ALPHA THEORY - 2016 YEAR IN REVIEW
For the fifth year in a row, Alpha Theory clients have outperformed the HFRI Equity Hedge Index. Read on for the data.
For the fifth year in a row (as far back as we have data) our clients have outperformed the HFRI Equity Hedge Index. To date, our clients’ compound return is 20% greater than the index.
As good as our clients are, they would have been even better if they followed the optimal position sizes they built inside of Alpha Theory:
On average, Alpha Theory suggests a lower gross exposure. So, to compare on an apples-to-apples basis, we look at Return on Invested Capital. For 2016, the Optimal ROIC was 13.3% versus 6.5% actual. That’s a difference of 6.8%.
Let’s put that difference into perspective. Our clients manage over $100B using Alpha Theory. On an ROIC basis, 6.8% of additional return on $100B is $6.8B. Assuming 20% performance fees, our managers left almost $1.4B of income on the table.
In 2016, 84% of our clients would have performed better if they would have followed optimal position sizing.
Betting the Forecasting Edge
Lastly, 2016 was the best year on record for the correlation between our clients’ forecasts and actual returns. The correlation between expected and actual returns was 0.19 for 2016. While this may seem low, one would expect a correlation near zero if selected randomly. For every year since 2012, with the exception of 2015, the correlation between expected and actual returns has been positive.
We believe this is a strong indication of predictive power in analysts’ forecasts. If analysts’ forecasts were random, then optimal position size would not beat actual returns with such regularity.
There are many ways to try and improve but few are as easy as creating a discipline around position sizing. The evidence is clear, if a firm has any edge, then creating a repeatable process to bet that edge is the difference between good and great.