HedgeCo.Net Columnists
Aaron Wormus is the managing director of HedgeCo Networks, and part-time financial and technology blogger for Wormus.com.
» View Aaron Wormus
Alex Akesson is the author of Hedgefunds-Weblog.com, providing breaking news and interviews for the hedge fund industry.
» View Alex Akesson
Peter J. de Marigny is Portfolio Manager of DITMo® Strategies, an Equity Hedge, Aggressive-Income Objective, Buy/Write Portfolio for an Aggressive-Income Objective used as an Enhanced Cash investment vehicle. Pj is also Head of Risk Alternative Strategies for Newport Beach, CA advisor Renovatio Asset Management. » View Peter J. de Marigny
Jesse Marrus Jesse Marrus is the Founder and CEO of StreetID, a financial career matchmaking, news and networking site.  He has unique insight into the financial services job industry including career advice, employment trends, fund formations, layoffs and hiring developments.  » View Jesse Marrus
Rashida Fleet is involved with consulting and working with managers during the fund launch phase. Her work includes; interviewing managers, collecting information for the HedgeCo database and contributing to the HedgeCo News feed.
» View Rashida Fleet
Tim Seymour is co-founder and managing partner of Red Star Asset Management, as well as Chief Operating Officer of the $116 million Red Star Double Alpha Fund.
» View Tim Seymour
Richard Heller Richard Heller is a partner at the New York City law firm of Thompson Hine LLP. His experience is in the formation of private offerings for hedge funds as well as the formation of registered broker-dealers and RIAs.
» View Richard Heller
Bret Rosenthal Principal of RCM, LLC, and founding partner of the Fortune's Favor Family of Funds.
» View Bret Rosenthal
Cameron Hight, CFA, is an investment industry veteran with experience from both buy and sell-side firms, including CIBC, DLJ, Lehman Brothers and Afton Capital. He is currently the Founder and President of Alpha Theory™, a Portfolio Management Platform designed to give fundamental money managers the ability to create their own repeatable discipline to organize the complex process of portfolio management.
» View Cameron Hight





Emerging markets have seen explosive growth over the past decade, but with the recent contraction in the global economy, investors have a chance to look at real growth in individual markets. There is no doubt in my mind that the boom over the past couple of years in some countries were due to insatiable

investors overbuying in whatever country the talking heads mentioned. However, as the global economy worsened over 2008 and the first part of 2009, investors switched from the greed mentality and into a fearful and defensive position. Investors began pulling capital out of the emerging markets around the world, and what is left in these economies is real growth in GDP.

Investors now have a chance to analyze the fundamentals of the emerging markets and look for real potential value. Some of the markets stood up, while others folded to the economic pressure. MSCI Barra provides country specific indices based on equities listed by a specific country. The MSCI China Standard Core and the MSCI Brazil Standard Core have already doubled from their lows in October and November respectively. China is up almost 10 percent for the past year, but Brazil is down 13 percent over the same period. The MSCI India Standard Core is up almost 100 percent since its low in March of this year but is down almost 10 percent since August of last year. India has made it difficult for individual foreign investors to invest in Indian equity. Russia is struggling to recover as the MSCI Russia Standard Core is down almost 50 percent from this time last year.

As the market has started recovering over the past couple of months, many of these emerging markets are recovering quickly. Most of the emerging markets listed by MSCI are up 30 to 60 percent year to date, but hopefully investors will be weary of overbuying into emerging market funds just because it’s trendy. Hopefully, as a global society, we can stop to get our breath and think about building the economy back based on innovation, ingenuity, and real growth.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

 The HedgeCo Q & A Board provides a forum for parties interested in the hedge fund industry to share information. Questions range from people trying to understand what makes hedge fund different from mutual funds to how to calculate complex statistics for portfolio performance. Here is a summary of five of the most popular questions.

 Every industry has its excesses. If you had to name one for the hedge fund industry what would it be?

I’m going to post the answer given by Richard Wilson: “Besides the total number of hedge fund managers possibly approaching excess, I would say base management fees run high. They are typically 2% of total funds managed and I think that should come down to 1 or 1.25% or hopefully 0. If you are out there to make money for your investors than take it to the next level and only charge for positive performance.”

However, I would contend that while 2% management fees are high, large amount of the actively managed mutual funds approach 2% management fees, and managed accounts often are much more expensive when you include introducing broker fees.

Rather, leverage is an excess I would like to see fund managers cut back on. Leverage is not categorically risky, but in the past some of the excessively leveraged funds have proved calamitous. Long Term Capital Management provides an excellent example. LTCM took a relatively safe strategy and leveraged it to about thirty times their invested capital. With a leverage ratio of thirty, a 2% loss in the total position means about a 60% loss on capital. It didn’t take long for negative turn in the trading strategy of LTCM to bankrupt the fund.

While options and short positions are inherently leveraged, other types of leverage add unnecessary risk in an effort to increase profitability. But the risk is increased by the same leverage factor as profits.

 Are hedge funds regulated?

Yes and no.

Hedge funds are regulated as to who can manage, who can invest, how many investors it can have, how the company is created, basically how the business of the fund is managed.

However, hedge funds have the freedom to invest based on whatever trading strategies it has developed. Also, hedge funds aren’t required to register to SEC, report returns, or disclose their trading strategies.

Proponents of regulating the hedge fund industry are intensifying pressure on legislators to create new regulations that increase transparency in hedge funds. The United States Congress is one of many legislative bodies in the process of developing new regulations on the hedge fund industry. The proposed bill in the United States Senate called the Hedge Fund Transparency Act of 2009 could be voted on as early as the end of this year.

 Does the size of a Hedge Funds have any correlation to the risk involved in investing in it?

There does seem to be some correlation between assets under management (AUM) and standard deviation of returns, but it is important to look for factors driving the correlation and determine the causation of risk in hedge funds.

Funds with less risk might appeal to more investors and become more sizable. There are less assets in which a large fund can take a meaningful position, and those assets might be less risky. “Too big to fail” is a term that refers to any institution large enough that its failure would affect society as a whole. Institutions that are deemed “too big to fail” warrant government intervention in the event of a failure like the bank bailouts last year.

However, large hedge funds do fail, and some small funds, which contain some risk (like all financial investments) fit the needs of some risk-averse investors. You need to contact an investment advisor to find investments that meet your specific risk profile.

 What is a High Water Mark and should that matter when I’m shopping for a hedge fund?

A high water mark is the previous high value of the investment. The fund has to reach this value before the manager can start taking performance fees. For example, if a fund in 2007 was valued at $100 million, and in 2008 lost 20% or was worth $80 million, in 2009, the fund manager can only charge incentive fees once the fund is above the $100 million mark.

Here’s another example: imagine two funds, each with a $1 million in assets with no management fees and a 20% incentive fee. The first fund takes a 50% loss in year one and has a 100% gain in year two, leaving total fund assets at $1 million at the end of year two. The second fund loses 5% in year one and has 10% gain in year two, leaving the fund with $1.045 million in year two.

Without a high water mark, the incentive fee for the first fund in year two is 20% of the 100% gain on $500,000 or $100,000.

The incentive fee for the second fund in year two is 20% of the 10% gain on $950,000 or $19,000.

The fund that produced an overall gain of 4.5% makes 19% of the fund that has flat returns over a two year period. If a high water mark is used, the first fund can’t charge incentive fees, and the second fund charges 20% of $45,000 gain above the original high water mark of $1 million.

The problem with the high water mark is the fund manager whose fund is below the high water mark has incentive to walk away and start a new fund or increase risky trading trying to get back above the mark. The idea of a high water mark is to protect investors but does the exact opposite in application.

 What are some advantages to investing in an offshore fund?

Basically, offshore funds offer tax advantages. Most of these offshore funds are set up in countries with low tax rates and are not subjected to US tax laws. Non-US investors are able to avoid US taxes all together, and managers of offshore funds can leave their management and incentive fees in the fund to defer payment of taxes on their income.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Market Neutral Mutual Funds

Posted By Alex Thompson, August 5th, 2009 : Permalink

 

With last year’s market-wide slump, mutual funds are trying to take a play out of the hedge fund playbook. One of the more common strategies employed by hedge-like funds is market neutrality. By taking off-setting positions in equities, fixed-income securities, options, etc., managers can eliminate market risk.

Market neutrality conceptually works like this: If a fund manager believes that Visa will outperform Master Card, he can eliminate the market risk by buying Visa and short-selling Master Card in equal amounts. Assuming Visa does outperform Master Card and the market is on an upswing, the long position in Visa gains more than the short position in Master Card loses. Furthermore, if the market falls, but Visa still outperforms Master Card, the short position in Master Card gains more than the long position in Visa loses. No matter which way the market moves, the fund has made a net profit.

In practice, the math is more complicated. The beta of the short position has to be equal to the beta of the long position, so market moves affect the two positions equally but in opposite directions. Furthermore, the portfolio manager could short the market through one of the available short-selling or inverse ETFs and match the beta of his long holdings to 1, which represents the beta of the market as a whole.

While eliminating market risk is a valuable tool, market neutrality does not eliminate all risk and in fact, creates some unique risks. Market neutral positions won’t make as much profit in an aggressive bull market as traditional long positions. Also, if the manager picks a stock to outperform another stock, and the opposite happens, the fund will produce net losses whether the market goes up or down. Furthermore, the downside risk to the short position is theoretically unlimited because stock prices are not bound to an upper limit. Another unique risk to the market neutral strategy called “beta mismatch” . If the beta of the long position is larger than the short position, a market downturn should cause the long position to lose more, as it has a higher correlation to the market as a whole. Furthermore, if the beta of the short position is larger, a market upswing should increase the short position’s loss more than the long position’s gain.

Market neutrality has been one of the more popular hedge fund strategies over the years, and this popularity could be extrapolated to the hedge-like mutual fund sectors. Investors should see a large rise in the number of available market neutral mutual funds.

Read Part 3 Long/Short Mutual Funds

Read Part 1 Mutual Funds Emulate Hedge Funds

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Janet Paskin of the Wall Street Journal reports that mutual funds are trying to emulate hedge funds in an attempt to satisfy average investors needs in alternative fund classes. In the past, hedge funds have been the investment country clubs for wealthy investors. The average investor had no access to hedge funds because he/she was deemed too unsophisticated to research the complex strategies utilized be hedge fund managers and were therefore banned from the gated hedge fund community (by the SEC).

According to the investment-research company Morningstar,Inc., 132 mutual funds are offering hedge-like strategies to investors, half of which have been launched since 2006. Why is this appealing to investors? While some hedge funds fell short last year and the hedge fund industry lost 20% on the average, the market lost 39%.

Many of these hedge-like funds are using the traditional strategies of the hedge fund industry. Some use short selling, or borrowing shares to sell and trying to buy them back at a lower price later, which adds leverage to the portfolio. Others try to find arbitrage opportunities to exploit price differences between securities. Other funds try to mimic the returns of the hedge fund universe.

“These are strategies that should have been offered to retail investors a long time ago,” according to Morningstar analyst Nadia Papagiannis. These hedge-like funds have amassed over $41.3 billion in assets, which has grown in each of the last three years. This is a stark contrast to the mutual fund universe, which saw a contraction of over $100 billion of assets in 2008.

Over the next couple of weeks, I will discuss the various trading strategies used by hedge-like mutual funds and where they fit portfolio allocation needs.

Read Part 2 Market Neutral Mutual Funds

Read Part 3 Long/Short Mutual Funds

Tags: , , , , , ,