Alternative Viewpoints: 130/30 “not monolithic” but does represent a “convergence” in money management
| Jan 1st, 2008 | Filed under: 130/30, CAIA Alternative Viewpoints Columns, Guest Posts | By: Alpha Male |
|
Welcome back. Today, we bring you another in our ongoing series featuring the thoughts and perspectives of members of the CAIA (Chartered Alternative Investment Analyst) Association.  You may recognize the name Steve Deutsch from recent media articles on 130/30 investment vehicles. Deutsch is Morningstar’s resident expert on these vehicles and therefore has a bird’s-eye view of the sector and its recent performance. Below, Deutsch draws on his company’s extensive database to take a closer look at the 1X0/X0 phenomenon.
ALTERNATIVE VIEWPOINTS (powered by CAIA):
Some perspective on 130/30 funds, a year into the “(r)evolution”
Special to AllAboutAlpha.com by Steve Deutsch, CFA, CAIA, Director of Collective Investment Trusts/Separate Accounts, Morningstar, Inc.
Despite all the excitement about short-extension strategies, 130/30, 120/20 and other constrained ratio investment products are not that monolithic or revolutionary (Morningstar refers to them simply as “leveraged net long”). Contrary to popular assumption, most are not purely quantitative. Nor are they the sole domain of mutual fund companies and retail investors. And given their short histories, many remain unproven. As a result, it is far too early to determine if these vehicles will reach $2 trillion (or even $1 trillion, for that matter) in the next five years.
Not Monolithic
130/30 is a shared investment strategy, but that’s not a basis for large categorical conclusions. It’s misleading when money managers or the media make broad general conclusions such as “130/30 strategies did well (or poorly) in the early days of the credit crunch market downturn.”
To continue reading this article please login (at the right) or click here to learn more about accessing our archives.
Related Posts
- Alternative Viewpoints: The Ascendancy of Risk Management
- Alternative Viewpoints: Survey of hedge fund professionals finds 130/30 “minor discussion within larger context”
- January turmoil has “sharpened the argument for the convergence of traditional and alternative asset management”: Report
- Alternative Viewpoints: Sustainable Hedge Fund Performance
- Alternative Viewpoints: Survivors to Benefit from “Hedge Fund Industry Life Cycle”
[...] “130/30 funds will likely establish a formula that will be repeated in the years ahead for future investment innovations…” (All About Alpha) [...]
Nice summary analysis.
I wonder about two points, however:
“…the only way to generate Alpha is … with increasingly large amounts of leverage.
No, leverage can magnify the impact of manager skill, but it cannot create alpha where none exists. If the manager is a lousy long-only manager, his process is unlikely to add value with the ability to lever his insights.
“In examining the ‘investment approach’ narrative provided … I perceive four different varieties of leveraged net long investment vehicles”
I’d recommend taking these things with a large grain of salt. You can be pretty sure that virtually every product will employ a screen for both desirable and undesirable characteristics, but different funds might prefer a trait that others shun. Then, *most* PMs will apply their additional impressions, using notions that are impossible to backtest, in tweaking the final portfolio. Of course, you’ll seldom see “subjective judgement” as one of the key criteria emphasized.