1H 2009 Hedge Fund Update

July 22, 2009 -Credit Suisse Tremont Index LLC released a new research piece, 1H 2009 Hedge Fund Update: Halfway There, a review of how hedge funds have repositioned themselves in the first half of 2009 to generate positive returns for five out of the first six months of the year.

Hedge Fund tomorrow

避險基金版的「明日過後」報告,內容談到許多金融風暴掀起許多有關避險基金產業的疑問。當然,重要的是該報告所提出的建議方向。有檢討也有解決方案。值得一看。

2009/8/26

FROM MANHATTAN TO MADOFF-THE CAUSES AND LESSONS OF HEDGE FUND OPERATIONAL FAILURE

張貼者: Alternative Investment Practicer 晚上8:32 0 意見
一家成立30年,號稱不從事與任何避險基金有利益衝突的業務,沒有管理資產、不做基金估價業務、不賣產業報告,而是專注在實務察核(due deligence)扮演投資偵察隊角色的公司-Castle Hall,前一周發表一篇報告-FROM MANHATTAN TO MADOFF-THE CAUSES AND LESSONS OF HEDGE FUND OPERATIONAL FAILURE。從世紀騙徒-馬多夫詐騙案切入,點出了營運管理失誤(operational failure)的黑暗面對投資人的資產和資產管理業者所造成的負面影響。

Castle Hall從其避險基金的資料庫中,依照七大類別的營運過失項目共挖出了327件相關的失誤案例,若是把世紀騙徒馬多夫所捅下的800億美金天量不計,仍有150億美金的金額是因為這些營運過失而讓投資人的資產受損,其中比例最高的兩項就是侵吞款項與五鬼搬運捏造資產品項。而Castle Hall並未把操作失利的影響納入在營運過失項目中,所以像是LTCM,Amaranth,Sowood等過往曾經轟動避一時的避險基金虧損事件都不列入負面事件中。
1-Theft and misappropriation 侵吞款項
2-Non-existence of assets (the manager claimed to own fake securities or operated a Ponzi scheme where reported assets did not exist) 捏造資產數據,資產實際已不存在
3-Marketing Misrepresentation 詐騙行銷
4-Conflict of Interest 利益衝突
5-Legal/Regulatory Violation 違反法規
6-Concealment of Trading Losses 隱暪交易虧損
7-Mis-valuation of Assets. 謊報資產價值



Castle Hall指出甚少有資料庫專門追蹤基金經理人本身涉入的有問題基金與過往失敗經歷的記錄,而多是從基金公司或是投資策略的分類中去評估投資人的虧損來源。C.H.預估目前仍繼續經營的10000支避險基金中,約有3%的基金就發生過管理營運方面的過失,而且還發現在小型避險基金中,有一明顯的比例是打從一開始「成立」基金就是詐騙為目的。未能預防詐騙陷阱進而捲入其中,便是明顯的營運管理的過失。這對許多避險基金業者來說,賠錢損失是數字上的變化,還能夠經受的住,但是在專業聲譽受損,能力不足的污名難清。這些現象都足以強調獨立專業的實務察核(Due Diligence)的必要。

其中較讓人吃驚的一項發現就是,發生營運過失的避險基金類別,是以長短倉股票策略基金以及管理期貨策略基金(CTA)位居前兩名,而不是相對複雜難懂策略的基金。就C.H.的解讀來看,因為這兩種策略的交易原理簡單易懂,對於有心要上下其手進行詐騙而捏造數據的人而言,所要花費的工夫是相對的簡便易行的。

這篇報告是避險基金產業的相關行業中,較少出現有關實務察核與營運過失的統計資料,值得一看。

The largest 50 funds of hedge funds groups

張貼者: Alternative Investment Practicer 下午4:30 0 意見
2009年6月底為止,全球50大組合式避險基金名單已出爐。經過金融事件與風暴的洗禮之後,能夠維持靈活交易策略,恪守流動性承諾甚而有效保護投資人資產的基金公司,自然就是這個排行榜上的佼佼者,但是,恐慌性撤資現象導致這些流動性佳的組合式避險基金也掉入了「提款機陷阱」中,從2008年9月到2009年6月底,有2000億美金從這50大避險基金中撤離。在金融海嘯之前,組合式避險基金佔整個避險基金產業的總資產40%左右,最多曾擁有8250億美金,而至2009年第2季底,資產已縮水至5300億美金。馬多夫事件更讓許多身陷流動性不足、績效難看的組合式避險基金雪上加霜,走入清算關門一途。而且該事件也重創投資人對組合式避險基金的信任,未善盡資產管理人之責,看好投資人的資產是這段時間組合式避險基金難辭其疚的過失。

組合式避險基金依然還會是許多投資人選擇投入避險基金的最主要管道,因為多重策略、資產分散投資的特性仍是投資人看重它的原因之一,不過,避險基金產業在收費結構的調整將會是投資人評估再回鍋與否的關鍵條件之一。

2009/8/21

Conquering the crisis- BCG Global Asset Management 2009

張貼者: Alternative Investment Practicer 上午8:21 0 意見
全球知名的管理顧問公司-Boston Consulting Group, 在七月分發表了第七年的全球資產管理產業的調查報告。也是一份非常好的金融服務產業的報告之一。報告包括三大部份:現況描述、預期可能的轉變、行動方案。

開宗明義,報告建議讀者要了解今日全球資產管理現況的6件事:
1、2008全球資產管理的金額縮水了18%,來到48.6兆美金。而過去2002~2007年期間,則是以12%成長率累積管理的資產量。
2、2008金融風暴,投資人從高風險、低流動性的資產類別,搬錢到安全避風港的資產類別。貨幣基金市場、固定收益的債券以及成本較低的ETF資產類別,都是此波錢潮挪移的受惠者。傳統主動式投資資產(股票為主)繼續受到被動式投資的近身競爭壓迫。
3、資產管理從業者的收入明顯減少。
4、已有許多資產管理業者著手進行金融海嘯後的業務模式重整,檢視核心競爭力、檢討經營策略、甚至併購其他企業,為的就是要挽留客戶甚至招引新客戶。
5、為可能更糟的經濟前景預做準備。
6、危機之後所帶來的轉機與生機,端視業者如何將過去最拿手最成功的競爭力繼續應用在末來可能改變的營運模式上。

此篇報告中論述到要挽回投資人信任是資產管理產業的首要任務,THE LOSS OF INVESTOR TRUST 一針見血的描述了資產管理顧問(或是投資理財顧問)在這金融風暴之前的快樂時光,因勢利導促使投資人執行了許多「另類的」創新洐生型金融商品投資,短暫的歡愉抵不上資產急挫的痛苦。代價就是失去了投資人的信任,減少了優渥豪華的收入,甚至還引來了投資人與監管單位聯手的從嚴監管聲浪。因此,重建信任之路漫漫,挑戰甚多。


至於可能的經濟前景,此報告則是模擬了三個情境:艱苦聖戰、逐步復甦、前景似錦。也針對各項客觀因素對資產管理產業的影響,如投資人對風險偏好的態度變為保守謹慎、投資工具的消長與演變。

個人覺得有意思的地方是它認為未來幾年股票佔投資人的投資組合的比重會下降。因為從長期統計分析的觀點,股票歷經科技泡沫與金融海嘯之後,股票的長期投資報酬率已經與固定收益債券投資報酬率拉近了。投資人會回到風險考量的思維而不是追求報酬的思維。另外就是戰後嬰兒潮世代的人們都已屆退休之際,各種退休基金為了因應將要發生的退休金給付,而把資金挪移到較為安全穩定的投資工具上,股票的部位一定會因此減少。
報告中的第24頁,提到有關避險基金產業仍會因為追求報酬的策略受到有錢人的青睬。不過,大者恒大的消長現象也是一樣。

至於產業生態轉變之後的因應之道,都是原則性的指導論述。要如何落實採用,則會隨著企業體的規模、文化、競爭力等等條件的差別而有微調的必要。危機可能是下一次轉機的觸媒,但是也可能造成不適應者就此停機。

2009/8/19

管理期貨基金記事-看得到又摸到的雙D (Diversification & Decorrelation) (上)

張貼者: Alternative Investment Practicer 下午4:12 0 意見
對法人機構投資人而言,2008年最讓其出乎意料之外的並不是景氣衰退全球股市的重挫,或是避險基金的績效不彰,反而是避險基金各類不同策略基金的績效表現結果竟然是呈現高度相關性-一塊比肩沈淪。這個結果與投資人當初砸錢放在不同策略意圖求取分散風險與獲利來源的目的大相逕庭。探究過去5年,避險基金策略雖然不斷推陳出新,有許多避險基金卻是第一次真正遭遇市場的壓力測試,結果是如此不堪檢驗,令許多遵守資產分散配置原則的投資人預期破碎,恍如大夢初醒。因此對許多從2008金融風暴學到教訓的投資人來說,更努力尋找出低相關性資產就是為未來可能再度發生(或是一定會再發生)的金融震災預做準備的重要工作。

而2008投資績效異常亮麗的管理期貨策略即是投資人應該要用力探尋的資產類別。從2005年10月以來一直到2008年的10月,Credit Suisse/Tremont 的避險基金指數與S&P500的相關性高達77%,而同一段期間,管理期貨策略指數與S&P500相關性卻是-0.09。也就是說避險基金的整體績效表現與股市的相關性是有極高的一致性,但是管理期貨策略就不同了,光是這個統計數字就足以說明為什麼投資人需要在這個資產類別找尋投資人所需要的低相關性,但是在找尋之前,投資人一定要對於不同面貌的管理期貨策略基金的操作方法、獲利目標以及策略的限制等等面向進行研究與理解的功課。而且投資人千萬不要以2008的績效成果做為投資CTAs的驅動力,也不要期望管理期貨基金能夠繼續在2009年獲取40%或是令人眩目的報酬率,而是應該將管理期貨策略的部位視做為投資組合中的低(負)相關性資產,聚焦在它所扮演的策略性特質上。

許多資深的CTAs認為,諸多的財經報導一味著墨在管理期貨2008年的報酬率,其實是不正確的誤導投資人眼光,它們應該導引投資人檢視機構投資人所重視的「流動性」與「透明度」的特色上。而這兩種特色在管理期貨策略上經常是相伴相隨。2008年的信貸危機所誘發的流動性枯竭期間,管理期貨策略的運作成了少數真正維持流動性的資產,幾乎不受其他金融市場流動性頓時消失的影響。CTAs的流動性之所以受到青睬,就是投資部位的轉換可以很快的調整。Quantica Capital公司就曾說明,在2008年3月時,遭遇了Bear Stearns資產不斷惡化的影響,進而危及到他們公司部位的安全性,因為自從他們的公司成立之後,一直都是透過Bear Stearns做為其有價證券交易與其他金融業務的主要經紀商。在他們慎重評估交易對手風險飆高的狀況之後,決意解除所有透過Bear Stearns交易的部位,在45分鐘內,他們就將1億5千萬美金的投資組合解除。而當天結算的績效還保有正報酬。

流動性太好,對管理期貨策略而言,不是一成不變的優勢,而是個雙面刃。因為2008年金融風暴期間,管理期貨策略雖然可以繼續運作,但是卻都無法避免成為機構投資人的緊急提款機,不斷的從中提出額度贖回資金用以解救其他陷入流動性危機的資產類別中。以Winton Capital為例,他們在2008年的投資績效也將近20%,管理資產總量在2008最高峰時有160億美金,但是在一陣贖錢狂潮中,資產頓時也下跌到130億。同樣的狀況也同時發生在其他績效表現優異同樣遭遇資產狂跌異象的CTAs身上。

2009/8/12

Understanding professionally managed futures

張貼者: Alternative Investment Practicer 中午12:13 0 意見
Vision financial這家期貨商,為管理期貨整理一遍廣告文宣及簡報,我個人認為很適合對管理期貨策略陌生的投資人。這篇文章先從馬克維茲的現代投資理論破題,借由資產分配對投資組合的影響重大的角度,帶出管理期貨資產部位對整體投資組合的重要性。

低相關性、自成一格的投資策略特色與過往的績效特色,還是宣傳管理期貨最常提到的三大要素。但是資料的更新,以及常見 Q&A 整理,是我看重這篇報告的地方。






2009/8/10

Commodity Market Commentary - June 2009

張貼者: Alternative Investment Practicer 下午1:40 0 意見
Tiberius 公司是以原物料基金的操作為主力,它的月報是我第一次從網路上看到。19頁報告去頭去尾也還有17頁的內容,最新的月報共有三個部份,分別為是基金績效的說明;股市現況與展望;原物料商品市場的展望。
它先從6月底美國農業部所公告的農產品種植面積報告,將小麥、玉米、大豆的市場供需與價格掃描了一遍,基本上,小麥與大豆都因為產量驟增而壓低市場價格,而玉米則因為出乎預期的種植面積大增也產生了供過於求的訊息,導致玉米價格重挫。
至於其他有關金屬、能源相關的評論大致都與中國需求以及全球景氣變化有較大的關連。


我個人在閱讀此報告時,認為有二個部份是值得再看一次:
第一個是它們對全球股市反彈的看法,它們將此次衰退與2001年的衰退期間股市表現做了技術分析與特殊事件的比較。其中主要是著眼在三項因素:911事件、地綠政治(阿富汗)與法人機構的動態。它們認為最近的股市反彈仍然還有軋空行情,堆高股市指數。
第二個是它們說明在原物料商品的配對交易策略。包括做多石油+放空天然氣;做多鈀金屬+放空鉑金屬;做多小麥、玉米+放空大豆。

因為近年來接觸有關原物料市場的資訊時,深深覺得氣候因素、人口因素、經濟因素影響原物料商品價格甚為明顯,雖然也知道人類活動就是離不開吃喝,這也是原物料題材永遠會是主流的原因,但是要從中賺到財富,仍然是要對剛才所提到的影響因素有所了解才能解讀市場,話說回來,每日追蹤研究原物料資訊的投資人是否就從中賺到錢?起碼我是還沒有從中賺到堪稱「財富」的資產。

對於原物料市場,日後會搭配此公司月報與DIAOPSON COMMODITY REPORT 一塊閱讀。

2009/8/8

Outlook evolution of this blog 網站演化記錄

張貼者: Alternative Investment Practicer 下午5:47 0 意見
v1.0 陽春版,純粹記錄 HF Industry 的消息與報告




v2.0 動畫版,記錄 HF Industry 的消息與報告,再加上其他網路上匯集而來多媒體資訊。
建議到可以到http://btemplates.com/看看,有幾百種免費套件讓你直接使用。當然,重要的還是內容資訊的更新與維護。

Man Investment- 2009Q2 quarterly review & special topic

張貼者: Alternative Investment Practicer 上午8:52 0 意見
Man investment 每季都會出版一份季報,向來是一份投資避險基金的投資人或是業界人士都會閱讀的產業報告。因為該集團向來對外一再強調他們在研究資源的著力與重視,而且他們也的確一直都會提供研究報告給合作伙伴,讓他們能夠有效的更新避險基金產業的脈動與Man investment旗下商品的績效。
最新的這份季報幾天前剛出爐,包括兩大部份:
前半部內容是分析說明各類避險基金策略的績效表現與整體產業資產的變化。當然,隨著金融秩序的穩定之後,避險基金也是回春復原的非常明顯,其中又以新興市場股票多空策略及可轉債策略反彈最大、績效顯著;但是去年的倍受追捧的獲利策略-管理期貨策略則是反差的表現不佳。
後半部內容則是整理了產業結構現況與檢討。我認為不脫離:"Hedge fund tomorrow"與"New views of the hedge fund industry"的範圍,只是再次證明,避險基金的改造聲浪已經漸次要發生作用了。因為經過這段期間許多專業媒體與機構投資人的要求,透明度、流動性、資產管理權等等議題,避險基金很難再坐視不理。



2009/8/5

Hedged mutual funds (HMFs) may be a dominant trend in next hedge fund industry cycle

張貼者: Alternative Investment Practicer 下午1:05 0 意見
避險式共同基金」會是下一波避險基金產業的新潮流?這是一個值得關注的話題。避險基金被攻擊的成本結構、投資組合透明度、申贖流動性,似乎是有了新的替代方案。但是這個方案仍然是一個還不成熟的投資工具-Hedged Mutual Fund。
Opalesque這家另類投資界的媒體,近日有發表關於HMF 的觀察報導,是值得看看,其中也引用一家 K&L Gates 在研討會中發表有關避險基金產業發展現狀簡報,其內容就提到有關HMF的資訊,值得一看。
一個綜合共同基金、避險基金投資概念、投資工具的新投資載具,已經成形了。


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hedged mutual funds (HMFs) may be a dominant trend in next hedge fund industry cycle By Benedicte Gravrand, Opalesque London:

Last year, hedge funds lost on average 20%. But mutual funds lost around twice as much. However, there is a marked trend towards a convergence between the two styles and structures, particularly in the U.S.

Mutual funds have been under pressure for a while, what with underperformance and competition from the better-yielding alternative investment funds, and the cheaper ETFS and other index funds. So they are starting to use the clever tools that came out of the investment world's laboratories, namely: alternative investment funds, to generate higher returns. So the retail market can now access such tools as shorting, leverage (although not as much as with hedge funds due to regulations), derivatives, etc. for less fees, more transparency, better liquidity and more regulatory oversight.

Naik, Agarwal and Boyson, in their 2007 working paper entitled "Hedge Funds for Retail Investors? An Examination of Hedged Mutual Funds" (Hedge Fund Centre, London Business School) predicted that "...hedged mutual funds will play an increasingly important role in the field of investment management as they provide access to hedge-fund like strategies with the fee structure, liquidity, and regulatory requirements of mutual funds."

Next cycle?
According to a Greenwich, CT based consultancy firm Lake Partners' report on The State of the Hedge Fund Industry, produced in conjunction with international law firm K&L Gates and presented by webinar on 30 June-09, the hedge fund industry has had quite a few cycles of renaissance and wreckage including:

Cycle 1 - 1949-1970s, started with A.W. Jones, ending in the "dark ages";
Cycle 2 - 1980-1990, Golden Era cumulating to a market correction;
Cycle 3 - 1991-94, recovery and "masters of the universe";
Cycle 4 - 1995-98, bull market to margin calls;
Cycle 5 - 1999-2002, bull market ending in bear market;
Cycle 6 - 2003-2009, from institutionalisation to retrenchment.

The next cycle in the hedge fund industry chronicles might well be that of convergence between styles and structures for greater access to the retail market.

Democratization of alternative strategies
Lake Partners noted a definite trend towards democratization of alternative strategies as the latter is moving into mutual funds.

It all started in 1997 with the SEC's repeal of the "short-short" Rule, when the first mutual fund practitioners initiated more hedging. The following year, the first dedicated "hedge mutual funds" were created. (Note: Here is a link to a related research paper by K-H. Bae and J. Yi, which found that the timing performance of mutual fund managers improved significantly after the short-short rule repeal: "The Impact of the Short-Short Rule Repeal on the Timing Ability of Mutual Funds".)

According to Forbes.com, Robert Gordon, CEO of New York-based investment firm Twenty-First Securities, pioneered the mutual fund with a hedge fund style earlier than that, in 1985 in fact, under the management of now legendary money runner Robert Stovall - although the fund never became profitable. Gordon says he still thinks they're a good idea. "But they don't have the same cache" as a hedge fund. "You don't get the same thrill."

Now, we are seeing a rapid growth in AuM and in the variety of the alternative mutual funds and structures. Indeed, the alternative mutual fund industry has grown from $1.3bn in 1997 to $100bn (est.) in 2009 (YTD).

Hedge funds and other asset managers launching alternative mutual funds
It is not just mutual funds that are launching funds using alternative strategies; there is also a trend of hedge fund managers launching mutual funds - as they seek to attract capital from the retail market. Indeed, one can invest in such a fund with only a few thousand dollars.

Greenwich, CT-based hedge fund firm AQR Capital Management for example, is now offering new mutual funds. David Kabiller, founding principal of AQR, told ConnPost.com earlier this month that he did not think this trend would catch on among hedge funds: "There's a lot of cost and oversight to developing a mutual fund company. To take on those costs, you have to be able to innovate those products."

Only this month, we heard of U.S. firm Fred Alger Management, which is preparing to launch a long/short equity mutual fund; New York-based asset manager Van Eck Global, which is launching a new mutual fund that invests in hedge funds; Bull Path Capital Management LLC in New York, which recently converted the domestic version of its hedge fund into a mutual fund; and North Carolina-based hedge fund firm Hatteras Funds, which acquired AIP Mutual Funds, and with it the management of two mutual funds of hedge funds (see Opalesque Exclusive).

There is also U.S. investment adviser Driehaus Capital Management, which has just launched an absolute return mutual fund; FundQuest, a U.S. and European managed account services provider, which has expanded its alternative investments offering with hedge-style mutual funds; and Andrew W. Lo, the famed finance professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who has recently launched a mutual fund providing hedge-fund-like strategies.(interview video below)






By Benedicte Gravrand, Opalesque London:

This is the second of a two-part article. Part One was published yesterday and can be found here Source

What are HMFs?
According to the Lake Partners report, hedged mutual funds are open-end investment companies registered under the US Investment Company Act of 1940 which implement their underlying portfolios using hedging strategies or investments on an ongoing, regular or periodic basis. Although open-end mutual funds are not the only ones in the game: registered closed-end funds, ETFs and ETNs also use these strategies.

Strategies include long/short investing, hedging (options, futures, derivatives, etc.) and alternative strategies (commodities, leverage, derivatives, illiquid private placement or distressed securities and other instruments).

Hedged mutual funds provide access to alternative strategies with lower costs, more oversight, and better liquidity and transparency than hedge funds, says the report. Their regulatory safeguards include independent custody, limitations on leverage, liquidity and daily pricing, and lower costs.

Investing in HMFs
These funds indeed offer an opportunity for investors and professionals to have greater choice, additional sources of potential returns, more tools for risk management and enhanced diversification.

Those driving the current and future marketplace for hedged mutual funds are mainly: investors (individuals, HNWIs, family offices); investment professionals (manufacturers, advisors, alternatives managers); fiduciaries, foundations, endowments; and retirements plans.

According to Investopedia.com, unlike retail hedge funds, which have higher minimums that require some level of investor accreditation, this breed of mutual fund enjoys the same level of accessibility as the more commonplace active and passive strategies available across the traditional equity and fixed income style boxes.

Traditional mutual funds' load fees are around 3% and expense ratio fees are around 1% to 2% - although there are other one-off fees too. However, according to Investopedia, HMFs' fees are often higher than those of the typical actively managed mutual fund; the fee range for hedged products can be from 2.5% to 4% or more.

HMFs underperform hedge funds but outperform mutual funds
In their study, Naik, Agarwal and Boyson found that despite their use of similar trading strategies, hedged mutual funds underperform hedge funds : "We attribute this evidence to lighter regulation and better incentives faced by hedge funds", says the paper's abstract. "In contrast, hedged mutual funds outperform traditional mutual funds. Most interesting, this superior performance is largely driven by managers with experience in implementing hedge fund strategies."

So hedge fund managers would do well in the mutual fund arena. We could also conclude from this that if hedge funds outperform HMFs due to lighter regulation, the forthcoming, heavier, regulations on hedge funds, both in Europe and in the US, might affect hedge funds' performance significantly.

The Lake Partners report estimates that hedged mutual funds (HMFs) could outperform traditional mutual funds by as much as 4.8% p.a.

A Morningstar fund analyst recently mentioned two HMFs to CNN's Money Magazine: the Merger Fund and Hussman Strategic Growth. Both move out of sync with the S&P 500 and did well during the bear market but less well in the rebound. Over the past five years, Merger has gained an annualized 6.3%, Hussman 7.5% (Morningstar is tracking some 54 HMFs).

BusinessWeek.com mentioned another HMFs last month, a fairly new offering called the Nakoma Absolute Return Fund: the fund is up almost 6% YTD, trailing the S&P 500 by about 3%, a little better than the managers' historical performance in bull markets.

2009/8/4

CME Group-Managed Futures Resource Center

張貼者: Alternative Investment Practicer 清晨5:45 0 意見

找尋有關管理期貨策略在1983年刋出的經典文章:"The Potential Role of Managed Commodity – Financial Futures Accounts (and/or Funds) in Portfolios of Stocks and Bonds" (此文John Lintner所撰寫,他是一位Harvard Professor),在google 過程中,發現CME 的資源中心有幾篇有關管理期貨的相關資料,當然也包括了John Lintner的經典文章,還有網路簡報-A Former Institutional Investor’s Perspective on Managed Futures,可以聽聽他們怎麼介紹管理期貨策略。簡報資料相當豐富。


2009/8/3

Man Investment-Welcome to Managed Futures(& AHL)

張貼者: Alternative Investment Practicer 清晨5:19 0 意見
最近管理期貨策略的整體績效似乎走不出「打擺子」的低潮。看了許多的管理期貨基金的報告,理解到許多基金經理人目前都有降低部位,重新部局。當我例行進入Man Investments網路要檢視Man AHL績效時,發現他們專門為管理期貨策略開闢了一個網頁單元-Welcome to Managed Futures用以行銷說明管理期貨策略的特色以及他們的旗艦基金-AHL。

對於管理期貨策略較為陌生的投資人而言,我往往推薦他們先從AHL所提供的投資資料著手了解。一來是資料的取得較為容易、也很透明,因為他們的行銷策略對象原本就是針對全球一般投資人而出發,再來就是投資門檻較低,2萬美金就可以從香港直接投資,當然還有許多越洋過來台灣銷售的保險儲蓄計畫也能小額購買,現在,國泰投信也與Man Investments合作,為台灣投資人引入了這支管理期貨程式所衍生而出的混血商品。或許在理解台灣在地版的管理期貨基金資訊之餘,花點時間去看看原生的英文的資訊,可以讓投資人更充分理解,海外版與舶來版的差異。
不論是做研究也好、初入門也罷或是既有投資人對商品的關注,這個網站應該常常去看看。

2009/8/26

FROM MANHATTAN TO MADOFF-THE CAUSES AND LESSONS OF HEDGE FUND OPERATIONAL FAILURE

一家成立30年,號稱不從事與任何避險基金有利益衝突的業務,沒有管理資產、不做基金估價業務、不賣產業報告,而是專注在實務察核(due deligence)扮演投資偵察隊角色的公司-Castle Hall,前一周發表一篇報告-FROM MANHATTAN TO MADOFF-THE CAUSES AND LESSONS OF HEDGE FUND OPERATIONAL FAILURE。從世紀騙徒-馬多夫詐騙案切入,點出了營運管理失誤(operational failure)的黑暗面對投資人的資產和資產管理業者所造成的負面影響。

Castle Hall從其避險基金的資料庫中,依照七大類別的營運過失項目共挖出了327件相關的失誤案例,若是把世紀騙徒馬多夫所捅下的800億美金天量不計,仍有150億美金的金額是因為這些營運過失而讓投資人的資產受損,其中比例最高的兩項就是侵吞款項與五鬼搬運捏造資產品項。而Castle Hall並未把操作失利的影響納入在營運過失項目中,所以像是LTCM,Amaranth,Sowood等過往曾經轟動避一時的避險基金虧損事件都不列入負面事件中。
1-Theft and misappropriation 侵吞款項
2-Non-existence of assets (the manager claimed to own fake securities or operated a Ponzi scheme where reported assets did not exist) 捏造資產數據,資產實際已不存在
3-Marketing Misrepresentation 詐騙行銷
4-Conflict of Interest 利益衝突
5-Legal/Regulatory Violation 違反法規
6-Concealment of Trading Losses 隱暪交易虧損
7-Mis-valuation of Assets. 謊報資產價值



Castle Hall指出甚少有資料庫專門追蹤基金經理人本身涉入的有問題基金與過往失敗經歷的記錄,而多是從基金公司或是投資策略的分類中去評估投資人的虧損來源。C.H.預估目前仍繼續經營的10000支避險基金中,約有3%的基金就發生過管理營運方面的過失,而且還發現在小型避險基金中,有一明顯的比例是打從一開始「成立」基金就是詐騙為目的。未能預防詐騙陷阱進而捲入其中,便是明顯的營運管理的過失。這對許多避險基金業者來說,賠錢損失是數字上的變化,還能夠經受的住,但是在專業聲譽受損,能力不足的污名難清。這些現象都足以強調獨立專業的實務察核(Due Diligence)的必要。

其中較讓人吃驚的一項發現就是,發生營運過失的避險基金類別,是以長短倉股票策略基金以及管理期貨策略基金(CTA)位居前兩名,而不是相對複雜難懂策略的基金。就C.H.的解讀來看,因為這兩種策略的交易原理簡單易懂,對於有心要上下其手進行詐騙而捏造數據的人而言,所要花費的工夫是相對的簡便易行的。

這篇報告是避險基金產業的相關行業中,較少出現有關實務察核與營運過失的統計資料,值得一看。

The largest 50 funds of hedge funds groups

2009年6月底為止,全球50大組合式避險基金名單已出爐。經過金融事件與風暴的洗禮之後,能夠維持靈活交易策略,恪守流動性承諾甚而有效保護投資人資產的基金公司,自然就是這個排行榜上的佼佼者,但是,恐慌性撤資現象導致這些流動性佳的組合式避險基金也掉入了「提款機陷阱」中,從2008年9月到2009年6月底,有2000億美金從這50大避險基金中撤離。在金融海嘯之前,組合式避險基金佔整個避險基金產業的總資產40%左右,最多曾擁有8250億美金,而至2009年第2季底,資產已縮水至5300億美金。馬多夫事件更讓許多身陷流動性不足、績效難看的組合式避險基金雪上加霜,走入清算關門一途。而且該事件也重創投資人對組合式避險基金的信任,未善盡資產管理人之責,看好投資人的資產是這段時間組合式避險基金難辭其疚的過失。

組合式避險基金依然還會是許多投資人選擇投入避險基金的最主要管道,因為多重策略、資產分散投資的特性仍是投資人看重它的原因之一,不過,避險基金產業在收費結構的調整將會是投資人評估再回鍋與否的關鍵條件之一。

2009/8/21

Conquering the crisis- BCG Global Asset Management 2009

全球知名的管理顧問公司-Boston Consulting Group, 在七月分發表了第七年的全球資產管理產業的調查報告。也是一份非常好的金融服務產業的報告之一。報告包括三大部份:現況描述、預期可能的轉變、行動方案。

開宗明義,報告建議讀者要了解今日全球資產管理現況的6件事:
1、2008全球資產管理的金額縮水了18%,來到48.6兆美金。而過去2002~2007年期間,則是以12%成長率累積管理的資產量。
2、2008金融風暴,投資人從高風險、低流動性的資產類別,搬錢到安全避風港的資產類別。貨幣基金市場、固定收益的債券以及成本較低的ETF資產類別,都是此波錢潮挪移的受惠者。傳統主動式投資資產(股票為主)繼續受到被動式投資的近身競爭壓迫。
3、資產管理從業者的收入明顯減少。
4、已有許多資產管理業者著手進行金融海嘯後的業務模式重整,檢視核心競爭力、檢討經營策略、甚至併購其他企業,為的就是要挽留客戶甚至招引新客戶。
5、為可能更糟的經濟前景預做準備。
6、危機之後所帶來的轉機與生機,端視業者如何將過去最拿手最成功的競爭力繼續應用在末來可能改變的營運模式上。

此篇報告中論述到要挽回投資人信任是資產管理產業的首要任務,THE LOSS OF INVESTOR TRUST 一針見血的描述了資產管理顧問(或是投資理財顧問)在這金融風暴之前的快樂時光,因勢利導促使投資人執行了許多「另類的」創新洐生型金融商品投資,短暫的歡愉抵不上資產急挫的痛苦。代價就是失去了投資人的信任,減少了優渥豪華的收入,甚至還引來了投資人與監管單位聯手的從嚴監管聲浪。因此,重建信任之路漫漫,挑戰甚多。


至於可能的經濟前景,此報告則是模擬了三個情境:艱苦聖戰、逐步復甦、前景似錦。也針對各項客觀因素對資產管理產業的影響,如投資人對風險偏好的態度變為保守謹慎、投資工具的消長與演變。

個人覺得有意思的地方是它認為未來幾年股票佔投資人的投資組合的比重會下降。因為從長期統計分析的觀點,股票歷經科技泡沫與金融海嘯之後,股票的長期投資報酬率已經與固定收益債券投資報酬率拉近了。投資人會回到風險考量的思維而不是追求報酬的思維。另外就是戰後嬰兒潮世代的人們都已屆退休之際,各種退休基金為了因應將要發生的退休金給付,而把資金挪移到較為安全穩定的投資工具上,股票的部位一定會因此減少。
報告中的第24頁,提到有關避險基金產業仍會因為追求報酬的策略受到有錢人的青睬。不過,大者恒大的消長現象也是一樣。

至於產業生態轉變之後的因應之道,都是原則性的指導論述。要如何落實採用,則會隨著企業體的規模、文化、競爭力等等條件的差別而有微調的必要。危機可能是下一次轉機的觸媒,但是也可能造成不適應者就此停機。

2009/8/19

管理期貨基金記事-看得到又摸到的雙D (Diversification & Decorrelation) (上)

對法人機構投資人而言,2008年最讓其出乎意料之外的並不是景氣衰退全球股市的重挫,或是避險基金的績效不彰,反而是避險基金各類不同策略基金的績效表現結果竟然是呈現高度相關性-一塊比肩沈淪。這個結果與投資人當初砸錢放在不同策略意圖求取分散風險與獲利來源的目的大相逕庭。探究過去5年,避險基金策略雖然不斷推陳出新,有許多避險基金卻是第一次真正遭遇市場的壓力測試,結果是如此不堪檢驗,令許多遵守資產分散配置原則的投資人預期破碎,恍如大夢初醒。因此對許多從2008金融風暴學到教訓的投資人來說,更努力尋找出低相關性資產就是為未來可能再度發生(或是一定會再發生)的金融震災預做準備的重要工作。

而2008投資績效異常亮麗的管理期貨策略即是投資人應該要用力探尋的資產類別。從2005年10月以來一直到2008年的10月,Credit Suisse/Tremont 的避險基金指數與S&P500的相關性高達77%,而同一段期間,管理期貨策略指數與S&P500相關性卻是-0.09。也就是說避險基金的整體績效表現與股市的相關性是有極高的一致性,但是管理期貨策略就不同了,光是這個統計數字就足以說明為什麼投資人需要在這個資產類別找尋投資人所需要的低相關性,但是在找尋之前,投資人一定要對於不同面貌的管理期貨策略基金的操作方法、獲利目標以及策略的限制等等面向進行研究與理解的功課。而且投資人千萬不要以2008的績效成果做為投資CTAs的驅動力,也不要期望管理期貨基金能夠繼續在2009年獲取40%或是令人眩目的報酬率,而是應該將管理期貨策略的部位視做為投資組合中的低(負)相關性資產,聚焦在它所扮演的策略性特質上。

許多資深的CTAs認為,諸多的財經報導一味著墨在管理期貨2008年的報酬率,其實是不正確的誤導投資人眼光,它們應該導引投資人檢視機構投資人所重視的「流動性」與「透明度」的特色上。而這兩種特色在管理期貨策略上經常是相伴相隨。2008年的信貸危機所誘發的流動性枯竭期間,管理期貨策略的運作成了少數真正維持流動性的資產,幾乎不受其他金融市場流動性頓時消失的影響。CTAs的流動性之所以受到青睬,就是投資部位的轉換可以很快的調整。Quantica Capital公司就曾說明,在2008年3月時,遭遇了Bear Stearns資產不斷惡化的影響,進而危及到他們公司部位的安全性,因為自從他們的公司成立之後,一直都是透過Bear Stearns做為其有價證券交易與其他金融業務的主要經紀商。在他們慎重評估交易對手風險飆高的狀況之後,決意解除所有透過Bear Stearns交易的部位,在45分鐘內,他們就將1億5千萬美金的投資組合解除。而當天結算的績效還保有正報酬。

流動性太好,對管理期貨策略而言,不是一成不變的優勢,而是個雙面刃。因為2008年金融風暴期間,管理期貨策略雖然可以繼續運作,但是卻都無法避免成為機構投資人的緊急提款機,不斷的從中提出額度贖回資金用以解救其他陷入流動性危機的資產類別中。以Winton Capital為例,他們在2008年的投資績效也將近20%,管理資產總量在2008最高峰時有160億美金,但是在一陣贖錢狂潮中,資產頓時也下跌到130億。同樣的狀況也同時發生在其他績效表現優異同樣遭遇資產狂跌異象的CTAs身上。

2009/8/12

Understanding professionally managed futures

Vision financial這家期貨商,為管理期貨整理一遍廣告文宣及簡報,我個人認為很適合對管理期貨策略陌生的投資人。這篇文章先從馬克維茲的現代投資理論破題,借由資產分配對投資組合的影響重大的角度,帶出管理期貨資產部位對整體投資組合的重要性。

低相關性、自成一格的投資策略特色與過往的績效特色,還是宣傳管理期貨最常提到的三大要素。但是資料的更新,以及常見 Q&A 整理,是我看重這篇報告的地方。






2009/8/10

Commodity Market Commentary - June 2009

Tiberius 公司是以原物料基金的操作為主力,它的月報是我第一次從網路上看到。19頁報告去頭去尾也還有17頁的內容,最新的月報共有三個部份,分別為是基金績效的說明;股市現況與展望;原物料商品市場的展望。
它先從6月底美國農業部所公告的農產品種植面積報告,將小麥、玉米、大豆的市場供需與價格掃描了一遍,基本上,小麥與大豆都因為產量驟增而壓低市場價格,而玉米則因為出乎預期的種植面積大增也產生了供過於求的訊息,導致玉米價格重挫。
至於其他有關金屬、能源相關的評論大致都與中國需求以及全球景氣變化有較大的關連。


我個人在閱讀此報告時,認為有二個部份是值得再看一次:
第一個是它們對全球股市反彈的看法,它們將此次衰退與2001年的衰退期間股市表現做了技術分析與特殊事件的比較。其中主要是著眼在三項因素:911事件、地綠政治(阿富汗)與法人機構的動態。它們認為最近的股市反彈仍然還有軋空行情,堆高股市指數。
第二個是它們說明在原物料商品的配對交易策略。包括做多石油+放空天然氣;做多鈀金屬+放空鉑金屬;做多小麥、玉米+放空大豆。

因為近年來接觸有關原物料市場的資訊時,深深覺得氣候因素、人口因素、經濟因素影響原物料商品價格甚為明顯,雖然也知道人類活動就是離不開吃喝,這也是原物料題材永遠會是主流的原因,但是要從中賺到財富,仍然是要對剛才所提到的影響因素有所了解才能解讀市場,話說回來,每日追蹤研究原物料資訊的投資人是否就從中賺到錢?起碼我是還沒有從中賺到堪稱「財富」的資產。

對於原物料市場,日後會搭配此公司月報與DIAOPSON COMMODITY REPORT 一塊閱讀。

2009/8/8

Outlook evolution of this blog 網站演化記錄

v1.0 陽春版,純粹記錄 HF Industry 的消息與報告




v2.0 動畫版,記錄 HF Industry 的消息與報告,再加上其他網路上匯集而來多媒體資訊。
建議到可以到http://btemplates.com/看看,有幾百種免費套件讓你直接使用。當然,重要的還是內容資訊的更新與維護。

Man Investment- 2009Q2 quarterly review & special topic

Man investment 每季都會出版一份季報,向來是一份投資避險基金的投資人或是業界人士都會閱讀的產業報告。因為該集團向來對外一再強調他們在研究資源的著力與重視,而且他們也的確一直都會提供研究報告給合作伙伴,讓他們能夠有效的更新避險基金產業的脈動與Man investment旗下商品的績效。
最新的這份季報幾天前剛出爐,包括兩大部份:
前半部內容是分析說明各類避險基金策略的績效表現與整體產業資產的變化。當然,隨著金融秩序的穩定之後,避險基金也是回春復原的非常明顯,其中又以新興市場股票多空策略及可轉債策略反彈最大、績效顯著;但是去年的倍受追捧的獲利策略-管理期貨策略則是反差的表現不佳。
後半部內容則是整理了產業結構現況與檢討。我認為不脫離:"Hedge fund tomorrow"與"New views of the hedge fund industry"的範圍,只是再次證明,避險基金的改造聲浪已經漸次要發生作用了。因為經過這段期間許多專業媒體與機構投資人的要求,透明度、流動性、資產管理權等等議題,避險基金很難再坐視不理。



2009/8/5

Hedged mutual funds (HMFs) may be a dominant trend in next hedge fund industry cycle

避險式共同基金」會是下一波避險基金產業的新潮流?這是一個值得關注的話題。避險基金被攻擊的成本結構、投資組合透明度、申贖流動性,似乎是有了新的替代方案。但是這個方案仍然是一個還不成熟的投資工具-Hedged Mutual Fund。
Opalesque這家另類投資界的媒體,近日有發表關於HMF 的觀察報導,是值得看看,其中也引用一家 K&L Gates 在研討會中發表有關避險基金產業發展現狀簡報,其內容就提到有關HMF的資訊,值得一看。
一個綜合共同基金、避險基金投資概念、投資工具的新投資載具,已經成形了。


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hedged mutual funds (HMFs) may be a dominant trend in next hedge fund industry cycle By Benedicte Gravrand, Opalesque London:

Last year, hedge funds lost on average 20%. But mutual funds lost around twice as much. However, there is a marked trend towards a convergence between the two styles and structures, particularly in the U.S.

Mutual funds have been under pressure for a while, what with underperformance and competition from the better-yielding alternative investment funds, and the cheaper ETFS and other index funds. So they are starting to use the clever tools that came out of the investment world's laboratories, namely: alternative investment funds, to generate higher returns. So the retail market can now access such tools as shorting, leverage (although not as much as with hedge funds due to regulations), derivatives, etc. for less fees, more transparency, better liquidity and more regulatory oversight.

Naik, Agarwal and Boyson, in their 2007 working paper entitled "Hedge Funds for Retail Investors? An Examination of Hedged Mutual Funds" (Hedge Fund Centre, London Business School) predicted that "...hedged mutual funds will play an increasingly important role in the field of investment management as they provide access to hedge-fund like strategies with the fee structure, liquidity, and regulatory requirements of mutual funds."

Next cycle?
According to a Greenwich, CT based consultancy firm Lake Partners' report on The State of the Hedge Fund Industry, produced in conjunction with international law firm K&L Gates and presented by webinar on 30 June-09, the hedge fund industry has had quite a few cycles of renaissance and wreckage including:

Cycle 1 - 1949-1970s, started with A.W. Jones, ending in the "dark ages";
Cycle 2 - 1980-1990, Golden Era cumulating to a market correction;
Cycle 3 - 1991-94, recovery and "masters of the universe";
Cycle 4 - 1995-98, bull market to margin calls;
Cycle 5 - 1999-2002, bull market ending in bear market;
Cycle 6 - 2003-2009, from institutionalisation to retrenchment.

The next cycle in the hedge fund industry chronicles might well be that of convergence between styles and structures for greater access to the retail market.

Democratization of alternative strategies
Lake Partners noted a definite trend towards democratization of alternative strategies as the latter is moving into mutual funds.

It all started in 1997 with the SEC's repeal of the "short-short" Rule, when the first mutual fund practitioners initiated more hedging. The following year, the first dedicated "hedge mutual funds" were created. (Note: Here is a link to a related research paper by K-H. Bae and J. Yi, which found that the timing performance of mutual fund managers improved significantly after the short-short rule repeal: "The Impact of the Short-Short Rule Repeal on the Timing Ability of Mutual Funds".)

According to Forbes.com, Robert Gordon, CEO of New York-based investment firm Twenty-First Securities, pioneered the mutual fund with a hedge fund style earlier than that, in 1985 in fact, under the management of now legendary money runner Robert Stovall - although the fund never became profitable. Gordon says he still thinks they're a good idea. "But they don't have the same cache" as a hedge fund. "You don't get the same thrill."

Now, we are seeing a rapid growth in AuM and in the variety of the alternative mutual funds and structures. Indeed, the alternative mutual fund industry has grown from $1.3bn in 1997 to $100bn (est.) in 2009 (YTD).

Hedge funds and other asset managers launching alternative mutual funds
It is not just mutual funds that are launching funds using alternative strategies; there is also a trend of hedge fund managers launching mutual funds - as they seek to attract capital from the retail market. Indeed, one can invest in such a fund with only a few thousand dollars.

Greenwich, CT-based hedge fund firm AQR Capital Management for example, is now offering new mutual funds. David Kabiller, founding principal of AQR, told ConnPost.com earlier this month that he did not think this trend would catch on among hedge funds: "There's a lot of cost and oversight to developing a mutual fund company. To take on those costs, you have to be able to innovate those products."

Only this month, we heard of U.S. firm Fred Alger Management, which is preparing to launch a long/short equity mutual fund; New York-based asset manager Van Eck Global, which is launching a new mutual fund that invests in hedge funds; Bull Path Capital Management LLC in New York, which recently converted the domestic version of its hedge fund into a mutual fund; and North Carolina-based hedge fund firm Hatteras Funds, which acquired AIP Mutual Funds, and with it the management of two mutual funds of hedge funds (see Opalesque Exclusive).

There is also U.S. investment adviser Driehaus Capital Management, which has just launched an absolute return mutual fund; FundQuest, a U.S. and European managed account services provider, which has expanded its alternative investments offering with hedge-style mutual funds; and Andrew W. Lo, the famed finance professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who has recently launched a mutual fund providing hedge-fund-like strategies.(interview video below)






By Benedicte Gravrand, Opalesque London:

This is the second of a two-part article. Part One was published yesterday and can be found here Source

What are HMFs?
According to the Lake Partners report, hedged mutual funds are open-end investment companies registered under the US Investment Company Act of 1940 which implement their underlying portfolios using hedging strategies or investments on an ongoing, regular or periodic basis. Although open-end mutual funds are not the only ones in the game: registered closed-end funds, ETFs and ETNs also use these strategies.

Strategies include long/short investing, hedging (options, futures, derivatives, etc.) and alternative strategies (commodities, leverage, derivatives, illiquid private placement or distressed securities and other instruments).

Hedged mutual funds provide access to alternative strategies with lower costs, more oversight, and better liquidity and transparency than hedge funds, says the report. Their regulatory safeguards include independent custody, limitations on leverage, liquidity and daily pricing, and lower costs.

Investing in HMFs
These funds indeed offer an opportunity for investors and professionals to have greater choice, additional sources of potential returns, more tools for risk management and enhanced diversification.

Those driving the current and future marketplace for hedged mutual funds are mainly: investors (individuals, HNWIs, family offices); investment professionals (manufacturers, advisors, alternatives managers); fiduciaries, foundations, endowments; and retirements plans.

According to Investopedia.com, unlike retail hedge funds, which have higher minimums that require some level of investor accreditation, this breed of mutual fund enjoys the same level of accessibility as the more commonplace active and passive strategies available across the traditional equity and fixed income style boxes.

Traditional mutual funds' load fees are around 3% and expense ratio fees are around 1% to 2% - although there are other one-off fees too. However, according to Investopedia, HMFs' fees are often higher than those of the typical actively managed mutual fund; the fee range for hedged products can be from 2.5% to 4% or more.

HMFs underperform hedge funds but outperform mutual funds
In their study, Naik, Agarwal and Boyson found that despite their use of similar trading strategies, hedged mutual funds underperform hedge funds : "We attribute this evidence to lighter regulation and better incentives faced by hedge funds", says the paper's abstract. "In contrast, hedged mutual funds outperform traditional mutual funds. Most interesting, this superior performance is largely driven by managers with experience in implementing hedge fund strategies."

So hedge fund managers would do well in the mutual fund arena. We could also conclude from this that if hedge funds outperform HMFs due to lighter regulation, the forthcoming, heavier, regulations on hedge funds, both in Europe and in the US, might affect hedge funds' performance significantly.

The Lake Partners report estimates that hedged mutual funds (HMFs) could outperform traditional mutual funds by as much as 4.8% p.a.

A Morningstar fund analyst recently mentioned two HMFs to CNN's Money Magazine: the Merger Fund and Hussman Strategic Growth. Both move out of sync with the S&P 500 and did well during the bear market but less well in the rebound. Over the past five years, Merger has gained an annualized 6.3%, Hussman 7.5% (Morningstar is tracking some 54 HMFs).

BusinessWeek.com mentioned another HMFs last month, a fairly new offering called the Nakoma Absolute Return Fund: the fund is up almost 6% YTD, trailing the S&P 500 by about 3%, a little better than the managers' historical performance in bull markets.

2009/8/4

CME Group-Managed Futures Resource Center


找尋有關管理期貨策略在1983年刋出的經典文章:"The Potential Role of Managed Commodity – Financial Futures Accounts (and/or Funds) in Portfolios of Stocks and Bonds" (此文John Lintner所撰寫,他是一位Harvard Professor),在google 過程中,發現CME 的資源中心有幾篇有關管理期貨的相關資料,當然也包括了John Lintner的經典文章,還有網路簡報-A Former Institutional Investor’s Perspective on Managed Futures,可以聽聽他們怎麼介紹管理期貨策略。簡報資料相當豐富。


2009/8/3

Man Investment-Welcome to Managed Futures(& AHL)

最近管理期貨策略的整體績效似乎走不出「打擺子」的低潮。看了許多的管理期貨基金的報告,理解到許多基金經理人目前都有降低部位,重新部局。當我例行進入Man Investments網路要檢視Man AHL績效時,發現他們專門為管理期貨策略開闢了一個網頁單元-Welcome to Managed Futures用以行銷說明管理期貨策略的特色以及他們的旗艦基金-AHL。

對於管理期貨策略較為陌生的投資人而言,我往往推薦他們先從AHL所提供的投資資料著手了解。一來是資料的取得較為容易、也很透明,因為他們的行銷策略對象原本就是針對全球一般投資人而出發,再來就是投資門檻較低,2萬美金就可以從香港直接投資,當然還有許多越洋過來台灣銷售的保險儲蓄計畫也能小額購買,現在,國泰投信也與Man Investments合作,為台灣投資人引入了這支管理期貨程式所衍生而出的混血商品。或許在理解台灣在地版的管理期貨基金資訊之餘,花點時間去看看原生的英文的資訊,可以讓投資人更充分理解,海外版與舶來版的差異。
不論是做研究也好、初入門也罷或是既有投資人對商品的關注,這個網站應該常常去看看。

 

Just CTAs & Hedge Funds v2.0 Copyright 2009 Reflection Designed by Ipiet Templates Image by Tadpole's Notez