Thu, Sep 18, 2014
A A A
Welcome Guest
Free Trial RSS
Get FREE trial access to our award winning publications
Opalesque Futures Intelligence

Futures Lab: There are huge differences among commodity trading advisors. What does this mean for investors?

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

The Best vs. the Rest

In the previous pages Jon Sundt described a key feature of managed futures, namely the huge differences between managers' returns in any given period. We asked for evidence and Mr. Sundt's team kindly provided it. Here you'll find a discussion of this issue and what it means for investing with commodity trading advisors.

Picking a better mutual fund manager may make a difference, but not a huge one. Mutual funds, say in actively managed large-cap US equity, correlate highly with each other as well as with market indices. They not only go up and down together but stay within a relatively tight band.

By contrast, picking the right CTA or hedge fund can make the difference between a steep loss versus a substantial gain. The chart illustrates this using data from Altegris' managedfutures.com database. International Traders Research, Inc., an affiliate of Altegris, supplies the performance information for alternative investment managers that is available on managedfutures.com.

Each bar in the chart indicates the returns for 108 managers. The measure used is a two-year annualized rolling return for every 6 months. The darker part of each bar represents the larger number of managers that are clustered around a specific return. The group's mean for the period is indicated on the bar.

The full period under consideration includes both great and lackluster years for managed futures as a whole. That is, during the years from 2004 through 2008 returns varied widely over time for the entire group of managers. There were years where the mean rolling return was around 3%, whereas in 2008 the group averaged more than 19%.

Regardless of the variation in the group mean across the years, at any given time there were some managers who lost money and others who made high returns.

At the very extremes of this spectrum, one finds 50 percentage point swings'some managers lost 20% while others gained more than 30%. Those are the tails of the distribution, but even if you disregard the extreme tails, picking the right manager still gives you a huge advantage.

Or, from a glass-half-empty perspective, a bad choice could mean a loss even when the strategy does well. 2008 was a very good year for CTAs as a group, nevertheless there were CTAs that made a loss.

Below the surface of returns is a complicated story. Mr. Sundt pointed out several reasons for the wide dispersion. One is that entry is relatively easy. As he put it, "Someone can register, open a $100 K trading account with his grandma's money, post three good years, hire a marketer and make a lot of people think he has the goods." Many players in this space are not professionals, though they may seem like professionals, he says.

Many entrants have a good idea that works for a while, but they lack the ability to develop a program that performs reasonably consistently over time. After a glowing track record that attracts some money, the luck runs out.

But there is another major reason for the dispersion: CTAs pursue different approaches. They focus on different markets, have different time frames, look for different sorts of movements. Good managers can make a lower return than the average simply because their particular style does not work in certain market conditions. An investor has to consider whether the divergence in returns is due to differences in strategy, investment ability, business structure or some other factor.

To make it even more complicated, competent managers can lose their edge over time. For instance, a system may cease making money because the type of trade it captures becomes too crowded as other traders recognize the same opportunity. A good manager can become preoccupied with personal issues or his golf game and less interested in the business.

What all this means is that due diligence matters a lot and quantitative analysis of returns is at best a starting point. Qualitative questions are key to understanding why a CTA may be in a particular place in the wide distribution and what that may mean for the future.

The questions have to be asked continually for successful active investing in managed futures. An investment that made sense three years ago may not any more. The decision of whether to stay with a manager, with the ongoing due diligence it requires, is as important as the initial investment decision.



 
This article was published in Opalesque Futures Intelligence.
Opalesque Futures Intelligence
Opalesque Futures Intelligence
Opalesque Futures Intelligence
Today's Exclusives Today's Other Voices More Exclusives
Previous Opalesque Exclusives                                  
More Other Voices
Previous Other Voices                                               
Access Alternative Market Briefing


  • Top Forwarded
  • Top Tracked
  • Top Searched
  1. SEC charges 19 investment firms and one trader for breach of Rule 105[more]

    Benedicte Gravrand, Opalesque Geneva: The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) started a push to enhance the enforcement of Rule 105 of Regulation M last year to uncover hedge funds and private equity firms that have illegally participated in an offering of a stock after short selling it duri

  2. Fund managers, bullish on Europe, anticipate monetary policy separation of Fed and ECB[more]

    Komfie Manalo, Opalesque Asia: At least 202 fund managers with $556bn of assets under management said that while the European Central Bank (ECB) has eased its monetary policy that sent sentiments towards Europe to pick up, the Fed is expected to hike its rate in the spring of 2015. Investor

  3. Investors looking at other sources for hedge fund-like returns[more]

    Komfie Manalo, Opalesque Asia: Investors who are always on the lookout for higher gains are looking at alternative sources of income, particularly exchange-traded fund industry that generates hedge fund-like returns, according to

  4. News Briefs - Limited partners of investment managers may be subject to self-employment taxes, Just one week left until NYC's Rocktoberfest[more]

    Limited partners of investment managers may be subject to self-employment taxes On September 5, 2014, the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) issued Chief Counsel Advice 201436049, concluding that members of an investment manager were subject to self-employment taxes with respect to their e

  5. Institutions - Adviser's faith in hedge funds unshaken by CalPERS' move Advisers weigh in on CalPERS’ decision, Gina Raimondo sees no reason to follow California’s lead, exit hedge funds, Danish pension funds step up 'alternative investments'[more]

    Adviser's faith in hedge funds unshaken by CalPERS' move From WSJ.com: Financial advisers who use hedge funds in their clients' portfolios say they aren't rethinking that approach after a huge California pension fund announced plans to exit the hedge-fund market. The decision by the Cali