>>Are you telling me, its hard to stand up, when you have an investment philosophy which is believes in " value investments with catalysts"?<<
I believe this is what most hedge fund managers are doing, so it's hard to stand out with that headline on the resume. Some hedge fund managers like Einhorn and Ackman provide their own catalysts, others are betting on certain events. Most of them have some momo- component in their magic soup (trend following).
I am not saying that what you are doing is not good, you track record seems OK, although i would more emphasize the methodology than your track record because it's easy to fudge the latter and much of it can be luck or omission of mistakes (survivor Bias).
I personally found the emphasis on catalysts too restricting. For one thing a catalyst is often implicit a bet on a certain even. If widely know, the catalyst may already build in the stock price, so if you are wrong, the bet could get expensive.
My best investment have been those where i found stocks to be neglected rather than controversial. This is stuff like 5018.T, NWLI, 5988.T, CMB.MI or tiny little community banks in the US. With these stocks, there are no hedge fund involved (or they are selling NWLI-3rd Ave), no research or institutional coverage like with the Japanese stocks I hold. They don't have any catalyst but they still work on aggregate because they are just too darn cheap. |
