Skip to main content

It's Only Alpha, Not Mana

After reading an article covering the hunt for positive alpha and the unanticipated outcome of negative alpha it should come as know surprise to you that I am often amused at the army of academic that speak broadly on the subject of alpha, rely on academic credential to suggest expertise, pepper the conversation with quantitative catchphrases and deliver the whole mess with swashbuckling confidence. Baloney! Alpha is alpha and with the benefit of having managed more than a few billion dollars in assets in my life I unashamedly admit that sometimes I find, what I'm sure is, alpha, but I don't know what to do with it. Hence my frequent look back. And I wholesale disagree with any notion that the past is no indicator of the future. To suggest such would be to suggest that mankind learns nothing from all mistakes and only something from all successes are original. I think mandkind learns nothing from nothing, because something can only come from nothing.
Permit me one illustration. From 1982-1995 Bond prices & interest returned 4% and 10% respectively. Stocks prices and dividends returned 10% and 4% respectively. See where I’m going here? Street consensus suggests that the current statistics for Bonds is 0% and 6% versus 6% and 2% for Stocks. The edge (i.e. alpha) favors stocks. Is the street correct?
Stocks do not always outperform Bonds and diversification (correlation risk) is not as efficient as asset allocation (volatility risk) to which discipline is our master, there is long term historical evidence. Call it extrapolating (or otherwise) there is no evidence to suggest that certain phenomenon can’t happen in the future solely on the virtue that they happened in the past.. By the way, ask any bond manager (the original quantitative and technical analysts) if bonds were set to outperform stocks in 2000. That wasn’t hope, a contrarian view (which is a behavioral weakness) or academic prowess; it was good old fashioned common sense.

Popular posts from this blog

I B!#*$ For A Living

Not really, but I’d like to. The problem is I don’t search, or that is to say I don’t search for this blog. I do search, regularly so, with the same vigor that I flip though a newspaper. I have my pet subjects, finance, art, and sports, politics (not necessarily in that order) I never look at real estate and I rarely look at style articles. One of the reasons I don’t search for this blog is because there is a fine relationship between the price (the value of an asset) and time (the freshness of the analysis) that serve to form my views. That’s the only way I can assure that my posts are mine, grammatical blemishes and all. It also affords me the privilege of some license whereby I’m open to write about almost anything that strikes me as useful in the aim to inform. That’s one of the main reasons I choose to inhabit the space, which brings light to financial news, because it’s so reliant on nearly every other market, across all cultural and political spectrums and best of all it always…

Please Don't Believe Everything You Read

“I have news for you” said Andre
And as I peered through his bad hair weave, and “coke bottle”” glasses I realized he was right.

Nowhere in our collective memories do we ever fully understand the workings of our mind. Driven not by the collective accumulation of information but rather defined by the processes eternally influenced by the random cocktail of chemicals in our heads and poisoned by the principles we carry around in our back pockets with all smug confidence.