Why there’s Trillions in Hedge Funds with Stocks at All Time Highs

Looks like CNBC wants you to know the S&P 500 just hit a new all time high. Time to break out the Dow 30,000 hats and pics of Leo playing the Wolf of Wall Street.

But why is this really news anymore. We closed at a record high 62 times in 2017, and the bull market turns 3,453 days old on Wednesday, which would make it the longest on record by most definitions, according to CNBC. Maybe because we hadn’t been up in this range since January of this year, before the big sell off and VIX spike.  It has been a whopping 207 days between highs, a rarity over those 3,400+ days of up market.


But while everyone else is evaluating the valuations of the stock market itself, we’re looking at things a bit differently – and analyzing how far the diversifier (alternatives) has been outrun by the stocks (the thing needing diversifying from. There’ll surely be no shortage of articles (here’s one early adopter below) this week saying how hedge funds are trailing the stock market YTD, despite that being an apple and oranges comparison thanks to that not being what the hedge funds are designed to do.

We’re interested in analyzing how the S&P 500 is performing relative to alternatives like hedge funds and managed futures. Here’s the raw data, which doesn’t look so good for the alts:



But when you look at that same data from the standpoint of risk, with an underwater equity curve, you can see that the stock market (SPY) has had much deeper drawdowns equaling much more risk. Those outsized returns don’t come for free!



Which begs the question, of what they look like when risk normalized. We often approach that concept from the standpoint of bringing stocks down to equal the volatility of alternatives (yes, alts like hedge funds are, on average, less volatile than stocks). But what if we instead look at bringing hedge fund up to equal stock market volatility. We looked at a rolling three month volatility comparison between the hedge fund index and S&P 500, and found the stock market index to be about 2.89 times more volatile than the hedge fund index. Again, that’s the idea with hedge funds – their trying to control risk and not be blindly long equity beta. Here’s what the past 10 years look like when normalizing the volatility between the two indices by multiplying hedge fund returns by the rolling 36 month ratio between stock index and hedge fund index returns.



And that’s why there’s $3 trillion dollars invested in hedge funds. It’s not about the headline number or absolute performance compared to stock indices. Hedge funds are given mandates and expected to exist within tight drawdown and volatility bands by investors. They are employed for specific purposes and mandates which involve much more than just return – and generally speaking – are way more concerned with controlling risk. Scratch that. It’s not just controlling risk, It’s about delivering an expected risk. That’s something a passive investment in the stock market can’t do. We can’t ask the S&P to just give us a 10 vol next year. But alternatives can and do.  For one, that allows the investor to set the risk to whatever they are comfortable with, via notional funding of a managed account, or portable alpha mechanisms, or levered share classes.

So go ahead and celebrate the stock market’s new record! That rising tide will lift a lot of boats, to be sure. But don’t shed a tear for hedge funds trailing behind. You’ll note on both the raw data and risk adjusted graph, they’re essentially at their own all time high. And somewhere, probably on a group like Renaissance’s internal comms network or something, there’s a screen like CNBC’s saying something like:        Special Report: Hedge Fund X delivers its target VOL, while keeping max drawdown below the investor’s punch out level, while returning more than the 5 year note.



The performance data displayed herein is compiled from various sources, including BarclayHedge, and reports directly from the advisors. These performance figures should not be relied on independent of the individual advisor's disclosure document, which has important information regarding the method of calculation used, whether or not the performance includes proprietary results, and other important footnotes on the advisor's track record.

Benchmark index performance is for the constituents of that index only, and does not represent the entire universe of possible investments within that asset class. And further, that there can be limitations and biases to indices such as survivorship, self reporting, and instant history.

Managed futures accounts can subject to substantial charges for management and advisory fees. The numbers within this website include all such fees, but it may be necessary for those accounts that are subject to these charges to make substantial trading profits in the future to avoid depletion or exhaustion of their assets.

Investors interested in investing with a managed futures program (excepting those programs which are offered exclusively to qualified eligible persons as that term is defined by CFTC regulation 4.7) will be required to receive and sign off on a disclosure document in compliance with certain CFT rules The disclosure documents contains a complete description of the principal risk factors and each fee to be charged to your account by the CTA, as well as the composite performance of accounts under the CTA's management over at least the most recent five years. Investor interested in investing in any of the programs on this website are urged to carefully read these disclosure documents, including, but not limited to the performance information, before investing in any such programs.

Those investors who are qualified eligible persons as that term is defined by CFTC regulation 4.7 and interested in investing in a program exempt from having to provide a disclosure document and considered by the regulations to be sophisticated enough to understand the risks and be able to interpret the accuracy and completeness of any performance information on their own.

RCM receives a portion of the commodity brokerage commissions you pay in connection with your futures trading and/or a portion of the interest income (if any) earned on an account's assets. The listed manager may also pay RCM a portion of the fees they receive from accounts introduced to them by RCM.

See the full terms of use and risk disclaimer here.