The reason why quants are thriving is because they beat the market unlike the doom and gloomers who sell too early & short and miss out on the upsdie. Quants look only at the numbers while everyone else trades based on emotion.
Quants --Alive and Kicking
- Thread starter marketsurfer
- Start date
Just to clarify, I am the developer of the 'Kauai' system on Collective2, and use the alias 'Science Trader' on that website. I am not related to the person posting under the science_trader alias here.
I do not manage millions of dollars, but in 2008 I did outperform the Dow, S&P500 and Russell 3000 indices 11 out of 12 months with an annual return of ~17%, trading entirely against the prevailing direction of the market.
This was realized with a 100% quantitative approach.
OK,I've found some stats:
"According to Hedge Fund Research,the average hedge fund across all strategies ended the year down 18.3%.
The worst performing strategy group was energy and materials down 37% for the year
Fixed-Income Convertible Funds were down 34.6%
Distressed Funds fell 25.1%
Quantitative Directional Funds were down 21.3%"
"According to Hedge Fund Research,the average hedge fund across all strategies ended the year down 18.3%.
The worst performing strategy group was energy and materials down 37% for the year
Fixed-Income Convertible Funds were down 34.6%
Distressed Funds fell 25.1%
Quantitative Directional Funds were down 21.3%"
What are these quantitative directional funds? Never heard of that categorization and google neither. Are these benchmarked active funds? So it's quite normal they are down 21.3% with a S&P down -37%.
Well the Financial Times has heard of them:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e972b03e-ddcf-11dd-87dc-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
Third paragraph - they are quite clearly categorized,they are quite clearly described as quantitative and they are quite clearly down.
Oh don't tell me,someone else must be mistaken(again) - there's no way anything that is quantitative could have lost money.And just because you've never heard of them means what??You're hardly an authority on anything.The fact that they are listed in the FT's article means they exist,what sort of quant are you if you're not familiar with them,disregard the reporting expertise of a newspaper like the Financial Times and then do your research on google!!?A pretty ill-informed one by the looks of things.
Now it's enough. You are STUPID. That needed to be said. And do not expect any answer from me as you are on my ignore list now.
Quants vs. Quants. Who wins this battle? Or do they just play together nicely?
He is known on ET as science_trader
He is a highly skilled question evader
His ideas are so lame
He had to copy someone's name
He probably spend all day playing Tomb-Raider