[JumpCrisscross]

"We find that [Buffett's] alpha becomes insignificant when controlling for exposures to Betting-Against-Beta and Quality-Minus-Junk factors. Further, we estimate that Buffett’s leverage is about 1.6-to-1 on average. Buffett’s returns appear to be neither luck nor magic, but, rather, reward for the use of leverage combined with a focus on cheap, safe, quality stocks. Decomposing Berkshires’ portfolio into ownership in publicly traded stocks versus wholly-owned private companies, we find that the former performs the best, suggesting that Buffett’s returns are more due to stock selection than to his effect on management."

http://www.econ.yale.edu/~af227/pdf/Buffett's%20Alpha%20-%20...

[tim333]

It can be easy with hindsight to say oh you should have just done Betting-Against-Beta and Quality-Minus-Junk. It doesn't mean those strategies are going to win over the next decades.

[ethanbond]

Oh so all you've gotta do is pick cheap, safe, quality stocks.

Got it.

[oli5679]

Low beta just means low historic correlation with market returns. It can be computed mechanically with no subjective judgement needed

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_asset_pricing_model

If you had invested in low beta stocks, leveraged at the same level as Buffett you would not have performed much worse.