The hype surrounding alternatives, such as hedge funds, comes too heavily from those collecting fees from the asset class–and many institutional investors are being fooled, according to Jay Youngdahl, a senior fellow at Harvard University’s Initiative for Responsible Investment and a health plan trustee.

If video does not load, click here

February 14, 2013

Category: Hedge Funds, Video

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

2 Responses to “How Alternative Investments Are ‘Misperception’”

  1. VennData says:

    “Alternatives” are a complete waste of money adding nothing to portfolios. Stocks and bonds, re-balanced moving in opposite directions will give you everything you can possibly hope for.

  2. end game says:

    Actually, it depends on the correlations. Commodities as a stand alone investment lost money consistently in the 90s but when added to traditional portfolios the result was higher returns with lower risk. You can’t really draw any sweeping conclusions without taking correlation into account.

    Show me a hedge fund with 6% annual fees and half the return of stocks but with a negative return correlation and I will add 10% to my portfolio 100% of the time.