No, plenty of conservative investors are very happy with ANNUAL net IRR of 10%+. Not sure what Money management area are you talking about - in general, investors will be satisfied with what you stated in your offering documents. But because you want to be conservative in your offering docs, you should realistically target a few % above. This way your investors are not just satisfied, but very happy
It's all about alpha, if you can make 100% alpha over your cost of living (which is your benchmark) then yes it's spectacular, but you cannot and will not be able to, we can make more money than god but here's the problem you nor anyone else will have experience of and almost certainly never will. When you manage money you need to create a positive alpha for yourself and also a positive alpha for your investors, this never happens which is why it's taken a decade for us to come to the exact numbers with supporting fintech and processes to achieve that exact outcome, all other money managers will create a return say 20%pa and 14%pa after fees on 2&20, but who generates alpha on those numbers is variable, is it the investors, is it the money managers, is it both, is it neither. We can and do generate 300%pa but it could never be for you, simply because your entire approach is to generate alpha for you which will invalidate the alpha for any manager making it, we know because we've done it and that is exactly what happened, I'm out $100,000s just this past year because some investor wanted $100,000s managed at these levels and they invalidated all parties returns back to base capital*. People can make 200%, 500%, 1,000%pa (which you can't do with a job) but if their benchmark is cost of living and that 1,000% on $5k is $50k yet their cost of living is $50k then they made zero, every number you will see publicly is based on this, in the years of looking at this site and others I've seen a couple of people who actually made real alpha. I can tell you that we had an analysis report of Boeing at its highs in 2019 with a target to $100 which it hit 1yr later, 100shares of that shorted makes you a simple $30k, the number of research reports we have every week and month for profits like this are beyond spectacular, so why not manage money for anyone else, because you are wired to make sure we lose our alpha to generate even $1 more profit for yourself, there are more interesting things in life to do, namely watch investors and money managers fight to gain more alpha while having a ringside seat!
Depends on the field you're playing on and if it's tilted. Pit traders, niche markets, hard to enter markets, regulation
As a money manager consistency is much more important than absolute stellar returns. But are you right I think that doing +5% consistently is not effective. So with anything but double digit returns annually but being profitable every month or even every week makes you a successful money manager who can attract a lot of capital to trade with. Usually the problem then is scaling as you cannot do such consistent returns with unlimited capital so there is a bottleneck how much money a manager can trade with. The more consistent your returns the less money can be taken from investors, because the underlying strategy cannot trade effectively with so much money, as it becomes useless when it cannot be used even with no leverage then. So this is another dilemma here.
Consistent real return is simple, it’s not a number it’s a flow. I tell investors all the time, “not matter the market, if you’re not milking the dumb money and leveraging the smart money, even if it’s 10x ROI, it’ll fade to 1% by the small crowds who is”
The Capacity of Trading Strategies https://deliverypdf.ssrn.com/delive...69064102096066121070074116&EXT=pdf&INDEX=TRUE