Home » How To, Most Recent Stories, Myth Busting

RISK MANAGEMENT – AN UNDERVALUED COMMODITY ON WALL STREET

14 January 2011 by Cullen Roche 14 Comments

If you missed this Bloomberg piece on the unfortunate downfall of Peter Thiel’s Clarium Capital it’s a must read.  It’s a story of how brilliance was once again humbled by the almighty market.   The story is best summed up as follows:

“Clarium Capital Management LLC, which Thiel started in 2002 in San Francisco, fell about 23 percent in 2010, the third straight year of declines, according to investors. His fund’s assets are down about 90 percent and clients who stuck with him suffered losses of 65 percent from the mid-2008 peak.

While Thiel’s views, including predictions that the U.S. would face the threat of deflation and that the dollar and oil would rise, mostly came true, the losses reflect poor market timing and a lack of risk controls, according to several current and former clients.”

His collapse doesn’t surprise me.  In 2009 I said it was pretty clear that his fund was lacking in basic risk management structures:

“As for risk management – it doesn’t sound like Thiel is a big fan as leverage is often 3x -8x and positions are focused solely on a few macro themes.”

Of course, Thiel is a brilliant man and his successes in life are well documented, however, success in one industry by no means makes you a great investor and it certainly doesn’t make you a great portfolio manager.  But in every great collapse lies a great lesson to be learned so Thiel’s losses are not without gain (unless you’re one of his investors).  The most important takeaway from Thiel’s experience comes from the second paragraph of the article:

“It doesn’t matter if a manager is correct in his long- term views if they don’t get the timing right or manage volatility along the way,” said Don Steinbrugge, managing partner of Agecroft Partners, a Richmond, Virginia-based consulting firm that advises investors and hedge funds.

Managing volatility is risk management.  It’s a term on Wall Street that is too often overlooked and taken for granted. Most investors have no idea that their portfolio managers have weak risk adjusted returns.  Most investors are unaware of the fact that most portfolio managers take unnecessary risks and manage portfolios not for client returns, but for the institution they work for.  Risk management is important because the trek to the top of the investment mountain is fraught with risks.  Last year I wrote:

“I’m not pessimistic by nature.  In fact, I am quite the optimist (I was very optimistic about the U.S. stock market even at the beginning of 2009).  But I view the trek up to the top of the investment mountain as being full of risks.  Seeing butterflies and rainbows sure make the trek more enjoyable, but won’t guarantee that you ever get there (just ask the millions of baby boomers who have been fooled by the myths of buy, hold & hope!).  Anyone can get caught up in the beauty and wonder of a butterfly or a rainbow (or a bull market!), but it’s the cautious observant who steers you clear of the loose rocks and the avalanche attached.   If you don’t watch out for potential pitfalls I guarantee that you’ll never get to the top of the mountain.”

Risk management essentially involves the admission that you are going to be wrong, that you are going to run into loose rocks along the way.  There is a tendency to punish everyone in the investment world who is ever wrong.  Some people take great pleasure in trying to prove that other investors are just as bad as they are.  The truth is, we all make mistakes, but some people prepare for it and others don’t.

In large part, this admission involves the acknowledgment that you could be the absolute smartest person in the room, however, there is a chance that no one will agree with you. This is the classic Keynes beauty contest where participants are asked to choose the most beautiful contestant from a group and the participants who pick the most often chosen face are eligible for a prize.  As Keynes said:

“It is not a case of choosing those that, to the best of one’s judgment, are really the prettiest, nor even those that average opinion genuinely thinks the prettiest. We have reached the third degree where we devote our intelligences to anticipating what average opinion expects the average opinion to be. And there are some, I believe, who practice the fourth, fifth and higher degrees.”

You might have distinct inside knowledge that 1 of the contestants is in fact the most beautiful, however, if the crowd doesn’t see it this way it really doesn’t matter.  You will still lose.  The market is the same way.  You can be the most brilliant of the lot, but if the market doesn’t agree with you it matters not.  Therefore, you have to be willing to accept all outcomes.  Being dogmatic in the investment world is like burying yourself on a knife.  This is not a place for ideologues or politics.  As I mentioned the other day, the market does not care about your political affiliation, your personal feelings or your personal beliefs.  Therefore, you must be willing to accept that you are going to be wrong.  I am wrong all the time.  It happens in this business.  But I’ve created a flexible approach to investing that helps hedge me from my own ignorance.

Some investors create flexibility in a portfolio by hedging positions.  Others use multiple strategies.  Others diversify (true diversification).  Below is an outline you can follow that will help you create a flexible portfolio and hopefully avoid your own implosion or underperformance:

1) Always be flexible and never stay married to a loser.  The beauty of the stock market is that polygamy is perfectly acceptable.  Never get married to a particular position or a particular strategy.   The market is complex, dynamic and always evolving.  Learn to change with it if necessary.  No two investment environments will ever be the same so it’s not rational to believe that you have found some holy grail strategy that will never fail.  A static or rigid strategy is a sure way to lose.  In the case of Thiel, it’s clear that he was using leverage to essentially double down on a thesis that was wrong in the short-term.  As JM Keynes said we must always remember that the market can remain irrational longer than we can remain solvent.  A static approach will create losers and losers have no place for a portfolio.  Cut your losers – even if it’s an entire approach.

2) Use multiple asset classes and create non-correlation if possible.  This is why most investors fail in the market.  They learn one strategy or one asset class and when that one approach stops working they’re a sitting duck.  Trading one asset class with one directional bias would be like a professional baseball pitcher deciding to throw nothing but fastballs.  You have many options and pitches – utilize them all.  Learn to diversify your strategies AND investments.  This might involve using multiple strategies (my preference) or it might involve using several different asset classes.  Jim Cramer is  right: there’s always a bull market somewhere.  One of the primary reasons why global macro funds perform well when compared to other fund styles is due to their diversification overkill.  A good risk manager can be long Yen, short dollars, long Fed Fund futures, short gold, long Chinese equity and short GM debt all at once.   You don’t have to pigeon hole yourself in this world.  You can be flexible in this world.  Take advantage of it.  The greatest part about the mass financialization of our economy is that investors have choices now.  Learn to reach into a different bag of tricks if you need to.

3) Don’t be emotionally biased.  You might be trained to believe that buying stocks is the best way to invest in a market.  You therefore ignore the other side of trades or other asset classes.  This bias can lead to a permabull perspective (or a permabear perspective for the more pessimistic) or other extreme biases that make you susceptible to underperformance.   Learning to be unbiased and flexible are perhaps the two most important rules to becoming a good investor.

4) Never stop learning and recognize that you know less than you think you know.  The global economy is the greatest puzzle known to man.  To my knowledge no one has yet solved it.  It is dynamic, interesting and above all else important.  Understanding the entire system is vital to learning how to understand risk and better manage your money.  Most investors think they understand investments by picking up a book about dividend paying stocks.  But if you don’t understand how the global economy, currencies, and a multitude of other variables influence that stock’s performance you truly can’t even begin to fathom what risk management is.

5) Create rules within your approach AND FOLLOW THEM.  Your strategies should not be rigid, but your implementation of them should be.  I like to think of myself as a robot when I invest.  Some of my strategies are literally automated, however, if you don’t have software or the knowledge to create automated systematic approaches you should still create rules that remove the emotion from your approach.  This is no place for cry babies, excuses or arrogance.  If you allow the market to do it she will break you down and she will humble you.  Having rules will help you remove the emotion from your investment approach and help ensure that you don’t suffer catastrophic losses.

Cullen Roche

Cullen Roche

Bio - Coming Soon.

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
TwitterYouTube

Disclosures - Unless otherwise noted, authors have no positions in any securities mentioned and readers should never consider this to be investment advice. Always consult your financial advisor before acting on any ideas. Comments Guideline - Readers who denigrate authors or other readers will be banned without warning. This site does not tolerate any sort of reader abuse. The goal of this site is to create an environment that is conducive to learning and better understanding of the monetary system and the investment world. We expect readers to behave maturely and responsibly. We welcome and encourage intense and intelligent discourse, but the site adheres to a strict 1 strike policy. While it is your right to speak freely, it is not your right to behave childishly. Above all else, please enjoy the site. It is intended to be used as an educational tool and we hope the intelligent and mature debate will further that purpose. We hope readers will make an effort to respect that goal. Comments with excessive linking or foul language will be moderated before posting.
Comments
  • boatman

    making this post my homepage instead of the weather.

    basically the definition of pragmatic capitalism.

  • words

    +1 boatman

    Also, know the tax laws and how your investments and the timing of them are affected by those laws.

  • domingo

    When you are in an “running with the herd”(RWH) position, you will lose money. Last year the mother of RWH was LONG 30 YEARS BONDS.Doesnt exist any money management that correct bad timming.

  • Excellent advice as usual, Mr. Roche. I’ve also been particularly impressed by your recent coverage of rail data. Keep up the good work.

  • AnonymousE

    With due respect, risk management seems to be subjective. Peter Thiel probably knows the rule to cut losers. Usually it is not clear, during the moment, that something is a “loser”, until it is too late. Doubling down (instead of cutting) is commonly practiced by famed investors. For example, Seth Klarman initially bought BBEP at $20 in 2008, and continued to buy as the stock kept dropping to as low as $5. How many people can do that? Hence, it is subjective, as to when to cut your losses v/s when to double down. A few years ago who could have thought that Facebook would one day compete for advertising dollars spent at Google? Peter Thiel is Facebook’s first outside investor, who owns 3%, worth $1.5 billion. So, bottom line seems to be, you win some, you lose some, and if you get lucky cash in your chips and never come back.

  • Oroboros Oroboros

    Prescient post from another website on tempering your emotions while investing (among other things):

    The Emotions of Investing with Michael Mauboussin
    http://bigthink.com/ideas/20677

    (from http://www.planbeconomics.com/2011/01/14/the-emotions-of-investing-with-michael-mauboussin/)

  • scrilla_gorilla

    Wow… those 5 rules for “true diversification” are great. I couldn’t have said it better myself. It is like you are reading my mind!

  • Cullen:

    How about a refresher article on True Diversification? For the somewhat average investor…

    I read the link, but didn’t find it deep enough.

    Thanks!

  • Alex

    Another quote from somewhere that relates to this topic:

    “If you can’t think of one good reason why another investor is willing to sell, then your buy is almost certainly not as good as you think it is”

  • okl

    nice post… i’m one of the more dogmatic people, but i’ve recently turned my attention to learning about how the global economy and money functions first before even talking about investments! the most darned thing is that really, i don’t think there’s more than 1% of the WORLD population who can tell me how it works, let alone the increasing swath of “private bankers”!

    one other question; i’m not sure why i never thought about QE this way, but it just hit me like what… 20mins ago? basically, is QE just like a really bad repo agreement? whereby the fed gives the banks an unlimited timeframe at a really cheap interest rate to buy back those MBS, CDOs, CLOs?

    besides, they haven’t really dealt with the swaps have they?

    not to mention that they are not gaining a lot of trust with the people right? i mean, people in general don’t remember what you do during the good times, but only remember your conduct when the going gets tough- specifically, how you handled yourself and people that place their trust in you…

    anyway, is it fair to see QE as a really bad repo agreement?

    • Well, they’re not agreeing to buyback the tsys so it’s not really a repo, but it has the same elements I guess. Some people like to say that QE is a sneaky way of recapitalizing the banks, but really it’s draining the banks because it removes high int bearing assets and replaces it with lower int bearing assets. I suppose the Fed will never sell many of these assets back to the market. There is no need for them to do so.

      • In Accounting

        Wasn’t the ‘sneaky recap’ argument directed more towards the Fed’s MBS purchases in which it was unknown whether the Fed was paying par for securities which were potentially worth (much) less?

  • Jackie Cain

    Setting aside the great diversification advice, does your pragmatism – and Keynes’s observation – serve to undermine the ideologies that say that the market “knows best”? That philosophy says: “leave it to the market because it will come up with the ‘right’ solution.” But, aren’t you saying that the market might reward and the solution that some people think that other people think that yet other people think is right?

    Very interesting and clear article. Thanks for your hard work.