Multi-manager vs single manager vs index funds
Apr 7, 2010 at 5:51 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 20

chesebert

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
May 17, 2004
Posts
4,838
Likes
199
Has anyone done any study looking at long term risk-adjusted return on multi-manger funds (manager of managers, or fund of funds) compared to other types of investment vehicles?

I am mainly interested in risk-adjusted return comparison.
 
Apr 7, 2010 at 9:47 PM Post #3 of 20

El_Doug

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Posts
3,450
Likes
108
There have to be studies like this - heck, I'd bet you could get this data on the fly from a bloomberg

I'd be willing to wager that, less some of the more exotic hedge funds led by gurus of the field with $10M buy-in prices, index funds will have the greatest risk-adjusted return - their risk is inherently absurdly small
 
Apr 7, 2010 at 10:50 PM Post #4 of 20

invisiman

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 28, 2008
Posts
109
Likes
0
Quote:

Originally Posted by El_Doug /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I'd be willing to wager that, less some of the more exotic hedge funds led by gurus of the field with $10M buy-in prices, index funds will have the greatest risk-adjusted return - their risk is inherently absurdly small


I would also wager that this is correct. There are many graphs and studies showing market indexes outperform mutual funds. Funds of mutual funds will also be expected to under perform relative to an investment in a single mutual fund, as you are paying (basically) 2x the fees every year, and the level of diversification they represent is generally unhelpful, as beyond a certain point (25-35 securities, I believe) diversification does not yield an appreciable decrease in portfolio risk.

I have not run across any relevant data in my studies about other types of funds though RBC does have an index of 250 hedge funds, but I have not compared it to market indexes.
 
Apr 7, 2010 at 11:47 PM Post #5 of 20

chesebert

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
May 17, 2004
Posts
4,838
Likes
199
All the graphs show real return, I am interested in looking at graphs showing only risk adjusted return.

I could have used the Sharpe Ratio. But, I believe Sharpe ratio calculation only covers 1 year, which doesn't say much at all. I need a place where I can get risk-adjusted return graphs for 10, 15, 20 years.
 
Apr 8, 2010 at 12:07 AM Post #6 of 20

invisiman

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 28, 2008
Posts
109
Likes
0
Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert /img/forum/go_quote.gif
All the graphs show real return, I am interested in looking at graphs showing only risk adjusted return.

I could have used the Sharpe Ratio. But, I believe Sharpe ratio calculation only covers 1 year, which doesn't say much at all. I need a place where I can get risk-adjusted return graphs for 10, 15, 20 years.



I'm not overly familiar with the Sharpe ratio. Any possibility of simply using average (or net) return and average risk free return over a period of time over the portfolio's standard deviation(adjusted for time if necessary)?

I've been trying to find related graphs, but I am finding them to be surprisingly elusive.
 
Apr 8, 2010 at 6:34 AM Post #8 of 20

Uncle Erik

Uncle Exotic
Joined
Mar 18, 2006
Posts
22,596
Likes
504
I wouldn't pay much attention to historical performance today. All bets are off for the next couple of years until the mortgage and corporate bond messes fully unwind. That won't happen until late 2012 and early 2013. I don't know what's going to happen, but it doesn't smell good to me.

My take is that the recent rebound in stock prices has more to do with bailout funds taken right back to the casino.

For what it's worth, I'm unloading all of my securities and putting them into real property (
eek.gif
, however, prices are good in some markets because mortgage payments are well below rent, which is how I measure the value of real property), some tangible assets and cash. I've also aggressively paid down debt. The credit cards are zeroed out and my car note will be toast by June or July.

My take, of course, but I think the markets are full of funny money. I'd rather sit out the next few years with cash and tangible assets.
 
Apr 8, 2010 at 7:14 AM Post #9 of 20

invisiman

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 28, 2008
Posts
109
Likes
0
Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I wouldn't pay much attention to historical performance today.


When it comes to the stock market, it's unwise to make decisions on historical data any day. Too much changes too quickly for anything to be particularly useful for long. The "good" things tend to get ramped up to the point where all hell breaks lose when somethings goes wrong(see: Black-Scholes,CDS's, ABCP etc, etc.)

Quote:

All bets are off for the next couple of years until the mortgage and corporate bond messes fully unwind. That won't happen until late 2012 and early 2013. I don't know what's going to happen, but it doesn't smell good to me.]My take is that the recent rebound in stock prices has more to do with bailout funds taken right back to the casino.


Amen. However, it can be argued that all regulatory changes will do is serve to foster a new wave of financial innovation. Are we better off repeating essentially the same crash over and over again, or by jumping into murky waters? It's an interesting point for discussion, but it seems, no matter which way it goes,the "average" investor does not win.

Quote:

For what it's worth, I'm unloading all of my securities and putting them into real property (
eek.gif
, however, prices are good in some markets because mortgage payments are well below rent, which is how I measure the value of real property), some tangible assets and cash. I've also aggressively paid down debt. The credit cards are zeroed out and my car note will be toast by June or July.


I'm glad to see people are still finding some good deals out there. The bailouts, while arguably necessary, seem to have created a falsely inflated sense of stability, when the reality is that many of the problems are still there, just in different forms.

Quote:

My take, of course, but I think the markets are full of funny money. I'd rather sit out the next few years with cash and tangible assets.


Mind if I ask which currency you're holding your cash in?
 
Apr 8, 2010 at 7:51 AM Post #10 of 20

chesebert

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
May 17, 2004
Posts
4,838
Likes
199
I guess no one here has any experience with multi-style multi-manager funds.

I only have 20% of my holdings in US-based equities anyway. It's better to be in the market than not; an easy 3% annual dividend compounded quarterly will turn into some decent cash even if the market is going side ways for the next few years.

Dirt investment is such a pain, you not only have to deal with renters, you will have to maintain the property, pay property tax and deal with nasty home associations. The worst part is your income is taxed at ordinary rate so you lose 40% right there assuming you are in the top bracket (I am assuming you are not putting your properties under a Roth IRA custodian). Sure you can depreciate your property and deduct your expenses, but when you sell your property, all your depreciation gets added back to your basis . The one good thing I like about real property investment is you can leverage up (although that's what got us in this situation in the first place).

To put all your eggs in one asset class is not very prudent IMO.
 
Apr 8, 2010 at 3:01 PM Post #11 of 20

baka1969

Chaser of Ghosts
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Posts
3,443
Likes
82
If you're going to invest in the index funds, you might be better off investing in them directly (ETF) like The Qs, Spiders and Diamonds. Spread the money over all of them. Also think about investing with conglomerates such as GE. Depending on how long you intend on investing, long-term (more than 10 years) those will offer you the most reliable risk adjusted returns. That said, I would not use any single investment strategy. Real estate and other tangible appreciable real assests should be implemented. Don't forget about cash. It's good to have a portion on hand. It's all about balance. There is no one-and-done solution.
 
Apr 8, 2010 at 4:25 PM Post #12 of 20

nealric

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Posts
435
Likes
11
I've always been a fan of Index funds. Everyone thinks they have a secret sauce for picking the right stocks, but I've never been convinced that anybody can really beat the market through skill.

I reserve judgement on hedge funds, but I'm a ways away from being a accredited investor (especially if they up the requirements), so I haven't looked too much into them.
 
Apr 8, 2010 at 6:07 PM Post #13 of 20

gknix

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 27, 2010
Posts
659
Likes
15
Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif

My take, of course, but I think the markets are full of funny money. I'd rather sit out the next few years with cash and tangible assets.




Completely agree. Different forms of bail out soothes the media and hence the general public. There are still way too many problems right now that are not truly uncovered to the public. Credit card debts are a HUGE problem for America right now. Rating agencies are still iffy to me.

Well, they do say Cash is King right?
 
Apr 9, 2010 at 11:26 PM Post #14 of 20

Konig

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Posts
1,433
Likes
11
Quote:

Originally Posted by El_Doug /img/forum/go_quote.gif
There have to be studies like this - heck, I'd bet you could get this data on the fly from a bloomberg

I'd be willing to wager that, less some of the more exotic hedge funds led by gurus of the field with $10M buy-in prices, index funds will have the greatest risk-adjusted return - their risk is inherently absurdly small




Im not sure how you arrived at this conclusion with so much obscurity in the hedge fund industry and potential for fraud. Remember Madoff?
 
Apr 9, 2010 at 11:27 PM Post #15 of 20

Konig

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Posts
1,433
Likes
11
Quote:

Originally Posted by gknix /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Completely agree. Different forms of bail out soothes the media and hence the general public. There are still way too many problems right now that are not truly uncovered to the public. Credit card debts are a HUGE problem for America right now. Rating agencies are still iffy to me.

Well, they do say Cash is King right?



Soon enough gold is king
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top