He attended the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business after his BA at Harvard. And that is where I know him from and respect him from. He has a gigantic ego, but he is highly intelligent, and his methodology is how we can all learn from him. He is scientific in nature, and I respect the way he looks at the markets and approaches the markets. His tale, regardless of how you think of the man, is a fascinating one.
Most of us will not make as much money in the markets as he did. Most of us will not lose as much money in the markets as he did. Most of us will not disappoint as many investors as he did, or as often. Fascinating indeed.
Could scientific method be a flaw? I am just curious and wondering to myself that if something can be researched and measured based on publicly available information, then the resulting strategy can easily be figured out and work against us.
None of what you said is in question, AFAIK. But this being a trading and markets related board, and VN being in the public eye with books, blogs and funds, the question remains: Is VN a great, or even a good, fund manager? Why does he blow out every few years? Why is he listed as being a tax delinquent? Yeah he is famous, has a huge house, still throws lots of money around, and we are just small time scum trying to bring the big man down, etc, etc. But I bet most here pay their taxes, don't blowout their account every couple years, don't cheat on their wife... As always, JMHO. Good trading to all.
"jmho" by writing jmho you prove that u are not humble. it is a bad habit that u should have dropped when u left yahoo finance chat. have any of you met VN recently? if yes please comment about his general physical condition.
Another question: Why did marketsurfer who is a friend of Vic, pointed out about Vic's tax problem on a public message board? It just seems a little weird.
Correct. There is enough info publicly available... Let's answer the question the way looking at his funds' performances over the years as a blackbox and trying to reverse engineer its strategy, shall we? Let's keep in mind that it doesn't matter how complicated a blackbox's strategy is or how many geniuses worked on creating it if it can be approximated with a much simpler, but very similar strategy. If one looks at VN's performance, it is basicly a 4-5 times overleveraged being long of the S&P 500 index strategy. Since he is using puts (selling insurance), it isn't exactly linear, but as an approximation it works rather well: 2002 February, market is down -8% YTD, Matador had a -30% DD 2006 market closes the year up 12%, Matador is up 56% 2007 July-Aug market drops -13%, Matador blows up etc.etc. Now if actual timing was involved when the fund moved to cash or shorted the market, this could be a unique winning strategy depending on how successful the timing is, but all evidence shows that it is just a simple overleveraged long strategy through the years... Anytime when the market fumbled, so did Victor...
Not exactly Kom..... VN made a big bet on the Thai Bhat and lost. Chris Argyrople, CFA Concentric 2 What Happened to Neiderhoffer? * Victor Niederhoffer, a famous trader who wrote a heavily promoted book on trading and the markets, lost all of his investors $130 million dollars in the summer of 1997. * WHAT HAPPENED? He had a ten year track record of compounding capital at 35% * He lost about 45% of his investors money in July, betting on the Thailand Baht 3 Niederhoffer Didnââ¬â¢t Re-Evaluate * Niederhoffer didnââ¬â¢t slow down * Instead, after losing 45%, he wrote puts on the S&P !! * The press intimated that he wrote the puts to generate cash to pay margin calls. * Writing the puts probably requires extra margin, so the newspapers were probably wrong. * Never try to gamble out of the casino. pathetic. charm and bs encased in .... ? is a formula for success.
The scientific method isn't flawed when directed properly, applied correctly and interpreted both objectively and accurately, and with full awareness of both the scope and limitations of the findings. Unless, of course, it's just concept marketed in order raise capital, leverage up and let the cards fall where they may, in a quest for glory. Either way you have a hero - either a conquering hero or a tragic hero. But a "hero" nonetheless. And, of course, there is the attention...
The only think that is fascinating is who the hell keeps investing in him. Because his "friends" never invest with him, even marketsurfer, aka cosmokramer aka multiple aliases, would not invest with him, all while kissing his ass all over ET. The real feedback in the hedge fund industry about Vic Niederhoffer is not criticism of him. It's generally disbelief that he keeps getting funding. It's hard to understand how anyone stupid enough to invest with him would actually have any capital. There is no real need to arguments or even discussion on this topic. If you think Vic is so great & awesome, go invest with him. If you think he is crap, dont invest with him and try to take the opposing side.