Successful investors will be defined by highly idiosyncratic and concentrated portfolios. "The next chart shows flows into passive ETFs (red) and active mutual funds (blue). Highlighted on the chart is the depth of the financial crisis, September 2008. This appears to be the inflection point where investors soured on active management in favor of passive investing. So, if one thinks a bear market or more volatility will save active managers, the last bout certainly didn't. ... What does the future of active management look like? We believe it should only seek a portion of an investor's assets. To do this, they will have to create highly idiosyncratic and concentrated portfolios. They will have to find the one thing they do well and do it in a concentrated, risk-seeking way, whether it be health-care, emerging markets, macro themes, algorithms, technology or trading. The manager will need to be known as the "go to" person in that space to emerge as the next star, allocating capital as efficiently as possible." https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-04-23/active-money-managers-are-doomed
that what active manager is or supposed to be... but investing is as hard as trading if not harder, and very few are capable of doing it successfully that's why for most of those suckers for generations the asset allocation was/is a substitution for the working method, and they always compared themselves to the peers (which is a bunch of as inept managers as themselves) or to the index which very few have beat consistently
This is why I think Amazon should go into passive mutual funds. Have a minimum of $50,000. per account required. Charge regular fees (the same as Fidelity and Schwab) for all the bells and whistles...Wire transfers, exit fees, minimum trade restrictions, ect...