Economist Podcasts

Podbit · Economist Podcasts

Cockroaches 1, Modi 0: India’s remarkable protests

Explore episode Jul 27, 2026

Where this was said

AI vs Humans vs Experts: Who Can Actually Trade the News?

At 17:37 · chapter starts 15:35

The Elm Wealth experiment didn't stop at human participants. The researchers also ran AI models through the same crystal-ball test and found the results were both reassuring and sobering. The machines correctly predicted market direction about 60% of the time — better than the 51% human average — but they made the same fundamental error: over-betting when uncertain and under-betting when confident. Rosie Blau admits to finding it 'quite comforting' that the machines aren't brilliant at this. The real revelation comes when the five expert macro traders are introduced. Unlike the AI and lay participants, all five finished in profit, and on average they more than doubled their stake. Their edge wasn't dramatically better prediction — it was dramatically better bet sizing. On low-conviction days they chose not to trade at all. On high-conviction days they ramped up leverage aggressively. Roberts draws a broader lesson: the investing world obsesses over what to buy, but the more important question is how much to bet, calibrated to actual confidence. This, he argues, is possibly the most important question in investment, and the one we give the least thought to.

Similar podbits