<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hybrid Theory (Building Better Portfolios with HPT)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://venturepopulist.com/2009/06/hybrid-portfolio-theory/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://venturepopulist.com/2009/06/hybrid-portfolio-theory/</link>
	<description>"Venture to the People"</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:09:31 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: winstongator</title>
		<link>http://venturepopulist.com/2009/06/hybrid-portfolio-theory/comment-page-1/#comment-1548</link>
		<dc:creator>winstongator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 May 2010 18:05:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://venturepopulist.com/?p=771#comment-1548</guid>
		<description>Let&#039;s consider a 401k illiquid, but you also keep a cash fund.  When times are good you put into both, when times are bad, you pull out of your cash fund, and try to keep funding your 401k.  Your relative % in illiquids should track as it should.

A lot of this portfolio theory can be answered by &#039;how big a rainy day fund do you need?&#039;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#8217;s consider a 401k illiquid, but you also keep a cash fund.  When times are good you put into both, when times are bad, you pull out of your cash fund, and try to keep funding your 401k.  Your relative % in illiquids should track as it should.</p>
<p>A lot of this portfolio theory can be answered by &#8216;how big a rainy day fund do you need?&#8217;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: winstongator</title>
		<link>http://venturepopulist.com/2009/06/hybrid-portfolio-theory/comment-page-1/#comment-1547</link>
		<dc:creator>winstongator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 May 2010 17:38:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://venturepopulist.com/?p=771#comment-1547</guid>
		<description>Why wouldn&#039;t you put all (or most of) your money on the B strategy?  Obviously the volatility is not for the faint of heart, but if you&#039;re counting on that to increase your rate of return, you&#039;re assuming that B will deliver at least the low-risk rate, long term.

Part of the problem is that B-strategy investments are not always available.  What would you have invested in around 2006-2007?  Gold?  Shorts of housing or stocks?  It is safer to keep liquidity and then pour into the B-types when they come along.  Keeping a constant % of the portfolio (vs. time) liquid doesn&#039;t seem to make sense.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why wouldn&#8217;t you put all (or most of) your money on the B strategy?  Obviously the volatility is not for the faint of heart, but if you&#8217;re counting on that to increase your rate of return, you&#8217;re assuming that B will deliver at least the low-risk rate, long term.</p>
<p>Part of the problem is that B-strategy investments are not always available.  What would you have invested in around 2006-2007?  Gold?  Shorts of housing or stocks?  It is safer to keep liquidity and then pour into the B-types when they come along.  Keeping a constant % of the portfolio (vs. time) liquid doesn&#8217;t seem to make sense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Venture Populist &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Playing The Angel</title>
		<link>http://venturepopulist.com/2009/06/hybrid-portfolio-theory/comment-page-1/#comment-199</link>
		<dc:creator>Venture Populist &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Playing The Angel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 00:45:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://venturepopulist.com/?p=771#comment-199</guid>
		<description>[...] the mindset should embrace private venture investments&#8211;for the benefit of their client’s portfolios, as well as, their practices. Yet, the majority of independent wealth managers should best leave [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the mindset should embrace private venture investments&#8211;for the benefit of their client’s portfolios, as well as, their practices. Yet, the majority of independent wealth managers should best leave [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kamchako</title>
		<link>http://venturepopulist.com/2009/06/hybrid-portfolio-theory/comment-page-1/#comment-193</link>
		<dc:creator>Kamchako</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 05:45:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://venturepopulist.com/?p=771#comment-193</guid>
		<description>This strategy is essentially what we&#039;ve been running for a few years now. Essentially we run three model strategies at 70%A, 80%A, and 90%A, and for the B portfolio we blow it out shooting for the moon. Frontier markets, leveraged etfs, micro caps, and opportunistic trading utilizing etf&#039;s for simplicity. No complaints here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This strategy is essentially what we&#8217;ve been running for a few years now. Essentially we run three model strategies at 70%A, 80%A, and 90%A, and for the B portfolio we blow it out shooting for the moon. Frontier markets, leveraged etfs, micro caps, and opportunistic trading utilizing etf&#8217;s for simplicity. No complaints here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Arzu</title>
		<link>http://venturepopulist.com/2009/06/hybrid-portfolio-theory/comment-page-1/#comment-181</link>
		<dc:creator>Arzu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:42:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://venturepopulist.com/?p=771#comment-181</guid>
		<description>very interesting post.. 

this is what Taleb had proposed in his black swan book..this was even corroborated by a Profsssor of Boston University I happened to meet and listen to his presentation at the FPA  conference at Boston last year..He in fact had been personally investing using this hybrid portfolio model..

cheers
partha;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>very interesting post.. </p>
<p>this is what Taleb had proposed in his black swan book..this was even corroborated by a Profsssor of Boston University I happened to meet and listen to his presentation at the FPA  conference at Boston last year..He in fact had been personally investing using this hybrid portfolio model..</p>
<p>cheers<br />
partha;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vincent Esposito</title>
		<link>http://venturepopulist.com/2009/06/hybrid-portfolio-theory/comment-page-1/#comment-57</link>
		<dc:creator>Vincent Esposito</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 20:13:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://venturepopulist.com/?p=771#comment-57</guid>
		<description>Interesting conversation here.  I think we are all looking for ways to manage risk in our clients portfolios.  I have been doing my DD on systems like Dorsey Wright and VPM partners in search of a system that I can implement in my practice.  
Want to talk shop with other successful, independent, forward thinking advisors?  Check out www.advisorconnect.groupsite.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting conversation here.  I think we are all looking for ways to manage risk in our clients portfolios.  I have been doing my DD on systems like Dorsey Wright and VPM partners in search of a system that I can implement in my practice.<br />
Want to talk shop with other successful, independent, forward thinking advisors?  Check out <a href="http://www.advisorconnect.groupsite.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.advisorconnect.groupsite.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: partha iyengar</title>
		<link>http://venturepopulist.com/2009/06/hybrid-portfolio-theory/comment-page-1/#comment-49</link>
		<dc:creator>partha iyengar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 19:40:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://venturepopulist.com/?p=771#comment-49</guid>
		<description>very interesting post.. 

this is what Taleb had proposed in his black swan book..this was even corroborated by a Professor of Boston University I happened to meet and listen to his presentation at the FPA  conference at Boston last year..He in fact had been personally investing using this hybrid portfolio model..

cheers
partha</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>very interesting post.. </p>
<p>this is what Taleb had proposed in his black swan book..this was even corroborated by a Professor of Boston University I happened to meet and listen to his presentation at the FPA  conference at Boston last year..He in fact had been personally investing using this hybrid portfolio model..</p>
<p>cheers<br />
partha</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: VenturePopulist</title>
		<link>http://venturepopulist.com/2009/06/hybrid-portfolio-theory/comment-page-1/#comment-45</link>
		<dc:creator>VenturePopulist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 16:02:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://venturepopulist.com/?p=771#comment-45</guid>
		<description>Russ, 

Thanks so much for your post. 

With respect to your comment, &quot;&lt;em&gt;Pity though that you have given up on stocks. Forget stock investing in the classic sense and look at stocks as a trading vehicle for making money&lt;/em&gt;&quot;...please note that we are in agreement...stocks can have a role in Portfolio B. 

Public equities have a distinct place in portfolio B if they can be allocated to in within a quantitative model that maintains and &lt;em&gt;insures&lt;/em&gt; a postively-skewed risk/reward ratio (where, I might add, there is no discretionary overlay)

The powerpoint &lt;a href=&quot;http://venturepopulist.com/category/media-library/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;deck&lt;/a&gt; on Hybrid Portfolio Theory contains the following definition of investments that are characterized by their potential for a &lt;em&gt;positive asymmetric outcome&lt;/em&gt;...

&lt;em&gt;PAO is a positively-skewed risk/reward ratio that can be achieved via investments such as venture capital, private equity, direct (angel) private investment in start-ups and emerging small businesses (PVI), private manufacturing businesses, private real estate, private debt, franchises, operating cash-flow businesses, as well as, &lt;strong&gt;publicly traded emerging growth companies&lt;/strong&gt;, leveraged (long vol) option strategies, &lt;strong&gt;and highly specialized investment strategies employed by managed futures and some hedge funds&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/em&gt;

A properly executed strategy like that you are referring to can certainly be a candidate for the B portfolio.

Thanks again for your comments.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Russ, </p>
<p>Thanks so much for your post. </p>
<p>With respect to your comment, &#8220;<em>Pity though that you have given up on stocks. Forget stock investing in the classic sense and look at stocks as a trading vehicle for making money</em>&#8220;&#8230;please note that we are in agreement&#8230;stocks can have a role in Portfolio B. </p>
<p>Public equities have a distinct place in portfolio B if they can be allocated to in within a quantitative model that maintains and <em>insures</em> a postively-skewed risk/reward ratio (where, I might add, there is no discretionary overlay)</p>
<p>The powerpoint <a href="http://venturepopulist.com/category/media-library/" rel="nofollow">deck</a> on Hybrid Portfolio Theory contains the following definition of investments that are characterized by their potential for a <em>positive asymmetric outcome</em>&#8230;</p>
<p><em>PAO is a positively-skewed risk/reward ratio that can be achieved via investments such as venture capital, private equity, direct (angel) private investment in start-ups and emerging small businesses (PVI), private manufacturing businesses, private real estate, private debt, franchises, operating cash-flow businesses, as well as, <strong>publicly traded emerging growth companies</strong>, leveraged (long vol) option strategies, <strong>and highly specialized investment strategies employed by managed futures and some hedge funds</strong>.</em></p>
<p>A properly executed strategy like that you are referring to can certainly be a candidate for the B portfolio.</p>
<p>Thanks again for your comments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Russ (aka, TheRTTrader)</title>
		<link>http://venturepopulist.com/2009/06/hybrid-portfolio-theory/comment-page-1/#comment-44</link>
		<dc:creator>Russ (aka, TheRTTrader)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 14:55:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://venturepopulist.com/?p=771#comment-44</guid>
		<description>Hi Jeff- more people need to read, ponder and read your recent post on failed portfolio theory and the pathetic returns, or lack thereof, and how it has hurt the average person, just not the rich who can &quot;absorb&quot; it better. 

Your basic ideas and the concept of being a large part in low yielding cash makes perfect sense not only as an asset class but as a volatility dampening agent, if you were. So-called professionals just have no clue what to do to manage risk, other than &quot;diversification&quot; which is the two edged sword of limiting returns, and does not control much of anything in market swoons.

Pity though that you have given up on stocks. Forget stock investing in the classic sense and look at stocks as a trading vehicle for making money. To use stocks in  your part B - exactly what we do, has a great advantage over the other asset classes you propose - one always knows exactly what those assets are priced at, and of course ease of entry and exit at a cheap cost. The way we do it revolves around stock picking and of course timing, i.e. short term position trading and a limited portfolio of 4-8 positions, never more than 12. 

However, the reality is that great returns are all about risk control. Below explains my major points of view on risk- 

&quot;I am a very risk adverse chart pattern break out trader with a system that clearly defines the risk in a trade before it is made (entry-minus exit prices.)  Knowing the risk per share allows me to calculate how many shares to buy such that the total risk of the trade to total equity equals whatever percent I want to control. Currently, and for the past year, that risk is ca.0.2% of total equity at risk per trade. 

I also control total portfolio risk to total equity by limiting the total number of trades I place in a day and the total number of trades I keep open. That controls the total dollar risk to whatever percent of total equity I deem appropriate at any given time, based on market conditions. Cash is a great dampener of volatility.

The third way I control risk is through a working hedge. When I take a long position I do not hedge it, nor do I hedge the entire portfolio. However, at times, when my exposure to market risk is high and the markets turn suddenly, as they often to do, to dampen risk of loss, as well as protect profits, I will place an estimated beta neutral hedge using -2x short index ETFs.  The ramifications of that strategy, how it works and when it works and fails is a long discussion. The net is that it added 17% of the profits in 2009. 

And it goes without saying staying away from any risk one can mitigate - e.g., no positions on when earnings are announced, no biotech which is always subject to huge loses from unfavorable FDA rulings, etc. 

My belief is that managing risk is THE ABSOLUTE most important part of ANY type of program. The bottom line is that our program accounts did NOT lose money in 2008 and were at all time new highs for June 2009.

Russell Mascieri

General &amp; Managing Partner 
RTT Growth Partners, L.P.
(contact via LinkedIN)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Jeff- more people need to read, ponder and read your recent post on failed portfolio theory and the pathetic returns, or lack thereof, and how it has hurt the average person, just not the rich who can &#8220;absorb&#8221; it better. </p>
<p>Your basic ideas and the concept of being a large part in low yielding cash makes perfect sense not only as an asset class but as a volatility dampening agent, if you were. So-called professionals just have no clue what to do to manage risk, other than &#8220;diversification&#8221; which is the two edged sword of limiting returns, and does not control much of anything in market swoons.</p>
<p>Pity though that you have given up on stocks. Forget stock investing in the classic sense and look at stocks as a trading vehicle for making money. To use stocks in  your part B &#8211; exactly what we do, has a great advantage over the other asset classes you propose &#8211; one always knows exactly what those assets are priced at, and of course ease of entry and exit at a cheap cost. The way we do it revolves around stock picking and of course timing, i.e. short term position trading and a limited portfolio of 4-8 positions, never more than 12. </p>
<p>However, the reality is that great returns are all about risk control. Below explains my major points of view on risk- </p>
<p>&#8220;I am a very risk adverse chart pattern break out trader with a system that clearly defines the risk in a trade before it is made (entry-minus exit prices.)  Knowing the risk per share allows me to calculate how many shares to buy such that the total risk of the trade to total equity equals whatever percent I want to control. Currently, and for the past year, that risk is ca.0.2% of total equity at risk per trade. </p>
<p>I also control total portfolio risk to total equity by limiting the total number of trades I place in a day and the total number of trades I keep open. That controls the total dollar risk to whatever percent of total equity I deem appropriate at any given time, based on market conditions. Cash is a great dampener of volatility.</p>
<p>The third way I control risk is through a working hedge. When I take a long position I do not hedge it, nor do I hedge the entire portfolio. However, at times, when my exposure to market risk is high and the markets turn suddenly, as they often to do, to dampen risk of loss, as well as protect profits, I will place an estimated beta neutral hedge using -2x short index ETFs.  The ramifications of that strategy, how it works and when it works and fails is a long discussion. The net is that it added 17% of the profits in 2009. </p>
<p>And it goes without saying staying away from any risk one can mitigate &#8211; e.g., no positions on when earnings are announced, no biotech which is always subject to huge loses from unfavorable FDA rulings, etc. </p>
<p>My belief is that managing risk is THE ABSOLUTE most important part of ANY type of program. The bottom line is that our program accounts did NOT lose money in 2008 and were at all time new highs for June 2009.</p>
<p>Russell Mascieri</p>
<p>General &#038; Managing Partner<br />
RTT Growth Partners, L.P.<br />
(contact via LinkedIN)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: derek</title>
		<link>http://venturepopulist.com/2009/06/hybrid-portfolio-theory/comment-page-1/#comment-38</link>
		<dc:creator>derek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:22:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://venturepopulist.com/?p=771#comment-38</guid>
		<description>After reading your outstanding reply about the Kool-Aid, I realize even more how much you&#039;ll enjoy Loeb&#039;s book. Another of his recurring themes is breaking the &quot;Myth of the Ideal Investment&quot;. One would think 12 years of zero returns would eliminate the need to convince people of the inherent risk in markets, but I guess there are more to be converted in the years ahead</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After reading your outstanding reply about the Kool-Aid, I realize even more how much you&#8217;ll enjoy Loeb&#8217;s book. Another of his recurring themes is breaking the &#8220;Myth of the Ideal Investment&#8221;. One would think 12 years of zero returns would eliminate the need to convince people of the inherent risk in markets, but I guess there are more to be converted in the years ahead</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
