Why 92% of Fund Managers Can't Beat a Simple Algorithm

92.4% of professional fund managers lost to the S&P 500 over 15 years. These aren't amateurs—they're Harvard MBAs working 100-hour weeks at Goldman Sachs. And they lost to a computer program that doesn't think. Data. Without the spin. In this video, you'll discover why intelligence actually correlates negatively with investment returns, what happened when Mensa members (98th percentile IQ) tried beating the market, and why the greatest investor alive tells you not to do what he does. This isn't theory—it's what the data actually shows about professional investors, behavioral finance, and why doing nothing beats doing something. You'll learn the exact mechanisms that make smart people underperform, the real cost of feeling like you have an edge (13% annually according to UC Berkeley research), and why the same market that turned $100k into $432k for index investors only generated $268k for the average active investor. That's $164,000 lost to the illusion of skill. WHAT YOU'LL LEARN: → Why 92.4% of professional fund managers underperform (S&P SPIVA Scorecard) → The Mensa Investment Club experiment: 2.5% returns vs 15.3% market returns → How frequent trading costs investors 13.2% per year (Barber & Odean study) → The narrative fallacy that keeps intelligent people poor → Warren Buffett's actual advice for 99% of investors → The psychological mechanism that destroys returns TIMESTAMPS: 0:00 - The Statistic 1:04 - The Competition 2:16 - The Mensa Experiment 3:37 - The Mechanism 4:22 - The Personal Stakes 5:09 - The Berkshire Paradox 5:49 - The Truth This is Ground Truth. We cover behavioral finance, investing psychology, and what the data actually says about building wealth—without the financial industry spin. Subscribe for data-driven finance content that challenges what Wall Street wants you to believe. SOURCES & RESEARCH: S&P SPIVA Scorecard 2023 Barber & Odean, UC Berkeley (2000) - "Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth" Mensa Investment Club Performance Data (