As election season moves into full swing, there are a lot of angles being pursued on all sides of the political debate. One of those angles has been the dissection of former Governor Romney’s record as CEO of private equity firm Bain Capital. While the initial debate centered on Bain’s outsourcing track record, more recent commentary was far more interesting to us. In taking a look at the performance of Bain rather than the ethics of its methods, Ritholtz makes reference to an eBook from WSJ reporter Brett Arends, which can be found here. One nugget from its pages explains:
From 1984 through the end of 1998, as mentioned above, Bain Capital’s investors put in about $900 million, and the firm’s investments produced gains of about $2.4 billion. This understates the final total a little, as some investments hadn’t fully matured. Nonetheless it’s the best figure we have, and the one most widely relied upon by both sides.
In other words, Bain Capital under Romney made a dollar-over-dollar gain of about 170%. Not annualized: In total.
Ritholtz explained in a recent blog post (emphasis ours):
That sounds like a great deal – but it is a far less attractive when you do the math and compare to other alternatives.
[…] Bain produced all Beta, no Alpha. They used high leverage and took big risk for what was essentially market level rates of return. Any investor who listened to Vanguard’s John Bogle would have done about the same during 1984-1998 – just buy the S&P500 index, and hold it, reinvesting the dividends. The net returns would be ~20% per year — without giant fees or excessive risks necessary.
In my opinion, the whining (from the right!) about Bain’s outsourcing, layoffs, and the fortunes produced for insiders are misguided. That’s not why Bain should be criticized. Their fundamental flaw, at least according to the math, is that they took lots of risk, use immense leverage, and charged enormous fees, for performance that was more or less the same as indexing.
Now don’t get us wrong- we’re always happy when people take sketchy performance numbers to task- but it was the bit about comparing the performance to other alternatives that got us going. You mean… alternatives like managed futures?
Bain Capital touts itself as a bit of a legend in the private equity space, proclaiming on its website, “Bain Capital is one of the world’s leading private investment firms.” So we decided to see how they stood in relation to managed futures programs that also bore that standard in the era – Millburn Ridgefield Corporation Diversified Program, and Campbell & Co. Fin, Metals & Energy. Both of these programs were playing the game at the same time as Bain. Both, like Bain, continue to cater to high net worth investors today in the alternatives space with great respect. So how do they stack up?
Disclaimer: Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.
That’s quite the difference in performance. To be entirely fair, not every managed futures program is going to be a Millburn or a Campbell – and there were programs that crashed and burned over that time period. Even these stalwarts have experienced their drawdowns along the way.
The point is that, during this time period – a time period of robust economic growth in the U.S. and substantial stock market performance – Bain Capital was far from alternative, especially compared to its managed futures peers from the same era. But before you dismiss the titans referenced here as exceptions to the rule, realize that even when looking at diverse indices, like the BarclayHedge CTA Index*, Bain’s performance looks again less than stellar. The index mustered an increase of 474% over 1984-1998 time period, more than doubling Bain’s performance.
In other words, Bain Capital, like many private equity firms, was merely a stock market investment dressed up as an alternative investment. While the world is coming around to the idea that private equity is merely an alternate strategy within the equity asset class, many still trumpet it as an alternative investment which can provide non correlated returns to the stock market.
This is not about linking Romney, Bain and Presidential capabilities. We don’t care who you vote for in November, as long as you put some thought into it. But when you put the thought into alternative investment selection, in our opinion, make sure you know which asset classes (hint: managed futures) give true alternative investment exposure – and which (hint: private equity) are merely sold as alternative investments.


Disclaimer
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.
The programs listed here are a sub-set of the full list of programs able to be accessed by subscribing to the database and reflect programs we currently work with and/or are more familiar with.
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. Individuals cannot invest in the index itself, and actual rates of return may be significantly different and more volatile than those of the index.
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.
Limitations on RCM Quintile + Star Rankings
The Quintile Rankings and RCM Star Rankings shown here are provided for informational purposes only. RCM does not guarantee the accuracy, timeliness or completeness of this information. The ranking methodology is proprietary and the results have not been audited or verified by an independent third party. Some CTAs may employ trading programs or strategies that are riskier than others. CTAs may manage customer accounts differently than their model results shown or make different trades in actual customer accounts versus their own accounts. Different CTAs are subject to different market conditions and risks that can significantly impact actual results. RCM and its affiliates receive compensation from some of the rated CTAs. Investors should perform their own due diligence before investing with any CTA. This ranking information should not be the sole basis for any investment decision.
See the full terms of use and risk disclaimer here.