The philosophical question to ask is this the death of trend following methodology/system/techniques/whatever you call it(it does NOT have to be a mechanical sytem to be call trend following. ) If too many people are doing trend following then it's the end. Or is the market just "bad" in the sense that there is no more big macro trends to ride this year 2005. Every few decades you hear people complain and say it's the death of trend following. And then lo behold a new trend starts... In the 70s it was commodities. 80s-90s was equities. If you traded gold or other commodities in the 80s-90s with a trend following system you would have probably lost since no major trend existed. Then 2000-2004. FX, Gold, and other commodities surging up. So, it begs is trend following over or is it the trend just ended until the next trend comes along...
I won't be surprised if it heralds the beginning of a new era in trend following. If a big trend follower closes shop in this environment, the ripple effects will kill off many smaller trend followers trying to raise money or trying to persuade their investors to stick with them through the next drawdown. Since other trendfollowers are primarily responsible for killing off the efficacy of trendfollowing, fewer survivors might bring back the glory days of trends. Just idle speculation of course.
Can somebody help me? When I look at quadriga funds performance on their site, they give numbers for NAV of their funds. Do this numbers come after all fees (including performance or incentive fee) are subtracted? For example, their last year results of Superfund L.P. Series A were +11.35% (in accordance with this NAV figures). Was this number 11.35% calculated after all management and incentive fees were subtracted?