Tag Archives: brian-haskin

Market Neutral Funds: Best And Worst Of November

By DailyAlts Staff (click to enlarge) Market-neutral funds balance long and short holdings, generally in pursuit of something close to a 0% net-long exposure. This allows investment managers to neutralize beta and focus on generating alpha – or at least, that’s the idea. In November, the top three market-neutral mutual funds generated returns ranging from +0.94% to +3.52%, while the category’s three laggards returned between -2.53% and -3.19%. In this month’s review, we look beyond November’s performance and also consider the composition of each of the featured funds’ three-year standard deviation and Sharpe ratio. (click to enlarge) November’s Top Performers The top performing market-neutral mutual funds in November were: (click to enlarge) The QuantShares US Market Neutral Momentum ETF fund led the pack last month with its decidedly strong returns of +3.52%. Year to date through November 30, the fund had spectacular gains of 20.43%, but its annualized three-year return through that date stood at a lower +3.80%! Overall, the QuantShares US Market Neutral Momentum Fund’s three-year Sharpe ratio stood at 0.31. The Hussman Strategic International Fund’s +1.37% returns in November weren’t quite as impressive, but were still strongly positive for the month. However, the fund’s three-year return of -1.91% through November 30 is less impressive. On a risk-adjusted basis, the Hussman fund’s three-year Sharpe ratio stood at a dismal -0.28, as of November 30. Perhaps the best looking of the three funds was November’s third-best performer, the Turner Titan II Fund, which posted a 0.94% gain for the month. Its three-year annualized return of 4.69% is much stronger than its peers’, and the three-year Sharpe ratio of 0.82 is by far the best of any market-neutral fund reviewed this month. November’s Worst Performers The worst performing market-neutral mutual funds in November included: (click to enlarge) The Whitebox fund was the month’s worst, at -3.19%. For the first eleven months of 2015, the fund lost 6.56%, but its three-year annualized returns were in the black at +1.44%. What’s more, the fund’s Sharpe ratio of 0.27 was not only better than either of November’s other worst performing market-neutral funds, but among the top three of the six funds covered this month. The QuantShares US Market Neutral Value Fund lost 2.98% in November, bringing its year-to-date losses to 10.03% as of November 30. The fact that QuantShares has found itself on both the Best and the Worst lists for the month is a clear indication that momentum exposure worked in November (and the year), and value did not. On a three-year basis, the fund was in the black, with annualized returns of +0.30%. Finally, the Hussman Strategic Growth Fund was November’s third-worst performer, also earning Hussman the distinction of being in both the penthouse and the doghouse for the month. Of the three biggest losers from last month, the Hussman fund has the worst looking long-term results: a three-year annualized return of -8.88%. Its three-year Sharpe ratio of -1.38 was also easily the worst of the bunch. Past Performance does not necessarily predict future results. Meili Zeng and Jason Seagraves contributed to this article.

GSAM Makes The Case For Multimanager Alternatives

By DailyAlts Staff Record-low interest rates and historically high stock valuations have more and more investors considering liquid alternative investments, which Goldman Sachs Asset Management (“GSAM”) defines as “daily liquid investment strategies” that seek to deliver “differentiated returns from those of core assets” and the potential to mitigate overall portfolio risk and severe drawdowns. In a recent Strategic Advisory Solutions white paper, GSAM makes the case for a multimanager approach to liquid alternative investing – through single turnkey multimanager funds, allocations across multiple managers of the investor’s choosing, or a combination of both. Why Diversify an Alternatives Allocation? GSAM categorizes the liquid alts universe into five peer groups: Equity long/short Event driven Relative value Tactical trade/macro Multistrategy As shown in the table below, the median returns of each peer group have very little persistence from year to year. Therefore, by diversifying across peer groups, investors can avoid the highs and lows of any given year in any given strategy. Building from Scratch One approach to diversifying across liquid alternative peer groups is to “weave” several liquid alts into a “unified portfolio construction framework.” This approach may be best for investors seeking to express high-conviction market views of their own, or for those who possess deep knowledge of particular strategies and managers. But in GSAM’s view, the process of selecting liquid alts requires expertise in the asset class, knowledge of manager capabilities, and judgment of manager and strategy risks, among other things. This makes the “build” approach research-intensive, which may be a bit much for many investors. Turnkey Solutions On the opposite end of the spectrum is the “turnkey” approach – a pre-assembled package of alts, such as a multimanager alternative mutual fund. In this approach, investors effectively outsource the research-intensive process cited above to professional managers. On the downside, investors employing this approach don’t get a customized allocation, which means that their specific investment needs could potentially be better-served. What are some other risks to the multialternative approach? GSAM lists several, including: Performance may depend on the ability of the investment advisor to select, oversee, and allocate funds to individual managers, whose styles may not always be complementary. Managers may underperform the market generally or underperform other investment managers that could have been selected instead. Some managers have little experience managing liquid alternative funds, which differ from private investment funds. Investors should be mindful of these and other risks, according to GSAM. The Best of Both Worlds? GSAM calls combining the “build from scratch” and “turkey” approaches “Buy & Build.” This hybrid approach generally entails complementing a multialternative fund with one or more high-conviction managers the investor believes can potentially contribute to specific investment objectives. This “middle ground” between pure customization and an off-the-shelf solution gives investors additional flexibility with a fraction of the research-intensity. Conclusion In conclusion, GSAM states the company’s belief that multimanager strategies have the potential to help investors pursue additional sources of returns and to diversify their alternative investment allocations. In the firm’s view, investors who are new to investing generally opt for the single package approach to multimanager investing, while more experienced liquid alternative investors often consider building from scratch. The important thing, in GSAM’s estimation, is to understand the potential that liquid alts offer as an additional driver of portfolio returns. For more information, download a pdf copy of the white paper . Jason Seagraves contributed to this article.

Natixis And AlphaSimplex Launch Dynamic Allocation Fund

By DailyAlts Staff On November 30, Natixis Global Asset Management added its tenth alternative mutual fund to its lineup: the Natixis ASG Dynamic Allocation Fund (MUTF: DAAFX ). The new fund is the firm’s fourth fund sub-advised by affiliate AlphaSimplex Group, which was founded by MIT finance professor Andrew Lo, PhD. The new fund seeks to deliver long-term capital appreciation, with a secondary goal of capital-preservation during unfavorable market conditions, via a “tactical global asset allocation strategy.” “Building a durable investment portfolio has become even more challenging in a volatile market environment buffeted by global economic uncertainty,” said David Giunta, president and CEO of U.S. Distribution for Natixis, in a recent statement announcing the launch of the new fund. “To successfully diversify a portfolio of traditional stock and bond funds, investors need adaptive tools, such as the ASG Dynamic Allocation Fund, which incorporate a wide range of information available today to make investment decisions.” Investment Approach The ASG Dynamic Allocation Fund employs dynamic tactical allocation across global markets and asset classes through the use of futures, forwards, and ETFs. Its long positions will span the following traditional asset classes: U.S. stocks; Non-U.S. developed market stocks; Emerging markets stocks; U.S. bonds; and Non-U.S. developed market bonds. The prospectus for the fund indicates that commodities will be added in the future, which will be limited to 20% of the fund’s assets. The strategy starts with a balanced allocation to “high-risk” and “low-risk” asset classes, and then adjusts the allocations according to AlphaSimplex’s quantitative analysis of market behaviors. Portfolio managers Alexander Healy, Robert Rickard, and Derek Schug are also charged with the task of managing the fund’s annualized volatility, which is targeted at no more than 20%, as measured by the standard deviation of the fund’s returns. The fund will also use leverage, which will not exceed 200% of assets, and may hold short positions through the use of derivatives. The fund’s portfolio construction process is depicted in the graphic below. “The ASG Dynamic Allocation Fund seeks to balance risk with expected return by tactically allocating to multiple asset classes across a range of global markets using a disciplined quantitative approach that draws on AlphaSimplex’s current strategies and our experience managing liquid alternatives since 2003,” said AlphaSimplex CEO Duncan B. E. Wilkinson. “We created the fund to help investors shift exposures among global assets in a fast-paced global market environment and help them stay invested over the long term.” Fund Details Shares of the fund are available in A (DAAFX), C (MUTF: DACFX ), and Y (MUTF: DAYFX ) classes, all with an investment management fee of 0.70% and respective net-expense ratios of 1.25%, 2.00%, and 1.00%. The minimum initial investment for A and C shares is $2,500. The minimum for Y shares is $100,000. For more information, visit the fund’s web page .