth, and one of them is liquidity. Assuming both anticipate bad times, I think that Simons will most likely be in a better position if he wants to go to cash and ride it out. Warren Buffet's investments are not only in stocks but actual land and factory ownership and that type of adjustments are much harder, in my opinion.
 
MattZ said:
There are many ways to measure wealth, and one of them is liquidity. Assuming both anticipate bad times, I think that Simons will most likely be in a better position if he wants to go to cash and ride it out. Warren Buffet's investments are not only in stocks but actual land and factory ownership and that type of adjustments are much harder, in my opinion.
More...

good point, i guess the liquidity factor goes both ways, eg. some of the hedge funders didnt get there as fast as some of the billionaires who got there by way of paper valuations, but their holdings are pretty liquid as compared to ownership in pre-ipo (pre-earnings?) companies
 
jl1575 said:
The whole article stresses on how young Buffet started his investment, and suggested if he started interested in investment at 22 rather at 10 he would have 1.9 Billion rather than 81 billions. Then his conclusion is "Start investing as young as you can". Then the Amazon story just negated his statement, as we all know Bezos has made a much bigger fortune than Buffet in about 25 years (instead of 60 years by Buffet).
More...
Bill Gates would be worth north $220 billion right now provided he never gave any money to charity and held his MSFT stake. I've included DIVY income. He held 24% of all outstanding shares.

Warren B would be worth north of $150 billion plus if he didn't donate any of his funds.

Bezos first donation to charity of $2 billion was this year plus his fortune could possibly be cut in half after his divorce.
 
Simons was the best there was or ever will be. Presses a button cashes out billions a year. Simons is a short term trader. You can't compare the 2 styles. His main fund that produces the bulk of his income, the Medallion fund, is private. Nobody really has a clue how much he's making or is really worth. I remember when the media listed his net worth at $8 billion a few years ago then suddenly it ballooned to $22 billion.

How many more secret accounts is he holding.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/20...private-wealth-fund-tax-haven-paradise-papers
 
WallStWhizKid said:
Simons was the best there was or ever will be. Presses a button cashes out billions a year. Simons is a short term trader. You can't compare the 2 styles. His main fund that produces the bulk of his income, the Medallion fund, is private. Nobody really has a clue how much he's making or is really worth. I remember when the media listed his net worth at $8 billion a few years ago then suddenly it ballooned to $22 billion.

How many more secret accounts is he holding.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/20...private-wealth-fund-tax-haven-paradise-papers
More...

Simons machine will die within a few years of his death. Warren Buffet’s will continue to earn for another 200 years.
 
pinetboltz said:
good point, i guess the liquidity factor goes both ways, eg. some of the hedge funders didnt get there as fast as some of the billionaires who got there by way of paper valuations, but their holdings are pretty liquid as compared to ownership in pre-ipo (pre-earnings?) companies
More...

I can not talk about hedge funds in blank statements or ones who are not. For example, you can have hedge funds with OTC derivatives with long term maturities, and then you can have day traders who use exchange only products. So "liquidity" is a relative term.
 
There is also a large tax differential in the two structures. If you were to liquidate all of Berkshire the numbers change quite a bit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top