Reality check please...JWH, hedge funds and mutual funds

Quote from marketsurfer:

you are really lacking a response....

funny, that thread, which you retracted--by the way, was placed in the "religion" forum. LOL !

and once again, thank you for the PR !

surf:D :D

surf, you should be flattered that Thunderdog is your personal stalker. He seems easily distracted, and I'm sure his trading results reflect that. :p
 
Quote from lars22:

Couple months ago, I read a book called "How trend followers make millions in up or down markets". It talked about hedge funds and great traders who averaged like great returns, year after year. One of the important people in that book was John W. Henry, and how he's great and had averaged 30% a year for something like the past decade or so, blah blah.
I thought it was a great book. Today, for some reason, I thought I'd make a search on JWH. His site, jwh.com, has list of all his programs and performances. To my surprise, I could not find anything even NEAR 30%. Theres something like 10 programs on his site, and most of the perfomances, if you take them for the past 5 years, are around the 3 or 4%! And not only that, a couple of them are in the negative...and this is the average of 5 years. And if you look at the overall results of the programs since their creation(maybe 20 or 30 years ago), 10% seems to be where it's at. And this is all 10 programs, not ONE is in the range of the 30% for the last 5 years, let alone 15%... How it this great? This is a multi billion hedge fund! They have all the money to hire any professional, economist, mathematician, etc...If they can not do it, why are we even trying???
I mean, why should I risk my money trading by myself, when the best can only do 10%?? And even then, why put it in a hedge fund, when I can put it in a VERY LOW mutual fund at my bank, where they average 10% very easily. Is trading just useless? The best seems to be around 10%, and for that, my banks does it for nearly no risk. Why trade? Whats the point that I'm missing? Someone please enlighten me...

Very well written and valid arguments indeed.

I look forward to hearing your conclusions. TIA.
 
Quote from LivermoresGhost:

surf, you should be flattered that Thunderdog is your personal stalker. He seems easily distracted............ :p


well, that is one way to look at it!

thanks!!

:D :D :D
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

i am also name checked in that book.( thanks for the PR, Michael!). the above review was given as a professional courtesy, as is customary in that business.


Do you understand why people have difficulty trusting you?
The price of dishonesty rarely surpasses the rewards...
 
m4a1, NTB,

Alpha generated by trend following strategies has been in a steady decline virtually since their inception. I track trends across a basket of 94 global futures markets (since 1990) and the results speak for themself. Financial asset classes have been the hardest hit. Markets have been become more efficient due to advances in tecnhnology, regulatory changes and increased participation. A broad based strategy of buying strength and selling weakness is no longer viable.

bolter


280l188.png
 
@bolter


Great excel sheet and excatly what i experience trading also. Would you share that excel sheet or the formula behind it how you determine the "trendiness" ?
 
hi trillenium,
It's not a simple formula, there is some serious number crunching that goes into producing the data. If you're looking for something specific I might be able to help.
regards,
bolter
 
I have no argument with your analysis. In fact, it is consistent with my anectodal experiences. However, I would say that, since 1990 (16 years), is but a mere blip in time and not enough to pronounce the end to a strategy that has produced billionaires and is predicated upon human nature. Second, I cannot assume that you have stated all of the reasons, or the accurate reasons, for the breakdown in trendiness when you state it has been as a result of advances in technology, regulatory changes and increased participation. I might argue that the most significant event has been the smoother management of monetary policy and credibility established by the Greenspan Fed during this period (maybe you are catching this under regulatory changes). I think it is no coincidence that the period that you site is under one Fed regime. I believe trendy markets require policy mistakes, dislocation, and distress as a requisite to germinate. The period you site lacks those key elements and has generally been characterized as economic nirvana around the world. Nonetheless, your analysis seems solid and consistent with my thoughts that trend-followers should continue to remain on an extended vacation. Bernanke probably holds the short-term key to the viability of the strategy.


Quote from bolter:

m4a1, NTB,

Alpha generated by trend following strategies has been in a steady decline virtually since their inception. I track trends across a basket of 94 global futures markets (since 1990) and the results speak for themself. Financial asset classes have been the hardest hit. Markets have been become more efficient due to advances in tecnhnology, regulatory changes and increased participation. A broad based strategy of buying strength and selling weakness is no longer viable.

bolter


280l188.png
 
Back
Top