Economics and Finance

   

Is Hedge Funds Declared Strategy Compatible with What Actually Data Say?

Authors: Theodosios PALASKAS, Chrysostomos STOFOROS

Constructing a diversified hedge funds portfolio is very much associated with the degree of complementarity/substitutability of alternative fund strategies/styles, which are self declared by fund managers. To this extend, an obvious and important question related to the safe pick by investors of a specific fund strategy is: ‘if and to what extend the fund managers declared strategy and its investment style are compatible with what actually their performance states?’. If yes, then the investors’ decision making is well informed, otherwise they run to risk of constructing a homogeneous rather than heterogeneous portfolio of funds. The purpose of this paper is, by utilizing clustering techniques -k-means and two-step -, to identify the compatibility between managers self-declaration of fund strategy/style and what the data actually reveal. The framework used is based on data driven classification, covering 2,853 hedge funds of all strategies and styles for the period 2000-2009 with monthly returns, standard deviations, skewness, kurtosis and % of positive months as inputs. The results suggest that both, k-means and two-step clustering, produce similar outcomes and that all funds strategies and styles are classified in eight clusters. Moreover, the results indicate that, other than convertible arbitrage, emerging markets and event driven fund strategies, which are mainly classified in one cluster, none of the other hedge fund strategies appear as a homogeneous category. The latter suggests that investors should be very careful when building up their portfolio of hedge funds because the self-declaration of fund managers’ strategy could be misleading.

Comments: 25 Pages. Published in The Hellenic Open Business Administration Journal; https://hobajournal.wordpress.com/

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 2018-07-01 03:30:35

Unique-IP document downloads: 4 times

Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus