PART 18: SHORTING

We short to generate alpha and hedge unwanted risks in longs, in a high return on time way that minimizes risk of a blow-up. This means we generally only short stocks owned by investors we can understand who we think are wrong on terms they care about. A 🧵:
Part of investing is knowing yourself. There is a good argument to be made that only shorting zeros, frauds, fads, and failures owned by irrational people produces the most alpha over time. But this is only true if you can handle the vol, which most can’t (myself included).
The risk in the HF biz is not being in business. 2020 and 2021 taught a new generation of investors not in biz for .com that the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent. It’s hard to survive long/short factor mismatch over a long enough time horizon.
Most people that short junk are also value investors. This creates a factor mismatch that can crush you. Some people navigated this successfully but many did not and their funds did not survive their strategy being out of favor. Big drawdowns are the enemy of longevity.
Our short book generally matches our long book. We are short value traps, over-earners, decelerating garp, and occasionally spicier shorts in a size that matches the size of our unprofitable growth/tech long allocation. We see the following benefits of this approach:
1) alpha will be generated based on long/short spread and stock picking ability, not factor movements. We are good at picking stocks, not factors. I want to generate alpha by betting on things I’m good at and avoiding things I’m not.
3) Our strategy has a much better return on time. People who short zeros almost never turn around and go long them. Today’s over-earners are tomorrows under-earners - we can leverage our knowledge 2 ways. We also come across them more naturally while looking for longs.
4) did I say it was less stressful? I know many a manager who goes into work every day lamenting the irrationality of their shorts, even the ones who claim to be unphased by it. It’s really hard to make good decisions and focus consistently when you think the world is wrong.
5) shorts have the potential for unlimited losses and get bigger as they work against you. This is a portfolio management nightmare. One bad decision on GME, AMC, BBBY or the like can wipe out many good decisions. I don’t want to blow up.
6) it’s a lot easier to figure out when you are right or wrong and exit because you are betting on the same things. If a stock is structurally unprofitable but growing 100% you can be right that it will never make money but get your face ripped off b/c the longs don’t care.
7) the risk of this approach is you look like an idiot in 2022 for not shorting this stuff in 2021. I can live with that - there is plenty of alpha to be generated in our approach, and I’d go for doubles than swing for the fences, strikeout, and watch the game from the bench.

• • •

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

Keep Current with HF Reflections

HF Reflections 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 @hfreflection

Jan 23
PART 17: TIME HORIZON
Most investors are either short term or long term - ST will only invest when a biz is improving or inflecting (<6mo). LT doesn’t care and looks out years (2+). We like living in the middle - a 🧵 on time horizon in idea and alpha generation.
I’d argue there is the most competition in trying to predict what a biz will do in the next 2 quarters. Most datapoints - calls, alt data, etc tell you what is happening right now, usually with decent accuracy. Many investors won’t own a company where “numbers are too high”.
These people focus on comparing their ST estimates vs sell-side and vs the elusive “buyside consensus”. The problem with playing this game is that it’s very competitive, most people arrive at similar answers, and frequently reality is already priced in.
Read 18 tweets
Jan 19
WHY FUNDS FAIL PART 2 - ENVY

@pjme73 proposed 4 deadly sins as reasons for why funds fail, two of which were greed and envy. I’ve struggled with both of these at times, but envy more than greed. Some observations on how envy is destructive, and how to avoid it. A personal 🧵:
Envy seems almost uniquely suited for finance professionals - you have driven, competitive people with a natural inclination to quantify things. A simple definition of self worth is net worth. Thus begins the competition to get a higher number than someone else.
Some people get content when they hit a number that satisfies them, at which point they prioritize other things. Some people don’t know how to stop wanting a higher number. While this can serve as a great motivator for success, it’s also unhealthy, and often toxic.
Read 13 tweets
Jan 14
PART 16: MAINTENANCE WORK

Maintenance work - both the amount and how it’s done - is the single biggest waste of time at most funds. Most people usually focus on the wrong things, reach the wrong conclusions, and detract value here. A 🧵on proper maintenance work.
Maintenance work refers to updating expert calls, sell-side calls, frequent management check ins, conference attendance, prepping earnings previews, and other activities designed to find slight changes or compare your estimates vs consensus.
This is speaking as a single manager fund with a 9-36 month time horizon, that doesn’t think it can beat pods at the quarter or sentiment game in most cases. Most single manager funds claim to be this way, but few act like it. Play where you can win.
Read 16 tweets
Jan 2
WHY I TWEET

Most good investors don’t tweet. Having a twitter account is generally frowned upon by allocators. It’s a potentially (big) distraction. It doesn’t generate P&L. So why would anyone who isn’t an insecure egomaniac without better things to do, do it? A 🧵:
I have a hypothesis I have been testing for 4 months that I’ve funded mostly from my leisure time - twitter is a powerful platform with massive optionality, where the talent that lurks is much greater than the talent that posts. Before posting, I was a lurker.
I was at an idea lunch a few months ago - a well-respected PM sitting next to me was scrolling on twitter during most the event. He doesn’t post. I’d guess 1/3rd of professional investors use twitter to a decent degree, many badly. Much less than 1/3rd tweet.
Read 17 tweets
Dec 26, 2022
PART 15 - HF NETWORKING

I am an introvert in all respects except for stocks. Having the ability to network and form genuine relationships with talented ppl at funds and allocators is the best career protection, and the main way to maximize likelihood of career success. A 🧵:
Some people look down on “networking”. I think they have the definition wrong. Mine is very simple: aggressively going out of your way to meet talented people you like, finding out how to make them like you, and never letting go of them once you’ve got them.
Most of my network has become my friends, because my main criteria is that I like them as people. So most my social activitIes at this point are networking of a sort, but it doesn’t feel like that to me. There are enough talented good people to not have to settle for jerks.
Read 19 tweets
Dec 21, 2022
ALLOCATOR PART 4: AVOIDING BLOW-UPS

Most HFs and managers die “not with a bang but with a whimper”. Dying with a whimper means returns go mediocre slowly, reputations remain intact. Dying with a bang is an embarrassment and disaster to be avoided. A thread on the later 🧵:
1) Most funds with the most speculator deaths also had the most spectacular successes.  Usually what allowed them to be successful is what brings about their downfall, and their tremendous prior success likely hinders learning that could have prevented it.
So the first 🚩I think to avoid spectacular failure is to avoid spectacular successes (eg funds with up 50%+ years). To have spectacular success, you almost definitionally need high levels of concentration - in individual positions, factors, or sectors.
Read 16 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 on Twitter!

:(