May 2021 Report

This was a month of consolidation as I tidied up the SMSF and its repercussions and launched a review of all our investments.

The Australian Dollar rose from USD 0.7725 to USD 0.7738. It was another month of increases in world stock markets. The MSCI World Index rose 1.61%, the S&P 500 by 0.70%, and the ASX 200 rose 2.13%. All these are total returns including dividends. We gained 1.96% in Australian Dollar terms or 2.10% in US Dollar terms. The target portfolio is expected to have gained 1.58% in Australian Dollar terms and the HFRI hedge fund index is expected to gain 0.80% in US Dollar terms. So, we outperformed all benchmarks apart from the ASX 200. Here is a report on the performance of investments by asset class (currency neutral terms):

Gold added the most to performance followed by hedge funds. and only Australian small cap had a negative return. Things that worked well this month:

• Gold had a very strong performance, gaining 8.7% in AUD terms or AUD 43k. Next was Tribeca Global Resources (TGF.AX) gaining AUD 19k, and third was PSS(AP), which gained AUD 7k.
  

What really didn't work:

• The worst performer was new investment Fortescue Metals (FMG.AX), which lost AUD 5k. It was followed by Pershing Square Holdings (PSH.L) and Hearts and Minds (HM1.AX) (-AUD 4k each).
  

The investment performance statistics for the last five years are: 

The first two rows are our unadjusted performance numbers in US and Australian Dollar terms. The following four lines compare performance against each of the three indices. We show the desired asymmetric capture and positive alpha against the ASX200 and MSCI indices. We are doing a little worse than the median hedge fund levered 1.6 times. Interestingly, USD performance is now stronger over the last five years than AUD performance because the Australian Dollar has appreciated over that time.

We stuck close to our desired long-run asset allocation. Real assets is the asset class that is now furthest from its target allocation (3.0% of total assets too much). Private equity and futures are underweight. The former will solve itself over time as Aura make capital calls. We will fix the latter this month.

 

On a regular basis there are retirement contributions. I have stopped making regular contributions to investments outside of superannuation. This was a again a very busy month:

• I sold some Regal Funds (RF1.AX) shares getting back down to 60k shares.
• I invested in Contango Income Generator (CIE.AX).
• I sold Treasury Wine and invested in Fortescue. This was a very bad move.
• I invested in the Ruffer Investment Company (RICA.L).
• I switched funds from Platinum International Fund to Generation Global Fund.
• I made the first investment through Domacom.
• I bought some more shares in Pershing Square Holdings (PSH.L).
  
• I invested in another painting at Masterworks.
  
• I switched funds from the CREF Social Choice Fund to the TIAA Real Estate Fund.
  
• I opened a new calendar spread trade in soybeans. 
• We applied for shares in the WAM Strategic Value IPO.
  

More Investment Review Actions

 Following up on Parts 1 and 3 of the Investment Review I am making the following changes:

1. Switching from CFS Future Leaders to CFS Developing Companies

2. Closing investment in CFS Diversified Fund and switching one third to CFS Imputation Fund and 2/3 to Aspect Diversified Futures. 

The latter is a bet that trend-following will become more profitable again than it's been in recent years.

Investments Review: Part 3, Small Cap Australian Equities

CFS Developing Companies. Share of net worth: 2.14%. IRR: 12.86%. This is one of my oldest investments. I originally invested in May 1997. However, I sold out again in 1998 and bought back in in 2001. Until recently, when I closed my CFS superannuation account, we had a larger position. It's performance relative to CFS's "custom benchmark" has been erratic. It has strongly outperformed over 10 years but underperformed over horizons up to 5 years. Still it gained 80% in the year up to March 2021 but that was less than the benchmark's 104% gain. However, I don't see any reason to change this investment, unless someone knows a better small cap Australian fund. Wilson Microcap (WMI.AX) is such a fund but trading at a big premium to NAV.

WAM Strategic Value. Share of net worth: 2.04%. IRR: Too new. We have applied for shares in this listed investment company that is in the process of IPO-ing and is managed by Wilson Asset Management. The fund's goal is mostly to invest in undervalued closed-end funds in Australia with the aim to closing the gap. It doesn't qualify as a hedge fund as far as I am concerned because it won't go short or use puts etc. As most of these funds are small caps, I'm categorizing it as a small cap investment.

CFS Future Leaders. Share of net worth: 1.00%. IRR: 10.37%. This is the oldest investment I still have. I originally invested in December 1996. This fund invests in somewhat larger companies than Developing Companies does. It has not performed as strongly in the long run. Like Developing Companies, it outperformed its benchmark over 10 years, though not as strongly, and has underperformed in recent years. I'm inclined to roll this into Developing Companies, despite nostalgia.

Domacom (DCL.AX). Share of net worth: 0.73%. IRR: -3.04%. This is a company rather than a fund and its business is fractional property investment. The company has developed a series of innovative products but has struggled to increase funds under management and so continues to make large losses. My thesis for investing was that they would likely get acquired by a larger financial player who could put a lot more funds into their products. Really it is surprising that this is a listed company rather than a venture capital sponsored investment. Now the company has "voluntarily suspended" its shares because ASIC is investigating its merger/takeover of a company called AustAgri that has made all kinds of wild claims the most solid of which was it was buying Cedar Meats in Melbourne. Why they would want to become a Domacom managed fund, paying management fees to Domacom was not clear. In return they were supposed to receive Domacom shares. Whatever the outcome of this is I don't think this will be a complete loss, because again I think they could sell the platform. I don't have any choice but to hold at the moment.

Career Update etc.

About a month ago I posted about my career decision-making. So, because I ummed and ahhed, the incoming director found someone else for the leadership position for a year with a view to me doing it after that. On the other hand, she was happy for me to get a teaching reduction when I am in that leadership position.

I talked with HR and my immediate department head about long service leave. He was happy for me to get a reduction in teaching next year but not the course I wanted to drop. Instead, he suggested I drop both courses that are supposed to run in the first half of the year and do another course instead in the second half of the year. This is somewhat appealing as after a few year I get bored of teaching a course even though preparing a new course is a lot of work. So, then I would have a year out of teaching, then teach the new course, and then take on the leadership position while still teaching this course. 

That takes us to the end of 2024 when I will be 60 years old. So, my thinking is to then drop to a 50% position rather than retire outright and teach one course a year. 

On another front, a former student who I am collaborating with on research and maybe on another fintech business venture (at the moment I am on the informal "advisory board") is interested in trying to implement automatic systematic trading with my methods. He already has 2-3 other collaborators on the other (research intensive) business development. These guys are pretty expert in Python etc while I am relatively expert in markets. But he wants me to pay for their time up front for development. So, I really need to make sure I have something profitable before paying for this. So, I am going to do more extensive backtesting of my soybeans model, which is the easier one to backtest using my existing software. Most of the work is in compiling futures data together into a continuous series. I will go back at least to the Great Recession and maybe further. Currently I've tested about 6 years. If that works out (I am skeptical actually) they would then do more testing of other markets once we are trading the first market.

My thinking is to pay for development by being issued shares in return for cash in their (to be founded) company. After that when trading is up and running there would be profit sharing with the management company of which I would also be then a shareholder. One of the team is an accountant who would set all this up. They already have an IP agreement in place.

This actually all seems pretty crazy to me but you won't succeed if you don't try.

TIAA Real Estate Fund

I haven't gotten around to reviewing the TIAA Real Estate Fund yet, but have decided to buy more of it. There are two reasons. First, after reviewing the CREF Social Choice Fund, I'm a bit concerned that it is 40% bonds even though it has been a pretty decent fund relative to benchmarks. Second, it looks like timing is good to switch into TIAA Real Estate. The following chart shows its monthly returns and a 12 month moving average:

The fund does well after recessions but with a lag compared to the stock market. The moving average has just turned the corner again and monthly returns are above anything seen in recent years. In March I switched out of this fund as I was worried about the pandemic and into Social Choice and Money Market. Then in December I switched back into Real Estate. Now I just switched most of my remaining holding of Social Choice.

Already Making Changes Based on the Investment Review

I've only done the first two parts of the Investments Review, but am already making changes to our portfolio based on it. I switched our holding of the Platinum International Fund for more units in the Generation Global Fund. The internal rate of return of the latter is twice that of the former and the alpha of the former is about zero, while the latter is around 3%. We still have a holding in the listed investment company Platinum Capital (PMC.AX). I also cancelled the automatic investment plan for Moominmama's account that holds the Generation Global Fund. Now that we are trying to get more money into superannuation, it doesn't make sense to keep putting AUD 2k per month into these accounts. Her account now holds the Generation investment (now 2.45% of net worth) and holdings in CFS Imputation (0.98% of net worth) and CFS Developing Companies (not reviewed yet).

Third Point and AlphaSimplex

I don't write much on the blog about investments I evaluated but rejected. There are quite a lot of these, of course. Recently, I evaluated and rejected Third Point and AlphaSimplex. Third Point is  a well-known hedge fund managed by Daniel Loeb. Retail investors can invest in it through TPOU.L a closed-end fund on the London stock exchange. AlphaSimplex is a managed futures manager based in Boston that developed out of MIT. U.S. retail investors can invest with them through mutual funds issued by Natixis Funds. ASFYX has a USD 100k minimum and a lower expense ratio than AMFAX which has a low minimum investment. Non-U.S. investors can access them via Luxembourg based funds. There are institutional (USD 100k minimum and lower management fee) and retail classes (USD 1k minimum and higher management fee) and the funds are available in various currencies. Even the Australian Dollar! Kathryn Kaminski, their chief research strategist, was just on Meb Faber's podcast.

So, is this fund any good? And what about Third Point? Both these investments were interesting enough for me to do some proper analysis on them. These are some results using annual returns:

The period of analysis is the length of the track record provided by AlphaSimplex. All returns are in U.S. Dollars. None of this analysis deducts the risk-free-rate from returns. My returns in U.S. Dollars are not very good over the last ten years. In Australian Dollar terms they are much better.

So, it turns out that using annual data AlphaSimplex has a beta of 0.34 to the MSCI World Index and no alpha. Its correlation with the market is 0.4. Its average return was just 3.4% with a Sharpe ratio of 0.3. The Winton Global Alpha Fund has had similarly poor returns but actually has a negative beta and positive alpha. Before the 2020 debacle, Winton was a lot better than AlphaSimplex. I'm definitely not sold on AlphaSimplex.

Third Point is more attractive. However, it acts more or less like a good quality long-only fund. It's correlation with the MSCI is 0.92. It has an alpha of 1.4%. I added Pershing Square Holdings as a comparison. It has a much lower correlation to the market though it has a beta of 1.04. With an alpha of 4.3% it adds much more uncorrelated return. So, I haven't found Third Point convincing enough to add to the portfolio.

Investments Review: Part 2, Long-only Large Cap Equities

For the second part of the investments review, I am looking at our long-only large cap equities funds. Usually, I would divide these into Australian large cap, U.S., and rest of world equities, but Hearts and Minds spans all of these and Generation the last two. The funds all have strong IRRs. Note that the IRR of an investment depends both on its underlying performance and our trading and timing.

Hearts and Minds (HM1.AX). Share of net worth: 4.13%. IRR: 27.52%. This fund invests across Australia and global markets by picking the best ideas of a set of fund managers. 35% of the portfolio is allocated according to the stocks pitched at the annual Sohn Hearts and Minds Conference. 65% is allocated according to the best ideas of six core fund managers: Caledonia Investments, Cooper Investors, Magellan Financial Group, Paradice Investment Management, Regal Funds Management, and TDM Growth Partners. Instead of charging management fees, the fund contributes 1.5% of NAV to charity every year. Since inception, this fund has performed very well. On the other hand, it has been weaker this year as the conference stocks this time are mostly high growth stocks, which are now falling out of favor:

The China Fund (CHN). Share of net worth: 1.77%. IRR: 16.00%. This is a closed-end fund investing in Chinese stocks. There have been changes of manager over time and the latest manager seems to be doing well:

The reason to hold this fund is to tilt towards exposure to emerging markets. I think our diversified funds have a relatively low exposure to emerging markets, though it's impossible to get that information for most of them. OTOH, one of our "hedge funds", Platinum Capital has a 17% allocation to China and Hong Kong and 2% to India. So, this seems a good fund to get that exposure through. But is almost one third of our allocation to "rest of the world stocks" too much?

Generation Global Fund. Share of net worth: 1.60%. IRR: 16.50%. This fund is hosted on the Colonial First State platform and is closed to new investors. We are automatically adding AUD 400 to this fund every month. The question is whether to raise that or stop contributing to funds outside of super altogether. The fund is managed by Generation Investment Management, who are an ESG fund manager. Compared to the MSCI World Index it has a beta of 1.11 and annual alpha of 3.2% over the last five years. So, this is a good long-only fund.

Fortescue Metals (FMG.AX). Share of net worth: 1.60%. IRR: Too new. I very recently switched out of Treasury Wines and into this stock, which so far has been a very bad move. I guess I just like to do some trading with a small part of the portfolio. I am hoping this will pay nice franked dividends and that I at least won't lose capital value in the long term.

Colonial First State Imputation Fund. Share of net worth: 0.99%. IRR: 18.00%. This fund invests in large cap Australian stocks with strong "franked" dividends. There is little logic to hold both this fund and Argo Investments... Argo has a much lower management fee. On the other hand, this fund has outperformed the benchmark on many time scales despite the high management fee (0.96%):

So, if we retain this account, then I think this fund makes sense as one of the investments.

Berkshire Hathaway (BRK/B).  Share of net worth: 0.87%. IRR: 9.80%. My thesis for investing in Berkshire is here. Berkshire is providing more exposure to the US market in the SMSF.

Argo Investments (ARG.AX). Share of net worth: 0.79%. IRR: 23.03%. This is a closed end fund (listed investment company) investing in mainly large cap Australian shares. The expense ratio is only 0.15%! Timing has boosted our IRR for this fund... The fund has outperformed the benchmark recently and over 20 years, but not over the interim time frames:

So, maybe this isn't such a good idea? I recently invested again in this fund to get more exposure to the Australian market after rolling over my Colonial First State superannuation fund into the SMSF. Note that the share price performed poorly recently as the premium to NTA fell, after which we purchased the fund.

Investments Review: Part 1, Diversified Funds

After noting that we had at a conservative count, 40 different investments, I thought it'd be a good idea to do a review of all of them to see what makes sense and what doesn't. Maybe my readers will learn about some interesting investments too. Or about what not to invest in. Each post will look at one type of investment starting with diversified funds. Shares of net worth don't include our house in net worth.

Unisuper Balanced Fund. Share of net worth: 10.02%. IRR: 10.64%. This is my employer superannuation fund. I think in theory we could have contributions made to another fund instead but then they would only pay the 9.5% (of salary p.a.) superannuation guarantee instead of 17%! What I do have an option to do is to switch to other investment options within Unisuper. I also think I could rollover the investment into another fund such as our SMSF. The balanced fund is diversified across Australian stocks (33%), international equities (27%), bonds (30%), property (5%), and infrastructure and private equity (5%). It is one of the better performing balanced super funds in Australia. I used to invest more aggressively by investing in the growth option instead. Unless our SMSF outperforms strongly, I'm inclined to leave this as it is.

PSS(AP) Balanced Fund. Share of net worth: 9.16%. IRR: 9.41%. This is Moominmama's employer superanniation fund. It's not quite as well-performing as Unisuper. They only offer four investment options now. There used to be more. They provide even less information about their investments than Unisuper do. Generally, it's amazing how little information most Australian fund managers provide compared to U.S. fund managers. The fund is allocated across equities (56%), bonds (18%), hedge funds (15%), and real assets (11%). I think there is a similar condition on fund choice.

Colonial First State Diversified Fund. Share of net worth: 3.12%. IRR: 10.31%. I contribute automatically AUD 500 into this fund each month. Before rolling over my CFS superannuation account into our SMSF we had a lot of superannuation invested in this fund too. There isn't really a strong justification for holding this fund, especially given the 20% of net worth that we have invested in the two superannuation funds above. Selling would mean a capital gains tax bill, but I'm really not sure why I am continuing to put money into the fund. The CGT bill would actually not be that big as the distributions have been taxed all along the way. The fund is allocated 30% to Australia shares, 20% to global shares, 30% to bonds, 5% to property securities, 5% to infrastructure securities, and 10% to "real return". It has returned 7.78% p.a. in the last ten years to March, which is less than our portfolio return.

CREF Social Choice. Share of net worth: 1.66%. IRR: 13.33%. This fund is 40% U.S. stocks, 20% rest of the world stocks, and 40% bonds with an ESG overlay. I use this as the core fund in my former U.S. employer retirement fund (403b account). Apparently, my market timing since 2002 when I first invested in this fund has paid off to boost the IRR. I have been both more aggressive and more conservative in the allocation in this account. It has returned 8.33% in the last ten years and outpaced the relevant Morningstar benchmarks. The question is whether to be more aggressive in this account and shift to the Global Equities option instead.

Ruffer Investment Company (RICA.L). Share of net worth: 0.97%. IRR: Too new. This is an extremely new investment that plays more of the role of a hedge fund in the portfolio. But as it doesn't use shorting or charge a performance fee I've classified it as a diversified fund. The allocation is 9% U.S. stocks, 31% rest of the world equities, 39% bonds (mostly index linked), 8% gold, and 13% in what they describe as "illiquid strategies" and options. The illiquid strategies seem to be hedge funds specialising in mitigating tail risk. I'm counting this part of the fund towards our hedge fund allocation.

Adjusting Estimated Real Estate Exposure for Leverage

I realized that because the URF.AX fund, which is invested in New York and New Jersey real estate, is highly levered, my exposure to real estate is much greater than I previously estimated. The market value of this investment is AUD 51, but the underlying value of the real estate assets is almost AUD 1/2 million.

Based on this, the share of real assets in the portfolio is 17.28% currently, which is above the target share of 15%. The asset allocation pie chart now looks like this:

 In recent months the share of real estate increased a lot:

Two More New Investments

We're still in the process of reinvesting after the most recent reorganization, which centred on rolling over my Colonial First State superannuation fund into the SMSF. I bought the first "tranche" of a position in Fortescue Metals (FMG.AX) replacing the just closed Treasury Wines position. By the way that position made around AUD 15k in profit with an internal rate of return of around 90%. Fortescue is expected to pay out an enormous franked dividend very soon. The interim dividend was AUD 1.47, which was double that in the previous year. Brokers expect the final dividend to be around AUD 2.50 per share plus franking. This is around a 16% annual yield. The reason the share price isn't higher is that brokers also expect profits to fall in the following years. The thinking is that the iron ore price can't remain this high for long. My thesis is that retail investors will continue to buy the stock to get the dividend and that maybe future profits won't fall as much as expected. In the last 90 days they have increased their forecasts of 2022 profits but the share price is below where it was a the beginning of the year.

The second investment is in Contango Income Generator (CIE.AX). This is a listed investment company (closed end fund). It has been a failure, losing money since inception. Wilson Asset Management got involved, buying up shares and agitating for change. The company switched to a new strategy managed by WCM Investment Management who are based in California. This is a global long-short equity strategy, which supposedly has performed extremely well:

Of course, it is trading below net asset value. It's not that liquid, and so getting a full position will take a little while.

We now have 40 different investments not including cash in various currencies, our house etc. And that's counting the eight paintings at Masterworks as one investment. I still have a couple more investments in mind.

And in to Ruffer

 

I invested most of the remaining cash in the SMSF into Ruffer Investment Company. This is a closed end fund trading on the London Stock Exchange. It is a diversified fund invested 40% in stocks, 40% in bonds – mostly inflation indexed – and the remainder in gold, options etc. They are betting on inflation. It has done very well during market crises. The fund:  "has a simple aim – consistent positive returns, regardless of how the financial markets perform. We try not to lose money in any 12 month period, and to grow the value of our investors’ wealth over the long haul. If we can do this, we should outpace inflation, protecting and increasing the real value of our investors’ income and capital."

Got Out of Treasury Wine

Was getting bored of Treasury Wine (TWE.AX) so I exited the position. Probably now there will be a takeover announced :) Previous rumours about takeovers didn't eventuate so far.

First Investment through Domacom

 

 

I made my first investment using the Domacom platform. I bought some shares in a cattle grazing property in Victoria. Mostly, I just want to see how the platform works, so this is a very small investment. I also have made "pledges" for three "campaigns". Activity seems low on the platform in terms of either trading or crowdfunding campaigns. It's not surprising that the company seems to be focusing on other ways to generate funds under management. The platform provides quite a bit of information but I think deals mostly are a bit too nebulous to commit a lot of money to any one. For example, these are the financials for another farm property in Victoria:

What exactly are the outgoings? If there are finance costs, then how big is the mortgage on this property? The "position" has no loan listed. Was the loan paid off? But last year there were no finance costs. It's hard to understand the financials of most properties I looked at.

What farming activity is generating the rent? The pds says: "It is intended that this property will be used to derive income from mixed agriculture use including the farming of sheep and the growing of trees producing nuts." I'm doubtful about the latter. Is it happening? 

Most residential property listed on the site has fallen in value since the initial investment was made. Are initial valuations over-valuing the properties?

I think if this platform is going to be successful it needs to have much more transparent information.

April 2021 Report

This month we completed the initial investments in our self-managed superannuation fund (SMSF). I stopped systematic trading for the moment. We also reached a big round net worth number in  Australian Dollar terms. But once I raised the value of our house to reflect a recent sale in our neighborhood, I realised we would have actually reached that number in February.

The Australian Dollar rose from USD 0.7612 to USD 0.7725. It was another month of increases in world stock markets. The MSCI World Index rose 4.41%, the S&P 500 by 5.34%, and the ASX 200 rose 3.48%. All these are total returns including dividends. We gained 2.54% in Australian Dollar terms or 4.06% in US Dollar terms. The target portfolio is expected to have gained 1.76% in Australian Dollar terms and the HFRI hedge fund index is expected to gain 2.07% in US Dollar terms. So, we outperformed these benchmarks and did OK vs. the MSCI. Here is a report on the performance of investments by asset class (currency neutral terms):

Hedge funds added the most to performance and only Australian small cap had a negative return. Things that worked well this month:

• Tribeca Global Resources was the largest contributor in dollar terms contributing AUD 21k. Gold bounced back, contributing AUD 15k. Unisuper, Cadence Capital, and Pershing Square Holdings all also contributed more than AUD 10k. Other notable strong performers were URF.AX (NY/NJ residential real estate), 3i (UK private equity), and soybeans.
  

What really didn't work:

• The worst performers were Hearts and Minds (HM1.AX) and Domacom (DCL.AX).
  

The investment performance statistics for the last five years are: 

The first two rows are our unadjusted performance numbers in US and Australian Dollar terms. The following four lines compare performance against each of the three indices. We show the desired asymmetric capture and positive alpha against the ASX200 index. Against the MSCI World Index we could be doing better and we are doing a little worse than the median hedge fund levered 1.6 times.

We moved decisively towards our desired long-run asset allocation again as I implemented our SMSF investments. In October 2018, when we received the inheritance we were 48 percentage points away from our target allocation at the time. Now we are less than 6 percentage points away. We compute this by calculating the Euclidean distance between the target and actual allocation vectors. This is the square root of the sum of squared differences between the actual and target allocations for each asset.  Real assets is the asset class that is now furthest from its target allocation (4.6% of total assets too little):

On a regular basis, we invest AUD 2k monthly in a set of managed funds, and there are also retirement contributions. This was a very busy month. I'm only recording net changes here:

• Australian large cap: I invested in Argo Investments again.
  
• Hearts and Minds (HM1.AX): I bought back 20k shares I had sold a while ago at higher prices. This is a long only global equities fund.
  
• Hedge funds: I increased our holding of Regal Funds (RF1.AX). This wasn't intentional, but I didn't get the price I wanted in exiting part of our holding in a regular brokerage account while also establishing a position in the SMSF.
  
• Private equity: I increased our holding of the Pengana private equity fund (PE1.AX).
  
• Bonds: Our Medallion Financial baby bond matured and we bought shares in Scorpio Tankers,  Star Bulk Carriers, and Ready Capital baby bonds, increasing our net holdings of US corporate bonds by USD 50k. We also bought shares in the Australian MCP Income Opportunities Trust (MOT.AX).
  
• Art: I invested in another painting at Masterworks.
  
• Real estate: I invested in the Domacom and Australian Unity Diversified Funds. I also doubled our holding of URF.AX (NY/NJ residential property).
  
• Futures: I successfully closed a calendar spread trade in soybeans and stopped systematic trading of ASX futures.
  

Career Decision-Making

My university has a big deficit currently and one money-saving move has been to ask people who are eligible to take long-service leave. Every pay period money is put into a long-service leave account. The university can't access this money unless the employee takes long-service leave. When they take long-service leave, the university stops paying their regular salary thus reducing the current deficit. I haven't yet been eligible as you need to have 10 years of service, and I started in 2011 in my current position. But I was thinking of taking long service leave in the first half of next year. I was vaguely thinking about retiring by the end of next year.

According to standard criteria we are financially independent. 3% of our net worth is AUD 150k and our annual expenditure is around AUD 120k. However, I expect our expenses to rise faster than the rate of inflation. We have two young children who my wife is determined to send to private schools (I tend to think that public schools are fine). We are spending on one private school and daycare right now. We don't get much childcare subsidy from the government because our income is high. But high school is more expensive than this.

My wife (Moominmama) is working (2 days a week), though I told her she doesn't need to if she doesn't want to. She said that holding on to the job has option value. Which I kind of agree with. Things feel very uncertain.

Now I was asked whether I could again take on a leadership position in my school (school = very large academic department in US terms - our school has 4 departments within it - think something like a business school of a university). This is probably the best of the leadership positions. I think it is kind of unfair because I spent five of the last ten years holding such positions, which are a lot of extra work, and some full professors have never done even one. The argument is that I am good at it and they're not... 

So if I started this in January, I couldn't take long service leave and it would be for two years probably. Usually, you get AUD 10-20k a year extra pay. After tax, that is half that, of course. After discussing with Moominmama she said that I should ask instead to reduce my teaching. This has happened in the past and the incoming director might be more open to this than the current school director. Moominmama also think I should hold onto my job for the "option value" and not retire. So, I suggested to her that after doing the leadership position for two years maybe I would switch to half time, which means I could keep the low teaching load. The truth is that without leadership duties my job is a very easy way to earn AUD 200k a year (including the superannuation contibutions). AUD 100k a year is also good money. So, I think I will tell the incoming director that I will do it, but only if I can teach less. I would still earn the AUD 200k a year for the next two years. I won't tell her about dropping to half time after that. Or should I just say no, because others haven't done their fair share of the work?

Argo Investments Again

  

Back in 2012 I invested in Argo Investments for a while. I don't know why I sold it. There were no new investments that month and I didn't comment on it on this blog. Maybe I put the money towards our house buying fund.

Anyway, I just reinvested in the fund in a regular brokerage account. After selling some things which we were buying in the SMSF we now need to reinvest in those accounts. The target allocation says that we are underweight large cap Australian stocks and so that is what I bought. This is a managed fund with a tilt towards value and a very low expense ratio of 0.15%. It has performed pretty well I think. 

By the way, I recently tweaked the target portfolio slightly to give the US and rest of the world equities equal weights instead of a slightly smaller weight for the US. Each is now allocated 6% of assets. This doesn't include hedge funds and private equity, just long-only investments. Australian large cap is supposed to be 9% of the total.

Bond Investments and Overall SMSF Allocation

I made three bond investments and have completed the initial investments for the SMSF. I bought two US baby bonds - Scorpio Tankers (SBBA) and Star Bulk Carriers (SBLKZ). These are both companies that make money, pay dividends and whose stock has good analyst opinions. They also mature soon or are subject to potential call, which means their price doesn't deviate too far from the redemption price usually. I also invested in the MCP Income Opportunities Trust (MOT.AX). This is a listed private credit fund, which has a high yield and performed better than other listed credit funds in Australia through 2020's market crash.

Here is the overall allocation of investments in the SMSF at this point:

The cash and bonds are to take advantage of shorter and longer term future opportunities.

I plan to benchmark the SMSF against Unisuper and PSS(AP) in future performance reports. After all, if it doesn't perform better than our employer superannuation funds, there isn't much point in doing this. As these are both strong performers, it will be a tough hurdle to beat.

Second New Property Investment: Domacom

I made a second property investment application today. This one is to Domacom which is a fractional property investment or crowdfunding platform. I have been an investor in the company itself for a while.  It is now looking quite a bit more stable than it did when I wrote about it before. It's still one of my most speculative investments. The way it works is that you put cash into an interest paying account and then bid on various crowd-funded projects. You can also get a syndicate together to invest in a property using their platform. They have a variety of other products like housing equity release for seniors – selling part of your house, rather than doing a reverse mortgage – Islamic financing for buying houses etc. Their model is supposed to allow SMSFs to invest with leverage because you buy units in a fund rather than buying a property directly. 

The focus is on residential property, but there are also more unusual opportunities like solar power and rural farmland.

New Investment: Australian Unity Diversified Property Fund

This is the first new investment in our SMSF. Real estate is the area where we are most underinvested relative to our target allocation. The SMSF already has an investment in US residential real estate via URF.AX. I sold our existing investment for a capital loss and bought a larger holding in the SMSF. So, this investment covers Australian commercial property. This fund has a very good track record (better than Charter Hall in my opinion) and is diversified across industrial, retail, and office properties. Coles and Woolworths are the biggest tenants. We are investing AUD 50k in this fund.

I have a definite preference for direct investments in property rather than listed investments. REITS tend to move up and down with the stock-market and so don't provide as much diversification as direct investments. On the other hand, actually buying property myself is not something I want to do as the required size of investment is too large. Well, we could easily buy an apartment to rent but we couldn't access commercial property easily. So pooling investments with others makes sense. 

If a REIT is trading a lot below NAV, like URF is, then I am interested in buying. URF is a pretty risky investment, though US residential property seems to have turned the corner. Financial Samurai even said he wanted to buy Manhattan Real Estate.

We already have exposures to US and Australian commercial real estate through our employer superannuation funds, the Wilson Alternative Assets Fund (WMA.AX) and the TIAA Real Estate Fund.

Stopping Systematic Trading Again...

Of course, bitcoin went straight down after I got in and I have now closed that trade. There was no real basis to that trade. I just went in because Oscar Carboni was getting bullish on bitcoin again. But I have also decided to stop my attempts at systematic trading. I thought I could come up with something which my personality could handle. But it's not the case. I just can't get detached when there is an order out there that may or may not trigger, needs attention to close etc. My anxiety and lack of sleep has been getting worse again this week, despite not actually trading and last night I decided to pull the plug. I still have a soybean calendar spread trade open, which maybe I was most anxious about. But it is actually making money now. I had increased the size of the trade. That was a bad idea. I have now gone back down to two contracts instead of three. These moves should reduce the overall cognitive load. If this still doesn't work, I'll have to close that trade too.

This seems to have happened every time I really get into trading, but each time I think it will be different. Moominmama was concerned when I said I was trading again, saying that I always end up stressed as a result. She was right.

P.S. 9 April

I still had difficulty sleeping, so I closed the soybean calendar spread too. At least that one made some money.

Bitcoin

 I'm finally back into Bitcoin. The position I could get was tiny. Margin requirements are crazy. On IB they are something like twice the actual BTC position. I took a small position on Plus500.

March 2021 Report

This month we took some big steps towards fully setting up our self-managed super fund. Trading didn't go well, but I persisted, following the rules exactly. We also reached a big round net worth number in  Australian Dollar terms. 

The Australian Dollar fell from USD 0.7737 to USD 0.7612. The MSCI World Index rose 2.72%, the S&P 500 by 4.38%, and the ASX 200 rose 2.74%. All these are total returns including dividends. We gained 1.46% in Australian Dollar terms but lost 0.17% in US Dollar terms. The target portfolio is expected to have gained 2.00% in Australian Dollar terms and the HFRI hedge fund index is expected to gain 1.30% in US Dollar terms. So, we strongly underperformed all our benchmarks. Here is a report on the performance of investments by asset class (currency neutral terms): 

Hedge funds added the most to performance and gold detracted the most. Things that worked well this month:

• Three hedge funds: Cadence Capital (AUD 20k), Regal Funds, and Platinum had the largest gains this month in absolute terms. Cadence benefited from its investment in Deepgreen metals. Domacom gained 21% or AUD 7.5k.
  

What really didn't work:

• Gold lost the most in dollar terms (AUD 11k) with Hearts and Minds (HM1.AX) and the China Fund (CHN) following up. Trading the ASX200 lost the fourth largest amount AUD 6k.
  

I thought it'd be interesting to look at the twelve month performance since the end of March 2020 when the stock market bottomed:

Portfolio shares are as at the end of March and gains are the dollar gain since March divided by the value at the end of March. Hedge funds are again the star performer, but Aussie small caps did surprisingly well.

The investment performance statistics for the last five years are: 

The first two rows are our unadjusted performance numbers in US and Australian Dollar terms. The following four lines compare performance against each of the three indices. We show the desired asymmetric capture and positive alpha against the ASX200 index.

We moved sharply away from our desired long-run asset allocation. Rolling over my retail superannuation funds to the SMSF resulted in a big rise in cash. Cash is the asset class that is furthest from its target allocation (12% of total assets too much) followed by real assets (7% too little):

 

On a regular basis, we invest AUD 2k monthly in a set of managed funds, and there are also retirement contributions. Other moves this month:

• Our SMSF received all approvals, and I rolled over my Colonial First State super funds to the SMSF, made an AUD 15k contribution to the fund, and applied for a brokerage account.
• Ready Capital called their baby bonds early, reducing our bond exposure by another USD 25k.
  
• I continued systematically daytrading ASX200 CFDs and futures.... Daytrading experienced a strong drawdown. I lost as much (including slippage) as the algorithm did (not including slippage) despite using a smaller position size, mainly because of one bad trade where Plus500 got me into the opposite direction trade than I should have been in. The trade in the wrong direction triggered near the open, when in the futures market you would have got into a trade in the right direction later in the day.
  
• I started a calendar spread in soybeans futures. Soybeans are very strongly backwardated when usually they should be in contango. I am betting that the November and May prices will converge. They went the wrong way in March but on 1st April moved very sharply in my favor.
  
• I invested USD 10k in another painting at Masterworks. I now have USD 70k invested in 7 paintings.
• I bought 15,000 Cadence Capital shares (CDM.AX) @ $1.045 per share when they announced that their pre-IPO investment in DeepGreen Metals was being acquired by a SPAC and would list on the NYSE. The current share price of Cadence gives you this investment for free.
• I sold 10,000 shares of Hearts and Minds (HM1.AX) @ $4.78 a share. The shares are trading at a large premium to the NAV and I felt that some of their recent picks of growth and tech stocks perhaps peaked. I still hold 25k shares.
• I sold half our Treasury Wine (TWE.AX) position @ $11.15 a share. Now it is down to 1% of the portfolio again, which is the default allocation for an investment in a single company.
• I bought 2000 shares of Perth Mint Gold (PMGOLD.AX) @ $22.44 and 22.56 per share. Our allocation to gold fell below the long-term weight. It is now almost exactly at 10% of gross assets.
  

Trading Not Going Well

Last three ASX200 trades were stopped out, which is very unusual. The worst in the backtest was two stop outs in a row. Each day the market goes up at the open and puts me into a long position. Then it falls and stops out. Five of the last six trades were losses. I suspect that isn't so unusual. I've done two soybeans trend-following trades and both (long) were losers too. I'm also doing a calendar spread soybean trade which is about a breakeven at this point. On the other hand, we have been doing well in some stocks like Treasury Wine and Domacom.

ATO Audit of SMSF Applications

I didn't know that the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) audits applications for new Self Managed Superannuation Funds (SMSF). This guy from the ATO office in Perth phoned me yesterday and asked me a bunch of questions about my responsibilities as a trustee and the purpose of opening the SMSF and whether the admin company had approached me about opening a fund and how I picked them. He also wanted me to lodge my tax returns from 2002-07. I was in the US then and so not resident in Australia. So, I went on MyGov (the Australian government portal) and submitted a "don't need to submit a tax return" notice for each of those years. He sent me now by email an approval letter confirming that I passed the audit. Initially, I thought it was some scam when he left a message on my phone. But I checked the "switchboard phone number" on an ATO website and it checked out and so I phoned him back. The whole thing didn't sound very "professional".

February SPI Trading Performance

I made AUD 589 trading ASX 200 futures and CFDs in February. I have now compared my trades to the trades the algorithm specifies. If I had traded one whole SPI contract (rather than varying numbers of Plus500 contracts I would have made AUD 770. But the algorithm just daytrading would have made AUD 4,275. Overnight trading as well had a very negative return for the month (AUD -3,125 if you took an overnight trade every time you were up for the day). So, when I started doing overnight trades, it detracted from my performance. I can also calculate the "slippage". I lost an average of AUD 57 per day due to the spread between buy and sell and inaccuracy in getting in and out of trades at exactly the right time. This is actually less than the spread between buy and sell prices on Plus500 of 3 points or AUD 75. After accounting for slippage, the daytrading only algorithm would have gained AUD 3,062.

Hedge Funds Outperform Again in February

HEDGE FUNDS SURGE IN FEBRUARY AS INTEREST RATES RISE

HFRI Equity Hedge leads broad-based gains as retail trading trend expands;
Macro, CTA strategies advance on rates, commodities;
Crypto, Activist, Technology, Energy sub-strategies also lead

CHICAGO, (March 5, 2021) – Hedge funds surged in February to extend January gains as interest rates, commodity prices, and expectations for the reemergence of inflation all increased. The HFRI Fund Weighted Composite Index® (FWC) gained +4.1 percent in February, while the investable HFRI 500 Fund Weighted Composite Index advanced +3.2 percent, according to data released today by HFR®, the established global leader in the indexation, analysis and research of the global hedge fund industry.

Consistent with the previous month, the HFRI FWC experienced a wide dispersion in constituent performance, as the top decile of the HFRI gained +16.3 percent, while the bottom decile declined -3.1 percent for the month. As reported previously by HFR, total hedge fund capital jumped to $3.6 trillion to begin 2021, a 4Q20 increase of $290 billion, representing the largest quarterly asset growth in industry history. Estimated 4Q20 net asset inflows totaled $3.0 billion, bringing total inflows for the second half of 2020 to an estimated $16.0 billion.

Equity Hedge strategies, which invest long and short across specialized sub-strategies, led February performance as the influence of retail investors increased trading volumes and investors expanded their focus to a wider range of individual equities. The HFRI Equity Hedge (Total) Index surged +4.8 percent for the month, with strong contributions from a wide dispersion of sub-strategy performance led by the high-beta, long-biased Energy, Fundamental Value, and Technology exposures. Following strong January gains, the HFRI EH: Energy/Basic Materials Index surged +9.7 percent in February, while the HFRI EH: Fundamental Value Index spiked +6.4 percent and the HFRI EH: Sector-Technology Index added +4.4 percent.

Event-Driven strategies, which often focus on out of favor, deep value equity strategies and situations, accelerated January gains into February, with the investable HFRI 500 Event-Driven Index surging +2.8 percent for the month, while the HFRI Event-Driven (Total) Index gained +3.6 percent. ED sub-strategy gains were led by Activist, Special Situations, and Credit Arbitrage exposures, strategies which categorically trade in deep value equity situations, including companies which are possible targets for restructuring, acquisitions or investor-driven strategy shifts. The HFRI ED: Activist Index surged +8.3 percent in February, while the HFRI ED: Special Situations Index advanced +4.1 percent, and the HFRI ED: Credit Arbitrage Index added +2.7 percent.

Uncorrelated Macro strategies also posted a strong gain in February, driven by trend-following CTAs and fundamental Commodity-focused strategies. The HFRI Macro (Total) Index jumped +3.6 percent, while the investable HFRI 500 Macro Index spiked +3.7 percent. Driven by strong trends in interest rates, Macro sub-strategy performance was led by the HFRI Macro: Systematic Diversified/CTA Index, which gained +4.4 percent for the month, and the HFRI Macro: Commodity Index, which added +4.1 percent.

The fixed income-based, interest rate-sensitive HFRI Relative Value (Total) Index gained +2.3 percent in February, while the HFRI 500 Relative Value Index advanced +1.5 percent for the month, led by the investable HFRI 500 RV: Volatility Index, which jumped +3.0 percent, and the HFRI 500 RV: Fixed Income-Convertible Arbitrage Index, which advanced +2.4 percent. Extending the January surge, Blockchain and Cryptocurrency exposures continued to deliver strong performance as cryptocurrencies reached record highs and as hedge funds increasingly incorporated related exposures into new and existing fund strategies. The HFR Blockchain Composite Index and HFR Cryptocurrency Index each surged nearly +30.0 percent in February.

Risk Premia and Liquid Alternatives also gained in February, led by multi-asset and commodity exposures. The HFR Bank Systematic Risk Premia Multi-Asset Index advanced +7.9 percent for the month, while the HFR BSRP Commodity Index gained +3.3 percent. The HFRI-I Liquid Alternative UCITS Index advanced +1.05 percent in February, driven by a +1.8 percent gain in the HFRI-I UCITS Event Driven Index.

"Recent hedge fund gains accelerated through February, marking the strongest 4-month period in over 20 years as the drivers of performance widened to include not only Event Driven and Equity Hedge, but also captured strong positive contributions from trend-following Macro and interest rate-sensitive Relative Value Arbitrage strategies", stated Kenneth J. Heinz, President of HFR. "New stimulus measures, increasing vaccinations, and uncertainty with regards to immigration and energy policy have shifted macroeconomic and geopolitical volatility to include not only the single stock or asset trends from concentrated, increased retail trading but also cryptocurrency trading, energy exposure and interest rate/inflation sensitivity. Institutional investors are likely to continue expanding allocations to leading hedge fund managers as a mechanism to gain specialized exposure to these and other powerful trends through mid-2021".

February 2021 Report

The month ended quite turbulently, but stock markets were still up for the month. The Australian Dollar rose from USD 0.7663 to USD 0.7737. The MSCI World Index rose 2.35%, the S&P 500 by 2.76%, and the ASX 200 rose 1.65%. All these are total returns including dividends. We gained 1.65% in Australian Dollar terms or 2.68% in US Dollar terms. The target portfolio is expected to have gained only 0.23% in Australian Dollar terms and the HFRI hedge fund index is expected to gain 1.05% in US Dollar terms. So, we outperformed or matched all our benchmarks. The S&P 500 isn't a benchmark.

Here is a report on the performance of investments by asset class (currency neutral terms): 

 

Hedge funds added the most to performance and gold detracted the most. Things that worked well this month:

• Tribeca Global Resources (TGF.AX), Regal Funds (RF1.AX), and Hearts and Minds (HM1.AX) were the top three performers gaining AUD 20k, 18k, and 11k, respectively. In other notable gains, we gained AUD 5k in Treasury Wine (now a 2% of net worth position) and Winton Global Alpha gained for a change, up AUD 3k.
  

What really didn't work:

• Gold was the worst performer, giving back AUD 30k of gains.
  

The investment performance statistics for the last five years are:

The first two rows are our unadjusted performance numbers in US and Australian Dollar terms. The following four lines compare performance against each of the three indices. We have the desired asymmetric capture for all three indices now and positive alpha compared to all of them.

We moved further towards our long-run asset allocation. Real assets (real estate and art) are the asset class that is furthest from their target allocation (7.2% of total assets too little) followed by bonds (2.9% too much):

 

On a regular basis, we invest AUD 2k monthly in a set of managed funds, and there are also retirement contributions. Other moves this month:

• I sold my USD 25k of Virgin Australia bonds for 8.125 cents on the dollar. With Australian borders closed longer than we would have expected at the beginning of the year, I guess the company's financial situation will be worse than they expected when they told us we would likely get 9 cents.
• Prospect Capital called its baby bonds (PBB) early, resulting in another USD 25k reduction in our bond exposure.
  
• I started systematically daytrading ASX200 CFDs and futures....  I made a little money, just under AUD 600. I also started trading soybean futures using my version of the turtle model. This system doesn't trade that often. It made one trade which was stopped out for a loss.
  
• Two days before the earnings release, I sold 2000 of our Treasury Wine shares (TWE.AX) as I was anticipating some turbulence. The next day the price fell sharply and I bought them back almost a dollar lower. By the end of the day the price recovered. On the earnings day not much happened. Then the day after earnings the stock price rose 17% on a broker upgrade and a positive article in the Fin Review. After that there was more turbulence and I adjusted the positions a little
  
• I invested USD 10k in another painting at Masterworks. I now have USD 60k invested in 6 paintings.
  

Trading Update

I've now been trading the ASX200 systematically, mostly on Plus500, for two weeks. I'm only ahead by about AUD 500, but that's not surprising. Actually, it's a good result given the small position size so far, and the potential for drawdowns. I've done more backtesting and improved the algorithm. About half of total returns would come from holding winning positions (during the day) overnight and I haven't done that yet. I also updated my soybean trading model with the last year or so of data and the algorithm I was using would continue to be profitable, so I am adding that. By contrast with the ASX200 model, this is a trend following model that doesn't trade very often. Finally, during the past week I did some trading of Treasury Wine around the high volatility in the stock with the earnings release and broker upgrades and downgrades. This involved far larger fluctuations in value than the systematic trading.

Tweaking the Target Portfolio

I've decided to slightly tweak the target portfolio weights to reflect a larger allocation to hedge funds. The top level allocation is 59% to equity and 41% to everything else. Then there is 10% to private equity (split between venture and buyout) and 49% to public equity. Within that 25% to long-only and 24% to hedge funds (was 21.5%) (also split 50/50 to Australian focused and foreign focused funds). And within the long-only 13% to Australia and 12% to the rest of the world. Within Australian 9% to large cap and 4% to small cap and within foreign 5% to the US and 7% to other countries. Within the "everything else category", 10% to gold, 10% to bonds, 10% to real estate, 5% to art, 5% to futures, and 1% to cash and everything else. So:

9% Australian large cap

4% Australian small cap

5% US stocks

7% ROW stocks

12% Australian focused hedge funds

12% Foreign focused hedge funds

5% Venture capital

5% Buyout PE

10% Gold

10% Real estate etc.

10% Bonds

5% Art

5% Futures

1% Cash etc.

Overall the whole portfolio is levered by about 20% (assets are 120% of equity). This 20% is roughly the value of our house, which isn't included in the above. We also try to maintain a 50:50 allocation to Australian Dollar exposure vs. foreign currency exposure. My job is mainly to choose funds and a couple of stocks and do a little trading in part of the futures allocation.

We are still overweight hedge funds after this change.

Plus500 Update

I got a statement from the new HSBC account and submitted it to Plus500 and it was approved! So, now I tried to withdraw $1,000. They at least allowed me to submit the request now. However, there was a statement that they will refund the original source of the money.... Which would mean they will send it back to the credit card we used to fund the account, even though that is a joint account. Let's see what happens. 

P.S. 8 February 

The money showed up in the new HSBC account! So we successfully withdrew money from Plus 500.

Hedge Funds Gained 0.92% in January

 HEDGE FUNDS GAIN IN JANUARY, NAVIGATING VOLATILITY

HFRI Event Driven, RVA & Crypto lead strategy performance;
Deep value Special Situations, Merger Arbitrage, Credit lead sub-strategies

CHICAGO, (February 5, 2021) – Hedge funds advanced in January to begin 2021, actively trading through a turbulent month dominated by a volatile surge in trading from retail investors concentrated in a handful of deep value equities with significant short interest. The HFRI Fund Weighted Composite Index® (FWC) gained +0.9 percent in January, while the investable HFRI 500 Fund Weighted Composite Index advanced +0.35 percent, according to data released today by HFR®, the established global leader in the indexation, analysis and research of the global hedge fund industry.

Reflecting the powerful trading trends, the HFRI FWC experienced a wide dispersion in constituent performance, as the top decile of the HFRI gained +11.6 percent, while the bottom decile declined -7.8 percent for the month. As reported previously by HFR, total hedge fund capital jumped to $3.6 trillion to begin 2021, a 4Q20 increase of $290 billion, representing the largest asset growth in industry history. Estimated 4Q20 net asset inflows totaled $3.0 billion, bringing total inflows for the second half of 2020 to $16.0 billion.

Event-Driven strategies, which often focus on out of favor, deep value equity strategies and situations, led strategy performance in January, with the investable HFRI 500 Event-Driven Index surging +3.0 percent for the month, while the HFRI Event-Driven (Total) Index gained +2.8 percent. ED sub-strategy gains were led by Merger Arbitrage, Special Situations, and Distressed exposures, strategies which categorically trade in deep value equity situations, including companies which are possible targets for restructuring, acquisitions or investor-driven strategy shifts. Following strong performance in 4Q20, the HFRI ED: Merger Arbitrage Index surged +4.0 percent in January, the HFRI ED: Special Situations Index advanced +3.8 percent, and the HFRI ED: Distressed Index added +2.6 percent. The investable HFRI 500 ED: Special Situations Index jumped +6.2 percent for the month, and the HFRI 500 ED: Merger Arbitrage Index advanced +5.1 percent.

The fixed income-based HFRI Relative Value (Total) Index gained +1.3 percent in January, while the HFRI 500 Relative Value Index advanced +1.2 percent for the month, led by the investable HFRI 500 RV: Fixed Income-Convertible Arbitrage Index, which jumped +3.5 percent, and the HFRI RV: Yield Alternatives Index, which added +4.0 percent.

Following the 2020 surge, Blockchain and Cryptocurrency exposures continued to deliver strong performance as cryptocurrencies hit record highs and as hedge funds increasingly incorporated related exposures into new and existing fund strategies. The HFR Blockchain Composite Index and HFR Cryptocurrency Index each surged over +48.0 percent in January.

Through intense stock volatility, the HFRI Equity Hedge (Total) Index advanced +0.8 percent for the month. Equity Hedge funds experienced a wide dispersion of sub-strategy performance led by the high beta, long-biased Energy and Fundamental Growth exposures. Following strong 4Q20 gains, the HFRI EH: Energy/Basic Materials Index surged +4.8 percent in January, while the HFRI EH: Fundamental Growth Index added +2.3 percent. Partially paring these gains, the HFRI EH: Sector-Technology Index declined -1.1 percent, and the HFRI EH: Multi-Strategy Index fell -0.8 percent for the month.

Risk Premia, Risk Parity and Liquid Alternatives produced mixed performance in January, led by equity and commodity exposures. The HFR Bank Systematic Risk Premia Equity Index advanced +2.2 percent for the month, while the HFR BSRP Commodity Index gained +1.6 percent. The HFR Risk Parity Vol 12 Institutional Index fell -0.2 percent in January, while the HFRI-I Liquid Alternative UCITS Index posted a narrow loss of -0.14 percent for the month, driven by the -0.3 percent decline in the HFRI-I UCITS Macro Index.

Uncorrelated Macro strategies posted a narrow gain in January, with the HFRI Macro (Total) Index advancing +0.2 percent, while the HFRI 500 Macro Index added +0.1 percent. Macro sub-strategy performance was led by the HFRI Macro: Discretionary Thematic Index, which gained +1.8 percent for the month, and the HFRI Macro: Multi-Strategy Index, which added +1.1 percent.

"Hedge funds effectively navigated the idiosyncratic stock trading volatility which focused on deep value equities with high short interest, with this trend driving gains across Event Driven strategies which categorically focus on inexpensive, out of favor equities that are experiencing fundamental, structural transition in the underlying businesses. While certain sub-strategies declined in January, as is evidenced by the wide dispersion in performance, as a direct result of the size, breadth and diverse nature of hedge fund strategies, overall industry performance was positive for the month," stated Kenneth J. Heinz, President of HFR. "While significant financial market attention has been focused on a handful of funds and small number of equities impacted by these recent trading trends, the overall hedge fund industry is comprised of over 9,100 funds managing nearly $3.6 trillion across a highly diverse range of strategies, which include significant capital exposure to out of favor, deep value equities. With an emphasis also on opportunistic positioning and sustained capital appreciation achieved through specialized long-short portfolio management, leading institutions are likely to continue expanding allocations to hedge funds as a tool for achieving their long-term portfolio objectives."

Finished First Week of Trading

I traded each day according to the rules and had 3 wins and 2 losses and ended up AUD 219 for the week. If that is a typical week then I would need to trade ten times bigger to make a decent "wage" from this. That would be 4 full futures contracts (AUD 670k notional value). But that would expose the account to a possible daily loss of AUD 50k during a market crisis like the March crash last year. I would feel that is just too much for even a AUD 1 million SMSF, though for our full portfolio it is reasonable theoretically. So, we would need to use a constant risk strategy to reduce the risk to AUD 10k every day. That also feels like a big risk in trading if it is a daily thing. So, I doubt we get up to that size of trading any time soon. 

If this is a successful strategy I will likely pursue trying to build an automated system later this year. I previously explored Capitalise, but found they couldn't implement a system like this with variable position size based on risk. So, unless they have improved it'd probably mean learning Python, but that isn't a bad thing...

Why a Constant Risk Trading Strategy Works

A constant risk trading strategy in the day-trading context is where your maximum loss possible is a constant. There are other definitions in trend-following etc contexts where you choose a position size so that the typical or expected daily movement up or down is a constant over time and markets.

Using the first definition, once you choose a stop loss, you compute the loss per contract or share if the stop was triggered and divide the fixed maximum loss figure by that to find out how many contracts or shares to buy. For example, if you are willing to risk $2000 on a trade and a contract will lose $1000 in the worst case, you buy (or sell) two contracts. 

The reason this works is the maximum downside loss is capped but by trading more contracts when possible the upside is increased. This helps create asymmetry. 

This graph shows possible loss on the x-axis and trading results (in backtest) on the y-axis, when trading one SPI contract over the last 13 months:

And this is what happens to the returns when the maximum loss is set at the average $2,300 (yes the stop loss can occasionally be exceeded when the opening price of the day is above the entry stop):

 

This has a lower information ratio (similar to Sharpe ratio but without deducting the risk free rate) than the one contract strategy though. It misses out on really big gains when volatility is high. But if you combine the two and set a minimum maximum loss at $2,300 you get better results than either strategy alone. Below $2,300 potential loss you trade a variable number of contracts and above it one contract only:

This has a higher information ratio than either simple strategy but it does take on a lot more risk at times than the constant risk strategy, which for a small account trading full size futures contracts could mean just not trading when volatility is high.

2nd Day of Trading

Today's trade was a winner, recovering a bit more than half of yesterday's loss. This is going to need a lot more research. Especially around the relationship between volatility and returns. I suspect that it's not worth trading when volatility is low and maybe there is an upside limit to how much volatility to tolerate. Now I have 13 months of data (from Barchart) nicely organized. Just need to merge all the spreadsheets together and test hypotheses.

Trading Once Again

Just over a year ago, I decided to stop systematic trading. This wasn't the first time. The problem with my trading systems was that they were overfitted to the data. They worked well for a while but then didn't. I did try one similar approach that is not tuned to the data. Yes, I said that this wasn't for me. But then over this weekend, I thought: "Maybe it is?" :) So, I downloaded a bunch more data and did backtests. It would have done especially well during the COVID-19 crash and OK in other months in the last year. So, I decided to try it today again. I used the Plus500 account, which I had decided to shutdown but hadn't managed to do yet. At least this allowed me to trade a smaller position - only AUD 10 per SPI point. The full size futures contract is AUD 25 per point. Well, I was stopped out for a AUD 960 loss... In the backtesting, getting stopped out is fairly unusual. Initially, the market fell and the short trade was profitable. Then it reversed and had a steep rally. 

 

Most losing trades have to be manually closed at the end of the day. So bad luck on my first trade. I'll try a few more and see how I go...