Follow Us

Follow us on Twitter  Follow us on LinkedIn
 

12 November 2012

IPE: Hedge funds - what's wrong with a 0 per cent return?


Default: Change to:


Martin Steward argues that it might be best to judge hedge funds' diversification benefits by their optionality, as opposed to the conventional risk/return metrics.


We should think about hedge funds' diversifying properties in terms of the optionality they can give investors when big buying opportunities open up across asset markets. That means three things: first, we have to consider periods that include big market moves like 2008-09; second, we have to focus on particular hedge fund strategies – not 'hedge funds' per se; and third, when we do all of this, the fact these strategies might deliver very low or even zero returns over quite a long time becomes a secondary issue.

Hedge funds as a broad group are a perfectly good (but expensive) way to allocate capital. Some of what they do you can get with a conventional balanced portfolio, so, in a standalone context, it may or may not be worth paying hedge fund fees for those risks that you can get from conventional assets. In a portfolio context – a 15 per cent allocation, say – they don't appear to move the needle much in terms of either performance or diversification.

But in that portfolio context, the optionality you can isolate from certain strategies (like volatility-trading, managed futures and global macro) certainly is worth paying for. To recognise that value, however, you need to get over your fear of holding something with low – or even zero – expected returns

Full article (IPE subscription required)



© IPE International Publishers Ltd.


< Next Previous >
Key
 Hover over the blue highlighted text to view the acronym meaning
Hover over these icons for more information



Add new comment