Two studies, by Watson Wyatt and UBS (both from March 2005), give a pessimistic view of the hedge fund industry’s capacity to generate long-term returns, due to its increasing size. Unfortunately, these studies focus almost exclusively on alpha. In the present paper, we show the importance of considering not only the exposure to the market (the traditional beta), but also the other exposures (the alternative betas) to cover all the sources of hedge fund returns. To do so, we examine the real extent to which the variability and level of hedge fund returns are affected by (static) betas, dynamic betas (i.e. factor timing), and pure alpha (i.e. security selection). A revisited version of this study was published in the Summer 2006 issue of The Journal of Alternative Investments.
Two studies, by Watson Wyatt and UBS (both from March 2005), give a pessimistic view of the hedge fund industry’s capacity to generate long-term returns, due to its increasing size. Unfortunately, these studies focus almost exclusively on alpha. In the present paper, we show the importance of considering not only the exposure to the market (the traditional beta), but also the other exposures (the alternative betas) to cover all the sources of hedge fund returns. To do so, we examine the real extent to which the variability and level of hedge fund returns are affected by (static) betas, dynamic betas (i.e. factor timing), and pure alpha (i.e. security selection). A revisited version of this study was published in the Summer 2006 issue of The Journal of Alternative Investments.
Type : | EDHEC Publication |
---|---|
Date : | 13/06/2005 |
Keywords : |
Alternative Investments |