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

What a brief encounter with Elon Musk taught me about the limits of capitalism

What a brief encounter with Elon Musk taught me about the limits of capitalism

In 2013, on the sidelines of the Milken Conference at the Beverly Hilton, my friend and then-colleague Sean Scallan and I found ourselves in a seven-minute private conversation with Elon Musk.   He was not yet the figure he is today. Tesla was struggling. SpaceX had launched but not yet proven itself. The idea of humans

Sort content by

Is chasing lower taxes really a strategy for value creation?

Investors are just beginning to understand global tax issues and the risks associated with aggressive tax planning by the companies int their portfolios, Fiona Reynolds, managing director of PRI says there are a number of common-sense measures that companies should begin to put in place.   The 2014 G20 Summit to be held in Australia

The investment model for asset owners: is there a best-practice version?

In the last of a series of articles exclusively for conexust1f.flywheelstaging.com, Roger Urwin, head of global content at Towers Watson examines the asset owner investment models that are recognised as best practice, questioning whether there are patterns to the models of success. The best-practice investing model could either involve how you do it or what

PFZW reformulates investment principles

PFZW, the €150 billion ($205 billion) Dutch pension fund for the health care industry, has created a new investment framework which is the result of an 18-month soul-searching journey under a project called “The White Sheet of Paper”. The framework will translate into policy and implementation steps starting from 2015. Jaap van Dam, PGGM´s chief

Risk parity – the benefits of a conditional approach

Risk parity is a meaningful and robust approach for building well-diversified portfolios, but it relies on historical volatility estimates, which penalises upside risk as well as downside risk and leads to a massive overweighting of bonds versus equities, even in a low yield environment. The authors from EDHEC Risk-Institute build the case for an alternative

The in-house investment team: right people, roles, rewards

Good people are at the core of any successful organisation, and that is true for asset owners. Global chief investment officer of Towers Watson, Craig Baker discusses how designing and implementing structures that attract the right people in the right roles can unlock long-term sustainable advantages that the right investment team can offer.   It

Ubiquitous and adaptive investing – the aspiration of a truly global fund

Large pension funds might be invested on a truly global basis but their operating models are rarely global structures. Towers Watson argues that asset owners can benefit from a business model that can deliver organisational performance, manages talent and aligns with core missions from multiple operating locations. Over the last decade, large pension funds and

Previous