Discussion in 'Energy Futures' started by TraDaToR, Aug 15, 2011.
most funds trade long-only strategies.
they don't even have brains to employ simple MA crossover systems...
or their investors don't care whether money is managed efficiently or whether it is risked without a stoploss
most investors deserve negative triple digit losses: -100%.
Yeah, MA crossover's work every time...
yeah, of course everyone will demand something which will work every time. 100% winning trades.
such attitude can only result in ..... huge losses.
If you are referring to alternative investments funds ( like Andrew Hall's, for example ) - you are spectacularly wrong.
I asked a buddy at Phibro to give me some color on this. He simply said, "See the crude chart."
The only upside risk to crude, given the current equity market doldrums, would be geopolitical risk. The 'Arab Spring' is waning, with Syria being the remaining holdout - and of course, Syria has no energy exports per se.
Holding wildly OTM calls as a contingent for Israeli military action and getting eaten alive by the theta decay doesn't seem logical.
Most mutual funds use long-only strategies. You missed a key word there in your description of what kind of fund.
This article is about hedge funds which are a different animal.
yeah i know, but most hedge funds also trade mostly on the long side.
its visible in correlation of their returns vs S&P and commodity indicies.
AND you have to trade with super wide stoplosses to lose on CL during such a smooth down trend.
but how about Gold? funds should make some money on it...
unless of course, they've traded counter-trend with hugely wide stops, which is again very popular.
Separate names with a comma.