S2S Posted September 20, 2011 Share Posted September 20, 2011 Wow, T2 Partners manages a lot less money (~$300M) than I thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 20, 2011 Author Share Posted September 20, 2011 Here is the excel file with the 441 funds for those interested. I have no doubt there are at least 200-300 managers in the world who have audited track records that deliver a return exceeding 3% margin of indices over a decade. I can think of so many off the top of my head. I think that stat is outdated and relies on something Buffet said in relation to a 20-30 year career, in which case it's obviously more difficult. But over this specific last decade, making money was like stealing candy from a baby. I can't believe managers that did not get rich between 2003-2007, at least temporarily before the drop. Take Pabrai for example. Every dollar in his net worth can be attributed to that period. Had that period not existed his performance is tepid. But he is a perfect example of someone that took advantage of the good times, and is preserving (at least his carried interest) during the bad times. 5year_annualized_over_20.xls5year_annualized_over_20.xls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted September 20, 2011 Share Posted September 20, 2011 I just did one for shits and giggles. I found 441 Funds on Bloomberg that delivered a CAGR of 20% or more over the last 5 years. I can't do 10 years, but will find a way to do it tomorrow. And keep in mind Bloomberg doesn't have access to all funds, IE: Non listed funds like Greenlight. I think your numbers are way off. There are hundreds of Managers that have outperformed the S&P by over 3% over the last decade. I can name 20-30 of which I personally know a dozen or so. We did it as well, and we are a small time fund out of Toronto that nobody has ever heard of. I'm talking about funds that are directly comparable to a specific index. Don't compare China or emerging market funds, or China-heavy, resource-heavy funds to the S&P500. If you do an apples to apples comparison...North American equity funds when compared to S&P500 Total Return, the numbers are about 0.5% of total managers beat by 3% annualized over ten years plus. There are plenty of "superstars" these days, and when you actually rip apart their portfolio...they aren't so super. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 20, 2011 Author Share Posted September 20, 2011 http://www.groupgcapital.com/ These guys who I have never heard of delivered 32% CAGR over 5 years lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 20, 2011 Author Share Posted September 20, 2011 Parsad what do you mean, rip apart their portfolio. Either they are superstars or their not: Loeb, Einhorn Ackman Bass, are they not superstars? Soros Druckenmiller Caxton Tudor Jones? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted September 20, 2011 Share Posted September 20, 2011 http://www.groupgcapital.com/ These guys who I have never heard of delivered 32% CAGR over 5 years lol Moore, did you even read about these guys. They are distressed debt guys, not equity managers. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted September 20, 2011 Share Posted September 20, 2011 Parsad what do you mean, rip apart their portfolio. Either they are superstars or their not: Loeb, Einhorn Ackman Bass, are they not superstars? Soros Druckenmiller Caxton Tudor Jones? How much leverage? How much concentration? How much in derivatives? How much insider information? Annualized or cumulative numbers by themselves tell you nothing about skill. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 20, 2011 Author Share Posted September 20, 2011 Parsad your post sounds like "excuses "excuses "excuses" to me. your rebuttal as to why I was able to name 8 managers in a heart beat who completely obliterated a criterion you thought only 50 people would meet, is simply inadequate. You are making ridiculous assumptions such as "insider information" or worst you are saying that the single most important indicator in this business (PERFORMANCE) has nothing to do with skill? And relating to those Distressed debt guys, so what? Are you adjusting your statement to cover only managers per each asset class? That is ridiculous, Tilson buys CDS and distressed debt when he wants to? And no distressed debt benchmark delivered a CAGR of 32% like these guys did. Nobody is placing a gun to Tilson's head and forcing him to deploy in equities case in point: just as he dabbled in Macro he can dabble in distressed debt. I assure you that he has deployed his capital in asset classes he felt would deliver the best returns possible, not the best within an asset class. You guys should look at the competition more often, instead of finding solace in completely mediocre performance. People are getting rich left and right delivering superior returns. Look at Ted Weschler who nobody ever heard of, there are hundreds of guys like him, if not thousands. We recently put some money with 3 young kids from Toronto: Anson Capital. Look at their returns over the last 4 years. Incredible. Look up James Melcher , Look Up Erez Kalir of Sabretooh, so many I can think of that have delivered returns exceeding 3% of indices (or their benchmark for that matter). Keep in mind, hedge funds are different from Mutual Funds. In the Mutual Fund world, your statement might hold water. Not in the hedge fund world where we literally get paid 2% just for the privilege of managing others hard earned capital. In the hedge fund world, Tilsons performance is crap and falls into the category of mediocre at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombgrt Posted September 20, 2011 Share Posted September 20, 2011 @ Moore: 50 out of 10000, not 50 in total. Right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 20, 2011 Author Share Posted September 20, 2011 Parsad claimed that out of 10,000 hedge fund managers, only 50 will beat the index by 3% or more over a decade. I say the number is at least 200-300, if not higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 20, 2011 Author Share Posted September 20, 2011 his mutual funds underperform and his fees are sky high. not a great combo. Whos? Also Parsad, when you said 10,000 Managers you obviously mean the pool of global hedge fund managers which includes all asset classes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 Hell I am sure there are 10-20 guys on this board (at least) who have generated superior returns to that metric over the last decade. Otherwise I wouldn't have joined this community! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 Put it to a poll! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 I attached Ansons performance over the same period as Tilsons: 2008: 1.7% 2009: 19.61% 2010: 23.27% 2011 YTD: 20.76% Larger AUM than Tilson. Net of Fees. Plenty of guys like that you have never heard of because they spend their time looking for alpha and less time marketing or holding conferences or 200 page presentations and blog posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BargainValueHunter Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 So the question is does Tilson most resemble a Mohnish circa Q2 2009? or Bill Miller post-Bear Stearns? http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122886123425292617.html or Berkowitz now? Even the Maestro was "clearly too old for this game" when Juniper Networks was trading at ~$225 per share! Is Whitney a fake or a pro just going through a rough patch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 Total fake in my humble opinion. A decade is plenty for a value investor or any investor for that matter to demonstrate if they "have it". If whitney ends up riding a rally and getting back on top, it's only due to the heads I win tails you lose structure he has in place and his celebrity in the industry. If he was investing his own capital, he would barely have enough to make living expenses with his performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hester Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 MooreCapital you are by definition wrong when you call Tilson's performance mediocre. Tilson has beat the market over the last decade net of fees. The vast majority of fund managers underperform the market over a random 10 year period net of fees. Therefore his performance is by definition above average. I thought Tilson was benchmarked to the S&P 500, but according to you apparently he is benchmarked to some guy named Ezra Kalir. I guess Tilson is just a pathetic loser until he has beaten every random fund manager in bumf*ck Canada. Anything less is mediocre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stahleyp Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 his mutual funds underperform and his fees are sky high. not a great combo. Whos? Also Parsad, when you said 10,000 Managers you obviously mean the pool of global hedge fund managers which includes all asset classes. I believe he means Tilson's. http://quote.morningstar.com/fund/f.aspx?t=TILFX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 Hester, that statement seems a tad emotional and lacks the demeanour I would expect from a debate that seems to be leaning my way. Since posting the Poll, 8 human beings on this board have confirmed that they have been able to beat their respective benchmark by a margin of 3% over the last decade. My comments towards tilson are based on facts, Tilson hangs out in circles with Super investors, and tries to proselytise value investing as though he is the leader of the pact (IE: VIC) when in fact, he damn well is a disgrace to value investors. To me personally seeing the NFLX Debacle was the nail in the coffin. August was no surprise to me, as he always "tries something new" so this time it was a Macro call. His performance is just terrible, and I can't believe some of you think otherwise. If you truly sit here thinking a 33% return net of taxes over a decade constitutes alpha in any environment than you are dreaming. I would rather spend my money on booze and women than leave it with a manager that spends too much time proselytising and no time performing. I think my analogy of the nerd at the gym is the best for Tilson, or the Bat boy, or even the Caddie. He's got no swing but can talk your brain off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 Two quotes pertaining to the viewpoints of the Tilson supporters on this board: “It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” “The great tragedy of Science – the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact.” You can manipulate the data however you like, adjust for good years or bad, but the bottom line is: Tilson = Mediocre hedge fund manager, and average Mutual Fund manager or in other words, nobody we should even be discussing on this board, and definitely not someone the media should be paying ANY attention to based on his performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERICOPOLY Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 I think my analogy of the nerd at the gym is the best for Tilson, or the Bat boy, or even the Caddie. He's got no swing but can talk your brain off. I've never met him, but his media image reminds me of the realtors in my area who work their butts off to promote their name -- which brings in business, and make them money, so good on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 I know investors that are retired businessmen, guys with 1-10 million that literally invest as their only source of income, and have been doing so for several decades. These guys have all had better performance than Tilson or else they would be eating into their principal. It's important for equity investors to also measure their performance net of tax and many fund managers fool their LP's with their numbers which most of the time include significant portion of gains charged as Income. Tax-Free bond funds have been delivering 5 % a year fairly easily, tax free. Compounded over a decade that blows guys like Tilson out of the water, with no volatility and less risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_capital54 Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share Posted September 21, 2011 Ericopoly you are on my side on this debate! Great :) Makes my life easier. I know Parsad will return a rebuttal tomorrow AM that is usually how he does it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERICOPOLY Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Ericopoly you are on my side on this debate! Great :) Makes my life easier. I know Parsad will return a rebuttal tomorrow AM that is usually how he does it... Well, truth is Tilson probably (certainly) would school me in terms of business knowledge. But I'd rather invest with Parsad before putting money with Tilson, even though the media has never heard of Parsad (doesn't promote himself as Tilson does). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S2S Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 If I read correctly the Bloomberg screenshot that moore_capital54 posted (link to that post below), Tilson Offshore Fund's 5 year performance upto 4/29/11 ranks in 52th percentile (of all managers?). Its performance from 4/29 till now is, in all likelihood, much worse and might have even wiped out the bulk of prior period alphas, but for the moment let's work with what we got. It is awfully hard to reconcile this 52th percentile ranking with Parsad's "50 in 10,000", or 99th percentile, comment. I'm sure there is some degree of survivorship bias built in; that being said, Tilson Offshore's yearly rankings don't scream "super investors", IMHO. http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/index.php?topic=5246" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic" 55846#msg55846 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now