Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Videos
  • Submit an article
  • More
    • About JOI
    • Editorial Board
    • Published Ahead of Print (PAP)
  • IPR Logo
  • About Us
  • Journals
  • Publish
  • Advertise
  • Videos
  • Webinars
  • More
    • Awards
    • Article Licensing
    • Academic Use
  • Follow IIJ on LinkedIn
  • Follow IIJ on Twitter

User menu

  • Sample our Content
  • Request a Demo
  • Log in

Search

  • ADVANCED SEARCH: Discover more content by journal, author or time frame
The Journal of Investing
  • IPR Logo
  • About Us
  • Journals
  • Publish
  • Advertise
  • Videos
  • Webinars
  • More
    • Awards
    • Article Licensing
    • Academic Use
  • Sample our Content
  • Request a Demo
  • Log in
The Journal of Investing

The Journal of Investing

ADVANCED SEARCH: Discover more content by journal, author or time frame

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Videos
  • Submit an article
  • More
    • About JOI
    • Editorial Board
    • Published Ahead of Print (PAP)
  • Follow IIJ on LinkedIn
  • Follow IIJ on Twitter

REBUTTAL: The Endowment Model Defense That Wasn’t

Richard M. Ennis
The Journal of Investing August 2021, 30 (5) 27-33; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3905/joi.2021.1.189
Richard M. Ennis
is the retired chairman of EnnisKnupp and a past editor of
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF (Subscribers Only)
Loading

Click to login and read the full article.

Don’t have access? Click here to request a demo 

Alternatively, Call a member of the team to discuss membership options
US and Overseas: +1 646-931-9045
UK: 0207 139 1600

Abstract

In “The Endowment Model Is Just Active Management” (Siegel 2021b), Siegel chooses to expound on active investing in conceptual terms, with occasional reference to endowment management. This rebuttal contends that the Siegel article is long on intellectual theory and short on proof. The author takes issue with Siegel’s rationalization of endowments’ significant underperformance over 12 years and counting. The case for active investing looks past the elephant in the room—theory and evidence casting grave doubt on the merit of diversified—that is, myriad-manager—active investing such as that of endowments. The exceptionalism argument falls flat. The article sidesteps the glaring deficiencies of the endowment model. Siegel simply posits the presence of “skilled employees” in university investment offices who will get the job done despite obstacles of their own making. This rebuttal finds the explanation unconvincing and concludes that the endowment model is dead as a doornail.

TOPICS: Foundations & endowments, portfolio theory, portfolio construction, performance measurement

Key Findings

  • ▪ Siegel’s article makes a case for endowment exceptionalism. This is a kind of cultural advantage that leads him to conclude that endowment managers should be able to generate superior returns over the long run. The exceptionalism argument falls flat when subjected to logical and empirical analysis.

  • ▪ In letting the endowments off the hook for an extended period of underperformance, the article makes a specious comparison of endowment returns with those of the S&P 500 stock index during a major bull market. A proper benchmark is 72% all-cap, global equities and 28% bonds.

  • ▪ The article sidesteps the glaring deficiencies of the endowment model. Siegel simply posits the presence of “skilled employees” in university investment offices who will get the job done despite obstacles of their own making.

  • © 2021 Pageant Media Ltd
View Full Text

Don’t have access? Click here to request a demo

Alternatively, Call a member of the team to discuss membership options

US and Overseas: +1 646-931-9045

UK: 0207 139 1600

Log in using your username and password

Forgot your user name or password?
PreviousNext
Back to top

Explore our content to discover more relevant research

  • By topic
  • Across journals
  • From the experts
  • Monthly highlights
  • Special collections

In this issue

The Journal of Investing: 30 (5)
The Journal of Investing
Vol. 30, Issue 5
August 2021
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on The Journal of Investing.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
REBUTTAL: The Endowment Model Defense That Wasn’t
(Your Name) has sent you a message from The Journal of Investing
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the The Journal of Investing web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
REBUTTAL: The Endowment Model Defense That Wasn’t
Richard M. Ennis
The Journal of Investing Jul 2021, 30 (5) 27-33; DOI: 10.3905/joi.2021.1.189

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Save To My Folders
Share
REBUTTAL: The Endowment Model Defense That Wasn’t
Richard M. Ennis
The Journal of Investing Jul 2021, 30 (5) 27-33; DOI: 10.3905/joi.2021.1.189
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Tweet Widget Facebook Like LinkedIn logo

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • ON THE ECONOMICS OF THE ENDOWMENT MODEL
    • PICK YOUR PERIOD
    • ENDOWMENT EXCEPTIONALISM
    • ACTIVE MANAGEMENT
    • APPLES, ORANGES, AND LOW BETAS
    • SUMMING UP
    • WHAT LIES AHEAD?
    • ENDNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF (Subscribers Only)
  • PDF (Subscribers Only)

Similar Articles

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar
LONDON
One London Wall, London, EC2Y 5EA
United Kingdom
+44 207 139 1600
 
NEW YORK
41 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10010
USA
+1 646 931 9045
pm-research@pageantmedia.com
 

Stay Connected

  • Follow IIJ on LinkedIn
  • Follow IIJ on Twitter

MORE FROM PMR

  • Home
  • Awards
  • Investment Guides
  • Videos
  • About PMR

INFORMATION FOR

  • Academics
  • Agents
  • Authors
  • Content Usage Terms

GET INVOLVED

  • Advertise
  • Publish
  • Article Licensing
  • Contact Us
  • Subscribe Now
  • Log In
  • Update your profile
  • Give us your feedback

© 2022 Pageant Media Ltd | All Rights Reserved | ISSN: 1068-0896 | E-ISSN: 2168-8613

  • Site Map
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Cookies
  • Privacy Policy