How do I start a business managing people's money?

Quote from TopTrader8:

I'm surprised that no one has suggested to you that you just do everything through collective2. com. Your only cost will be about $200/yr and you can set up an account with them that will only allow your friends and family to participate. You'll have a legitimate sole-proprietorship business where collective2 processes your fee requirements for you and sends you a 1099 at the end of each year for you to file with your Schedule C. All of the legalities are taken care of for you thru the site. No need to set up LLC's and Corporations and pay high-voluting lawyers fees.

Just food for thought. Check them out.

Are you sure that C2 is appropriate also for long-term investing and not just for trading based on "signals"? I got the impression that C2 let people to publish their trading system and if other people like that they can subscribe for a fee, and C2 pass a certain amount of that fee along to the trading system's owner. I am not sure if it is suitable also for long-term money management which is not necessarily based on "signals" or any sophisticated algorithm (as opposed to short-term trading). Please correct me if I am wrong.
 
Quote from dragonman:

This logic sounds correct, so do how people really start managing OPM and making money from that? Even if you have a 10 million fund you can earn only a modest amount after you consider the expenses, and I assume that money managers don't start with a 10 million but with much less.

But if they start with much less, how do they make a living from that (if at all) during that period and at least don't loss money after all of the expenses? It sounds to me like a catch-22 -- no one will give you substantial amounts of money to manage unless you have a great and long track record of successfully managing substantial amounts, but you just can't start by managing substantial amounts and with managing small amounts you may just breakeven (if not loss money) and have a huge administrative and legal headache.

Therefore I don't understand how there are people who succeed to make millions a year from managing OPM, could you please explain it?

You are absolutely right about the catch. There are a few managers who started with under $1 mln fund and grew it to a billion size, but as a rule they started up 10 years ago or earlier when the hedge fun industry wasn't so crowded, they produced stellar returns in the first year (over 50%), they also usually had industry connections. So, there were rich people who they knew personally and to whom they'd go marketing.

The above is still a very adventurous route.
As the article linked by newwurldmn suggests, a popular way to start a hedge fund is by securing "seed" capital. Search the forums. There are a few threads with in-depth discussion.

Typically, in exchange for providing capital the "seed" investor would request a share of the fund fees. There might be additional conditions like the new fund manager may be required to take teh first loss on the fund etc.

The advantage of this route is most peopel who specialise in providing "seed" capital also run a massive marketing machine. So, the fuind manager gets lots of support in this department. Also note that the interests are aligned. The investor participate in the fees the fund earns.

Another route is "CTA", where there is no fund and the manager trades in accounts that belong to individual clients. Fees from this approach are not necessarily any higher. However, CTA may have more sources of earnings. They may earn commission from selling 3rd party investment products. They may offer consulting for people who want to set-up autotrading operation. All depends on the individual's skill. There are a few prominent posters on these formus who've gone this route.

In practice, most people who start a hedge fund are people who have already managed money either as a trader in bank or as a fund manager for another fund management company. So, a better route could be securing a job with one of the big fund management companies.

Quote from dragonman:

Are you sure that C2 is appropriate also for long-term investing and not just for trading based on "signals"?
collective2 has a different business model. If you already have clients there is absolutely no reason to share the fees with collective2, as in this case c2 doesn't provide any value whatsoever.

collective2 is also useless for generating a track record. All record it can demonstrate is "paper trading" and there is no means to verify how much or actual money is managed or if the real-money performance is anywhere near the paper trading performance.

Further to trade using collective2 one needs some kind of auto-trading solution. If you sell both auto-trading solutions and strategies to run in them, arguably, you are managing people's money directly irrespective of whether you distribute trade signals via local network or via c2.

collective2 has an option to send trades from systems directly into brokerage accounts... but I would think twice about giving brokerage account logon to people who only have a web-site and don't answer a phone. Especially after collective 2 was hacked a year or so ago and credit card details got stolen.
 
Quote from LeeD:

You are absolutely right about the catch. There are a few managers who started with under $1 mln fund and grew it to a billion size, but as a rule they started up 10 years ago or earlier when the hedge fun industry wasn't so crowded, they produced stellar returns in the first year (over 50%), they also usually had industry connections. So, there were rich people who they knew personally and to whom they'd go marketing.

The above is still a very adventurous route.

As the article linked by newwurldmn suggests, a popular way to start a hedge fund is by securing "seed" capital. Search the forums. There are a few threads with in-depth discussion.

Typically, in exchange for providing capital the "seed" investor would request a share of the fund fees. There might be additional conditions like the new fund manager may be required to take teh first loss on the fund etc.

The advantage of this route is most peopel who specialise in providing "seed" capital also run a massive marketing machine. So, the fuind manager gets lots of support in this department. Also note that the interests are aligned. The investor participate in the fees the fund earns.

Another route is "CTA", where there is no fund and the manager trades in accounts that belong to individual clients. Fees from this approach are not necessarily any higher. However, CTA may have more sources of earnings. They may earn commission from selling 3rd party investment products. They may offer consulting for people who want to set-up autotrading operation. All depends on the individual's skill. There are a few prominent posters on these formus who've gone this route.

In practice, most people who start a hedge fund are people who have already managed money either as a trader in bank or as a fund manager for another fund management company. So, a better route could be securing a job with one of the big fund management companies.

collective2 has a different business model. If you already have clients there is absolutely no reason to share the fees with collective2, as in this case c2 doesn't provide any value whatsoever.

collective2 is also useless for generating a track record. All record it can demonstrate is "paper trading" and there is no means to verify how much or actual money is managed or if the real-money performance is anywhere near the paper trading performance.

Further to trade using collective2 one needs some kind of auto-trading solution. If you sell both auto-trading solutions and strategies to run in them, arguably, you are managing people's money directly irrespective of whether you distribute trade signals via local network or via c2.

collective2 has an option to send trades from systems directly into brokerage accounts... but I would think twice about giving brokerage account logon to people who only have a web-site and don't answer a phone. Especially after collective 2 was hacked a year or so ago and credit card details got stolen.

Thanks for the detailed response.
I didn't find a reference to seed capital in the article in the link, can you please provide a link to the specific article you mentioned?

Also, as to collective2, don't you think that the people who provide there trading "signals" are on the borderline of being investment advisers without registering with the S.E.C?
 
Quote from dragonman:

Thanks for the detailed response.
I didn't find a reference to seed capital in the article in the link, can you please provide a link to the specific article you mentioned?

Also, as to collective2, don't you think that the people who provide there trading "signals" are on the borderline of being investment advisers without registering with the S.E.C?

The article's point was that it's tougher now to run a fund. It wasn't talking about seeders (which have existed for a long time). It is mentioning that the bootstrapping method (start with a guy in a room and build out as you raise funds/revenue) is no longer viable. You have to spend a lot more in infrastructure from the beginning than 5 years ago.
 
Quote from dragonman:

Thanks for the detailed response.
I didn't find a reference to seed capital in the article in the link, can you please provide a link to the specific article you mentioned?
You are welcome!

Seed capital deals are often kept quiet. So, I just assumed there was one with CC Asian Evolution Fund. Nothing indeed is mentioned in the article.

If you want to read one of the more open discussions on the topic, check out http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=214586

Quote from dragonman:

Also, as to collective2, don't you think that the people who provide there trading "signals" are on the borderline of being investment advisers without registering with the S.E.C?
No, they are clearly not. In order to qualify for "investment advice" signals should be accompanied by some kind of commentary. For example, TheRumpledOne with his DRAIN THE BANKS!! thread may be at risk of being considered giving investment advice because he provides argument behind his ideas.

collective2 only provides buy or sell signal. The lack of any argument or reasoning behind the suggested trades makes it clearly excluded from the "investment advice" area.

If a c2 vendor also posts comments on his or her Web-site, they are still excluded from regulation as mass midea (the same way as commentary on TV or in newspapers is excluded) but they carry the same fiduciary responsibility to readers and fall under all the same rules as regulated financial advisors regarding frontrunning etc.
 
Quote from bwolinsky:

If you have less than 15 clients you will want to be an advisor at interactive brokers.

LLP's only if more than 15 clients, and any registration fees can be found at the secretary of state's business entity registration pages and will save you substantial amounts of money filing on your own. You do not need a lawyer to do this. Look up "LLP registration forms" on your secretary of state's home page. There should be a link to business filings, and I would not talk to a lawyer to do this. I started a general partnership with about a 1 page summary of what was being formed, who was involved, what the purpose of the agreement was, and how fees and compensation were handled. If you can get your clients to sign this, then there isn't any problem, as it will stand up in court, but just remember to get the signatures notarized.

Filing an RIA registration has taken nearly all year for me, and I'm still not done completing a disclosure document for my CTA.

These are only licenses you'll want to get, again, if there are more than 15 clients and you'll want to trade through IB.

Whatever you decide, I'd like to suggest becoming a model manager on Covestor, and getting your people to subscribe. They have plans to charge performance based fees to accredited investors, which, incidentally, is the only type of investor that you may charge percentages of profits from. It does not sound like any of your people qualify.

To qualify to be an accredited investor, you must have either 3 year spousal combined income of $300,000 or 2 years as an individual of income of $200,000 with expectations for that to continue. The other possible accredidation is $1 million of liquid assets not including primary residence. Only the above three allow you to charge percentages of profits, but can be overridden with all investors becoming party to your LLP or LLC.

These formalities aren't necessary and neither is speaking to a high priced attorney. You can take care of any of your filings through your secretary of state, and, as long as you don't sound like a complete moron and haven't forged anybody's signatures, having these documents notarized are really all you'd have to do to set this up.

I understand all that is being said here in this thread but have a few questions:

A) So you have an LLC that goes in and trades these family and friend accounts - I get that - How then does one charge,legally, a fee for that?

B) Are you then not an investment adviser at that point?
 
Different states have different rules regarding when you don't need to register as an investment adviser and under what circumstances you are able (or unable) to charge a performance fee.
 
Quote from thunderbolttr:

Different states have different rules regarding when you don't need to register as an investment adviser and under what circumstances you are able (or unable) to charge a performance fee.

I see. That article that was posted makes a lot of sense. It's amazing what a little research will do.

Thanks.

Dan
 
Back
Top