[okhobb]

Investors in Vision Fund likely have the goal of returns for this investment that are not similar to the S&P 500 or other public equity indices. I'd further bet that 15-20% annualized is considered a very good result for this part of those investors' portfolios.

[hartator]

sp500 has both better returns and better diversification so less overall risks. And I am sure Vision Fund has higher expenses ratio than most of sp500 indexes. The only ones winning here is the execs of the fund.

[FanaHOVA]

You aren't understanding how capital and risk allocation work at a portfolio level. The people putting money in the SoftBank funds ALREADY have hundreds of billions invested in public equities. They are looking to diversify their portfolio across different asset classes. Your comment isn't relevant.

[smabie]

This is correct: an uncorrected return stream that underperforms market beta is often still highly desirable / sought after.

[allisdust]

Probably meant *correlated

[smabie]

No I meant uncorrelated

[cerved]

maybe it's just me but the tone of this comment reads unnecessarily hostile

[zeusk]

so they'd rather plow it in a fund that buys options on exactly the equities that make up the index? or blow it on bets like oyo, wework et al? all the while expense ratio blowing through the roof.

My brother was a buy side banker at softbank, we all know the kind of debauchery that went on in there.