EnlightenedChosenOne

You obviously didn't even read the replies in this topic    

Mr SETX financial advisor doesn't even understand basic portfolio diversification concepts. Another "financial advisor" outed as nothing more than a glorified salesman. BOOM ROASTED X3

Why is having a back and forth discussion an issue all of a sudden now that Stevenash is getting exposed? Oh wait.. I know why.

BOOM ROASTED X2 Stop before you get even further behind in this topic.

I never said put all your money in hedge funds. As a financial advisor, you are supposed to know at least the very basics of asset allocation and diversification across asset classes. Example - A traditional 60/40 portfolio returned 6.57% from 1990-2010 with a std dev of 10.26%, sharpe of 0.29 and max drawdown of -36.4%. Add a 20% allocation to global macro and the return jumps to 8.0% with a std dev of 9.18%, sharpe of 0.48 and max drawdown of -30.5%. So Mr. Financial Advisor, wouldn't you agree the portfolio with the 20% global macro allocation has outperformed the traditional portfolio in every single metric?

I never said hedge funds routinely get 15-30% returns. I was referring to limited partnerships with long lock up periods, hence including moic in the performance metrics. In fact, most hedge funds target high single/low double digit returns with low vol. And the money did flow to those skilled hedge fund managers , that's why top hedge funds are controlling more and more of the market share and are either hard or soft closed, only accepting new capital to match redemptions. And comparing hedge fund performance to equity performance is apples to oranges. Hedge funds underperform in bull markets and outperform in bear markets.

By the way, skilled alternative managers return 15-30% net irrs and 2.0-3.0x moic, depending on the strategy. With returns so high the fees are almost an afterthought. Sure you'll fall behind at the beginning due to the j curve but will surpass traditional portfolios by harvest period. And that's just looking at alternatives from a performance perspective. Alternatives also reduce volatility and increase the sharpe of a traditional portfolio since it's an almost uncorrelated asset class.

BOOM ROASTED KABOOM POW BADABING BADABANG I should start charging a consultants fee for all the education and enlightenment I'm providing for this board. Markets closed, wrapping up some stuff and I'm off for the 3 day weekend.

Your comments about underperforming managers are a moot point. I'm not disagreeing with you there. I believe you're wasting your time trying to beat some of the most efficient asset classes. Where skilled managers CAN consistently outperform is the least efficient markets such as small cap, micro cap, international, emerging and frontier. Yes, most probably underperform because they suck, but that doesn't discredit my argument that skilled managers exist.

Stevey boy, You asked how to gauge performance on privately held investments, not publicly held equities. Privately held investments (limited partnerships) are almost always compared to a benchmark of similar funds with the same vintage year. I am 110% sure of that. Obviously large caps are benchmarked against the S&P, Small caps with R2K, etc.

Correction - you asked how to gauge performance. They're usually compare to a benchmark composed of other similar funds with the same vintage year

And a very large number of hedge funds have beaten their benchmarks since inception. It's called doing your due diligence on the team, philosophy, process and infrastructure. And are you really asking how performance is calculated? Like for reals for reals?

Well, my personal IRA options are limited so I'm stuck in the usual highly correlated assets. Large, mid, small caps, intl, emerging, etc. Most managers underperform but I do know managers that consistenly outperform. What I recommend usually isn't available to the average Joe Schmoe. Private equity (venture, growth, special sits, buyout, secondaries) , sponsored and unsponsored private debt (mezz, senior loans ), real estate (core, value add, opportunistic), hedge funds (cta/managed futures , macro, credit, multis) and real assets (upstream, midstream, infra, timber, nat resources)

Mutual funds, index funds. Tomato tomato. The correlations are through the roof.

Nash you're a financial advisor you stick people in index funds lol stop.

Thanks

Yawn

Same topic different day Yawn

Fox News is the most watched "news" outlet in the country iirc, how come they aren't covering it?

Tax codes do need to be fixed, but if a large company is actually paying that high tax rate then they need to fire and replace all their accountants and lawyers.

Will you stop with the idiotic historical GDP comparisons already? There's plenty of other points you can make about the terrible economy but that is not one of them. Of course the GDP growth after (realistically were still in it) the greatest recession since the Great Depression will be low when you compare to GDP growth post WW2. Last time I checked, the post WW2 period excludes the Great Depression. And no one is saying YOU should pay your fair share. You are not in the top 0.1%. Why middle class Americans defend the top 0.1% while they outsource jobs, cut benefits and keep compensation flat is beyond me.

Luckily I am intellectually superior to most on this board and can read between the lines.

Try reading the two replies before mine

Republicans are so convinced they're the high information voter and democrats are low information voters. Can't help but laugh at that one

Whoa whoa whoa, get out of here with your facts.