Joe Kelly, partner at Campbell, joins us this week for a new episode of The Derivative. Jeff starts talking skiing, as he’s apt to do, but this time is a bit different, with Joe sharing an update on his recent recovery from a nasty ski accident that nearly left him paralyzed (or worse). We then move right into Joe discussing his career journey from trader to founding a FinTech startup during the tech bubble, to joining the long-time managed futures standout Campbell & Company.
Joe touches on the firm’s focus on collaboration and shared research culture differing from the classic ‘pod shop’ model. Kelly and Malec discuss Campbell’s investment strategies, including trend following, quantitative macro, long/short equity, and short-term trading. They also debate systematic macro strategies versus global macro versus trend following; while touching on risk management, portfolio construction, and the challenges of managing non-correlated investments. Kelly provides insights into Campbell’s future plans, including enhancing short-term capabilities with AI and considering new asset classes. This episode has it all! A little alternative investment history tour, a peek inside one of the most successful Alts firms of all time, and bringing it back full circle, overcoming adversity through resilience. SEND IT!
______________________________
______________________________
From the episode:
MMI Index Article (Blast from the past: How futures saved stocks)
Panel Event Podcast with Joe Kelly (Why Systematic, Why CTA? Why Now?)
Andrew Beer on The Derivative episode (Fund replication)
Check out our Trend Following Guide!
For more information visit: https://www.campbell.com/
Check out the complete Transcript from this week’s podcast below:
Surviving Adversity, Building Resilience, and Evolving a Quantitative Investment Firm with Joe Kelly of Campbell
Jeff Malec 00:06
Welcome to The Derivative by RCM Alternatives, where we dive into what makes alternative investments go analyze the strategies of unique hedge fund managers and chat with interesting guests from across the investment world. Hello there, Happy spring, which unfortunately comes with no more ski trips for me this season, but hey, what are you gonna do? That doesn’t mean we’re not going to get into some scary ski stories on this pod though. Yep, we’re back this week with Joe Kelly, a partner at quantitative investment firm Campbell and company. And as well known as Campbell is some of the stories and background of fintech startup during the tech bubble. His role in shaping the firm’s collaborative culture were new to me. So come for the stories, but stay for the dive into the quantitative multi strat systematic macro world of Campbell and how they’ve grown from their trend roots into a multibillion dollar manager who is approaching things in quite a unique way. Send it this pad is brought to you by RCM outsource trading desk, which everyone from startup hedge funds and big firms like Campbell use 24, 6 since their outsource trade operations. Check it out at our rcmalts.com/ 24 rcmalts.com/ 24. And now back to the show. All right, everyone. We’re here with Joe Kelly. Joe, how are you?
Joe Kelly 01:29
I just good. Thanks for inviting me. Good to be here.
Jeff Malec 01:32
Good to see you. And we’re just talking. You’re up just north of the city here in Chicago.
Joe Kelly 01:39
North of the city, as everybody likely knows Campbell’s based in Baltimore, but I’m lucky enough to raise my kids around our family and work for the firm from Chicago.
Jeff Malec 01:50
But But you were in New York for a while. Yeah.
Joe Kelly 01:53
So Campbell, we had an office in New York pre COVID. So we ended up in Connecticut for a couple of years did the commute down. Really good situation. But then, as you know, as is the case with a lot of groups COVID hit, we actually had a realtor take us out of the lease pretty much for even money. And nobody knew. I mean, this was early, late 2020s. And nobody knew, you know if that was going to be a good deal or a bad deal, or how long this is going to last and my wife, my wife from Chicago. So we took the opportunity to kind of, you know, use the flexibility going forward.
Jeff Malec 02:32
Yeah, that’s perfect. Welcome. Yeah, a little bit of a cost of living increase from Connecticut to North Shore, probably, you
Joe Kelly 02:41
know, we thought it would be the opposite. But it was it was about a flat trade taxes, believe it or not, are higher in Illinois, or maybe, you know, maybe you knew that, but it was we had been outside of Illinois for about 18 years, at that point, always in the industry, but on kind of both coasts. And so, you know, it wasn’t it was it was pretty much an even trade. Overall.
Jeff Malec 03:03
I love it. And as my listeners know, I’m always gonna talk skiing if I got a ski around here, so yeah, you’re a skier, but had it go a little sideways two years ago. And
Joe Kelly 03:17
yeah, it’s actually my last operation was less than a year ago, it was 11 months ago. And so you know, if you’ve heard this, I apologize, because probably sick of it by now. But December of 22. I was out in Utah had a fall, we initially thought I got hit. But you know, to be fair, at this point, my memory is a little fuzzy. Woke up, was knocked out and woke up completely paralyzed. I think you know, this story, Jeff.
Jeff Malec 03:53
We just talked briefly, so yeah, I want to hear I’ll bet. Yeah. So
Joe Kelly 03:57
laying, you know, laying face up paralyzed on a slope. And you never know what’s gonna go through your mind. I think that’s the most fascinating part is, you don’t know until you’re in that situation. So I had first was kind of fascination. And this, you know, it happened long enough that I could actually think through this second was how am I going to remodel my house, so that we could we could manage this. And then, you know, did to give you the very short version, I went from paralyzed with when not got me where I thought maybe that was kind of the end to wind knocked out of me, which was the remodeling the house portion of the memory. And then, you know, very slowly, akin to like a, you know, something you’d see in the movies, toes started coming back, fingers started coming back, and then the adrenaline really takes over and adrenaline like you’ve never, ever witness before I sat up from, you know, sort of that position this is all over the course of about four minutes. But I did realize that was in trouble.
Jeff Malec 05:11
What Hill were you on again,
Joe Kelly 05:13
I don’t even know if I’m allowed to name the resort. But Utah. I’ve actually never named the resort on a recording just out
Jeff Malec 05:21
of in Utah. That’s good enough prudence.
Joe Kelly 05:24
And so, waited for help, help, never came, Big Snow Day, had to pop my skis on, ski down, go to the clinic, flew home to Chicago with blood pressure of 190, over 120. And at Evanston hospital discovered that I had broken C two which is right at your brainstem. And it’s usually usually is fatal. Christopher Reeves type of fatal and I’d also broken T two and T three in my thoracic spine from the fall. And, you know, the guy at Evanston came in almost white as it goes, Great. young doctor put me in a collar. And then the process started
Jeff Malec 06:10
and you say How the hell did you ski down and fly from Utah to Chicago with all this going on?
Joe Kelly 06:17
Yeah, that’s, that’s kind of the subject of what I’ve played out in my mind. 100 times is like almost like a TED talk. You know, I from there, I’ll give you the lessons learned in about 10 seconds. But from there been a world class doctor a rush, just lucky to hedge fund, prominent hedge fund people that we had never known got us into this gentleman, which was, you know, we’re extremely thankful for ones here in Chicago, ones out in New York might have a spine center at Cornell named after him. And from there to operations, January 23, may 23. Fusing me and I would show you the picture if I could bone healing, and then unfused thing, of which there’s, I think about four of us in the United States.
Jeff Malec 07:14
And using doesn’t sound pleasant. Confusing
Joe Kelly 07:17
was 11 months ago, that was that was for the benefit of range of motion and the curse of cutting back into some pretty significant muscle that had started healing. So kind of, you know, and then Jeff, I probably saw you, you know, in June, which was super aggressive and not very smart. Yeah, you’re
Jeff Malec 07:36
still a little Yeah, yeah,
Joe Kelly 07:39
um, stage and Yeah, exactly. So I ended up spending about three months at an organization, I think they’re just in Chicago, but surely Ryan, which is known as kind of a stroke center, but it’s also really prominent Spinal Cord Injury Center. And I was lucky because I, I was just, it was just bone. So it wasn’t, you know, motor function, other than, you know, bone infusion. But kind of the, the two things that came out of that first is sitting in for three months with these folks that do have spinal cord injuries that are coming back from strokes, I have not paid, you know, an extraordinary amount of attention to people that were disabled, on the street, in stores, etc. Now I have my kids, they realize how incredibly strong you have to be to go through that experience. The attitudes were amazing, truly, truly humbling. And, you know, most of the time, a lot of levity. And being around that was incredible, because again, I was one of the ones that was gonna heal. The second and this is more of what the TED talk is. And if you have kids, so this will resonate with you, like resilience isn’t like a point in time thing. And I’m not saying like, this is like some big heroic thing, but like, a lot of us like I played youth sports, played a college sport, went through a, you know, a pretty challenging trading career round just fighting through, you know, to make a career out of it, climb mountains, etc. And all of those little pieces, all of those small things. Get You Off a ski hill with a with a broken cervical spine. I mean, it is going back to that adrenaline moment, I would just love to impart that resilience piece, to my kids, to my family to anybody that realizes that, you know, doesn’t want to go through the hard stuff now because they don’t realize that it makes you so much stronger later. So your body
Jeff Malec 09:46
was like going through the catalog and pulling like, hey, I need a little bit of this resilient man. I need a little bit of this one, put them all together and get off this hill by
Joe Kelly 09:54
Yeah, and your brain. And you know, you could sit there or you could go and And at some point, you can’t sit there anymore. And not having a choice helps to so and so
Jeff Malec 10:07
is it if it had been an inch this way or that way it might have severed the spinal cord and all that nasty stuff. Yeah, so
Joe Kelly 10:14
So the reason why I was paralyzed is normally that shears off and severs your spinal cord, mine sheared off and bruised my spinal cord for no reason. And so that temporary four ish minutes or whatever it ended up being. That’s the way they described it to me. And, and thankfully, again, it wasn’t displaced enough where they had to permanently fuse me. But this world class, individual at Rush hadn’t hadn’t done a lot of these surgeries so
Jeff Malec 10:48
and so, million dollar question, do you will you get back out on the ski hill?
Joe Kelly 10:52
Yeah, I mean, it’s a great question we had, we had to, we had a short vacation book this year, and it affects your kids more than you think. And it affected my wife more than any of us knew. So we punted this year, but I’m, I’m 100% point. I mean, it’s, if you’re, if you’re a skier, or any of your listeners, sounds like you’ve had a couple of people on here that are passionate guy was a young kid in Michigan, youngest of seven, we skied. So that was, that was my babysitter for a few years growing up, so I gotta get back.
Jeff Malec 11:27
Yeah, it had the weird effect on me, after you told me that story. And I was like, and as you told me, then I won’t say too much. But it was on like a Blu Ray, you weren’t doing anything crazy. You were going down, I grew blue from what I remember.
Joe Kelly 11:42
That’s why we that’s why we think I got hit is because it was a little more of a congested area. Yeah.
Jeff Malec 11:46
So someone might have come out of the woods. And so it had the weird effect on me. I was like, Well, I’m gonna keep going full, full bore, right. If I could get hurt, just going down a blue, I might keep going off cliffs and doing this doing this crazy stuff. Because if it’s your time, it’s your time, and who knows how it’s gonna happen. Yeah, might not be the best for all the people who are listening here for risk management techniques. But my twisted brain, that’s what I got out of it of like, well, heck, if that can happen. I’m just gonna keep going hard.
Joe Kelly 12:15
I appreciate that. I, and I don’t disagree. I it is, is, you know, the thing if you would ask me what I want to do when I’m 85. It’s, I want to have enough, you know, mobility to ski. So we’ll see. We’ll see what the next couple of years old.
Jeff Malec 12:32
Oh, well, we’re glad you are among the living and get to move your neck around. Yeah. Yep.
Joe Kelly 12:39
Thank you.
Jeff Malec 12:45
So you mentioned there, I’m going to dig into that. You mentioned some travails back when you were in your trading days. Want to dig into that and give us a little bit of the personal background? Yeah,
Joe Kelly 12:55
I don’t you maybe that was a little bit of a misnomer. I think it’s the same sort of challenge. Every young trader goes through breaking into the industry, you know, a friend of mine worked for some independence, in the single name it over an IBM and others. And he described it as kind of, you know, an English major learning, you know, three dimensional chess in Chinese, you know, and there’s money on the table. And this was when we were all in our 20s. So like, a lot of people I came out, I went to Penn out in Philadelphia, came out was a Midwest kid ended up interviewing with O’Connor and hole. And they were kind of looking for, you know, two things mathematicians and athletes. You’re lucky if you had some of both. And so I ended up at hole hole at the time in 1993 was the upstart if you remember. 40 people and Blair hole, famously kind of bought the bottom in the s&p during Black Friday, Black Monday, and
Jeff Malec 13:57
we have a blog post about that. It was actually the MMI index was the MMI. Okay, right. And there was no volume in there. So when he put in, he bought like 10 months and it yeah, basically created this arbor. Everything kind of bottomed out. Yeah, we’ll put a link to that. It’s a cool story. Yeah,
Joe Kelly 14:14
amazing. And so I got to spend some time around him. The firm was just kind of getting bigger are Margulis a bunch of other people that are kind of, you know, big names in the Chicago, Financial Engineering community, etc. And so, came up through that organization for a couple of years, spent some time in Germany, back here in Chicago. And then, as you recall, Jeff Hall got bought by Goldman in 98. I moved on to a smaller prop shop, and then founded at that point, and we were kind of working on this in the background at that stage. Were two of the people in the trading community and I came up with this concept. This is tech bubble now. 99 2000 2001 and our friend And, and the industry of Tech had created about a trillion dollars of wealth. That was paper wealth in employee stock options. And using our background, you know, we created what you would call today FinTech, you know, kind of a decision engine sitting on top of a broker dealer to provide liquidity within the construct of the corporate agreements, to employ stock option holders. So this could go through benefits. It has people retaining instead of paying tax, achieving their goal, etc, all these amazing things. Option
Jeff Malec 15:31
overlays are when you should add the option overlay, just
Joe Kelly 15:35
straight up hedges that were like that were tax aware. And at the same time, because they were hedges, you wouldn’t be taxed on the original exercise, because most of the time the extrinsic value was just being given away. And at the time, if you remember, and this goes a long way back, but post tech bubble, there was a famous article about JP Morgan, trying to name names, buying long term options from Microsoft employees who wanted to sell, and they were selling them for, you know, $1 Because they were underwater. And there was eight years and all of the traders were saying, wait a minute, you know, what are those eight years and JP Morgan does an amazing job of providing liquidity. But also, you know, they were hedging their own long term options in the market. And that’s what we were doing. So
Jeff Malec 16:23
what were some of the names some of the like, pet.com and things crazy like that, and it was, um,
Joe Kelly 16:30
yeah, more mainstream IBM, you know, we found that Lou Gerstner had a huge straddle on or strangle on at one point, and that kind of drove some of our thinking around the C suite having access to these things. And the enormous pool of non c suite that emerged tech bubble. So like, there was a group called sapient. That was one of our vendors that, you know, that’s probably as edgy as it got. pets.com and the others, you know, we were lucky, we didn’t do too much there. But the FCC needed to approve a no action letter on this. We spent about seven years with the FCC, getting that process up to speed and eventually they approved our concept. Right. That was three years after we ran out of money.
Jeff Malec 17:20
Yeah, right. That’s my old line. No one doubts you’re a pioneer. It’s whether you’ll make it over the Rockies. Yeah.
Joe Kelly 17:24
Well, we were we were young, and, frankly, addressing a need that people didn’t know they had, which is the death knell for startups. Right. Don’t Don’t, don’t try to you know, create a demand.
Jeff Malec 17:40
Yep. One. Spider Rock has now done this. Right. Yeah. Done it. Well,
Joe Kelly 17:45
yeah. Yeah. So what that did though it, you know, we all know plenty of traders that, that have made a lot of money and they have great careers. But I, you know, I needed a little bit of a broader horizon. I don’t know why. So it took me from being a trader. And it was one of the only things I knew that could take that skill set, but also allow me You know, I had an argument with Myron Scholes on the phone. And in person, he slammed his book and said, you know, we got to make this a private enterprise. And our whole theory was, you know, cutting out the middleman and making it a democratized enterprise. And so we had some disagreements with some very big people, super fun. But it, it made me realize I want to run businesses in alternatives rather than be the, you know, on the, on the end of the trading spectrum and so along along came Rotella at that point. So sorry for the very long story. It’s
Jeff Malec 18:40
good. You know, Robert Rotella on the pod before Bob
Joe Kelly 18:45
Yeah. Do you Sure. Or who?
Jeff Malec 18:48
We had Bob himself on? Way back when but then Jagdish afterwards Yeah.
Joe Kelly 18:53
Okay, good. So, Bob Rotella was Rotella. I mean, salt of the earth, great people. Robert had moved from Chicago. Jeff, as you remember out to Seattle. And there was some questions about whether that would be successful. It actually made him work harder, because now he was in a place he loved. And Joe Canterbury and I kind of built the business back up after that move, because they lost some European business. And it was great. We launched Molinero, we launched you know, a few other people in the industry that you know, Jeff, and in 2011, Robert decided that you run the course and didn’t want to manage outside capital anymore. And that’s where jegliche kind of moved into his seat. And from there, I kind of bounced around one of your questions earlier, it was why Campbell during that period, we were all presumably doing the same thing. Campbell was not Campbell was heavy into macro in the early 2000s. Heavy into stat ARB in single name equities, and when you went out and you thought you were competing, you weren’t. Bruce cleeland was doing a really Good job tellers were very friendly with accountable folks. So I got to know the business, but I competed a lot with them. And so I got to know it from a very sort of early stage bounced around for a couple of years post Rotella Russell, couple of private enterprises trying to learn the private side of the business. And then Campbell 2016 had a seat open and Mary foreman, at Morgan Stanley called me up and said, Would you guys move? Yeah. Would you guys move at that point from San Francisco to Connecticut? For Campbell? And I said, immediately, I said, Yes.
Jeff Malec 20:39
How old are your kids at that point?
Joe Kelly 20:41
That point they
Jeff Malec 20:42
are three and one. All right. So that made it a little easier, right? If they had been on the high school team or whatnot, and friends, and yeah, big
Joe Kelly 20:51
time. And so you know, if you know much about San Francisco, obviously, its tech community. My wife is also in the business. You know, the hedge fund industry out there is not large, and it’s very sort of long, short, equity centric, impact centric. So for me getting back to quant the only option in San Francisco at that point was BGI. Kidding back to quant was my DNA. And so I immediately jumped at the opportunity, moved to Connecticut, obviously started running the business. And from there, you know, I would describe sort of the modern version of the firm, not attributable to me, but it was, it was being created, like, you know, what I call 3.0. Right at that point, and it took a couple of years. But we’re kind of what we describe as not, certainly not a finished project or product. But like the modern view on who we want to be, is now kind of in place after several years of working through that.
Jeff Malec 22:00
I’ve always admired Campbell from afar, because it’s very non founder ish, for lack of a more scientific name, right? Like most of these firms, Winton founder here, blah, blah, blah found it right, it all ties exactly to the founder were, in at least my view and a lot of your investors. I don’t know, do they even know who the founder was? Do they care?
Joe Kelly 22:21
Yeah, yeah, I
Jeff Malec 22:22
got a good job of basically lessening that impact. And like, No, this is a firm, here’s what we’re doing as a firm. So talk a little bit about that. That’s intentional, obviously.
Joe Kelly 22:31
Yeah, it is. I mean, there’s an ownership team, I’m super lucky to be on it. So you know, in some rooms on the market, or in some rooms, I’m a partner, but we spend all of our time. I mean, when you know, when we want to talk about where we want this to go, it always ends up back in culture. So the nuts and bolts end up being, you know, there’s five people on an IC that run the portfolios, that’s intentional, very low ego across the firm, that’s, you know, we’re sort of lucky to have kind of that as a derivative of the way we’ve been running the firm over time. But from the culture perspective, having this concept where so you know, if we, if we essentially kind of bucket our strategies across probably kind of trend, as you’d expect, while macro short term market, neutral quant equities, in some firms, you would expect the evolution of this to be, you know, siloed. And we’re not the only one to come up with this concept. But we think there’s more, you know, more alpha and kind of more of a force multiplier and having those teams collaborate in a peer review process when ideas get documented. So by the time, you know, that comes into the portfolio level, there is no individual ownership of anything. It’s shared IP across research, that very low IP leakage, believe it or not, which is always a question. But what ends up happening in sorry, Jeff, I, you know, I talked about this all day long, because I think culture drives returns. But one of the what ends up happening is when, let’s say you have two models that have been developed by two different three different teams, four months later when it gets in the portfolio, because there’s sort of no individual fighting someone else for risk, or, you know, trumpeting their efforts over somebody else’s efforts, because
Jeff Malec 24:33
it’s elaborate promotion is based on it or what? Yeah,
Joe Kelly 24:37
exactly. Those teams are actually incented. Not necessarily to choose their model or fight for their model. But look at in the portfolio context, what’s the most additive model? Maybe it’s both, but if we have to choose one or the other. Everybody on the research team is aligned with choosing the optimal model within a given portfolio and that’s, you know, optimal can be defined a number of different Ways. But we come back to the management level. And the way that works is because we compensate everybody based on total p&l. And so now and that’s kind of the that’s kind of the kicker, right? Because now, and we have, we have superstars, we have amazing minds in research that want to be part of that culture, as much as they want to be part of something that pays them millions and millions and millions of dollars. Because oftentimes, when you get into that second culture, the pressures on you don’t get to talk to anybody. And you know, your PhD is your PhD and kind of ends there. Yeah, not not the case here. So that draws people in, then investors think about it, investors know, the optimal models are going in. And they know our research teams getting paid on their portfolios. So again, this was not in place. 15 years ago, I was lucky because the wheels were turning, that collaborative piece was already in place 10 years ago, but it’s really come of age. And
Jeff Malec 26:04
so contrast it with that 15 years ago, it was more of a set of models.
Joe Kelly 26:11
That I think, and I wasn’t there. So this is second hand information. But I think they paid more people on individual efforts. When somebody wanted to trade FX options, or, you know, et cetera. And so it was a little more piecemeal. Bruce, who was a really great leader liked that framework, right? He liked to have people compensated for some great idea, but you know, GFC, and other areas, you know, teach you that. You know, egos can be a good thing, they can be a toxic thing. And so we’re trying to have enough of that, but also incent people to have sort of that learning mindset.
Jeff Malec 26:51
And so not sure, yeah, but a lot of these firms, the people get upset, right? Because they’re like, hey, my read, I didn’t get bonus on my p&l because I got netted out against this idiot who was trading New Zealand swaps or whatnot. But so right, they get upset, and they go and start their own firm, right? So your goal is, hey, it’s not your p&l. You’re also not necessarily getting netted out against the really bad trade, but the whole portfolio, now you get to participate, regardless of how you perform.
Joe Kelly 27:23
Yeah, you got it in, you know, I mean, then management wise, it’s pretty easy to find the people that, you know, maybe could hide under that we have none of those. We only have 65 people. Yeah. So we have we have, we’re lucky we have more outperformers than underperformance and, and people, like I said, it’s not for everybody, it really isn’t. But people have really sort of bought into that that are with us right now.
Jeff Malec 27:51
And it seems like a anti New York model, right? Like, it seems like not to upset all my New York friends. Sorry, but Right. That’d be like, hey, I want Alpha dogs in here and you fight for what’s yours and you prove your worth?
Joe Kelly 28:04
Yeah. It’s a quant model. You know, it’s a quant means a lot of things. But it might have a harder road in a big discretionary shop. Whether it’s macro or long, short equity, where people are sourcing ideas, you know, and they want to get paid on doing the heavy lifting on that individual idea.
Jeff Malec 28:27
But even in the quant where I feel like we’re starting to see these pod shops that are mostly all want sure maybe they have one guy doing some discretionary stuff, but they’re putting together multiple quant models, and each pod is running one of those quant models. So that has grown significant right? Do you guys consider yourself sort of a pod shop? We
Joe Kelly 28:48
so it’s not necessarily pod but we do mean we use systematic multi strategy internally externally, the nuances with investors, you know, come back to that collaborative culture versus compete competing for sort of risk. And then honestly, sometimes those work quite well together in a portfolio. And so we’re trying to hold off on the individual. And, and we, again, we think there’s alpha, you know, give you an example. Our macro team thought there might be some opportunities to trade intraday data in you know, in some pretty historically long holds in macro. And they couldn’t do that unless our short term team did some heavy lifting with them. And we we now trade some you know, week hold W E k holding period, macro ideas using intraday data that got to market faster because of that collaborative effort. You
Jeff Malec 29:51
were interested in holding the W E AK
29:58
exactly Like,
Jeff Malec 30:02
and so you mentioned that they’re coming in and the Investment Committee as to identifying them as optimally. So there’s a few ways to define that. Right? So as a quant chap, is it hard to just be like, boom, there’s the best Sharpe or whatever risk adjusted ratio you use, let’s plug it in, like, what are some of the other metrics that you use to say, how does it have to help the portfolio?
Joe Kelly 30:23
Yeah, yeah, I mean, it’s, um, the, I think the days of having an arms race around model count are over, you remember those, they used to drive me crazy at, you know, Rotella and other places where, you know, sometimes your dad has zero sharp model, just to say you add more more models. And then, you know, inevitably, correlations weren’t what you thought they were during periods of stress, and you weren’t well diversified, etc. So for us, you know, we we identify a model as a unique idea, you know, timeframe independent, right, because you can apply the same idea to five different timeframes, that’s not five models, we try to be just conservative about that, we don’t think that’s a way you need to sort of compete as an arms race. But, you know, having a minimum sharp, you know, at times point five, to one, et cetera, but also, you know, the expected correlation of a given strategy, you know, being zero or negative can be a lot more interesting, even if, you know, the Sharpe is not, too. So there’s a lot of moving parts around it, but it’s, you know, it takes a really robust risk framework to feel like you have gained a level of comfort around your assumptions. That’s obviously a huge, huge concept within these development teams. And then, you know, obviously walking into risk, rather than running into risk implementing in a portfolio with lower levels, and then, you know, post launch reviews, etc. And so, it’s a little bit of a moving target, but, you know, healthy, sharp, not not just diversifiers diversifiers, that really helped. And now we’re finding, you know, negatively correlated models to the other pieces of the portfolio, which really add not only diversification, but you know, we’re looking for capacity, but it could be in some of those areas as well.
Jeff Malec 32:28
And do you ever do anything, I think I use New Zealand as the example before, so I’ll stick with New Zealand, whoever be like, hey, we need this New Zealand exposure, we don’t have anything that’s exposed to that geography or that level of GDP, or that currency type.
Joe Kelly 32:47
We, so you and I and your team have talked about China, and we can walk through, you know, that that’s more of a market efficiency rather than a regional exposure, you know, alternative markets type of idea. But, you know, for us, just like a lot of other managers, if you have a momentum signal, conceptually, you should be able to apply that pretty universally. But then you get into short term and macro leaving off market neutral equities for a minute. And there are some very market specific ideas that use different sets of data that are not applied universally, but we don’t, we don’t tend to say, hey, we, you know, we need South Africa exposure, most of the derivatives we trade, you know, are not originally exposed, but they’re, let’s say commodities or whatever else. But it’s more around, you know, what is the fundamental underpinning of why this should work, why it shouldn’t decay overnight, and why it would be additive to the portfolio.
Jeff Malec 33:52
And then we had the guys from Florin court on a couple of weeks ago. And he’s right there going into all sorts of unique stuff. So if you started to lift that, the lid on that and be like, hey, if we could get access to this via OTC or swaps, or whatever, this would be a great additional model on this product.
Joe Kelly 34:12
I give those guys a lot of credit. I really do and as well as others that were really to that game, as you know, you know, the operational lift around that is significant. You have to invest in that. However, I I would love to have a beer with them and talk about counterparty risk. And yeah, how, you know, sort of inherent to our industry is the lack of counterparty risk, but there’s some alpha there. So how much what
Jeff Malec 34:42
right and right off over 50 years. Are you getting paid enough for that? Yeah.
Joe Kelly 34:47
And and we all know that there’s firms that should not have gone out of business that do so. We we are at that inflection point and this is circa 2018. We We could have gone down that road, or we could have gone down the road of instead sort of looking at our skill set and figuring out what markets we do have an advantage in, rather than applying some universal concept as many markets as we could. And we took that route, we took the route of look, we have a very specific skill set that we’re trying to build inside the firm. You know, a lot of it’s sort of non price skill sets that are specific to one, sometimes one market, sometimes five markets. And we went down that road of trying to generate alpha that we think could be more sustainable than then being the fifth or six or seven player, you know, in XYZ energy market that is seeing the Alpha road quite a bit. If it’s like momentum based alpha. And I’m not saying it is, but conceptually, the more players, the more that could work versus kind of our approach.
Jeff Malec 35:59
You took that path to the right to the left, whichever one it was. So that was the end. you’ve bumped on this a few times. But let’s just tighten it up. So it was there’s trend, there’s macro, and there’s long short equity are the three main buckets you would say. And,
Joe Kelly 36:17
and short term that is really, really very unique. So those are the four buckets
Jeff Malec 36:26
and short term just short term just in and out. Like we’re talking high frequency trading or no within W right. Okay. Yeah. Right
Joe Kelly 36:35
up against it. We’re not We’re not looking to provide liquidity. We do. You know, we are changing science, a few times a day, sampling a lot of data, not using just a shortened momentum signal in short term, Abeille breakouts all the things we kind of grew up on. More recently, it’s been around things like, where is there more information and data? That might not be, you know, the last hour, it might have been a day ago, might have been a week ago. So that’s been, you know, a hugely interesting area. And as you know, the degrees of freedom in short term, you know, when when Robert Rotella went into short term, and we’ve would say, you know, from one day to two days, you got, you know, twice the opportunity set. And, and so that hasn’t changed at all. There’s so many opportunities, the two sort of, sort of most diverse groups for us are called macro, which can can be a lot of different ideas or short term.
Jeff Malec 37:39
And then this just popped in my head, sorry, but do you kind of view these, right, these four pillars, you kind of view, trend and macro? As more like long ball for lack of a better term, and long short equity in the short term stuff as kind of short vowel, I don’t want to put it as short ball, but you’re kind of those are more generating this consistent return. And you have those other two pieces that are positive, skewed and looking for the outliers?
Joe Kelly 38:06
Yeah, I would, I would put, I know, I would put trend in that camp, I would put macro neutral to that camp. Right, I would put, I would put short term loving volatility, like, as you said, when we were just coming out around your example, around March 23. And I would say, you know, quad equities, doesn’t care about that camp. So we have two that don’t care. Okay. And, you know, one that loves volatility, but it doesn’t have to be, you know, in any, it could be, you know, a reduction in stress, it doesn’t have to be running in distress. Whereas momentum, as you know, you know, plays, plays that momentum role in the portfolio. And so, you know, not surprisingly, and this is like a multi strategy, right, we do subsets of this, if investors wanted pure trend, for instance, risk mitigation, etc. But, you know, our sort of biggest Capabilities Portfolio, you know, the real goal is cycle agnostic. And so those four tend to rotate into opportunities very differently. And that’s why those are there.
Jeff Malec 39:16
Yeah, it’s kind of like, imagine a simplistic multi strat that’s got carry, right, and then trend on the other side, and when Carrie gets hit trend is likely to do well, and that kind of your carries there to pay the bills, and then trends there to cover it when it gets it. Yeah. When it’s not necessarily that level, you’re just saying, Hey, these are all non correlated to negative correlate, and they work.
Joe Kelly 39:39
Yeah. When, I mean, that’s a perfect example when we all got to know Campbell in 2002. That was, you know, it was trend carry instead of, yeah, and, and, you know, now we have over 100 variations on, you know, different techniques underlying all of this, and, and we’ve cycled through all Hundreds over the years, right? So that’s just the state of it today. But obviously, when you look back at that portfolio versus the portfolios today, the only one that is very similar, it’s kind of trend even carries evolved quite a bit. But everything else has evolved so much that you it’s fun to have data going back that far. But but it’s a totally different process now. But it’s a great year. I mean, you nailed the example.
Jeff Malec 40:25
Yeah. And how do you? How do you weigh and consider like, Okay, if these, we have all this cool stuff? How do I get to a point of like, T bill rate of return? Right? If I have all this cool stuff that’s non correlated? Am I really taking no huge position? Am I taking any position? Yeah,
Joe Kelly 40:43
no, it’s, it ends up being this concept of embedded leverage, which, again, isn’t the Campbell thing. But if we’re going to deliver you net 10, ball, let’s say, which, in today’s environment, even, you know, in my travels in, in, in Japan two weeks ago, single digit ball used to be the bogey. Now, whether it’s the hedge ratio, or, you know, other things, you need to be able to deliver a healthy amount, but a healthy amount has also evolved to, to a stable amount, right, high Sharpe, depends on stable vol, normal distribution, you know, et cetera, et cetera. So if you can deliver stable vol, and net all of that complexity, down to a 10, you’re, you’re doing something special, and that comes back, we have a an individual named Grace Lowe on our team, who heads the risk piece. And that’s really the part that does rotate risk across these, you know, several parameters, models, markets, etc. And to do that, and nail that stability piece. I mean, that is, that’s where you get really happy investors is minimizing those outliers. You might not always make, you know, as much money as you want to, but not having outliers over time.
Jeff Malec 42:00
You know, both
Joe Kelly 42:02
sides, both sides, both sides.
Jeff Malec 42:05
So you’re not seeking to make 58% in a month, in telco or whatever. Yeah,
Joe Kelly 42:11
- And that’s where, and I think it’s really, it’s really interesting, because we serve two different masters, specifically to Campbell. So one master is, you know, give me an absolute return, you know, cycle agnostic, one chapter better on 10, ball, you know, et cetera, et cetera. With all this diversification. That’s sort of what I would describe again, and you’ve heard me say this a couple times on panels, etc. If you have to use the term CTA, that’s like CTA, 3.0. And don’t forget, it includes quad equities as a material, part of the portfolio, market neutral. But we also serve the risk mitigation, you know, Makita. driven, and others, but but I think they did a great a great job leading the industry into this risk mitigation class, long bonds, trends, etc. And, you know, we’ve got quite a few clients there as well. And that goal, as you describe it is, you know, put up the 58%. Maybe not in one market, because we haven’t, but, you know, the goal is convexity. Sometimes convexity comes at a price. And that’s where, you know, certain firms have done a really good job talking about, especially with boards portfolio level, like don’t look at these line items, portfolio level impact of this is truly sort of incredible. And going really well for people right now, obviously.
Jeff Malec 43:45
And do you feel some of the stuff you’ve added? Right? So we’ll call loosely crisis, period performance, right. So that risk mitigation, when there’s a 2008, when there’s a problem, this should be there. But adding some long short equity, adding some of the stuff that’s not necessarily convex and positive skew, how does that right versus what you used to be the big trend, like how do you weigh out of like, okay, we’ve added all these pieces, and we’re very cautious to not really ramped down the convexity. Ya know, it’s
Joe Kelly 44:19
sort of two things come to mind. First, is transparency, right? So you have to you have to walk into meetings, and, frankly, distill what that goal is, which leads to much better conversations around what you might be able to deliver because we don’t, nobody wants, you know, we all work too hard to have these very short term relationships. If you’re not if you’re not fully transparent. I mean, that is a enormous tenant of the way we run the business. And then the second is the way we think about and there’s no magic number, but let’s say because we can net some very diverse approaches down to a 10 annualized risk. We have to run each of those At higher leverage, just due to the portfolio effects. And think about what you can possibly run trend at inside of a portfolio that maybe has zero correlation to everything else. But, you know, again, you’re gonna net to a 1010 Is your number. Sorry, if I’m giving away trade secrets, I don’t think I am. But because of that, when it’s working, you get, and I know, I can’t name numbers, but you get quite a significant bit of up capture in that portfolio as risk is consumed into that piece. And then how good is your risk system at now, you know, locking that in rotating risk and not having that give back, that pure trend tends to have, and you try to capture the middle, as everybody knows, get into it, capture the middle, and have something else rotate in baby to capitalize on that, that reversal. And so you we do think about it as X percent of capture 90% up capture. And, let’s say 10% down capture. And, and, thankfully, it’s kind of, it’s kind of gone that way in the past couple of years. And, you know, when you get with an investor, and they, you know, they say, Hey, you made x and this firm made 1.3x as a pure trend follower, they should have been in that strategy in the first place. If that was what they were looking for.
Jeff Malec 46:35
Yeah. Right. Like, you’re gonna be unhappy? Are you going to be as happy on the way down when they’re 1.3x? The loss? Or maybe 3.3x? On the loss? Yeah,
Joe Kelly 46:45
I do think, you know, kind of as a sidebar, I think some of the bigger pensions that have gotten into the space, and let’s just call it pure trend. And I’ve done well, I give them credit, I give everybody involved, because some of them, you know, really needed to have diversifiers work. And as far as we’ve seen it, it seems to be working. So it’s to credit, frankly, to everybody involved in the process. The teams there. The consultants, the managers, every it’s so cool to see it work.
Jeff Malec 47:17
Well 23 made me so nervous, because I’m like, here we go again, like gains and Oh, eight losses and gains and 22 losses and 23 Everyone’s gonna bail on it again. But I think to your point, I think they’d be a little more educated, like, Hey, this is part of it. See it through?
Joe Kelly 47:34
Yep. No doubt.
Jeff Malec 47:37
And so when I mean, sorry, go ahead. You,
Joe Kelly 47:40
I was just gonna say, I mean, you do have to step back every once in a while and think about the effect of all of this, and we try to people’s retirement, et cetera, et cetera. It might kind of be cheesy, but it’s, yeah, that’s rewarding. So, again, I just think it’s just kind of a cool couple of years that should lead to better results. I mean, we’re talking about 2030 year timelines, but if they stick with this, it’s gonna have a real impact. I
Jeff Malec 48:07
was getting mad when some hedge fund blows up. And there’s people like cheering like, Oh, those fat cats lost their money. I’m like, it’s actually some fireman’s pension that probably lost their money. Right. So it’s not these billionaires that lost their money at some pensioner. So be careful cheering it lower. So I want to get into if we can the what do you guys call now you just said quant macro. But before you’ve said systematic macro, so quant or systematic macro versus trend? Yeah, some of the differences there, you’ve talked about in the past? So let’s just dive into that. Before we wrap up.
Joe Kelly 48:47
I think you were the one. You know, we have that panel in Chicago again, shortly after my second surgery. I think you were the one in the audience who kind of nailed sort of the non price comment about what’s what’s the difference is because we’re all kind of, kind of, you know, riffing on what anybody else was saying. But for us, the way we describe it, unfairly or fairly, because I know you, you work with a lot of our peers, and this is going to be a broad statement. Don’t take it personally. But you know, we want to separate kind of momentum from macro, mean, there’s always going to be that impact, right? I mean, I’m not going to stand here and say it’s not. But there are certainly some Qwop macro, systematic macro managers and concepts in the marketplace that rhyme a lot with momentum. We try really hard to take a lot of relationships that I would describe as the way economies interact based on either the dominant driver of that economy given commodity is the easy example. You know, or, you know, different trade agreements, different impacts on, obviously, like economic release data differentials around, you know whether it’s something simple like to given country’s yield, which we don’t do a lot of sort of Curb trades. But also kind of the direct, you know, the direction of that without sounding like it’s momentum, the delta of that on a very, very short term basis. And so I guess my point is, take, take concepts that are not price related. But price can certainly help or be a conditioning factor on it take concepts that this still dominant pieces of an economy and how that’s going to have a knock on effect across asset within a given economy. And what is that going to do to its, you know, its partners, trade partners, etc. And so that’s kind of what we mean by macro, and I touched on this earlier, that means that we trade certain datasets in single markets, because it just is very specific to the behavior of XYZ market. And there are some, we, you know, we’ve traded more broadly, in this concept of, of carry, we try to iterate on, you know, some of the reward and risk that used to be a big part of carry and now, you know, make it a little more dynamic around how that changes through time. And, you know, time can be a day, which is very different than that, you know, year long use left tail. Previously in the macro concerts construct. So the one, the one give by me is I will include carry in macro, but we try to do that a little bit differently so that it’s not just a premia. In fact, we try to actually constrain from more known methods and just even even momentum, believe it or not, Jeff, we try to constrain against maybe like a indexed factor, and try to find where we provide alpha and allocate risk to that, even as we described it at the at the expense, even at the expense of just raw convexity, or the benefit of alpha where we can get in the make sense, sorry, the long answer,
Jeff Malec 52:27
no, no, I like the end, the example we use back on that panel was and while I’ll start with the confusion, perhaps for investors and people have gone without of you could be in very similar possession positions to momentum. But for different reasons. So I think the example we use was the trend followers long copper, because it the 30 days above the 100, day moving average, or whatever, and it hasn’t come back down, yada, yada, some classic momentum signal. And you guys are long copper, because the Chilean peso did XY and Z. Right. And but you’re both long it and have been for weeks. Who knows? So that’s sort of the confusion of like, but I guess that same signals use as exit? Or do you get in on that macro factor and out on some other factor,
Joe Kelly 53:12
same in a continuous signal. So that may actually be a position that’s 20 models. And, you know, because there’s going to be scaling in and out daily. We’d like to think that just, you know, that benched against a, you know, a very simple trend signal, should, over time provide a higher Sharpe, even if it’s the same opportunity set, so that that sort of portfolio effect should generate a higher Sharpe. And that’s not rocket science, and then just that that singular signal, even if we’re both long, and inevitably, what we’ve come across in the market is, there are more people in macro that are directional, and there are not a lot of relative value, systematic relative value players. And if you just look at that, increasing your number of bets, if you look at the diversity of that, etc, again, all theory but like sharpshooter increase by adding more relative value approaches, because we have we have momentum over here. Yeah. And so macro is our place. I think I said this on stage, not only as a data, you know, in the opportunity set, but relative value is where we, we push very hard on ambassadors, because it’s it’s hard to tell five managers that I’ve been in business for more than 20 years apart when we’re all using the same terms.
Jeff Malec 54:42
Yeah, exactly. And dude, so relative value, we’ll use that copper trade still do you seek out does it have to have opposite pair? Do you have to be short silver or something on the other side?
Joe Kelly 54:53
It doesn’t have to, but it might, it might use? It doesn’t always have to be that count? Countries FX, right? It might be a data set that looks like relative value dataset. And then it’s also this conception of there’s relative value portfolio construction. So at the model level, it might not have an exact pair. But at the sector level, sub sector sector portfolio level, it looks like it does. Because there’s different effects in the portfolio. And so it gets that gets a little bit in the weeds. Yeah.
Jeff Malec 55:29
Fundamental input could be could trigger a short in some roughly related Mark.
Joe Kelly 55:35
Yeah, it’s not, it’s not like you would consider pairs trading in in equities, where there is a population or a single name. But it’s more of the portfolio effect at times. At times. It’s, yeah, it isn’t exact pair, but at times, it’s the portfolio effect. And
Jeff Malec 55:51
then it’s also becomes like a bit of a voting machine, right? So if you’re at the same position and trend in quant macro and short term for a few hours, like that’s just the strength of that signal, right? Multiple multiple models about said V long x. Yeah,
Joe Kelly 56:05
those are all independent. Exactly. With the with the exception of risk management, where we see we’ve got, because, as I said, we’ve got a process that looks at our position, looks at the markets position, you know, tries to come up with kind of a context for how much money we’ve made or can make versus the market in a given trade. And then it will constrain across rather than, you know, any individual model as well.
Jeff Malec 56:34
And I’m jumping a little all over the place here, but
Joe Kelly 56:36
yeah,
Jeff Malec 56:37
what are your thoughts on replication? So like, everything you guys are doing, how complex it is? And if I right, people are like, Oh, we can replicate this by being long Euro dollars and short, golden, and whatever? Impossible? Yeah.
Joe Kelly 56:55
Short term, you might get lucky. Long term. You know, we’re, we’re, we’re moving every day to right. So we’re not, you know, we’re not reconstructing the portfolio every day. We have a year even. But it does look very different today than it did two or three years ago, five years ago. And again, that comes back to transparency with what you’re trying to do with investors. But yeah, you could you could come out and replicate our 2002 portfolio today. No problem. Maybe not not maybe not even just that our beats. You know, way too complex. And I used to even back to Robert Rotella. We just said there’s just no way. He was very anti SMA for that reason. And we, we would say time and time again, you just couldn’t do it at that point with him.
Jeff Malec 57:51
But you’re you’re part of an index that is being replicated. So Brian, the interesting thing, Andrew beer was on the podcast to go back and listen to that one. But right, he’s saying, Yeah, I know, they’re doing tons of complex stuff. But if you regress the last quarter’s performance, these three markets can explain the performance can air quotes, explain the performance? Right. And there’s a huge lag effect and all this stuff. So I, I’m with you that I’m dubious. But
Joe Kelly 58:18
yeah, a really kind of, you know, sarcastic answer would be, you know, replicate the short term traders index by doing nothing. Right. But there are some, but there are some world class managers making up that index that you’d be lucky to invest in at any point. Yeah. And so, you know, there’s a little bit of a nuance between selecting the individuals and, and replicating the total. Yeah, yeah, if you will. And again, like I’m not, you know, there are way smarter people that I am doing that. But that’s just my sort
Jeff Malec 58:57
of one, the funny little piece there is you need you guys to continue to be super successful so that he can replicate if you go away. There’s nothing to replicate. Good point. So what’s next for Campbell for you? What’s on the horizon? You guys going to move? Right? You’re saying this is always changing. So I’m sure the research processes out of this world? Yeah. Talk to us about what’s next. What are you guys looking at?
Joe Kelly 59:25
Yeah, it’s good. It’s. So we sort of come up with themes. I mean, at the end of every year, you sort of look back and say, what did we do? What’s our thing going forward? What’s currently in the pipeline? That’s always changing. I mean, some things just don’t work. Some things work and they’re pushed through and then what’s your next thing? So sort of, you know, thematically right now and this isn’t going to be surprising, but um, you we, we’ve upgraded what quite a bit of our short term capabilities are Um, to have, you know a lot more of what we call data density, that, at a minimum validates what we’re doing across a lot of different parts of the portfolio. And that sort of the most optimistic leads to some really cool ideas. You know, as I’ve described it around, you know, information and data, etc. So short term was going to be, you know, if we, if we came on next year, it’d be short term, the year after, it’s, it’s a big part of where we see opportunities, even now. And those have played out, again, in certain pieces of the market where there was high stress over the past year and a half. So it’s self fulfilling, I mean, it’s sort of reinforcing that effort. The second in you, I laugh at the guys that work with, you can’t get through a meeting, if you don’t say AI at a meeting, I’m gonna take, you know, I’m gonna take something away from you. But I’m finally kind of true applications for it, like, you know, code review, like engineering, you know, sort of supplementing engineering, we’re using it right now to as a supplement to risk management to identify market themes that maybe, as humans, like, we think we know what’s going on. But there’s five more ideas out there, some of them are completely irrelevant, you know, maybe there’s a few that are worth paying attention to this is going to be the year of risk, not surprisingly, because of the election, but then how does that impact certain markets, you know, etc. So that’s something we’ve been hidden place for a little while now, the members piece we’ve had him for about almost 10 years now. And so AI, across, you know, risk across engineering and code, not for us, and I’m happy to say this right now, not per client, sort of not putting risk capital. Behind it right now, we, you know, we see efficiencies rather than, you know, pushing into ideas that we don’t know the fundamental underpinnings of, if you will. So that’s a bit, you know, that’s something that’s going to be really interesting to watch, because everybody wants to know if it’s a risk. But at the same time, you know, we could develop some really cool techniques that right now are being done by 1020 people at certain firms. And it’s, I called it and I did this an hour before we got on job with our Chief Technology Officer, I, I at times kind of call it the great equalizer. And it’s been a lot of technologies over the years that we’ve called the great equalizer, but but, you know, it’s really interesting for that reason. And I, you know, I mean, you know, better than I do, the firm’s that might be saying they’re putting risk capital behind it. I, I, we’re not there yet. Kind of hand on heart.
Jeff Malec 1:02:52
Yeah. And the few that I’ve read about right man HL, that was like three years ago, they were in an article and there, it basically told them to buy the s&p after Trump got elected. Sounds like that’s it. That sounds right. Because they were like, oh, all these dips had been bought. And so the AI said, Buy the dip. Right? Well, that doesn’t sound very sophisticated. I’m out. Yeah. Yeah,
Joe Kelly 1:03:13
we do see, you know, again, in research for models that have capital now, but are not using this, you know, is there a more predictive technique, which is kind of a holy grail, especially around loopback, etc? To be determined? So that’s, that’s sort of another
Jeff Malec 1:03:31
method you said, it just gives, it can be like, you have 100 Extra employees or something, right? Yes, like manpower? Yeah. I
Joe Kelly 1:03:39
mean, everybody’s worried about taking their job, but what about the jobs, you know, the sort of jobs that adds to current teams, in it, you know, in a, you know, sort of a subtle way, not real jobs, but obviously, capabilities, efficiencies, etc. So that’s significant. And then your firm level, we want to keep this culture going, you know, we’re limited capacity. So we’ve, we’ve got a couple billion left to capacity outside of those pure trend, strategies that tend to scale quite a bit. And so you know, eventually we’ll start exploring other asset classes, etc. Just to keep building on those capabilities. All of that, as you know, it’s, it’s it’s a, I will, I’m very happy to articulate that it’s kind of really, let’s just go back to that progression from the accident to trading to you know, running a fintech. It’s fun running this firm. And so that was that was kind of my goal. And you know, it doesn’t always work out but but it’s, it’s going in that direction really well right now.
Jeff Malec 1:04:46
Well, wait, you’re a pro brought it back full circle to the excellent. Well, we’re glad again, that you guys are doing what you’re doing. Keep it up. It’s been fun to watch from afar. And let’s get out on the side. gives me a new one day. I’d
Joe Kelly 1:05:01
love it. And I appreciate everything you do. Jeff, thank you very much. Thank
Jeff Malec 1:05:05
you. We’ll talk to you soon. Okay, thanks. All right, thanks. Okay, that’s it for the pod. thanks to Joe and the folks Campbell thanks RCM for sponsoring, thanks Jeff Burger for producing. We’ll be back possibly next week but more likely the week following that piece.
This transcript was compiled automatically via Otter.AI and as such may include typos and errors the artificial intelligence did not pick up correctly.
