Humans still have some edges on AI

Our lives are touched and influenced by technology daily. And no matter where you get your news from, there is discussion around the jobs that robots and automation will displace. While we might like to think the investment industry is different, reports tell us that 40 per cent of all hedge funds launched in 2015 use artificial intelligence for investment decision-making. Is the role of the human investment decision-maker safe?

First, we are not yet in a world where characters from films such as Terminatoror I, Robotroam the streets or occupy offices. Instead, sophisticated as it is, AI has reached only the first two of four levels as defined by Arend Hintze, assistant professor of integrative biology and computer science and engineering at Michigan State University.

Developments in the field have yet to come up with machines that are “other-aware” or “self-aware” (although there might be some portfolio managers that have yet to reach these levels, too!).

Instead, all AI to date simply uses varying degrees of classification of data – from fairly simple to deeply complex with multiple layers.

This does still create significant advantages for technology relative to humans. The volumes of data that exist today challenge our human abilities; in contrast, the speed with which machines can sort through it all and recognise patterns with accuracy and objectivity is their strength.

However, AI also identify meaningless patterns – it fails to distinguish between correlation and causation and cannot (yet) draw insights from classification. In addition, the perfect objectivity of AI ignores human emotions and motives that may be creating the patterns in the first place.

Sponsored Content

Today, humans and AI maintain relative advantages over each other. Some might choose to respond to our changing environment by ignoring one or the other. We suggest a better way would be to harness the strengths of each, augmenting or empowering human investors so they perform better or more than they could without technology. In discussing this with portfolio managers across the investment industry, by far the most common response was to do just that.

What might this mean for the investment industry? Building on the comments from portfolio managers, we suggest this might result in:

Smaller investment teams, as machines continue to do more of the ‘heavy lifting’ analysis

A shorter investment decision-making period, as investors are provided with detailed analysis faster

Lower market volatility, as information from new data sources flows through to stock prices more quickly and efficiently

A shift in the shape of investment teams, with data scientists becoming more prevalent and age diversity becoming an issue to consider, as older generations bring experience to complement the younger generations’ ready adoption of technology

Fee reductions for clients, as remuneration-heavy teams shrink in size

A bifurcation in the industry between systematic, AI-related strategies and judgmental strategies, specifically in terms of differences in time horizon. AI struggles to construct a reasonable representation of the distant future, and human portfolio managers of judgmental strategies might gain an easy win over machines by taking an increasingly longer-term perspective.

An increased focus on non-quantifiable factors, such as governance, employee wellbeing and relationships with third parties.

What might be an appropriate response for asset owners? We’d suggest not rushing out to replace your portfolio manager with a machine, but there are some questions to be asked to gauge asset manager readiness for the evolution, such as:

What actions they are taking – how is leadership empowering the analysts through technology?

What insights they are developing – to what extent does their approach come into direct competition with AI?

To what extent are they engaging with the human management of companies to bring about positive change?

We believe the future investment industry will be strongest where machines and humans work side by side, each playing to their own strengths for better outcomes for clients.

Suzanne Lubbe is senior researcher within Mercer’s equity boutique, and co-lead researcher for global and EAFE (global ex-US) equity.

 

Leave a Comment

The future belongs to investors who can adapt

The future belongs to investors who can adapt

Canada's HOOPP has officially adopted the total portfolio approach since the start of 2026. Unpacking the move, the fund's managing director and head of total portfolio group Jacky Lee writes that while the approach doesn't magically make the return better, the fact that it frees the investment team from outdated processes and gives investment leaders the flexibility to act is what gives it an edge.

Sort content by

Beyond backtests: considering the robustness of smart beta

Systematic equity investment strategies – so-called smart beta strategies – are usually marketed on the basis of outperformance. However, it is important to recognise that performance analysis is typically conducted on backtests that apply the smart beta methodology to historical stock returns. Concerning actual investment decisions, a relevant question, therefore, is how robust the outperformance

Big owners should act like big owners

One of the key ways that institutional investors can promote a long-term orientation in the companies they invest, is by rejecting a company’s compensation plan if it puts too much emphasis on short-term results, says Bob Pozen, visiting senior lecturer at the MIT Sloan School of Management. Writing in the Financial Analysts Journal, he says

Capturing true geographic exposures in risk reporting

New research by EDHEC-Risk Institute questions the usefulness of analysing geographic equities exposures based on the stock’s place of listing, incorporation or headquarters. Head of applied research, Felix Goltz, suggests that in a globalised marketplace, a more meaningful analysis of geographic risk exposures, and performance attribution, comes from looking at geographic segmentation data including total sales

G7 agreement shows benefits of engaging policymakers

Fiona Reynolds, managing director at the Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) discusses why it’s in everyone’s interests for more investor voices to be heard between now and November before the world’s nations converge at COP21 in Paris.   The announcement that the G7 leading industrial nations have agreed to cut greenhouse gases by phasing out the use of

Fiduciary duty: great power, great responsibility

As the landscape for investment changes rapidly, so too does the notion of fiduciary duty. Fiona Reynolds, managing director of PRI, argues that using the status quo as a reason not to adapt to changing perceptions and new demands from investors is no longer possible or acceptable. The PRI will publish a fiduciary duty roadmap

2015 could be watershed year for ESG issues

2015 is poised to be the turning point as a number of key issues relating to environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues take centre stage says Fiona Reynolds, managing director of the Principles for Responsible Investment.   First and foremost is climate change. With the Paris talks scheduled for December 2015, it’s an issue that

Previous