DOCSLIB.ORG

SGA U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Q2 2021 Firm Profile

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

SGA U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Q2 2021 Firm Profile Founded July, 2003 Primary Portfolios Customized Portfolios • U.S. Large Cap Growth • U.S. Focused Growth • Global Growth • Global Focused Growth Portfolios Managed • International Growth • Emerging Markets Growth • Global Mid Cap Growth $24.6 Billion Firm-Wide* • $14.1 Billion U.S. Growth Assets Under Care • $10.0 Billion Global Growth • $0.5 Billion International & EM Growth Ownership 69% majority-owned by Virtus Investment Partners, 31% employee-owned^ Location Stamford, CT * As of 6/30/2021, $24.6 billion in assets includes $21.0 billion from discretionary accounts and $3.6 billion from emulated (Model) accounts. ^ 17 employee partners as of 6/30/2021 2 Sustainable Growth Advisers Distinguishing Characteristics The picture can't be displayed. Established Time-Tested Alignment to Stability & Performance Process Clients Continuity Pattern Outperformed in Te a m -based Broad equity Multi-generational volatile markets to approach and time- participation, co- team with very low provide for long- tested philosophy investment and turnover term compounding enhances process compensation linked of wealth repeatability to client performance SGA U.S. Large Cap Growth composite inception is 4/1/2000. The primary benchmark for the SGA U.S. Large Cap Growth composite is the Russell 1000 Growth Index. It should not be assumed that future results will be reflective of past performance. 3 Philosophy Identify those few Perform deep Wield valuation as Focus on a Invest with differentiated company an essential longer-term time conviction based global businesses research with element of horizon to take solely on that offer coverage by growth stock advantage of opportunity and predictable, multiple analysts selection; cash short-term not benchmark sustainable to enhance flow metrics best inefficiencies and active weights growth over the objectivity reflect reality volatility long term 4 SGA U.S. Large Cap Growth Portfolio SGA vs R1G SGA vs R1G Gross Margin 61% 51% EPS Growth 14.6% 6.1% Cash Flow/Earnings 93% 85% Revenue Growth 11.5% 4.4% Debt/EBITDA 2.6x 2.3x Net Debt/Mkt. Cap 5% 4% Quality Earnings Variability 5.9% 10.2% Pricing Power Recurring Revenues Growth Global Opportunity Over 2x Earnings and Financial Strength Revenue Growth vs. R1G Management Strength SGA U.S. LCG Valuation Cash Flow Based SGA vs R1G Enterprise Yield 2.5% 2.3% Cash Earnings Ratio is a measure of proportion of earnings that is converted into cash (CFATS / Earnings). Cash Flow Available To Shareholders (CFATS) = Op Cash Flow – Cap X – Sustaining Acquisitions – Unfunded Obligations (pensions, legal). Enterprise yield (EY) is a proprietary measure of the free cash flow truly available to investors as a percentage of market value (CFATS / Market Capitalization). (I) based on enterprise yield calculations. Source: Bloomberg, FactSet, and SGA estimates and adjustments. Data as of 6/30/2021. C/E Ratio, EY exclude financials. SGA C/E ratio and Enterprise Yield projected. Earnings Growth data is through 12/31/20 (last full calendar year of reported EPS data) for SGA’s longest tenured account. SGA EPS Growth data is based upon portfolio companies non-GAAP operating earnings. EPS calculations exclude companies with earnings going from (i) positive to negative or (ii) negative to positive, year to year. 5 EPS and Revenue Growth are historical values since inception of the U.S. Large Cap Growth composite, 4/1/2000. Higher Growth with Lower Variability SGA Portfolio Companies have historically grown their earnings at 2-3x the rate of the index with 40% less variability Annual Earnings Growth 39% SGA U.S. LCG vs. Russell 1000 Growth 28% 26% 23% 24% 22% 23% 21% 19% 17% 16% 17% 15% 15% 15% 14% 14% 14% 16% 14% 13% 14% 11% 12% 11% 11% 10% 11% 12% 10% 8% 9% 9% 6% 5% 5% 1% -2% -3% -4% -4% -6% -8% -12% Earnings Growth Earnings Variability SGA U.S. LCG 14.6% 5.9% Russell 1000 Growth 6.1% 10.2% Source: Bloomberg, FactSet, SGA Estimates and Adjustments. Data as of 6/30/2021. Historical growth rates for Russell 1000 Growth are sourced from Bloomberg. Russell 1000 Growth Index estimates and characteristics sourced from Bloomberg and FactSet using Russell data. SGA EPS Growth data is based upon portfolio companies non-GAAP operating earnings. EPS calculations exclude companies with earnings going from (i) positive to negative or (ii) negative to positive, year to year. Earning variability calculated using standard deviation of annual EPS growth, since inception 4/1/00. SGA and Russell 1000 Growth earnings growth and volatility statistics are since inception through last full calendar year, 2020. All accounts are modeled in line with SGA’s representative account. Account holdings and weights may differ from this representative account. The representative account holdings are subject to change without notice. This information is supplemental and complements the GIPS Report on composite performance found on the last pages of this document. It should not be assumed that future results 6 will be reflective of past performance. Lower Risk By Most Measures – U.S. LCG Downside Sharpe Information Capture Ratio Ratio 0 25 50 75 100 9th Percentile 13th Percentile 27th Percentile Rank 16 of 146 Rank 22 of 146 Rank 41 of 146 62.8% 0.51 0.36 Data is from 4/1/2000 to 6/30/2021. Source is eVestment. Universe is eVestment US Large Cap Growth Equity. Peer size is 146. Peer universe data and SGA data based on quarterly gross returns and do not reflect the deduction of investment advisory fees. SGA’s fees are available upon request and also may be found in Part 2A of its Form ADV. Actual fees charged to clients may vary depending on, among other things, the applicable fees schedule and portfolio size. It should not be assumed that future results will be reflective of past performance. 7 Downside Capture Down Years Since Inception SGA U.S. LCG Wrap (Gross) Upside & Downside Capture Gross Net SGA U.S. LCG Wrap (Net) 86% Russell 1000 Growth 74% 4.7% 3.3% 1.0% 1.6% -1.5% -5.2% -8.0% -14.7% -17.3% -20.4% -27.6% -27.9% -34.3% -36.3% -38.4% 63% 70% 2000* 2001 2002 2008 2018 Upside Downside *Partial year. SGA US Large Cap Growth WRAP composite inception is 4/1/2000. The performance figures do not reflect the deduction of investment advisory fees. The prospective return will be reduced by the advisory fees and any other expenses incurred in the management of the account. SGA’s fees are available upon request and may be found in Part 2A of its Form ADV. Returns reflect the reinvestment of dividends, interest and other earnings. For interest and capital gains, SGA does not withhold taxes, for dividends, SGA will withhold taxes as reported by the client’s custodian. This information is supplemental and complements the GIPS Report on composite performance found on the last pages of this document. Upside and Downside capture based on quarterly gross returns compared to the Russell 1000 Growth Index, since inception of the SGA US Large Cap Growth composite. It should not be assumed that future results will be reflective of past performance. 8 Investment Team Analysts and Portfolio Managers Tucker Brown Julian Cochran George Fraise HK Gupta Analyst, PM Analyst Analyst Analyst, PM SGA Since 2006 SGA Since 2019 SGA Since 2003 SGA Since 2014 Alexandra James Li, CFA Peter Madej, CMT Gordon Marchand, Lee, MD CFA Analyst, PM Analyst Analyst Analyst, PM SGA Since 2004 SGA Since 2019 SGA Since 2005 SGA Since 2003 Kishore Rao Jon Richter Rob Rohn Luying Wang, CFA Analyst, PM Analyst Analyst, PM Analyst SGA Since 2004 SGA Since 2019 SGA Since 2003 SGA Since 2017 PORTFOLIOS U.S. Global Emerging Markets International Global Mid Cap Gordon Marchand, CFA HK Gupta HK Gupta Tucker Brown HK Gupta Kishore Rao Gordon Marchand, CFA Kishore Rao Alexandra Lee, MD Kishore Rao Rob Rohn Rob Rohn Rob Rohn Gordon Marchand, CFA Rob Rohn 9 Five Flagship Portfolios One Qualified Company List US Global EM Intl. Global Growth Growth Growth Growth Mid-Cap Since 2000 Since 2011 Since 2014 Since 2015 Since 2018 Focused version Focused version available available 10 Investment Approach Structured to manage risk across three pillars Lower Lower Lower Business Risk Human Risk Price Risk Selectivity in Te a m -based Discipline in company approach valuation identification 11 Company Identification 1000+ ≈200 Universe of Thousands Research ≈110 Coverage List Qualified Company List Analysts seek the best Actively monitor ≈200 Continuous due diligence companies worldwide: companies that potentially (including valuation) of ≈110 conferences, trade shows, meet SGA criteria and/or direct companies that meet SGA company ecosystems and competitors and ‘ecosystem’ quality and growth criteria screens companies 12 Research Process 1 2 3 4 5 Idea Due Qualified Valuation Client Formation Diligence Company Portfolios List Analysts Deep Investment Relative to Concentrated present idea for fundamental concept other QCL 25-30 stock analysis to IC analysis, 10Y presented to IC companies portfolios ‘Go/No Go’ financial for inclusion on based on cash providing best projections the ‘buy-list’ flows and combination of Time: 2 – 6 Requires 2 of 3 conviction valuation, months Executive quality and Committee growth Members’ approval 13 Lower Business Risk Key Investment Criteria High degree of predictability in their business Repeat Revenues Able to consistently Long duration of price profitably sustainable growth Pricing Global Power Opportunity Management Financial Execute responsibly and Strength Strength High returns on capital good stewards of shareholder and strong cash-flow capital generation 14 Reducing Business Risk . What We Seek Frequently-replenished, CPGs trusted consumables . Medical/industrial supplies Companies possessing the characteristics we seek can be found across numerous industries Frequently-visited, .
Recommended publications
  • Julian Robertson: a Tiger in the Land of Bulls and Bears

    Julian Robertson: a Tiger in the Land of Bulls and Bears

    STRACHMAN_FM_pages 6/29/04 11:35 AM Page i Julian Robertson A Tiger in the Land of Bulls and Bears Daniel A. Strachman John Wiley & Sons, Inc. STRACHMAN_FM_pages 6/29/04 11:35 AM Page i Julian Robertson A Tiger in the Land of Bulls and Bears Daniel A. Strachman John Wiley & Sons, Inc. STRACHMAN_FM_pages 6/29/04 11:35 AM Page ii Copyright © 2004 by Daniel A. Strachman. All rights reserved. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey. Published simultaneously in Canada. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permis- sion of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per- copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400, fax 978-646-8600, or on the web at www. copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, 201-748-6011, fax 201-748-6008. Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fit- ness for a particular purpose.
  • Cryptocurrencies Exploring the Application of Bitcoin As a New Payment Instrument

    Cryptocurrencies Exploring the Application of Bitcoin As a New Payment Instrument

    Cryptocurrencies Exploring the Application of Bitcoin as a New Payment Instrument By Shinnecock Partners in association with Sophia Bak, Jimmy Yang, Peter Shea, and Neil Liu About the Authors Shinnecock Partners undertook this study of cryptocurrencies with the authors to understand this revolutionary payment system and related technology, explore its disruptive potential, and assess the merits of investing in it. Shinnecock Partners is a 25 year old investment boutique with an especial focus on niche investments offering higher returns with less risk than more traditional investments in long equities and bonds. Sophia Bak is an analyst intern at Shinnecock Partners. She is an MBA candidate at UCLA Anderson School of Management with a focus on Finance. Prior to Anderson, she spent five years at Mirae Asset Global Investments, working in equity research, global business strategy, and investment development. She holds a B.S. in Business Administration from Carnegie Mellon University with concentration in Computing and Information Technology. Jimmy Yang is a third-year undergraduate student at UCLA studying Business Economics and Accounting. Peter Shea is a third-year undergraduate student at UCLA studying Mathematics, Economics and Statistics. Neil Liu is a third-year undergraduate student at UCLA studying Applied Mathematics and Business Economics. Acknowledgements We are grateful to the individuals who shared their time and expertise with us. We want to thank John Villasenor, UCLA professor of Electrical Engineering and Public Policy, Brett Stapper and Brian Lowrance from Falcon Global Capital, and Tiffany Wan and Max Hoblitzell from Deloitte Consulting LLP. We also want to recognize Tracy Williams and Steven Kroll for their thoughtful feedback and support.
  • Hedge Fund Billionaires Attack the Hudson Valley Wall Street Goes All in to Save Tax Breaks for the Wealthy

    Hedge Fund Billionaires Attack the Hudson Valley Wall Street Goes All in to Save Tax Breaks for the Wealthy

    HEDGE PAPERS No.39 HEDGE FUND BILLIONAIRES ATTACK THE HUDSON VALLEY WALL STREET GOES ALL IN TO SAVE TAX BREAKS FOR THE WEALTHY Hedge funds and billionaire hedge fund managers are destroying our economy, corrupting our government, hurting families and communities and exploding inequality. It’s happening all over America, and increasingly all over the world. And now it’s happening in the Hudson Valley. A tiny group of hedge fund billionaires have targeted the congressional campaign in the 19th House District of New York, spending millions of dollars to support GOP candidate John Faso and attack Democratic candidate Zephyr Teachout. SIX HEDGE FUND BILLIONAIRES HIT THE HUDSON VALLEY WITH $5.5 MILLION IN CAMPAIGN CASH The amount of campaign cash is amazing: we’ve found that six billionaire hedge fund managers from New York City, Connecticut and Long Island have given $5,517,600 to PACs and Super PACs active in the Teachout-Faso campaign in this electoral cycle. These same six men have given $102,768,940 in federal and New York state campaign contributions in the past two decades. They’re not doing it for nothing -- they want something in return. These hedge fund billionaires and their colleagues at hedge funds and private equity firms get billions of dollars in special tax breaks under the “carried interest loophole” – and they want to keep the loophole wide open. Closing the loophole would save the federal government an estimated $18 billion per year, according to an analysis by law professor Victor Fleischer.[1] But huge sums of lobbying and campaign cash directed at Congress – and Congressional candidates – by hedge funds and private equity firms have stymied reform in Washington and fueled continued obstructionism.
  • Fit to Be King: How Patrimonialism on Wall Street Leads to Inequality Megan Tobias Neely*

    Fit to Be King: How Patrimonialism on Wall Street Leads to Inequality Megan Tobias Neely*

    Socio-Economic Review, 2018, Vol. 16, No. 2, 365–385 doi: 10.1093/ser/mwx058 Article Article Fit to be king: how patrimonialism on Wall Street leads to inequality Megan Tobias Neely* The Michelle R. Clayman Institute for Gender Research, Stanford University, 450 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA, 94025-2047, USA *Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract The hedge fund industry is one of the most lucrative and powerful industries in the USA, yet it mostly comprises white men. To understand why, I turn to Weber’s theory of patrimonialism, which primarily has been applied to historical or non- Western societies. I argue that patrimonialism—activated through trust, loyalty and tradition—restricts access to financial rewards and facilitates the reproduction of the white male domination of this industry. Using data from 45 in-depth interviews com- bined with field observations at industry events over a 4-year period, I investigate how hiring, grooming and seeding practices within and among firms enable certain elites to maintain monopolies over financial resources. Applying the theory of patri- monialism to a context with few women and minority men in power-holding posi- tions demonstrates how practices that reproduce elite structures are directly connected to inequality in the workplace. Key words: patrimonialism, trust, loyalty, social capital, elites, gender, race and ethnicity, social class, work and occupations, finance JEL classification: G24, J44, J62, J70, J71 1. Introduction Inequality in the USA has returned to levels unprecedented since the years before World War II. The rising incomes of the top 10% of earners are driving this increasing inequality (Piketty, 2014).
  • Bain Capital Specialty Finance, Inc

    Bain Capital Specialty Finance, Inc

    SUBJECT TO COMPLETION, DATED NOVEMBER 7, 2018 PRELIMINARY PROSPECTUS 7,500,000 SHARES BAIN CAPITAL SPECIALTY FINANCE, INC. Common Stock We are an externally managed specialty finance company focused on lending to middle market companies that has elected to be regulated as a business development company (‘‘BDC’’), under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (together with the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, the ‘‘1940 Act’’). Our primary focus is capitalizing on opportunities within our Senior Direct Lending strategy, which seeks to provide risk-adjusted returns and current income to our stockholders by investing primarily in middle market companies with between $10.0 million and $150.0 million in annual earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. We focus on senior investments with a first or second lien on collateral and strong structures and documentation intended to protect the lender. We may also invest in mezzanine debt and other junior securities, including common and preferred equity, on an opportunistic basis, and in secondary purchases of assets or portfolios, but such investments are not the principal focus of our investment strategy. We are managed by our investment adviser, BCSF Advisors, LP, a subsidiary of Bain Capital Credit, LP. This is an initial public offering of shares of our common stock. All of the shares of common stock offered by this prospectus are being sold by us. Shares of our common stock have no history of public trading. We currently expect that the initial public offering price per share of our common stock will be between $20.25 and $21.25.
  • What Hedge Funds Really Do: an Introduction to Portfolio Management Copyright © Business Expert Press, LLC, 2014

    What Hedge Funds Really Do: an Introduction to Portfolio Management Copyright © Business Expert Press, LLC, 2014

    ROMERO THE BUSINESS What Hedge Funds Really Do E C EXPERT PRESS Philip J. Romero and Jeffrey A. Edwards, Editors DIGITAL LIBRARIES An Introduction to Portfolio • Management BALCH EBOOKS FOR BUSINESS STUDENTS Philip J. Romero • Tucker Balch Curriculum-oriented, born- When I managed a hedge fund in the late 1990s, computer- digital books for advanced based trading was a mysterious technique only available to the business students, written by academic thought largest hedge funds and institutional trading desks. We’ve come What Hedge leaders who translate real- a long way since then. With this book, Drs. Romero and Balch lift world business experience the veil from many of these once-opaque concepts in high-tech into course readings and nance. We can all bene t from learning how the cooperation reference materials for Funds between wetware and software creates tter models. This book students expecting to tackle does a fantastic job describing how the latest advances in nan- management and leadership cial modeling and data science help today’s portfolio managers challenges during their solve these greater riddles. —Michael Himmel, Managing Really Do professional careers. Partner, Essex Asset Management POLICIES BUILT I applaud Phil Romero’s willingness to write about the hedge An Introduction BY LIBRARIANS DO HEDGE FUNDS REALLY WHAT • Unlimited simultaneous fund world, an industry that is very private, often amboyant, usage and easily misunderstood. As with every sector of the invest- to Portfolio • Unrestricted downloading ment landscape, the hedge fund industry varies dramatically and printing from quantitative “black box” technology, to fundamental re- • Perpetual access for a search and old-fashioned stock picking.
  • Chase Coleman Makes a Killing

    Chase Coleman Makes a Killing

    COVER STORieS THE WORLD’S RICHEST HEDGE FUNDS ILLUSTRATION BY ISTVÁN SZUGYICZKY Month 2012 BLOOMBERG MARKETS 29 CHASE COLEMAN’S TIGER GLOBAL FUND SCORED A 45 PERCENT GAIN AND THE NO. 1 SPOT. OtHER ACOLYTES OF TIGER MANAGEMENT FOUNDER JULIAN ROBERTSON ALSO THE DISTINGUISHED THEMSELVES IN A YEAR WHEN PERFORMANCE WAS GENERALLY DISMAL. THE WORLD’S 100 RICHEST HEDGE FUNDS TIGER CUBS ROAR BY ANTHONY EFFINGER, KATHERINE BURTON AND ARI LEVY ILLUSTRATION BY DAVID JOHNSON Left to right, Bill Hwang of Tiger Asia, Chase Coleman of Tiger Global, Julian Robertson of Tiger Management and Philippe Laffont of Coatue Management February 2012 BLOOMBERG MARKETS 31 THE WORLD’S 100 RICHEST HEDGE FUNDS TOP-P100ERFORMING LARGE HEDGE FUNDS CHARLES PAYSON ASSETS, IN YTD TOTAL 2010 Fund, Manager(s) Management Firm, Location Strategy BILLIONS RETURN RETURN COLEMAN III, KNOWN AS CHASE, 1 Tiger Global, Chase Coleman, Feroz Dewan Tiger Global Management, U.S. Long/short 6.0 45.0% 18.0% IS AS CLOSE AS ONE 2 Renaissance Institutional Equities, Peter Brown, Robert Mercer Renaissance Technologies, U.S. Quantitative 7.0 33.1 16.4 GETS TO AMERICAN 3 Pure Alpha II, Ray Dalio Bridgewater Associates, U.S. Macro 53.0 23.5 44.8 ARISTOCRACY. 4 Discus Managed Futures Program, Team managed Capital Fund Management, France Managed futures 2.5 20.9 –6.7 A descendent of Peter Stuyvesant, 5 Providence MBS, Russell Jeffrey Providence Investment Management, U.S. Mortgage-backed arbitrage 1.3 20.6 30.3 the last Dutch governor of New York, 6 Oculus, David E. Shaw D.E.
  • Hedge Fund Wisdom a Quarterly Publication by Marketfolly.Com

    Hedge Fund Wisdom a Quarterly Publication by Marketfolly.Com

    Q2 2014 hedge fund wisdom a quarterly publication by marketfolly.com Background: table of contents Each quarter, hedge funds are required to disclose their portfolios to the Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) via 13F consensus buy/sell lists: filing. p.02 Most popular trades These filings disclose long U.S. equity positions, American hedge fund portfolios: Depositary Receipts (ADRs), stock options (puts/calls), warrants, as p.06 Baupost Group well as convertible notes. They do not disclose positions in other p.08 Berkshire Hathaway asset classes (such as commodities, currencies, or debt). They also do not reveal foreign market holdings, short sales or cash positions. p.10 Greenlight Capital p.12 Lone Pine Capital Hedge Fund Wisdom, a quarterly publication by p.15 Appaloosa Management MarketFolly.com, aggregates, updates, and analyzes the latest p.18 Pershing Square Capital portfolios of top hedge funds. This issue reveals second quarter p.20 Maverick Capital holdings as of June 30th, 2014. p.23 Third Point p.26 Blue Ridge Capital In This Issue: p.29 Paulson & Co - Consensus buy & sell lists revealing which stocks were most p.32 Tiger Management frequently traded by these managers p.35 Soros Fund p.38 Bridger Capital - Portfolio updates on 25 prominent hedge funds: data tables, p.40 Omega Advisors expert commentary & historical context on each fund’s moves p.43 Coatue Management - Equity analysis section examining 2 stocks hedge funds were p.46 Fairholme Capital buying p.49 Tiger Global p.52 Passport Capital - To navigate the newsletter, simply click on a page number in p.60 Perry Capital the Table of Contents column on the right to go to that page p.62 Glenview Capital p.65 Viking Global Quote of the Quarter: p.68 Farallon Capital p.72 Icahn Capital “Despite strong recent data on jobs and manufacturing, it remains p.74 JANA Partners unclear whether growth will be robust enough to merit tightening action by the Fed this year.
  • James Aldigé on the Investment Philosophy of Clio Asset Management

    James Aldigé on the Investment Philosophy of Clio Asset Management

    James Aldigé on the Investment Philosophy of Clio Asset Management We had the pleasure of speaking with James Aldigé, Managing Partner of Clio Asset Management LLC, based in Charlottesville, Virginia. In the wide-ranging interview, John speaks with James about his background and path in investing, the guiding principles and structure of his firm, the investment philosophy of Clio, and much more. The conversation took place in the spring of 2021. John Mihaljevic, MOI Global: You invest in a concentrated long-only way in public equities with a portfolio of eight to twelve exceptional businesses. That’s an approach many in the MOI Global community will appreciate. Let’s start with a little background on yourself and your path in investing. James Aldigé, Clio Asset Management: I was born in 1981, so I just turned forty earlier this year. I grew up in Alexandria, Virginia, just outside of Washington, DC. My parents both worked in and around the nonprofit sector. My mom founded a nonprofit related to cancer research when I was five, and my dad mostly worked in direct marketing. It was a for-profit business, but many of his clients were in the nonprofit and government sector. I got my introduction to investing at a fairly young age. I talked to my dad about the stock market. I also had classes at school as early as fifth grade where we looked at stocks. My grandmother had given me something like $500 in a handful of blue-chip stocks around that time, probably age 10 or 11, stocks like Disney, Coca-Cola, and JP Morgan.
  • The BOOK of JARGON ® Hedge Funds

    The BOOK of JARGON ® Hedge Funds

    The BOOK of JARGON ® Hedge Funds The Latham & Watkins Glossary of Hedge Fund Slang and Terminology First Edition Latham & Watkins operates worldwide as a limited liability partnership organized under the laws of the State of Delaware (USA) with affiliated limited liability partnerships conducting the practice in the United Kingdom, France, Italy and Singapore and as affiliated partnerships conducting the practice in Hong Kong and Japan. Latham & Watkins practices in Saudi Arabia in association with the Law Office of Salman M. Al-Sudairi. In Qatar, Latham & Watkins LLP is licensed by the Qatar Financial Centre Authority. Under New York’s Code of Professional Responsibility, portions of this communication contain attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Results depend upon a variety of factors unique to each representation. Please direct all inquiries regarding our conduct under New York’s Disciplinary Rules to Latham & Watkins LLP, 885 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10022-4834, Phone: +1.212.906.1200. © Copyright 2013 Latham & Watkins. All Rights Reserved. 2 The purpose of this publication is to assist the newest members of the hedge funds community in learning to talk the talk of hedge funds. It is intended to be a “Berlitz Course” for recent law school and business school graduates seeking initiation into the industry, and a desktop reference for not-so-recent graduates. In this book, you will find the key to the secret verbal handshakes that make up the code of the hedge fund community. The Book of Jargon®: Hedge Funds is one of a series of practice area-specific glossaries published by Latham & Watkins.
  • Hedge Funds and the Technology Bubble

    Hedge Funds and the Technology Bubble

    THE JOURNAL OF FINANCE • VOL. LIX, NO. 5 • OCTOBER 2004 Hedge Funds and the Technology Bubble MARKUS K. BRUNNERMEIER and STEFAN NAGEL∗ ABSTRACT This paper documents that hedge funds did not exert a correcting force on stock prices during the technology bubble. Instead, they were heavily invested in technology stocks. This does not seem to be the result of unawareness of the bubble: Hedge funds captured the upturn, but, by reducing their positions in stocks that were about to decline, avoided much of the downturn. Our findings question the efficient markets notion that rational speculators always stabilize prices. They are consistent with models in which rational investors may prefer to ride bubbles because of predictable investor sentiment and limits to arbitrage. TECHNOLOGY STOCKS ON NASDAQ ROSE to unprecedented levels during the 2 years leading up to March 2000. Ofek and Richardson (2002) estimate that at the peak, the entire internet sector, comprising several hundred stocks, was priced as if the average future earnings growth rate across all these firms would exceed the growth rates experienced by some of the fastest growing individual firms in the past, and, at the same time, the required rate of return would be 0% for the next few decades. By almost any standard, these valuation levels are so extreme that this period appears to be another episode in the history of asset price bubbles. Shiller (2000) argues that the stock price increase was driven by irrational euphoria among individual investors, fed by an emphatic media, which maxi- mized TV ratings and catered to investor demand for pseudonews.
  • Like Tiger, Like Cub the Progeny of Julian Robertson Leave Tracks in the Master’S Footprints by Stan Altshuller, Joe Peta and Christopher Jordan

    Like Tiger, Like Cub the Progeny of Julian Robertson Leave Tracks in the Master’S Footprints by Stan Altshuller, Joe Peta and Christopher Jordan

    RESEARCH Like Tiger, Like Cub The progeny of Julian Robertson leave tracks in the master’s footprints By Stan Altshuller, Joe Peta and Christopher Jordan In the National Football League, it’s known as the “coaching tree.” By tracing the lineage of a team’s head coach to the different coaches he served under as an assistant, the head coach is said to belong to the coaching tree of a single patriarch. This discussion gained a following in NFL circles during the late 1990s, when a number of Bill Walsh’s assistants, having employed the same type of offensive system that Walsh pioneered, enjoyed considerable success in their own right. Walsh, dubbed “The Genius” by observers in and out of the NFL for his tactics and his analytical approach to the game, is lauded by many as one of the most innovative offensive coaches ever, and the unquestioned architect of the so- called “West Coast offense.” If he’s not the greatest coach of all time, he’s certainly in the photo. Walsh 2 > Novus Tiger Portfolio April 2014 NOVUS RESEARCH™ won three Super Bowls, and his assistants led what we’ll call Julian Robertson’s “investing tree” five other teams to the Super Bowl, winning three account for over $250 billion of AUM. more. The six championships won by Walsh and NFL coaches are ultimately judged by their win- his direct coaching decedents since 1982, when loss record and number of championships. Yet, Walsh won his first, only tell part of the story. As- to truly dissect a coach’s offensive and defensive sistants of his assistants have coached in virtually schemes, one must go to the film room to, in the every city with an NFL franchise, collecting anoth- parlance of football coaches, “break down the er five Lombardi trophies in the process.