Once considered the titans of Wall Street, hedge fund managers are in trouble
Once considered the titans of Wall Street, hedge fund
managers are in trouble
Hedge funds produced returns of about 5 percent last
year, according to Hedge Fund Research, compared with the 10 percent rise of
the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index.
By Renae Merle May 29 at 5:04 PM
NEW YORK — Long considered the titans of Wall Street,
hedge fund managers have long thrived under a simple premise: They are smarter
than the average investor and can produce bigger profits.
That image of the slick, well-connected trader, making
bold bets with hundreds of millions of dollars, has attracted trillions from
wealthy investors, pension funds and endowments who were willing to pay high
fees and hand over 20 percent of any profits to the elite class of traders.
Now, though, many investors are reconsidering. Hedge
funds produced returns of about 5 percent last year, according to Hedge Fund
Research, compared with the 10 percent rise of the Standard & Poor’s
500-stock index, a broad collection of stocks that is trading near record
highs.
Investors have responded accordingly, pulling $111 billion
out of the industry in 2016, according to eVestment, an institutional investor
data firm. More than 1,000 funds closed their doors last year, the largest
number since the 2008 financial crisis.
Many of the advantages the industry relied on for decades
have started to disappear, industry experts say. There are more hedge funds
placing the same type of bets. And finding a unique idea, an undervalued
company or one with flaws that no one else has spotted, is becoming more
difficult, particularly at a time when so many stocks are rising, they say.
“The hedge fund industry has started to collapse on
itself,” said Charles Geisst, a Wall Street historian at Manhattan College in
New York. “There are too many players going after the same thing.”
The industry’s troubles began after the financial crisis,
when shocked investors saw the value of their investments plummet, industry
experts say. They had expected savvy stock pickers to shield them from the
widespread losses facing everyday investors.
“That made investors more aware,” said Alina Lamy, senior
analyst for quantitative research at Morningstar Research. “Plus, they are much
more expensive. Why are we paying you more if you are not giving much more
return?”
Indeed, during the economic recovery — which pushed stock
markets to record levels — those who put their money in passive investments
were rewarded. Over the past 10 years, the return for passive investors was
5.7 percent annually, while those with money in active funds had 5.3 percent
annual returns, on an asset-weighted basis, according to Morningstar. More than
90 percent of large-cap active funds, those with at least $6 billion in assets,
underperformed their passive counterparts, according to S&P Dow Jones
Indices.
Hedge funds are also losing favor among some of their
most important clients. The California Public Employees’ Retirement System
withdrew $4 billion from hedge funds, saying they are too expensive and
complex. The $51 billion New York City Employees’ Retirement System gave up on
the industry last year.
“It was a bad investment. The rate of return had not been
what we anticipated,” said Henry Garrido, an NYCERS trustee who led the effort
to dump hedge fund investments. The high fees were eating away at meager
profits, he added.
Despite the second-guessing, the top 25 hedge fund
managers collectively earned a whopping $11 billion in 2016, according to a
recent report by Institutional Investor’s Alpha magazine. On top again was
Renaissance Technologies’ James Simons, a former Cold War code breaker who made
$1.6 billion — or $4.3 million a day.
Simons’s fund reported double-digit gains, according to
Alpha magazine. But nearly half of the top 25 managers finished the year with
single-digit gains.
“A large percent of hedge funds are not very good, which
drives down the returns” of the industry overall, said Don Steinbrugge,
managing partner at Agecroft Partners, a hedge fund marketing firm. But the
best-run funds continue to bring in record profits, he said. And the industry
is still massive, with more than $3 trillion in assets.
The industry’s recent slump may be temporary, some
financial analysts argued. Passive funds are designed to match the market’s
performance. If the stock market becomes more volatile or declines, hedge funds
may regain their appeal.
Still, the recent tumult has left some bruises.
Take Bill Ackman. The silver-haired hedge fund titan
built a reputation as a master stock picker, one who has thrived in the world
of bare-knuckled activist investors who buy up shares in a company and shake up
their management, hoping to raise the stock price. Ackman’s aggressive wagers
have generated double-digit gains for his investors — 40 percent in 2014 and
hundreds of millions in fees for himself and his firm, Pershing Square Capital
Management.
But in 2015, Ackman made his biggest bet yet in a
pharmaceutical company called Valeant, which he championed even as it faced
intense regulatory scrutiny over the way it prices drugs and its accounting
practices. When skeptics began dumping the company’s stock, Ackman bought more.
The company’s stock, which once topped $200 a share, eventually tumbled to as
low as $8.
By the time Ackman threw in the towel and sold Pershing’s
shares in the company, the fund had lost $4 billion. The bad bet, a contrite
Ackman wrote in Pershing Square’s 2016 annual letter, “has cost all of us a
tremendous amount, and which has damaged the record of success of our firm.”
Ackman, who declined to comment for this article, is not
the only hedge fund manager who has struggled recently.
Last year, Richard Perry, considered one of the hedge
fund industry’s most successful investors, shut the doors to his fund, Perry
Capital, after steep losses. New York-based Eton Park Capital Management,
founded by a former Goldman Sachs partner, closed its doors this year.
Even John Paulson, who made what some called the greatest
trade in Wall Street history, earning his firm $15 billion by betting that the
housing market would collapse, has struggled recently. His fund lost $3 billion
last year, according to hedge fund investor LCH Investments. Paulson lost money
investing in Valeant and in some other pharmaceutical companies.
For veteran value investor Warren Buffett, the hedge fund
industry’s recent tumbles were predictable. Buffett has been critical of the
high fees charged by most fund managers — a 2 percent management fee and
20 percent of the profits earned, known in the industry as “2 and 20.” (Fees
for investing in passive index funds can be much cheaper, generally a tiny
fraction, as low as 0.1 percent in some cases.)
“If you even have a billion-dollar fund and get 2 percent
of it, for terrible performance, that’s $20 million,” Buffett said this
month. “In any other field, it would just blow your mind.”
Nine years ago, Buffett and Ted Seides, managing partner
for Hidden Brook Investments, wagered $500,000 on whether a low-cost fund that
tracked the performance of the S&P 500 would perform better for investors
than a hedge fund.
With just a few months remaining, Buffett is winning.
Buffett’s index fund has achieved a compounded annual
return of 7 percent so far, while Seides’s hedge funds delivered profits of
only 2.2 percent. That means an investor with $1 million who sided with Buffett
would have earned $854,000, while Seides’s followers would have collected
$220,000.
In a recent column, Seides acknowledged his deficit but
argued that given more time, hedge funds would eventually win.
Still, he said, “the bet is over. I lost.”
Comments
Post a Comment