Trung Phan Profile picture
Apr 4, 2021 23 tweets 9 min read Read on X
1/ For the past decade, 57-year old investor Bill Hwang (through his fund Archegos Capital) quietly built one of America's largest fortunes.

In late March, Archegos imploded and Hwang personally lost $8 billion over a 10-day span.

**$8B in 10 days**

Here's the insane story🧵
2/ Hwang is a true immigrant success tale.

Born Sung Kook Hwang, he moved from S. Korea to America as a child.

Hwang grew up in a religious household (father=pastor, mother=missionary) and to very modest means.

He taught himself English working night shifts at McDonald's.
3/ Hwang studied at UCLA in the 80s and his first job after graduation was as an equity salesman at Hyundai Securities.

While there, he met (and impressed) investing legend Julian Robertson, who ran Tiger Management hedge fund.

Robertson hired Hwang and taught him the ropes.
4/ In 2001, Robertson staked Hwang with $1.2B to start Tiger Asia...an NY-based fund picking Asian stocks.

His investing style later came back to haunt him:

• owning only a handful of stocks
• targeting "heavily shorted" names
• using leverage to juice his returns
5/ For years, Hwang delivered the goods: notching 40-80% gains per annum..but then:

• 2008: despite managing an Asia fund, Hwang got badly burnt shorting Volkswagen (it jumped 348% in 2 days on a massive short squeeze)

• 2010: Investigated for a Chinese insider trading scheme
6/ In 2012, Hwang paid $44m to settle the Chinese insider trading scheme and closed his fund.

He returned money to investors and started Archegos Capital. Archegos is Greek for "leader" or "prince of Christ".

The fund (like his childhood) was religious w/ Friday Bible reads.
7/ Archegos began w/ $200m but grew quickly.

To juice returns, Hwang deployed a financial instrument known as a Total Return Swaps (TRS).

In exchange for a fee, he bet on the direction of a stock and gained exposure w/o paying full price (it effectively created 5x leverage)
8/ By 2021, he was leaning on 6 prime broker bank partners for his TRSs: Goldman, Morgan Stanley, Credit Suisse, Nomura, Deutsche, UBS.

Despite the potential risks, the banks were happy to take fees from such a whale.

Without realizing it, they created a financial time bomb...
9/ Due to the nature of the swaps, the prime brokers built up massive long positions in Archegos portfolio companies.

(eg. The banks reported owning 68% of Chinese ed-tech GSX and 29% of ViacomCBS)

While Archegos portfolio swelled to $15-20B, it's total exposure was $100B+.
10/ ViacomCBS was the trigger for Archegos' collapse.

From the TSRs, Hwang had a $10B stake in the media firm (its share price was up 8x in one year).

One Mar 22, Viacom announced a ~$3B secondary share sale. It led to a 20%+ selloff and put huge pressure on Hwang's portfolio.
11/ If a portfolio is levered 5x, it only takes a 15-20% sell-off to wipe an investor out.

Hwang's banks met and discovered the scale of Archegos' scheme. They could work together to unwind the swaps...or beat each other to the exits.

GS and Morgan peaced the F out..
12/ This meme beautifully describes Goldman's plan for unwinding its Archegos TSRs:
13/ On Mar 26, the banks exited the trades by selling large blocks of Archegos-linked companies ($20-30B in total).

ViacomCBS declined ~30% on the day.

Similar block sales in Shopify, Farfetch, Discovery and Chinese tech firms hammered the stocks.
14/ While Goldman got out in time, Nomura (-$2B) and Credit Suisse (-$3B) both took 9-figure losses.

Archegos saw $100B+ evaporate.

Hwang personally lost $8B in 10 days...some traders called it "the fastest loss of such a large sum they had ever seen."
15/ The suddenness of the collapse is shining light on family offices.

While large pools of money like hedge funds, pensions and endowments are accountable to external parties, family offices operate in secret with few disclosure requirements.

16/ Even though Archegos looks to be contained, family offices (and the banks dealing with them) are prepping for new rules.

After the '08-09 crisis, Dodd-Frank tightened financial regulation.

Archegos could lead to the same for family offices, swaps and prime brokers...
17/ Prior to the implosion, Hwang lived a modest life in Tenafly, NJ. He is an active philanthropist but largely unknown in the Wall Street scene.

88-year old Robertson (who has seeded the industry's top performers, known as "Tiger Cubs") says he'd still invest with Hwang.
18/ If you enjoyed this breakdown, smash that FOLLOW for other business gold: @TrungTPhan.

For a story about financial engineering that has lead to a POSITIVE outcome, check this thread:
20/ What’s absurd is that I just wrote about Lex Greensill’s blowup and said “this will be the biggest non-$GME finance scandal this year”.

Couldn’t even last a few weeks at the top of the financial shenanigans board:
21/ Here is a good explainer thread on TSRs.

They are widely used in the industry, but the way Archegos employed them were a bit sketch:
22/ This thread makes the argument for why Archegos could be signalling a systemic issue...namely, banks seem to facilitating highly risky behaviour again without adequate controls in place:
23/ Finally, if you’ve made it this far.

Here are investments that did NOT blow up:

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Trung Phan

Trung Phan Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @TrungTPhan

Mar 12
McKinsey built an AI chatbot (Lilli) trained on 100 years of its work 100k documents and interviews.

70% of 45k employees use the tool, making 500k prompts a month.

A research firm hacked into it with “full read and write access to production database” including “47m chat messages about strategy, M&A, client engagement, all in plain text along with 728k containing confidential client data, 57k user accounts, and 95 system prompts controlling AI’s behaviour.”

Mcksinsey said it has patched up the vulnerability, which was made possible by “publicly exposed API documentation, including 22 endpoints that didn't require authentication…one of these wrote user search queries, and the agent found that the JSON keys (these are the field names) were concatenated into SQL and vulnerable to SQL injection.”Image
Image
Full read here: theregister.com/2026/03/09/mck…

Mckisney going all in on Lilli! x.com/bearlyai/statu…
Need to know how Lilli uses that time Mckinsey told AT&T in 1980 that mobile market by 2000 would be “niche” and only have 900k users (900k users added a day). Ended up costing $12 B to acquire cellular play.

Wrote that and 🐐 worst tech predictions here: readtrung.com/p/the-worst-te…
Read 4 tweets
Feb 23
these 5 paragraphs wiped ~$100B in market cap across credit card stocks (Visa, Mastercard, American Express, Capital One)…okie dokie Image
Image
Read 4 tweets
Jan 25
This timelapse of Alex Honnold’s 1 hour 35 minute free solo climb of Taipei 101 is unreal.

He said the main challenge was “not getting complacent up the bamboo boxes, because it’s 64 of the same sequence over and over.”

His music playlist (mostly Tool) helped because each bamboo box took about the length of a song and he could keep pace.

Honnold wants to climb other mega skyscrapers if allowed.

Thinks Taipei 101 was the ideal challenge, though: “This one is so perfect for climbing. There are some buildings that are almost too easy for climbing. Like, ones that have a window washing track on the outside, where you’re just hand over handing on some track the whole way. You can climb it, but it’s not a challenge. The thing about Taipei 101 is it’s perfectly in the sweet spot for me, where it’s possible, and it’s not too insanely hard.”

***

Post-climb intervie with Variety: variety.com/2026/tv/news/a…

Timelapse: reddit.com/r/nextfuckingl…
Honnold says the scariest parts were the dragons:

“The dragons, they’re also probably the scariest thing to actually do. I mean, they’re really fun, they’re really cool. It’s an incredible sequence, cool position. But every time I set up on the dragon, I’d be like, “this is kind of crazy.” You’re like, out over the abyss. It’s cool.”Image
Image
Read 4 tweets
Jan 16
Matt Damon and Ben Affleck on Rogan taking about how Netflix has changed filmmaking.

A major considerations is dealing with distracted viewers. To keep them tuned in, “you re-iterate the plot 3-4x in the dialogue because people are on their phones.”

Then, in action films, you change the ordering of climatic fights.

In traditional action films, you’d have “three set pieces” in every act (I, II, III) and each would “ramp up” (spend the big money on third set piece).

But streaming has to hook viewers within 5 minute, so the incentive is to put a major battle or action sequence much earlier.

Also, the directors have less incentive to make a film look great because so many people watch on laptops and phones.

They do say that streaming allows for more bets on risky projects since the theatre economics are geared towards IP, sequels and super-heroes.

Example: an independent film with a $25m budget would spend $25m on marketing (1:1 ratio). But since it splits box office with the theatre, the film needs to make $100m (1/2 of which is $50m) just to break even.

They’re realistic about the state of film and call it a supply-demand issue. If the demand is for at-home viewing (eg. Netflix 300m+ subs), then filmmaking approach will change to feed the algo.

When there’s demand for theatre, Damon will go team up with Christopher Nolan to make “The Odyssey”.
A similar dynamic is happening to streaming TV shows. The incentives for story arc, dialogue and character types warped thr medium.

I explain it more here: readtrung.com/p/the-case-aga…
Damon cooks.

Here is full Rogan: youtu.be/AVEZBy1uAk8?si…

Here is Hot Ones: youtu.be/yaXma6K9mzo?si… x.com/trungtphan/sta…
Read 4 tweets
Jan 15
The Economist has a great piece on strategy sportsbetting apps use to throttle smart bettors:

▫️Skilled players are “sharps” and given “stake restrictions” if they play too well (bets are capped).

▫️Rest of players called “Square”.

▫️In 2025, 4.3% of active UK accounts had a “stake factor” below the maximum bet allowance of 100%.

▫️Sportsbook will take bets with a profit margin as low as 4.5%.

▫️If they are able to do good “player-profiling” and keep the “sharps” from playing, the profit margin can reach 10-20%.

▫️As important as keeping out “sharps” is hooking “whales”, the deep-pocketed players that are willing to keep playing (and losing) large sums.

▫️Some “whales” are actually “sharps” in disguise, though. They’ll lose a bunch of bets to lull the sportsbook then put down a massive bet when they have an edge.

▫️While there is a risk of a “whale” being a “sharp”, the value of a real “whale” is so high that sportsbook will take the risk

▫️“In March 2024 PointsBet, raised its share of online sports-gambling revenue in New Jersey from 11% to 24% after wooing a single cash-spouting customer away from DraftKings.” (I can confirm that this wasn’t me).

▫️How sportsbook profile players:

> Playing on Mobile is a good sign (where majority of people play)
> Playing on PCs is a bad sign (it’s easier to compare odds and run models)
> E-wallets are a red flag (sportsbooks prefer debit direct deposit that can attach a player to a single account; e-wallet is more anonymized and players can move cash between sportsbook more quickly to shop for the best odds)
> Women bettors are a red flag (most bettors are men and “sharps” often use women to place bets)

▫️First wagers are a major tells (typical bettors go after top leagues — NFL, NBA, EPL — and do so near the start of the game).

▫️Popular bets for “squares”: who will win, scoring margins and how star player will perform (also, they love multi-leg parlays).

▫️“Sharps” go after less popular leagues and place bets as soon as odds are published, when they are most mispriced. They also go after less popular bets such as “pts in Q3” or stats from a random player (“Sharps” rarely do parlays and don’t withdrawal winnings often).

▫️One gambling consultant tells The Economist that “By the time a customer places his first bet, [sportsbooks] are 80-90% certain they know the lifetime value of the account.”

▫️”Sportsbooks look at a player’s ‘closing-line value’ — a measure that compares the odds at which he bets with those available right before a match begins. If it is consistently ahead of the market over his first ten wagers, he is highly likely to beat the book in the long run.”

▫️Sportsbook mathematically monitor players and creates a new risk score every 6-8 hours (risk score = estimate of probability that customers will wind up unprofitable).

▫️E-wallet users, women and bets over $100 are flagged. These suspicious bettors are given 30% of maximum bet (and proven sharps only allowed 1%).

▫️High-skilled players will often get a “beard” to bet on their behalf. Most sportsbooks ban this practice but it is widespread.

▫️Safest “beards” are close friends and relatives because you can mostly rely on them to pay out any winnings. The “beards” try to look like degens (playing at 3am, bet non-stop and doing ridiculous parlays) before placing a winning bet.

▫️The most effective strategy for “sharps” is “whale-flipping”. Find a losing gambler, then ask to put a (likely) large winning bet amongst their pool of guaranteed losers.

▫️Once “sharps” max out the people they can use as “beards”, they tap professional networks called “movers”. These “movers” employ a bunch of “mules” who can put down bets on the behalf of the network. Low-end movers charge 10-20% while high-end movers charge 50% of winnings.

***

Lots other great details here: economist.com/christmas-spec…Image
On a related note, I wrote on how slot machines make $10B+ a year in Las Vegas (~70% of all casino gaming revenue).

The history, psychology and design of the device…which went from a throwaway game to the industry’s “cash cow” and “gambling’s crack cocaine.”readtrung.com/p/the-ludicrou…
Read 4 tweets
Nov 19, 2025
Satya Nadella on why Microsoft Excel has been so durable after 40 years:

> the power of lists and tables
> the malleability of the software (“a blinking canvas”)
> spreadsheet software is Turing complete (“I can make it do everything”)
> it’s the world’s most approachable programming environment (“you get into it without even thinking your programming”)
fantastic pod ep: Image
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(