«
»

At Hedge Funds, Breakeven is the New Black

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - December 5th, 2011, 5:00AM

Daily HFRX Indices

Daily HFRX Indices  US Dollar On-Line access to all HFRX INDEX CONSTITUENT FUNDS via HFRDATABASE.COM
Monthly Performance Historical Performance
NOV ROR OCT ROR YTD INDEX VALUE (NOVEMBER 30, 2011) Last 12M Last 36M (ann) Last 48M (ann)
Global
HFRX Global Hedge Fund Index -0.87% 0.81% -8.48% 1,114.07 -6.32% 2.55% -4.36%
HFRX Equal Weighted Strategies Index -0.86% 0.88% -5.96% 1,101.36 -4.50% 2.75% -3.72%
HFRX Absolute Return Index -0.61% 0.86% -3.59% 947.78 -3.15% -3.22% -5.23%
HFRX Market Directional Index -1.38% -0.02% -17.68% 1,036.68 -16.53% 4.11% -4.87%
Equity Hedge
HFRX Equity Hedge Index -1.34% 1.36% -18.38% 1,009.05 -14.15% -0.38% -7.05%
HFRX EH: Equity Market Neutral Index -0.19% 0.60% -3.10% 979.59 -3.43% -2.77% -1.68%
HFRX EH: Fundamental Growth Index -2.13% -0.03% -12.77% 1,443.15 -10.42% 2.70% -5.88%
HFRX EH: Fundamental Value Index 0.15% 1.23% -22.73% 927.06 -18.92% -2.90% -8.63%
Event Driven
HFRX Event Driven Index -0.96% 2.11% -4.36% 1,314.65 -3.31% 4.10% -3.16%
HFRX ED: Distressed Restructuring Index -2.37% 3.06% -7.23% 951.95 -5.56% -4.84% -9.96%
HFRX ED: Merger Arbitrage Index -0.28% 1.28% -2.16% 1,492.70 -0.86% 4.55% 3.45%
HFRX ED: Special Situations Index -0.76% 2.03% -3.03% 1,079.81 -2.18% 5.59% -3.59%
Macro
HFRX Macro/CTA Index 0.30% -1.99% -4.61% 1,169.33 -3.33% -4.06% -2.06%
HFRX Macro: Systematic Diversified CTA Index 1.42% -4.84% -2.59% 1,628.09 -0.01% -1.06% 5.95%
Relative Value
HFRX Relative Value Arbitrage Index -1.15% 1.16% -4.11% 1,127.04 -2.99% 11.60% -2.92%
HFRX RV: Convertible Arbitrage Index -1.10% -0.55% -3.38% 653.00 -2.58% 12.16% -11.64%
HFRX RV: Multi-Strategy Index -1.06% 1.40% 0.21% 1,773.10 1.40% 16.28% 7.47%

Source: Hedge Fund Research

PERMALINK
Category: Hedge Funds, Markets.

Comments

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data, ability to repeat discredited memes, and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Also, be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor even implied. Any irrelevancies you can mention will also be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

8 Responses to “At Hedge Funds, Breakeven is the New Black”

  1. mathman Says:
    December 5th, 2011 at 6:33 am

    check this out:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/27/business/how-freedom-group-became-the-gun-industrys-giant.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&ref=business&src=me&adxnnlx=1323084702-hICVr4rZiIBabLvSgnZcEQ

  2. Look Out Above, the Interventionist edition | The Big Picture Says:
    December 5th, 2011 at 7:00 am

    [...] At Hedge Funds, Breakeven is the New Black [...]

  3. Hot Links: Risk-On Orgy | The Reformed Broker Says:
    December 5th, 2011 at 7:22 am

    [...] At Hedge Funds, Breakeven is the New Black.  (TBP) [...]

  4. michael-D Says:
    December 5th, 2011 at 8:15 am

    if hedge funds are the vehicle of high net worth individuals, and if hedge funds are performing so poorly, how is it that luxury retail continues to out-perform?

  5. macrotrader603 Says:
    December 5th, 2011 at 9:08 am

    @michael-D…

    Because hedgies are still raking in the big fees. $$$

  6. HububBub Says:
    December 5th, 2011 at 9:43 am

    How ’bout dis: “Zombie banks are the new hedge funds.” We bitch and moan about banks taking the profits and socializing the losses. But there is another subset of masters of the universe who take 2/20 in good times (or 3/30!) and in bad times renegotiate the highwater mark, or simply close the fund and open a new one, thus wiping out the loses and allowing the bonus calculation to begin anew (what would Mr. Barnum say?).

    Good work if you can get it, if you ask me. Are not TBTF bankers pikers by comparison? Which do you prefer, a greater number of fleeced or a deeper fleecing?

  7. michael-D Says:
    December 5th, 2011 at 12:43 pm

    @macrotrader603

    > Because hedgies are still raking in the big fees. $$$

    i read that and thought “oh… i get it.” but then i said to myself, “self, that bodes well for the fund -managers- but not so much for the fund -participants- and last time i checked the fund participants way out-numbered the fund managers. but i suppose enough of them could be doing well enough to support that theory. the .0001% …?

    thanx

  8. philipat Says:
    December 5th, 2011 at 8:19 pm

    Why would anyone pay 2/20 for such under-performance? Even cash under the mattress would do better.

58 queries. 0.374 seconds.