|
I am going to introduce a paradigm shift in the content that I introduce to
the blog. As reporters and institutional investors who have contacted me can
attest, I have been very secretive and stand-offish in terms of what I do for
a living. The reason is that I was in the process of launching a hedge fund,
and my lawyers were quite explicit in telling me that I am in no way to promote
the fund through the blog. You see, I think I'm pretty good at this investment
stuff, and I needed access to more capital to fully exploit the next step in
my investment
thesis. So, what better route than to open a fund up to investors who can
appreciate my investment
style, and take advantage of that 20:1 leverage offered so freely. Well,
one of the reasons I have had such a strong investment record is that I am
able to smell bubbles. Unfortunately, I smelled this fund bubble coming but
I thought I could sidestep it. I seem to have been wrong, but didn't realize
it until after I spent an upper middle income family's salary on fund formation.
With a raft of adverse legislation, tightening operating environment and increased
regulation, this bubblicious industry just ain't what it used to be.
So, I have decided to simply go it alone through my single family office.
What does this mean? Well, for one, I can now be much more explicit with what
I do in my postings to the blog since I cannot be seen as selling investment
management products - which I both do not do and do not want to do. I want
to make that clear from the outset, again! I will start being more communicative
right now by releasing my own proprietary account investment results and comparing
them with the blog's
research model, hedge
funds, and the US broad market. Here's a sneak preview to bait you into
reading this rather lengthy article behind my decision:

I will reveal a lot more in the future, as well as how to compare newsletters,
investment advisors, funds, pundits and blow hards on a true risk adjusted
reward basis (watch out Cramer!) in my next post or two. But first, a public
service announcement...
Hedge funds haven't been performing that well anyway
Hedge funds have experienced historically record losses, record client redemptions,
record volatility, and record closures. Sounds like the bubble is burst. There
are a few fundamental reasons for theses occurrences (other than there being
just too many of them (7,000+ as of last year):
-
Leveraged loans and high yield securities posted their worst monthly performance
on record as prices tumbled to new lows and volatility spikes after Lehman
filed for bankruptcy: The Standard & Poor's/LSTA Leveraged Loan Index
returned a negative 6.15 percent in September, almost double the previous
record loss of 3.35 percent set in July 2007. Leveraged loan prices tumbled
8.57 cents in September to a record low of 79.8 cents on the dollar as
financial companies failed and hedge fund managers sold assets anticipating
client withdrawals. The selling of assets into falling market always exacerbates
the collapse in price precipitating more selling, which leads to a further
collapse in price which precipitates more selling. Rinse, lather, repeat.
The leveraged loan debacle is covered in explicit detail in The
Asset Securitization Crisis Part 27: The Butterfly Effect.
-
Perfect Storm for Hedge Funds: Short-selling was banned literally
overnight, the actual collapse or near collapse of ALL of Wall Street's
major broker dealers, a literal freeze in the credit markets and unprecedented
volatility not only reduces the possibility for funds to borrow money and
hedge through exchanges, they're stuck with forced delivering and increased
regulation at the same time they are experiencing their own "run on the
bank" as September came to a close, marking the end of the fiscal year
for many funds. Forced redemptions in volatile and/or illiquid markets
lead to fire sales which lead to lower prices that precipitate forced redemptions
which leads to... Rinse, lather, repeat! What also bites is that hedge
funds are net sellers of credit protection via CDS in the $62 trillion
credit derivatives environment (see The
Next Shoe to Drop: Credit Default Swaps (CDS) and Counterparty Risk - Beware
what lies beneath! and Reggie
Middleton says the CDS market represents a "Clear and Present Danger"!)
and were called to perform on their obligations wrt Lehman, WaMu, Kaupthing,
etc. The Lehman credit sellers got a dismal recovery rate of 8.75 cents
on the dollar, meaning that they have to cough up roughly $320 billion
in cash to make whole their credit protection contracts. I hope they have
the spare change lying around.
-
NYT: In the month of July, hedge funds experienced nearly $12 billion
in outflows. September 30 was the deadline when many funds are scheduled
to accept withdrawal requests for the end of the year. To pay back investors,
some funds may be forced to dump investments at a time when the markets
are already shaky thus fuelling a vicious circle--> some hedge funds
are reported to block withdrawals.
-
Attari/Ruckes: Redemption feature causes fundamental maturity mismatch
with borrowing short term and lending/investing long-term and illiquid
e.g. in leveraged loans--> when redemptions increase, hedge funds have
no other choice than liquidate assets thus fuelling a negative spiral.
Evidence from leveraged
loan market shows that this is unravelling is underway. Rating agencies
start to downgrade collateralized fund obligations (C.F.O.) which
are the hedge fund equivalent of mortgage-backed securities: securities
backed by hedge funds. Some have a 7-year lock-up period. While few in
number, C.F.O.'s represent a broad swath of the $2 trillion industry.
-
In terms of performance, this year looks like the worst on record: the
average fund is down nearly 10 percent so far, according to Hedge Fund
Research.
-
About 350 funds were liquidated in the first half of the year and if the
trend continues, the number of closures would be up 24 percent this year
from 2007.
-
Oct 1: There are dozens of hedge funds whose Lehman prime-brokerage
accounts were frozen when the company filed for protection from creditors
on Sept. 15. "One executive who used Lehman as a prime broker -- and
who asked not to be named because his firm is private -- estimates that hedge
funds had between $50 billion and $70 billion in Lehman prime-brokerage
accounts." Moreover, hedge funds had pledged equity securities as
collateral that Lehman then loaned to other investors under a practice
known as rehypothecation - PWC says in that case "clients may
cease to have any proprietary interest in them."
-
Seides (InvestorsInsight): Hedge funds are sellers of 32% of all CDS,
insuring exposure of $14.5 trillion. Recent estimates indicate that the
entire hedge fund market is approximately $2.5 trillion in net assets under
management. Thus, hedge funds are bearing risk in excess of their ability
to pay the piper if anything goes wrong--> risk might well land again
with former investment banks and broker dealers (what's left of them, anyway)
whose exposure to hedge funds are significant, both through their prime
brokerages operations and as counterparties. As you can see, there is a
risk of systemic failure here. Roubini: "one cannot rule out that some
systemically important hedge fund may get into trouble with systemic consequences."
And exactly what was the hedge funds performance?
Let's take a look-see.

| Risk Summary (Since Inception
to 10/10/08 - to Sept. for select indices whose data lags the market).
|
| Sample Period: 16 months |
Reggie Middleton Proprietary Account |
S&P 500 |
Barclay Hedge Fund Index |
Barclay Event Driven Index |
Barclay Equity Long Bias Index |
Barclay Equity Long/Short Index |
Barclay Market Neutral Index |
Barclay Equity Short Bias Index |
Barclay Fund of Funds Index |
Barclay Global Macro Index |
Barclay Multi-Strategy Index |
| Standard deviation |
22.57% |
7.01% |
2.20% |
2.27% |
3.38% |
1.93% |
1.61% |
4.04% |
2.27% |
2.07% |
2.60% |
| Sortino ratio |
141.81% |
-43.34% |
-4.02% |
-30.48% |
-23.56% |
-31.90% |
-16.06% |
125.42% |
-36.97% |
7.95% |
-27.82% |
| Sharpe ratio |
55.31% |
-41.01% |
-0.27% |
-26.64% |
-19.44% |
-26.77% |
-9.72% |
48.02% |
-33.19% |
7.82% |
-25.01% |
| Correlation to S&P 500 |
-34.74% |
100.00% |
23.04% |
60.77% |
72.62% |
79.05% |
39.06% |
-84.20% |
66.66% |
40.67% |
67.52% |
| Jensen's alpha: 16 months |
9.35% |
Not App |
0.20% |
-0.03% |
0.37% |
0.12% |
0.11% |
0.52% |
-0.12% |
0.51% |
0.08% |
As can be seen above, hedge funds do dampen volatility through lessened standard
deviation, and provide superior relative returns. Thus on a basis relative
to the broad market, they provide superior risk adjusted returns. But hey,
wait a minute! Aren't hedge funds marketed as delivering superior "absolute" returns?
Don't they preach diversification from the traditional asset classes via uncorrelated
returns? Correlations to the US broad market index are actually very high for
an alleged "alternative asset class". This means that if you think you invested
in hedge funds to offset the risk of the broad market, you have another think
coming! Notice how truly uncorrelated (actually negatively correlated) my investment
returns have been in this down market. You can see it numerically in the table
above, and graphically in the chart above that. This is what invetors should
strive to achieve when pursuing alternative asset strategies. It's too bad
our government is about to regulate the industry to death, or I may have been
able to offer a Reggie powered hedge fund!
Also of note, although the Sharpe and Sortino ratios of the fund indices are
higher than that of the S&P 500, they are still abysmal as compared to
my results. They are even abysmal compared to a buy and hold strategy based
on this blog's
research model. If you still think that is worth 2&20, then check out
the actual alpha (Jensen's) generated. No single category generated more than
100bp of alpha except for... You know, that handsome, cynical, hard edged brother
that blogs a lot.
Readers interested in hedge funds may find it worthwhile to participate in
the BarclayHedge
Blog. If you go by, tell 'em Reggie sent ya'. Be sure to kick up a lot
of dirt about how a blogger tore the pants off of EVERY index that they track,
and published the research behind the performance free for a year, to boot.
That's one way to make friends over there .
Richard Wilson's Hedge Fund Blogger is
a much less corporate (the Barclay's spot is really a corporate press kit masquerading
as a blog - big financial companies just don't get new media), more interactive
blog that contains a lot of info - although none of them have activated the
ability to openly comment on the articles. I urge my readers to go over there
and kick up some dirt as well. Might as well start some trouble. For the record,
more than 30% of the BoomBustBlog readers are multi-millionaires, over 47%
make more than $350k per year, and many of them influence decision making in
their respesctive companies and firms. The largest demographic of the site,
by far, is the financial services industry. The largest occupational tranche
is entrepenuer. If BoomBustBloggers are not prime fodder for hedge funds, I
don't know what is. Take the BoomBustBlog
survey to find out more.
Here are some definitions for those of you who are not nerdy enough to memorize
all of these financial and statistical terms:
Jensen's Alpha (From Investopedia,
this is the most important measure): A risk-adjusted performance measure that
represents the average return on a portfolio over and above that predicted
by the capital asset pricing model (CAPM), given the portfolio's beta and the
average market return. This is the portfolio's alpha. If
this definition makes your head spin, don't worry: you aren't alone! This
is a very technical term that has its roots in financial theory.
The basic idea is that to analyze the performance of an investment manager
you must look not only at the overall return of a portfolio, but also at the
risk of that portfolio. For example, if there are two mutual funds that both
have a 12% return, a rational investor will want the fund that is less risky.
Jensen's measure is one of the ways to help determine if a portfolio is earning
the proper return for its level of risk. If the value is positive, then the
portfolio is earning excess returns. In other words, a positive value for Jensen's
alpha means a fund
manager has "beat the market" with his or her investing skills. Now, armed
with this newfound knowledge, revisit the chart above.
Sharpe Ratio: A ratio developed by Nobel laureate William F. Sharpe
to measure risk-adjusted performance. The Sharpe ratio is calculated by subtracting
the risk-free rate - such as that of the 10-year U.S. Treasury bond - from
the rate of return for a portfolio and dividing the result by the standard
deviation of the portfolio returns. The Sharpe ratio tells us whether a portfolio's
returns are due to smart investment decisions or a result of excess risk. This
measurement is very useful because although one portfolio or fund can reap
higher returns than its peers, it is only a good investment if those higher
returns do not come with too much additional risk. The greater a portfolio's
Sharpe ratio, the better its risk-adjusted performance has been. A variation
of the Sharpe ratio is the Sortino ratio, which removes the effects of upward
price movements on standard deviation to measure only return against downward
price volatility.
The Sortino ratio measures the risk-adjusted return of an investment
asset, portfolio or strategy. It is a modification of the Sharpe ratio but
penalizes only those returns falling below a user-specified target, or required
rate of return, while the Sharpe ratio penalizes both upside and downside volatility
equally. It is thus a measure of risk-adjusted returns that some people find
to be more relevant than the Sharpe. Thus, the ratio is the actual rate of
return in excess of the investor's target rate of return, per unit of downside
risk.
I know that many will probably try to excuse the hedge fund industry's performance,
just as they excused the collapse of the investment banks ran by all of those
smart people. I can hear the cackling now, "but no one could have foreseen
devastation of this magnitude", "Who could have known?". Well, for one, I don't
appreciate being called "no one." 
Debunking the "Nobody could have saw this coming" mythos!
Well, if nobody could have
saw this coming, where did my returns come from? I actually
believe nearly everybody ensconced in the industry saw it coming and
were to tunnel vision-ed to act accordingly. I am not even all that smart
and I figured it out. Let's walk through this visually. Here is an opportunity
to relate my proprietary results to the research that I released to the
blog on a month by month basis. See the post "More
on the accuracy of this blog's research" to follow the verbose postings
and analysis that I used to power through each and every peak and trough
on the graph below. You may persue "Actionable
Research and Ideas" for research and opinion that is literally time
stamped along the lines of the peaks and troughs in the chart below.
If there is anything that I am not lacking in, it is documentation. Click
the graph to enlarge to full size print quality.

So, no one coud have seen this coming, or guess the magnitude of the damage???!!!
-
I sold off my investment real estate in 2004 and 2005 (the peak in the
NY Metro area was 2006).
-
I went short on real estate developers, builders, REITS, banks, brokers
and insurers, in 2007 (see "More
on the accuracy of this blog's research").
-
I called for massive bank failure in the first quarter of 2008, quite
to the contrary of the Secretary Paulson's assertions (that's right, I've
been keeping track of the credibility factor of our world leaders - see
-
The
worst is behind us, unless massive bank failure is considered a bad
thing
-
Is
Paulson to be trusted, or is this Bush Administration Shock and Awe,
2.0?
-
Reggie
Middleton asks, "Do you guys know who you're messin' with?")
-
I called the crash of the Credit Default Swap market (see The
Next Shoe to Drop: Credit Default Swaps (CDS) and Counterparty Risk -
Beware what lies beneath! and Reggie
Middleton says the CDS market represents a "Clear and Present Danger"! ).
-
I called the demise or near demise of Bear Stearns, Lehman, Morgan Stanley,
GGP, Ambac, MBIA, Countrywide, Washington Mutual, and the extreme overvaluation
of Goldman (see More
on the accuracy of this blog's research).
-
I called the municipal sector bust (see The
Municipal bond market and the securitization crisis and The
Municipal Bond Market and the Asset Securitization Crisis, pt 2)
-
I called the manufacturing and industrial sector crunch via leveraged
loans and dried up financing markets (see The
Asset Securitization Crisis Part 27: The Butterfly Effect ).
-
I even told my blog readers about the blood bath that would occur in global
markets last week, and I posted the opinion Saturday evening. See Reggie's
thoughts on financial mayhem coming into the week of October 5th, 2008.
So, please spare me this "surprise of the century" bullsh1t.
Hopefully, you get the message, but I can go on. I am not stating this to
toot my own horn. At least half the people in the world are smarter than I
am. The point that I am trying to make is that when your government, your investment
advisor, your spiritual counselor or anyone else tells you that this was impossible
to see coming - you can say they are full of bovine boo-boo. I will finish
this rant with a follow up describing more of what I do. It will be called, "The
difference between research and advice!"
|
Reggie
Middleton
Reggie Middleton, LLC
Perpetual Interests, LLCTM
http://boombustblog.com/
Who am I?
Well, I fancy myself the personification of the free thinking
maverick, the ultimate non-conformist as it applies to investment and analysis.
I am definitively outside the box - not your typical or stereotypical Wall
Street investor. I work out of my home, not a Manhattan office. I build my
own technology and perform my own research - in lieu of buying it or following
the crowd. I create and follow my own macro strategies and am by definition,
a contrarian to the nth degree.
Since I use my research as a tool for my own investing
to actually put food on my table, I can stand behind it as doing what it is
supposed too - educate, illustrate and elucidate. I do not sell advice, I am
not a reporter hence do not sell stories, and I do not sell research. I am
an entrepreneur who exists just outside of mainstream corporate America and
Wall Street. This allows me freedom to do things that many can not. For instance,
I pride myself on developing some of the highest quality research available,
regardless of price. No conflicts of interest, no corporate politics, no special
favors. Just the hard truth as I have found it - and believe me, my team and
I do find it! I welcome any and all to peruse my blog, use my custom hacked
collaborative social tools, read the articles, download the files, and make
a critical comparison of the opinion referencing the situation at hand and
the time stamp on the blog post to the reality both at the time of the post
and the present. Hopefully, you will be as impressed with the Boom Bust as
I am and our constituency.
I pay for significant information and data, and am well
aware of the value of quality research. I find most currently available research
lacking, in both quality and quantity. The reason why I had to create my own
research staff was due to my dissatisfaction with what was currently available
- to both individuals and institutions.
So here I am, creating my own research for my own investment
activity. What really sets my actions apart is that I offer much of what I
produce to the public without charge - free to distribute and redistribute,
as long as it is left unaltered and full attribution is given to the author
and owner. Why would I do such a thing when others easily charge 5 and 6 digits
annually for what some may consider a lesser product? It is akin to open
source analysis! My ideas and implementations are actually improved and
fine tuned when bounced off of the collective intellect of the many, in lieu
of that of the few - no matter how smart those few may believe themselves to
be.
Very recently, I have started charging for the forensics
portion of my work, which has freed up the resources to develop the site to
deliver even more research for free, particularly on the global macro and opinion
front. This move has allowed me to serve an more diverse constituency, which
now includes the institutional consumer (ie., investment turned consumer banks,
hedge funds, pensions, etc,) as well as the newbie individual investor who
is just getting started - basically the two polar opposites of the investing
spectrum. I am proud to announce major banks as paying clients, and brand new
investors who take my book recommendations and opinions on true wealth and
success to heart.
So, this is how I use my background and knowledge in new
media, distributed computing, risk management, insurance, financial engineering,
real estate, corporate valuation and financial analysis to pursue, analyze
and capitalize on global macroeconomic opportunities. I have included a more
in depth bio at the bottom of the page for those who really, really need to
know more about me.
Visit his blog Boom
Bust Blog.
Copyright © 2007-2009 Reggie Middleton
Image rendition and html coding Copyright © 2000-2009
SafeHaven.com
« BullionVault.com
-- Buy gold online - quickly, safely and at low prices »
« Honest Money:
A History of U.S. Gold & Silver Currency -- by Douglas V. Gnazzo »
« Opinions expressed at SafeHaven are those of the
individual authors and do not necessarily represent the opinion of SafeHaven
or its management. Articles are available via RSS/XML. Please
visit RSSHelp for instructions. »
|