Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

Recent results - Whitebox as a diversifier

edited June 2013 in Fund Discussions
I put WBLSX and WBMIX on my watch list with quite a bit of skepticism. But looking very short term, they are holding up pretty well as alternative diversification. There have been a couple other recent posts about diversifiers and where to go in place of bonds. These funds were never mentioned.

Yesterday was an interesting signal. I have 4 L/S funds on my list. WBLSX, HSGFX, ARLSX adn FMLSX. In yesterday's late dive, WBLSX along with HSGFX were in the green. Over a pretty bumpy stock market week, WBLSX pulled out a +1.6% return. The controversial HSGFX was also in the green at +0.8%. FMLSX was slightly positive, +.2% and ARLSX was -0.2%. In comparison, the VFINX was -1.1%.

The positive comparison of HSGFX and WBLSX pretty much ends when looking back the last 3 months when the market did very well. Looks to me like HSGFX will only be decent in a prolonged bear market. Whitebox looks like it may do well longer term in market cycles. Again in comparison to equities, (VFINX gained over 8% n the last 3 months) WBLSX was a positive 5.3%. HSGFX was slightly in the red. WBMIX actually gained most of the markets returns gaining +6.6% over the last 3 mo.

A lot of rambling, but just wanted to highlight a couple funds that may well end up being decent diversifiers. Still not sure I would buy it if I could, ironically, neither fund is available to me through my TRP account.

Comments

  • edited June 2013
    I think your numbers are wrong or stale.

    ARLSX down 0.7%
    HSGFX up 0.58%
    WBLSX up 0.10%
    WBMIX down 0.64%
    FMLSX down 0.89%
    VFINX down 1.43%

    As of May 31st.
  • edited June 2013
    Hi Mike. I like WBMIX and I like the intellect and frankness of the shop, which Scott introduced us to. I think ARLSX makes for better diversification and suspect WBMIX correlates more with equities. That said, Mr. Redleaf has a lot of authority and if he assesses right, could be ok. Recently I chose ARLSX over WBMIX, but still attracted to WBMIX and may look for opportunity to get back in. Available at Schwab for no load at somewhat tolerable ER of 1.36, but better than the 1.75 ER for ARLSX. One gripe I have with Whitebox is that while I love their quarterly commentaries, they take forever to update them. For example, it's June and they are still showing only 4Q12. ASTON does a better job in this department. A gripe I have ASTON is their high minimums for institutional shares, $1M in case of ALSIX.
  • The Pimco L/S fund has done very well this year after a so-so start.
  • I am sorry, but I have ranted about this before. We need to ask ourselves if we simply accept industry classification for funds or make up our mind for ourselves. I respectfully submit you are not comparing apples to apples.

    A long short fund should be one that goes long stocks it thinks can outperform, that is simply buys them, and goes short stocks it thinks will fall. Goes short here means buy puts which has a cost or sell calls collect money and reinvest it. So we have two flavors of such funds.

    HSGFX is not a long short fund. It hedges exposure buying puts on indices and at the end of the day expects its long holdings to outperform the market. Even FVALX is classified long short; utter nonsense.
  • HSGFX seems more "market neutral" to me.
  • Reply to @VintageFreak: I don't disagree. I was really trying more to compare funds one might buy (instead of traditional bonds) to diversify their portfolio in lieu of an equity correction. I happen to think that in broader terms, market neutral and long/short aren't that much different. You know more about the dynamics, but they both seem to have the basic' long some equities' and 'short some equities' in common. And the goal of both is to do sufficiently well in up and down markets to smooth out the ride. At least that's my impression.

    So I guess my point was first to highlight that both Whitebox funds are doing a pretty good job in recent terms and in comparison to Hussman, the Whitebox L/S fund is a better diversifier in these markets then HSGFX.
  • HSGFX is not a market neutral fund. It varies its exposure based upon the managers estimation of expected returns. Totally different animal.
  • edited June 2013
    Reply to @MarkM: Actually, I'd say Scott's pretty close to the mark here based on how Hussman portrays this fund to the public. From HSGFX Prospectus: "The Fund’s portfolio will typically be fully invested in common stocks favored by Hussman Strategic Advisors, Inc., the Fund’s investment manager, except for modest cash balances that arise due to the day-to-day management of the portfolio. When market conditions are unfavorable in the view of the investment manager, the Fund may use options and index futures to reduce its exposure to general market fluctuations. When market conditions are viewed as favorable, the Fund may use options to increase its investment exposure to the market."

    The sales-pitch seems to be - "Make alot. Lose a little." (the opposite of what has occurred). Sounds market neutral to me. If the SEC has any definitive classifications for diversified equity funds I'm unaware of it. However, it seems labels are not nearly as important as how the manager operates. So I'd shy away from such classifications here. Hussman appears quite legally savy. So it's likely the Prospectus allows him to do pretty much anything he chooses with the fund (short of violating SEC regs or robbing banks:-)

    While "market neutral" seems to fit as well as anything, I'm inclined to call HSGFX "market reverse". (If memory is correct, OJ has already coined that term.) Past performance: 1 Year -11.67%, 5 Years -4.85%. For 10 years he's positive +1.39% - probably what you'd have made sitting in a money market fund - without the additional thrills and chills.

    Link to HSGFX Prospectus http://www.hussmanfunds.com/pdf/hsgprosp.pdf

    Link to Investopedia definition for "Market Neutral"http://onswipe.investopedia.com/investopedia/#!/entry/market-neutral,51033a8ed7fc7b567005560a Note: "There is no single accepted method of employing a market-neutral strategy."
  • Hank-

    Sorry to disagree.


    If a fund can increase its exposure to the market in times where the manager views conditions as favorable, it is by definition not market neutral. Neutral means neutral. The fund actually allows leverage in certain conditions, which Hussman says he will use. Hussman has been asked repeatedly if HSGFX is a market neutral fund and his answer has always been "No".

    Thanks to the Investopedia link. Forty year investor, advisor and lurker here from early days.



  • edited June 2013
    Reply to @MarkM: Sorry. Didn't realize you were an advisor. Hope my novice depiction of the fund wasn't taken as an affront to your knowledge. If John Hussman says it's not market neutral - then that should settle it!
  • Reply to @hank: Instead of a mis-categorization that Hussman might want or say, I would rather look at what he actually does with the investments.

    A lot of funds, simply select S&P 500 as the index to benchmark against (or something easier to beat) but they invest in a bunch of other stuff. Investing in other stuff is OK but mis-measuring is the problem.
  • Investor-

    There is certainly some truth to that! Hussman has not been exposed to market fluctuations to a significant degree since early 2004 and for a very brief period in late 2008/ early 2009. His hedging strategy has not " worked" (hence the returns), although he remains a very, very good stock picker. He has actually modified his strategy in response to his results during this rally, a fact that makes me somewhat uneasy.

    I am an on/ off investor and recommender into and of the fund. I have not held it personally since 2010. A week ago I began scaling into a small position in it. So evaluate what I say knowing my biases.

    I have read all his market commentaries, including those of his non- mutual fund version prior to 2000. He is quite transparent in what he does and a very readable economist and pundit.

    Use of his fund in a portfolio takes a bit of deftness. It is much easier, say, to use FPACX or FESGX as a core holding than to correctly use HSGFX. For that I blame Hussman himself as he intends it otherwise.
  • Mark, I think you should post more. With your experience you have a lot to share.

    I also dumped HSGFX in 2010. I wouldn't invest in it again even though I think the market will correct in the coming months - just like I don't want to invest in a fund that only plays well in an upside market. And you are right. It is much easier to invest in a fund like FPACX. That is a manager I believe can play al markets and come out ahead over a market cycle. I don't believe Hussman can do that.

  • We took a very long look at Whitebox Long-Short. They purport to have an absolute return strategy, but their numbers have simply been too wild for us to consider. The kind of risk they are taking is not at all what we want for absolute return. Tactical Opps advertises itself as long-short, and that is pretty accurate. We have used MFLDX since it first started in 2007 and have been very pleased with the consistency and communication from that fund's management. It is not inexpensive, but it is a lot less than Whitebox, and there is clear evidence of how the fund should perform, given its almost 6-yr history.

    Like some others, I would not own Hussman's funds. Yes, the man is obviously intelligent. And he will occasionally be right, but at what detriment to long-term shareholders?

    Unlike some commentators, we DO believe that owning a chunk of truly alternative strategy funds can lower volatility. We do this NOT to enhance returns, but to reduce volatility and risk. While they might not do much for long-term numbers, most investors are comfortable owning some holdings that reduce downside participation, even a small amount.
  • Reply to @MarkM: Going all cash if he is not sanguine in the market would not get him many investors. Also buying and selling generates capital gains.

    But now I don't know why one needs Market Neutral funds. Long/Short I get. Market neutral I don't.

    I really don't thing we have a good "diversifier" other than buy a bear fund. Which again would make us Market Neutral !!!

    Your post is now making me think. I considered TFSHX and HSGFX to be my "diversifiers".
Sign In or Register to comment.