Some people immediately feel offended by this take (see image below), but I think they are affected by biases because I assume they themselves invest in energy and tie part of their identity to it.

But broadly speaking, energy or O&G – which are admittedly very broad terms – are an unattractive sector to invest in; and the pure commodity plays specifically.

These tend to be firms with little to no competitive advantages. The result? They hardly earn a return that beats their cost of capital. Any excess returns get competed away in a capitalistic system.

In layman's terms, these companies struggle to create shareholder value over the long run.

Of course, this doesn't mean you cannot earn money in that space. The economic cycles in "energy" can be particularly violent, creating massive opportunities for those who can read the cycle better than their competitors and more generally have a good understanding of the industry.

But especially if you're a tourist in this space, what makes you believe you can do this better than your competitors who've been doing this for decades?

It's often more practical to set clear boundaries around where you want to invest. Just stick to the most attractive industries out there, which should already reduce the number of mistakes you make.