Can you explain what utility renaissance actually provides?
And don't say liquidity in the market cause that's a line of bullshit
It's not a line of bullshit. For every notable prop shop (that is, attempting to trade one's own money for profit, which you may view as an illegitimate market activity) there is in the market, there are 100x as many portfolio managers (who manage other people's money, such as pension funds, which you may view as a more legitimate use of the market).
Every trade that a "legitimate" entity puts on has a counterparty, and the more counterparties there are from speculative activity[0], the more liquidity there is and the more efficiently things can be transacted. Everyone ends up happier.
You could argue that the field of managing money in general pays more than it is "worth", but that's kind of an argument of cosmic morality. Who should be paid more, elementary school teachers or firefighters?
[0]: https://www.cmegroup.com/education/courses/introduction-to-f...
And of course the CME group has a positive view of speculators, because they profit from speculative activity.
How is it even possible to believe this? How do you think societies should manage their resources and plan for the future, if not a market? Soviet style central planning, or a cash and barter only economy? And if the answer is that we should have a market, then the market is providing some utility (because if it was providing neutral or negative utility then why have it) and is therefore not zero sum.
You can imagine other ways to do it (but good luck making these other ways "fair" or "efficient" or "fast") - or you can recognize that a market is an elegant (in the engineering sense) way to do it. Once you have a market, you also want liquidity. Anyone who tried buying or selling illiquid shares (or illiquid goods), knows how much of a pain is lack of liquidity. It truly is desirable.
tl;dr: (Actively managed) funds and investors are the Gosplan of capitalism.