Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Severe Hedge Fund Unwinding Continues

Recs

24

December 22, 2007 – Comments (12)

Two of the largest quantitative hedge funds each lost 6% in the month of November alone:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a1u52EKp84.w&refer=home

Everyone thought these guys were using nuclear physics to magically divine alpha from an alpha-stingy market.  If that were the case, then they wouldn't have similar positions and similar recent performance. Hence, their strategies must not be that complex or unique.

In my opinion, the lesson here is not that quantitative investing doesn't work.  The real lesson is that crowded trades are dangerous. They're even more dangerous when you use leverage.  These guys are now facing a double whammy of margin calls and investor redemptions at the same time, resulting in a vicious death spiral that cannot be overcome.  When they're forced to liquidate, it means that they have to cover short positions and sell long positions which results in further negative performance.  And of course, continued negative performance begets further redemptions and margin calls.  The death spiral accelerates.

As a result of the hedge fund problems, "bad" stocks have been outperforming good stocks lately.  Here's some evidence that I found almost shocking:

I ran a screen of all stocks with market caps between $100 million and $1.5 billion that trade on the major exchanges. That screen produced 2,919 companies.  I then looked at the stock price performance of these companies over the past week (Dec 14 - Dec 21) according to short interest level.  There were 841 companies with short ratios less than 3 days to cover.  Their average return this past week? -- negative 0.2%.  There were 596 companies with short ratios above 12x.  Their average return over the past week positive 5.1%.  That is a massive difference in returns.  And we're not talking about small sample sizes here.  This is statistically significant to a very high degree of confidence.  It implies that much of the rally this past week in micro-caps was due to short covering.

This is the second time I'm making this prediction (see my August blogpost).  December performance for the big quant funds will be abysmal.

So now maybe you're convinced but you're wondering, "So what?  What's in it for me?"  Solace and hope, for one thing.  Anyone notice that many of the top Caps players seem to have been stalled out the last couple months?  I think it is largely because of the hedge fund unwinding of billions of dollars of positions.  This can't go on forever.  Their assets have to stop at zero.  I wish I knew when they were going to stop unwinding, because there would be massive profit potential in that knowledge, but I don't.  I predict that when the unwinding does slow or stop, many top Caps players will resume their upward score trajectory.

 

12 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On December 22, 2007 at 11:33 AM, MakeItSeven (99.88) wrote:

Interesting.  Which screener did you use to get this statistics ?

Report this comment
#2) On December 22, 2007 at 11:49 AM, StatsGeek (99.97) wrote:

I use Zack's Research Wizard.  Software that I pay for and am very happy with.

Report this comment
#3) On December 22, 2007 at 12:30 PM, bubuzim (98.02) wrote:

I just checked out StatsGeek's profile.  Under 'How Many Love StatsGeek' it says: '1'.  What?  That can't be right...

Very impressive performance, by the way.   Mind teaching us a few more of the fundamentals of the market?

Report this comment
#4) On December 22, 2007 at 12:38 PM, MakeItSeven (99.88) wrote:

I have a subscription with Zack's Elite.  I considered getting Zack's Research Wizard but after the trial period, I didn't think it was good enough to justify the price.  Maybe I will consider again next year.

The main reason I balked was that I made a few screens without specifying the minimum prices for the stocks and then ran the backtesting.  It returned some huge profit percentages, like a few hundred percent a year, which was obviously wrong.  I asked the person who was handling my trial subscription and he explained that it was because my screen included penny stocks which got rounded off to zero.   Even so, such big return would not have happened if the backtesting program did not do something wrong,  I suspect that it pads up the returns by buying the stocks at bid prices while selling them at ask prices.  While that may make it easier for them to sell the Wizard, it makes it harder for the users to get a correct estimate for his strategies.

Anyway, I like the Zacks screener a lot but, as far as I'm concerned, the backtesting is not useful for me and it is the part that takes the most CPU cycles (since it has to screeen and calculate the profit/loss returns for each of the hundreds of periods).  I tried to get a better deal by asking them to offer a watered-down version of Zacks Research Wizard which allows screeening only without backtesting for a discounted price.  That did not work.  I think they should offer it since it requires very little computer resources to support (no more than the cumbersome screener they make available for free) and would be a better fit for price-conscious people like myself.

Report this comment
#5) On December 22, 2007 at 10:18 PM, GS751 (28.71) wrote:

very interesting.

Report this comment
#6) On December 24, 2007 at 8:07 AM, floridabuilder2 (99.59) wrote:

nice post...

Report this comment
#7) On December 26, 2007 at 3:00 PM, dwot (99.98) wrote:

Somewhere in the summer I read something that was estimating that 10% of the hedge funds would become insolvent.

I will go back and look at your August post. 

Report this comment
#8) On December 27, 2007 at 6:09 PM, Davigan100 (< 20) wrote:

Thanks for the thought-provoking blog.  Don't you think, though, that some of the micro-caps upside could be related to window-dressing from the major mutual funds (ie. the so-called Christmas Rally effect)? 

Report this comment
#9) On December 28, 2007 at 12:48 PM, mdea (< 20) wrote:

Enlightening.

Report this comment
#10) On January 01, 2008 at 6:31 PM, tiobueno (97.97) wrote:

I just happen to see SYNA and IIVI among your recent picks: examples of "your" good stocks underperforming bad stocks?

Report this comment
#11) On January 02, 2008 at 12:04 PM, StatsGeek (99.97) wrote:

SYNA and IIVI are two great growth stocks that have been beaten down for no good reason.  In case folks haven't figured it out, I like to buy good stocks that are going down and short bad stocks that are going up.  Many people like to do the opposite -- "The trend is your friend".  My approach usually causes short-term pain, since it is impossible to call an exact bottom or peak.

Report this comment
#12) On January 02, 2008 at 9:47 PM, abitare (99.58) wrote:

The leason of LCTM was it works great until there is a "black swan" type event. Then you can expect the FED to rescue you. That is why we have 100s of  LTCM type funds  active today. It is going to be interesting.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners