Hedge Funds X Mutual Funds

Both sides now
More mutual funds are using strategies such as short selling once allowed only in hedge funds
(From The Denver Post, provided by LexisNexis) April 17, 2007 Tuesday

The line between hedge funds and mutual funds is becoming increasingly blurred as a growing number of money managers introduce mutual funds that use strategies once limited to hedge funds.
What's more, some hedge-fund managers, who historically catered only to the most wealthy, are now offering their services through mutual funds, which are accessible to a wider group of investors.
The trend is providing average investors with a low-cost way of diversifying their portfolios through the use of hedging strategies - a category of investing techniques often too complex or risky for most small-
time investors.
Since 2003, the number of hedge-fund-like mutual funds, also called "long-short" funds, has more than doubled, increasing from 25 to 53 funds, according to investment researcher Morningstar. Long-short funds allow asset managers to buy stocks as well as sell stocks short, a technique used to profit from the falling price of a stock.
Denver-based Janus Capital Group, for instance, rolled out a long-short fund last August. The fund has attracted $50 million in investment since then.
Jerry Paul, head of Greenwood Village-based Quixote Capital Management, ran a hedge fund for years before introducing a mutual fund in 2005.
"It moved me into a whole new market," Paul said, who uses a hedging strategy in which he simultaneously buys into both sides of a merger-and-acquisition deal.
Paul's hedge fund has a $1 million minimum. Investors can get into his mutual fund for as little as $2,500.
The number of portfolio managers simultaneously operating mutual funds and hedge funds has increased from 80 three years ago to 124 today, according to Morningstar. In 2000, just 31 portfolio managers used such a side-by-side approach.
Hedge funds, or private investment partnerships lightly regulated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, are typically used by the wealthy. The funds are open only to accredited investors - those with at least $1 million in net worth or $200,000 in annual income.
Running mutual funds alongside hedge funds is attractive to money managers for several reasons, Paul and others said.
Hedge funds offer stock pickers greater compensation than mutual funds. Most hedge funds charge a base fee of 1 percent and then take 20 percent of profits. By comparison, mutual funds have an average expense ratio of 1.41 percent, according to researcher Lipper Inc.
The lucrative pay structure has allowed hedge funds to lure talented money managers away from mutual funds. In response, some mutual-fund companies are launching hedge funds as a means to retain top talent, said Ryan Tagal, a director with Morningstar. However, Tagal said small-time investors are potentially shortchanged if fund managers spend more time managing their hedge fund compared to their mutual funds.
"There are potential conflicts of interest," Tagal said. "Perhaps they will buy stocks for the hedge fund before they buy it for the mutual fund."
The interest in hedge funds and hedge-fund-like mutual funds boomed after the bear market of 2002-03, said Todd Trubey, a senior analyst with Morningstar.
Trubey said hedge funds outperformed mutual funds during that time, largely because the hedge funds were able to sell stocks short - a tactic that most mutual funds can't use.
"The reason the funds have appeal is that they do well in a rising market and in a falling market," Trubey said. But, he noted, long-short funds tend to lag most stock funds during bull markets.
Long-short funds have posted an average annual return of 6.5 percent since 2003. By comparison, the Standard & Poor's 500 has gained 14 percent per year during that span.
"Unfortunately, asset managers oftentimes show up at the party just as it's ending," Trubey said.
Staff writer Will Shanley can be reached at 303-954-1260 or .

Market Wizard

Artigo do Telegraph (UK) de 06 de Abril

Hedge fund guru prepares for London float Business Money Telegraph

Hedge fund guru prepares for London floatBy James Quinn, Business Correspondent
Last Updated: 10:19pm BST 06/04/2007
One of the founding fathers of the hedge fund industry is to float his fund of hedge funds in London with a market value of up to £275m.
Jack Schwager, who wrote the best selling Market Wizards series of investment tomes, is to list his Market Wizards Fund on the main market of the London Stock Exchange later this month.
Mr Schwager, who works for Fortune Asset Management, is to raise £200m as part of the float, with existing assets in the region of £75m.
Fundraising for the listing is due to begin next week, led by financial adviser Fox-Pitt Kelton. The fund has been running for seven years, and is incorporated in Guernsey as a closed-ended investment company.
Mr Schwager is an industry veteran of more than 30 years' experience, and is known for being the first to spot some of the big hedge fund managers of today, such as Michael Steinhardt and Paul Tudor Jones, founder of the Tudor Group.
He is Fortune's investment director, and plays a key part in all investment decisions. The Fortune team is led by London-based chief executive Simon Hopkins, who co-founded Fortune with investment director Rick Tarvin, while Nancy Curtin, the former head of global mutual funds at Schroders, is chief investment officer.
Fortune was bought last year by Close Brothers as part of its wish to move into the hedge fund sector.
The Market Wizards Fund has produced an annualised return of 12.44pc over the last seven years.
It has a great mixture of diversification across strategies, with the largest, options trading, accounting for only 18.2pc of the fund's total assets.
Its raison d'etre is that it invests in managed accounts of hedge funds, meaning that rather than just ploughing its money into a hedge fund's general money pot, its money is placed into specific managed accounts.
This allows Fortune to track the success - or failure - on a daily basis, allowing greater liquidity, more transparency, and the ability to mitigate the major drawbacks of investing in hedge funds. Typically, funds of hedge funds have to wait for monthly updates to know how their investments were going.

Bankruptcy

Artigo da Financial News.

Funds take equity stakes in bankruptcies
Heidi Moore
11 Apr 2007
Shareholders could have more say over assets

Hedge funds like having control almost as much as they like making money. They are trying to achieve both in the US by using their power to influence the outcome of corporate collapses.
Firms such as Cerberus Capital Management, Fortress Investment Group and DE Shaw are becoming more active in steering the fate of bankrupt companies, including power plant operator Calpine, Northwest Airlines and car parts group Delphi Automotive.
The funds are building their roles as shareholders in collapsed companies into a powerbase from which they force acquisitions, pressure unions, create capital structures and control restructurings.
If the hedge funds succeed, they will have created a revolution in bankruptcy law under which equity holders would have nearly as much negotiating power as the debt holders. In most cases there is usually nothing left for shareholders.
Robert Stark, a partner in the bankruptcy practice of law firm Brown Rudnick Berlack Israels, said: “Distressed fund managers are extremely intelligent problem solvers and will often propose alternative restructuring ideas that can yield value to equity, if that is where they are invested.”
Hedge funds are organising themselves into equity committees and pooling resources. “In bankruptcy proceedings, there’s an inclination against value going to stockholders. You need power, advocacy and stamina to get the ball rolling,” said Stark.
Martin Bienenstock, head of bankruptcy at law firm Weil, Gotshal & Manges, said of the hedge fund committees: “It helps them maximise their investment. They’re present at all the hearings, they see what’s going on in the case, they get a seat at the negotiating table and they get their opportunities to try their solutions.”
But it is not easy. Hedge funds are fighting an image problem in such cases. In at least one instance – that of Northwest Airlines – a bankruptcy judge raised questions about whether a group of 10 funds were trying to help fellow equity holders or seeking ways to use the bankruptcy code to ensure their profit at the expense of others.
Corinne Ball, a partner with law firm Jones Day, said: “Northwest is a case where equity holders are trying to stick a crowbar in the door and make sure they’re not eliminated until they ensure there’s no hidden value that’s deferred.”
The failure of Northwest Airlines is one that specialists are watching closely to see how far hedge funds will be allowed to wield power. Two groups of equity holding hedge funds are pushing Northwest to be taken over while in bankruptcy proceedings.
One, calling itself the “ad hoc committee of certain claims holders”, holds $949.3m (€712m) in claims and includes 120 hedge funds. A second group has an additional nine firms.
Judge Allan Gropper threw down the gauntlet to one group by forcing it to disclose the extent of its holdings, which it argued could create a “chilling effect” on hedge funds since they want to avoid revealing their holdings to the competition and because hedge funds argue that creditors do not have to reveal their stakes.
The ad hoc committee of equity security holders caved in and disclosed their holdings.
The strategy appears to have worked. By agreeing to lose the battle over disclosure, the hedge funds could be winning the war for the merger: Gropper last week helped the funds by appointing an examiner to evaluate whether Northwest had held secret discussions about a post-bankruptcy sale.
Such a transaction would rob equity holders of the value of their shares, the hedge funds argued.
Their push for Northwest to be taken over while in bankruptcy means an acquirer would provide a capital infusion that could pay off creditors and leave enough for shareholders.
Delphi Automotive and building materials company US Gypsum are other examples where hedge funds have pushed for the outcome they wanted. At Delphi, Cerberus Capital Management and Appaloosa Management organised equity committees and made a successful bet that Delphi’s connection to General Motors – its primary customer – would guarantee a rich payout.
Appaloosa also holds subordinated debt in the company and plans to invest in return for a substantial ownership stake when then group emerges from bankruptcy.
In the US Gypsum case, which concluded last year, an equity committee forged by hedge funds worked with the company and its lawyers to fend off lawsuits alleging that it was responsible for asbestos injuries among former workers, who were forced to submit X-rays. This led the judge to rule there was no recognisable disease and the lawsuits were thrown out as a factor in the case.
Cerberus has been the most active hedge fund, often buying automotive companies out of bankruptcy. Last week it bought Tower Automotive out of Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in a $1bn deal.
The plan was for Cerberus to pay Tower’s debt, including a $725m debtor-in-possession loan, its second-lien debts and its pensions. It is using its power to force rival bidders to offer $5m above its price.

NY X London

Matéria do The Independent

New York is the leader but London is catching up fast
By James Moore
Published: 11 April 2007
New York still dominates the hedge fund industry but London is beginning to snap at the heels of its rival.
Hedge funds were, of course, an American invention but - despite what was widely seen as a crackdown last year - the less prescriptive style of "risk based" UK regulation is increasingly helping Britain's capital to bridge the gap.
One only needs to take a drink in one of more exclusive bars in Mayfair after a look around the district's luxuriously appointed office space to see that these are boom times for the industry.
According to the Alternative Investment Management Association (AIMA), Europe accounts for around 20 per cent of the $1.5 trillion hedge fund industry, and the UK has four- fifths of that. London is also now growing faster than its transatlantic rival. "London has been growing faster than New York for some time now," said Florence Lombard, executive director at AIMA. "We believe this is because it is a professional and efficiently regulated environment that both managers and investors are comfortable with."
Perhaps the most prominent hedge fund manager in the City in recent months has been Christopher Hohn, the founder of TCI. That is thanks to the Southampton University graduate's ability to force sweeping changes at some of Europe's most high profile companies.
Hohn last year had to deal with a rare setback after the stock exchange operator Euronext resisted his attempt to force a merger with Deutsche Börse in favour of an alternative deal with the New York Stock Exchange.
But shareholders (including TCI) hardly suffered as a result of this and Mr Hohn moved on to bigger fish - he was responsible for putting the Dutch bank ABN Amro into play.
His intervention has already had the desired effect on the lumbering Dutch bank's share price and his name is beginning to strike fear into company boards all over the Continent. Mr Hohn is ranked at 22 in the Trader Monthly 100 list of top earning traders with an income estimated at $275m.
However, the top earners in London are Pierre Lagrange and Noam Gottesman, whom the list says earned $450m each.
Their GLG Partners appears to have been little scathed by the loss of the star trader Philippe Jabre and a hefty fine from the Financial Services Authority in the midst of last year's crackdown.
That is perhaps because it has been phenomenally successful; ask anyone in the business to name the top five hedge funds in Britain and GLG will be in there. With $9 billion under management it is second only to the granddaddy of them all - the London-listed Man Group, which is the biggest independently quoted hedge fund group.
No discussion of London's most prominent hedge fund managers should leave its former boss, Stanley Fink, off the list. Mr Fink may have stepped down as chief executive, but his legacy lives on. Starting out as an obscure commodity trading company, under Fink, Man Group shot into the FTSE 100, and then the FTSE 50 list of Britain's biggest companies and still just keeps on growing. Between 2003 and the beginning of this year its market value had nearly quadrupled.
The flagship AHL fund may have suffered some difficulties in recent weeks, but such is Man's diversity that it hardly mattered. The institutional businesses picked up the slack.
The majority of hedge fund groups, however, remain in private hands.
Another star is William Browder from Hermitage Capital Management. The $275m man has made his name with bets on the Russian energy market. Given the volatility shown by those markets, it takes nerves of steel to be involved, something Mr Browder, who splits his time between London and Moscow, obviously possesses.
The former Credit Suisse banker Alan Howard can hardly be said to have had it all his way last year, although his flagship fund still returned a healthy 11.5 per cent and the list has his earnings at $225m (although it notes the firm calls this "grossly over-estimated").
Like many successful hedge fund managers, he founded Brevan Howard Asset Management after leaving an investment bank's proprietary trading desk. Despite the seven-figure bonuses paid by banks, it is a route that many continue to follow.
With these sorts of earnings available, that is no wonder.

The 25 Most Intriguing Hedge Funds

Este artigo é ótimo e foi publicado no Hedge Fund Reader.

George Bush would have had a better chance of actually finding some “weapons of mass destruction”, albeit financial ones, if he had only known where to look – not in Iraq, but inside the hedge fund industry. No, this is not my flight of fancy; I’m only repeating Warren Buffet’s succinct summation of the $1.34 trillion business that’s got the financial world in a tizzy. Where else would you find pay packets so obscenely high that a secretary can steal more than £4.5 million from under the noses of her three bosses (Partner Managing Directors in a hedge fund) before they even notice that the money is missing? Or hear one manager refer to the secretive nature of another as “the biggest elephant trying to hide unsuccessfully in a jungle”?
There’s no doubt that hedge funds are part of an exciting and beguiling realm that thrives on secrecy and mystery, even as it draws and lures investors with the compulsive force of quicksand. The head honchos of these investment vehicles may be famous for playing their cards close to their chests, but we’re laying down what we know about them, face up on the table. So fasten your seatbelts folks, and let us take you on a whirlwind tour around 25 of the most intriguing hedge fund players in the game today.

1. SAC Capital Partners: Secrecy may be Steve Cohen’s middle name but that didn’t stop his hedge fund from being embroiled in controversy over the Fairfax Financial Holdings affair. The sex, lies and financial fraud scandal saw SAC Capital being accused of driving down the Canadian insurer’s share value, and slapped with a $6 billion lawsuit in the process. Started in 1992 with just $25 million, the group worth $12 billion now is minting money, if its alleged gross returns are to be believed – 40 percent before fees every year between 1996 and 2001. And if you’re thinking of joining the SAC bandwagon tempted by the 50 percent the fund retains, you’re out of luck – it’s closed to new investors. The “new prince of Wall Street” and the “hedge fund king” are sobriquets that lie lightly on Cohen’s shoulders – all he’s interested in is ruling his kingdom with an iron (secretive) fist.

2. Goldman Sachs Asset Management Group: It projects a conflicting image - Alpha Magazine ranks Goldman Sachs as the world’s largest hedge fund with assets totaling $720 billion, but the firm’s Manhattan headquarters does not even sport a sign to advertise its presence. The company is loaded with talent and money, but the secrecy is so high that one employee often does not know what his colleague is making. “The Apprentice” and Donald Trump fans will remember Kwame Jackson as the “ambitious chap” who threw up his cushy job at Goldman (he was denied a leave of absence citing “reputational risk”) for a chance to be Trump’s apprentice. Pity he got “fired” at the final hurdle! But that’s Goldman Sachs for you – secretive to the point of “shunning those who seek the spotlight.”

3. Quantum Fund: “If you had invested $1,000 with George Soros in his Quantum Fund when he started in 1969, you would have found yourself worth $4 million by the new millennium” – that sums up this particular hedge fund in a nutshell. It returned a whopping 3,365 percent in the ten years since its inception in 1970, and in 1992, made $10 billion worth of pounds at the expense of the Bank of England. Soros’s shrewd currency speculation and strategy of selling short earned him the dubious distinction of “the man who broke the Bank of England.” Now a philanthropist, this Hungarian emigrant to England donates his money and time to the creation of “open societies.”

4. Man Investments: A unit of the Man Group PLC, the biggest futures contract broker in the world, this is the largest publicly-traded hedge fund company in the industry. With $12.7 billion in assets, Man Investments uses the AHL black-box systems to decide on its trading strategies. The technique claims to have an annualized return of 17.9 percent since December 1990. An unlike achievement for a hedge fund, it’s also got its foot in the literary world – it sponsors the Man Booker Prize for Fiction, more popularly known as the Booker prize, awarded to the best original full-length English novel every year.

5. Caxton Associates: The world’s tenth largest with assets worth $12.5 billion, this hedge fund is known more for its enigmatic founder, Bruce Kovner. From driving a cab to pay rent during his days at Harvard to naming his fund after an obscure 15th century book printer – the range of Kovner’s eccentricities is wide. Caxton is a global macro hedge fund on the lines of Soros’ Quantum Fund. Kovner is said to have staff monitor the markets on a 24-hour basis, while he himself checks their status before and after trading hours.

6. Tudor Investment Corporation: “Never had a down year since its inception in 1980” would best describe Paul Tudor Jones’ hedge fund. The shrewd trader made most of his money on Black Monday in 1987 when the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped sharply and sent stock markets around the world crashing. Tudor Investment featured twice in Alpha magazine’s list of top 25 earners in the hedge fund industry in 2005 – Paul Jones in fifth place with $500 million and James Pallotta at number 14. The fund is known for more than just its global macro trading strategies – it runs the Robin Hood Foundation, an organization that helps New York City in the fight against poverty, besides collaborating with Save the Children to aid children affected by natural disasters and calamities like tsunamis and earthquakes all over the globe.

7. Renaissance Technologies Corporation: The year 2005 was obviously a good one for Renaissance - its flagship medallion fund made its founder James Simons richer by a cool $1.5 billion. Reliance on predictive computer models, science and associated spheres like mathematics and physics has paid off handsomely for Simons – in a world famous for its rollercoaster ups and downs, the Medallion Fund is known for its consistent success. Its average annual returns of 35 percent are 10 percent higher than the returns of Caxton Associates, Quantum Fund and Tudor Investment. And if you’re interested in learning how Simons earns so much, the 5 percent management and 44 percent incentive fees should tell you the entire story.

8. Hermitage Capital Management: It’s tempting to use the term “Russian Roulette” to describe the strategies of Hermitage’s CEO William Browder, but only because of the Russian connection. The fund, which focuses in Russian securities, has had a very successful decade since it was floated in 1996, with returns at an amazing 935 percent. Nelsons ranked it the “World’s Best Performing Emerging Markets Fund (1996-2001)”, Micropal called it the “Best Performing Fund in the World (1997)”, and Lipper termed it the “Best Russian Fund (1997-1998)”. A remarkable aspect of this activist fund is that it helps root out corruption in organizations, on the basis that this vice has an adverse effect on share prices. Browder is also renowned for his significant criticism of and subsequent effect on Russian corporate law, so much so that Russian President Vladmir Putin has banned him from setting foot in the country. The $1.25 billion fund has gone on record in 2000 to say that investors were valuing Hermitage at just 10 percent of its actual value. What is it really worth? Your guess is as good as mine!

9. ESL Investments: Its founder Edward Lampert is an eccentric chap; formerly of Goldman Sachs, he was the first hedge fund manager to earn more than $1 billion in a year, but then, this is also the same guy who drove around in an old car and lived in a rented apartment till he bought a $20 million mansion in 1999. The reclusive billionaire was thrust rudely into the spotlight when he was kidnapped and held for ransom; unfortunately for his kidnappers, he was rescued in 24 hours when one of them used his credit card to order pizza. Though Lampert has been compared to Warren Buffet for his low-key business style, his tactics in the merger of retail firms Kmart and Sears was anything but quiet. The deal earned his ESL Investments a 69 percent return on investments the same year the tycoon crossed the billion dollar earning mark.
10. BP Capital Management: According to the company website, the fund’s sole objective is “investing with energy.” BP Capital is managed by T. Boone Pickens, the octogenarian founder of Mesa Petroleum who earned $1.4 billion in 2005 through massive returns from his BP Capital Commodity Fund (650 percent) and BP Capital Energy Equity Fund (89 percent). Pickens shot to fame through his series of acquisitions, takeovers and mergers that led Time Magazine to feature him on its cover under the headline, “The Takeover Game.” BP Capital contributed $7 million to Katrina rehabilitation measures, while Pickens himself has donated nearly half a billion dollars to various charitable causes during the span of his career. A born survivor and fighter, as proved by his birth – after doctors had given up on him, Pickens was the first C-Section baby to be born in Holdenville hospital in Oklahoma.

11. Fortress Investment Group: This global alternative asset manager made news in November last year when it became the first hedge fund listed manager in the United States. It filed for an IPO that puts its value at $7.5 billion, and is looking to raise $750 million with Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Citigroup and Deutsche Bank as underwriters. The hedge funds arm of the group manages assets worth $9.4 billion and deals in hybrid and liquid hedge funds.
12. D.E.Shaw & Co.: Fortune Magazine called it “the most intriguing and mysterious force on Wall Street” in 1996. D.E. Shaw, founded by an erstwhile computer science professor at the Columbia University, is chock full of Rhodes, Marshall and Fulbright scholars and Putnam winners who are extremely skilled in problem solving and quantitative trading. Amazon.com’s founder, Jeff Bezos, was an employee at the fund before he left to make his own millions. And if you think you have a reasonable chance of getting your foot in the door, well, rumor has it that not even one in 500 applicants pass the eligibility criteria. The $24 billion fund recently made headlines when it hired Lawrence Summers, former Treasury Secretary with the Clinton administration and ex-president of Harvard University as its managing director. With its penchant for the erudite, it’s no surprise that this fund supports various educational programs like math and problem-solving Olympiads.

13. Pirate Capital: This hedge fund worms its way into the list for the sheer audacity of its name; its website features a pirate ship sailing across the seas, and its flagship funds are all tagged with the name Jolly Roger, an allusion to the flags of pirates of yore that sported the skull and crossbones. Pirate lends itself to the best headlines being crafted – an exodus of its staff saw this beauty hit the newsstands – “Staff Walks the Plank at Listing Pirate Capital.” The fund, which focuses on shareholder activism, was the subject of an SEC investigation for failing to provide accurate information on its stock sale. Tiger Management is another hedge fund manager that belongs in the category of captivating names – its founder Julian Robertson named his funds Puma, Jaguar and Panther after his wife, Tiger Robertson. The second-largest hedge fund in 1997, Tiger Management closed shop in 2000.

14. Barclays Global Investors: The largest money manager in the world, this London-based hedge fund had $1.77 trillion in assets under management as of March 2006. It is also the biggest privately-held beneficial owner of companies in the world. A part of Barclays PLC, this group manages $14.3 billion in single manager hedge funds, the sixth largest in the world according to Alpha Magazine. The fund management unit accounted for more than 50 percent of the firm’s revenue in 2005. Barclays Global is credited with the creation of the first index strategy in 1971 and the first quantitative active strategy in 1978.

15. Vega Asset Management: What’s going on at Vega Asset Management? The fund, which was ranked by Alpha Magazine as Europe’s biggest hedge fund manager in 2005, is now facing a crisis. With assets down to $6 billion from $12 billion just a couple of years ago, and investors seeking quick redemptions, questions are being raised if the fund will go the way of Amaranth. Vega is an example of the wide fluctuations in fortune that characterize the hedge fund industry.
16. Eton Park Capital Management: He retired from Goldman Sachs at the “ripe” old age of 36, with 15 years of experience, to float his own hedge fund, Eton Park. Meet Eric Mindich, the “Doogie Howser” in the world of hedge funds, Harvard economic graduate and youngest partner at Goldman Sachs at 27. Eton Park, launched in early 2004, was one of the largest start-ups with $3 billion in assets. Investors made a beeline for the fund even though there was a minimum investment limit of $5 million, a lock-up period of 4.5 years and a 6 percent redemption fee within the said period, an annual management fee of 2 percent, and 20 percent of the profits to the manager. Mindich’s financial savvy is demonstrated clearly by the 12.8 percent returned by Eton Park in 2005.

17. Geronimo Financial: A relatively small and new start-up that makes the cut because of its unusual attitude to hedge fund investing. Geronimo Multi-Strategy, which diversified into mutual funds, “sets a new standard for advancing the concept of democratizing hedge fund investments.” It has the ridiculously low investment limit of $1,000, with no need for net accreditation and a performance-based fee structure. Geronimo could well go ahead and create a new benchmark for publicly-traded alternative investments.

18. Bridgewater Associates: The world’s second largest hedge fund manager with $21 billion managed by its fund Pure Alpha, the biggest in the United States, and the founder in the top 25 earners in the business – Bridgewater sure has impressive credentials. Ray Dalio, CIO and president of the outfit, believes in the equality of all his employees. There is no hierarchy, with even the least important subordinate being encouraged to voice his/her opinions.

19. UBS AG: This fund of hedge funds is the world’s largest money manager with $45 billion assets under management. But that’s not what makes it interesting; rather, it’s the contrasting facades that UBS projects. The financial services organization has been named among the 100 best companies for working mothers in the United States for the fourth straight row; the same company was sued successfully by a female employee who alleged sexual discrimination in the workplace. UBS claims to have active gay and lesbian and ethnic minority groups, but it was taken to court by three African-American employees in a class action lawsuit that alleged racial discrimination in hiring and employment policies. And that’s not all – a watchman was dismissed after he found a historian destroying archives that tied a UBS subsidiary to the Nazi holocaust.

20. Brevan Howard: One of the largest and fastest growing hedge fund managers in Europe, Brevan Howard is all set to float a new permanent capital vehicle in London. The move has been eased by the Financial Services Authority relaxing rules to allow single-strategy hedge funds to float in London. With BH planning to raise between €500 million and €1 billion, the London Stock Exchange is finally keeping its share of listed funds instead of losing them to Amsterdam and other European destinations.

21. Lone Pine Capital: Named the hedge fund of the year in 2004 by the Alternative Investment News' Second Annual Hedge Fund Industry Awards, Lone Pine created a flutter of sorts when it broke away from industry norms and created its own performance fee structure. Instead of no fees for performances below the high-water mark, Lone Pine’s founder Steve Mandel gave his staff 10 percent for figures under the mark and 20 for those over, with investors also compensated accordingly. From Tiger Management to Goldman Sachs to Lone Pine Capital, Mandel’s long journey through the hedge fund industry has only served to put him among the top ten earners in the business – Trader Monthly pegged his 2005 income between $300 and $350 million.

22. Moore Capital Management: He calls Paul Tudor Jones II a close friend and Julian Robertson’s sister step-mother, but he’s quite the recluse that there are not too many photographs of him around – that’s Louis Bacon of Moore Capital Management for you. A shrewd macro money manager, his Moore Global Investments flagship fund has returned 31 percent every year, after fees, since it launched in 1990. Bacon is another of those hedge fund bigwigs who guard their trading secrets with their lives – he’s against the publishing of even historical returns for his funds.

23. GLG Partners: One of Europe’s largest hedge funds in 2005, GLG Partners has of late found itself in the news for all the wrong reasons. The first sign of trouble came in August 2006 in the form of a severe rap on the knuckles from the Financial Services Authority which fined the fund and its former managing director, Philippe Jabre, £750,000 each for market abuse and violation of FSA principles. To show that it pours when it rains, the French financial authorities pulled up GLG in December for alleged trading abuses relating to a convertible bond sale in 2002. Jabre’s brush with the wrong side of the law seems not to have had any adverse effect on him; two months down the line and the former MD is setting up his own financial company in Switzerland, with open plans for the development of a hedge fund!

24. Avenue Capital Group: Of course you’re going to make news when the daughter of one of the most (in)famous presidents in American history joins the ranks of your staff, especially when she’s also the child of a prospective future president. Chelsea Clinton dragged Avenue Capital into the front pages of newspapers when she signed up to work with the $12 billion fund. Of course, it also helps that Avenue’s Marc Lasry is among the top 25 earners in the hedge fund industry.

25. Atticus Capital: This investment management firm with $5.6 billion in assets under management is the largest shareholder in the pan-European currency exchange house Euronext. Atticus had a significant role to play in the merger between the New York Stock Exchange and Euronext, paving the way for the creation of a single platform where traders can deal in stocks, futures, commodities, options and corporate bonds across two continents for at least 12 hours every day.
--

Aquisições e RH

Acquisitions of people carry indigestion risk Renée Schultes
01 Feb 2007
The bottom line is: you can buy assets but you only rent staff
Mergers and acquisitions in the asset management sector reached record levels last year but the boom has been met with unprecedented scepticism by many chief executives, who believe an acquisition-led strategy remains fraught with danger.
The long-running belief is that acquisitions are generally bad for business. With the exception of the largest deals, such as BlackRock/Merrill Lynch and Legg Mason/Citigroup Asset Management, which were about global positioning and scale, mergers have been about plugging product gaps. In almost every case, hiring would have been a better option.
But the most sought-after deals this year are likely to be acquisitions that provide contracts to manage assets. Managers want sources of permanent capital so they may generate more stable earnings. Hedge funds have listed closed-ended funds but fund managers with larger balance sheets could achieve this through acquisitions of contracts.
A handful of savvy chief executives, who have stood back from the acquisition frenzy in the past two years, have been buying contracts to manage assets for years. Goldman Sachs led the market in 1996 when it bought the right to manage the majority of the British Coal Pension Schemes’ assets.
Merrill Lynch did a similar deal in 2005 when it bought Philips’ pension fund in the Netherlands, becoming a local participant overnight with one of the largest pension fund contracts in that market and T Rowe Price bought the right to manage the Caterpillar funds.
Todd Ruppert, president and chief executive of T Rowe Price outside the US, believes the indigestion caused by acquiring people is not worth it. “The best antidote is to avoid the acquisition in the first place. No amount of incremental assets is worth the risk. The problem with the industry is that many have eyes bigger than their stomachs can legitimately tolerate. Fortunately for us, we don’t,” he said.
Mergers in the closed life fund business are likely to dominate this type of acquisition but a few pension funds that run their assets internally could find themselves targets. Buying contracts to manage money is a deal that almost every asset management chief executive sees merit in.
BT, which owns Hermes, has appointed investment bank Hawkpoint Partners to advise it on potential acquisitions for its pension fund but others suggest Hermes itself may be a target. Buying Hermes would be about acquiring the management contract, rather than expertise. Considering BT’s pension liability, it is highly unlikely to want to cede control of the management of its pension fund, but selling exclusive rights to manage the contract for a defined period is a more palatable option.
Acquiring for the sake of securing better distribution capabilities will be another big theme this year. Companies such as Henderson Group, which was divested from AMP in 2003, could benefit from a deal like this.
But the rise of private equity buyers in the sector and the lure of high valuations in public markets suggest mergers are less attractive than they once were. Firms such as Hellman & Friedman and TA Associates have provided an alternative means for asset managers that want to remain independent to realise monetary value.
The bottom line is the same as it has always been: you can buy assets but you only rent people.
• Old Lady harder than Fed
Minutes from the Bank of England’s monetary policy committee led many last week to conclude the close vote signalled interest rates have reached their peak. The suggestion was that because the Governor voted against his chief economist and the deputy governor, and his was the deciding vote, he will be uncomfortable about voting against them again at the next meeting. Others called the bank “confused” because of the closeness of vote, which was 5-4 in favour of an increase.
But this is the way the committee ought to operate, with each member drawing his or her own conclusions from the data. The chief UK economist at Barclays Capital wrote last week: “This is a reminder that there is no ‘Bank-pack’, or bank block voting as has often been suggested in the past.”
The diversity among the members demonstrated by this month’s vote suggests there will be more surprises to come.
Unlike the US Federal Reserve, which some investors argue has been held hostage by the market, the Bank of England showed it has clout.
Pimco’s Bill Gross hit the nail on the head in January when he wrote: “Is the Fed impotent now – a 110-pound weakling getting sand kicked in its face by the global financial community as it creates massive liquidity?” Whereas the Bank of England has moved from a reactive to a pre-emptive stance, the Fed rests heavily on its back foot.

Merrill Lynch

Esta página da Merrill Lynch dá acesso ao sistema de índices de Renda Fixa globais (ML Index System).

Definições

Página muito útil com definições dos índices internacionais mais utilizados.

Hedge Funds

Artigo publicado hoje na Gazeta Mercantil.

Hedge funds: setor ainda pouco regulado

Washington, 25 de Setembro de 2006 - Mais de 100 fundos de hedge passarão a fornecer menos informações para os reguladores depois que um tribunal decidiu que a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), a comissão de bolsas de valores americana, não pode impor regras que exigem mais transparência do setor. A D.
Washington, 25 de Setembro de 2006 - Mais de 100 fundos de hedge passarão a fornecer menos informações para os reguladores depois que um tribunal decidiu que a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), a comissão de bolsas de valores americana, não pode impor regras que exigem mais transparência do setor. A D.B. Zwirn e a Mason Capital Management, que juntas administram perto de US$ 7 bilhões em ativos, estão entre os fundos que retiraram seus registros desde que o tribunal federal de apelações de Washington tomou sua decisão em junho, divulgou a SEC. Algumas cancelaram seus registros na SEC este mês, enquanto a Amaranth Advisors, com sede em Greenwich, Connecticut, perdia perto de US$ 6 bilhões com apostas erradas no mercado de gás natural. A SEC queria que os fundos de hedge informassem seu tamanho, número de funcionários e tipos de clientes, e que se submetessem a inspeções aleatórias. "Tenho dito há um bom tempo que um desastre de trem pode ocorrer pela falta de supervisão regulamentar adequada", disse o ex-comissário da SEC, Harvey Goldschmid, que votou pela norma da agência. "O caso Amaranth só indica a continuidade dessa preocupação", disse Goldschmid. As perdas da Amaranth ampliaram-se em US$ 1,4 bilhão na semana passada porque a companhia teve de vender ativos com desconto para não fechar as portas. Os fundos administrados pelas companhias MotherRock, Saranac Capital Management e Ospraie Management fecharam este ano depois de contraírem perdas em commodities e bônus conversíveis. A Aeneas Capital Management, que administrava perto de US$ 400 milhões em ativos, está sendo investigada pelos reguladores nos Estados Unidos e na Malásia depois que as apostas em ações causaram perdas de 60% em um de seus fundos. Os fundos de hedge são grupos privados de capital que permitem aos gestores participar substancialmente dos ganhos sobre os investimentos feitos em nome dos clientes. Eles habitualmente cobram taxas anuais de administração de 2% sobre o patrimônio e embolsam 20% ou mais dos ganhos dos fundos. As comissões de administração e desempenho da Amaranth eram de 1,5% e 20%. Mais de US$ 42 bilhões foram aplicados nos fundos de hedge no trimestre encerrado em 30 de junho, o mais alto volume em um trimestre desde 2003, segundo dados fornecidos pela Hedge Fund Research, de Chicago. A regra para fundos de hedge da SEC foi inspirada em parte pelo colapso em setembro de 1998 da Long-Term Capital Management. O tamanho de suas posições e a ameaça que sua quebra representou para os mercados financeiros alarmaram os reguladores. (Gazeta Mercantil/Finanças & Mercados - Pág. 2)(Bloomberg News)

Ratings

As agências de ratings Moody's, S&P e Fitch estão desenvolvendo novos critérios para avaliação de hedge funds.

Opportunity

A captação de recursos estrangeiros foi destaque entre os fundos do Opportunity.

Gestão Ativa

Segue link para artigo que saiu hoje no Valor Econômico sobre fundos de ações que participam ativamente da gestão de empresas. Este artigo tem um segunda parte.

Administração X Gestão

Link para matéria muito interessante do Valor Econômico sobre o conflito entre gestão e administração.

Multimercados

Matéria da Gazeta Mercantil de 14 de Agosto.

Multimercado reconquista o investidor e lidera captação

São Paulo, 14 de Agosto de 2006 - Queda de juros e aplicador mais maduro explicam a forte captação dessas carteiras. Os fundos de investimento multimercados - mais flexíveis para explorar as oportunidades dos diversos mercados - retomaram a confiança do investidor. De todo o volume captado pela indústria de fundos ao longo de 2006, essas carteiras lideraram as aplicações com cerca de 40%, ou R$ 18,3 bilhões, destaca levantamento da consultoria Quantum. Com esse fluxo de recursos e um retorno médio de 11%, o patrimônio dos multimercados superou os R$ 152 bilhões, o que corresponde a uma participação de 18,6% no setor (com volume de R$ 817,3 bilhões).
O movimento representa uma reversão do que ocorreu em 2005, quando os multimercados sofreram resgates de quase R$ 3 bilhões e tiveram sua participação na indústria de fundos reduzida de 29% em janeiro para 17,6% no final do ano. A alta dos juros durante boa parte do ano, a crise do mensalão e o fraco desempenho da Bolsa afastaram o investidor dos multimercados, uma que vez que a aplicação tem um nível de risco maior. Mas, a partir de setembro, quando foi dado início ao corte da Selic, esse mercado começou a apresentar recuperação, mas ainda não o suficiente para anular as perdas do ano.
"Queda de juros e boa performance explicam o desempenho positivo dos multimercados", avalia Fernando Ganme, sócio da Capital Serviços de Agente Autônomo, distribuidora de fundos com foco em produtos de risco. De fato, toda vez que a tendência do juro apontava para baixo, os multimercados aumentavam seu peso no setor. Dados da Associação Nacional dos Bancos de Investimento (Anbid) mostram que, entre dezembro de 2002 e dezembro de 2004, a fatia dos multimercados passou de 26,6% para 29,6%, enquanto a taxa Selic caiu de 25,50% para 17,25% ao ano.
O gestor da Mauá Investimentos, Lourenço Tigre, reconhece que a dinâmica da taxa de juros e o ambiente macroeconômico - com o País menos vulnerável a crises e inflação controlada - foram fundamentais para que o investidor começasse a pensar na sua poupança com uma visão de mais longo prazo e buscar ativos que gerassem uma rentabilidade melhor. Mas, na sua opinião, há um outro fator importante que explica o bom desempenho dos multimercados: o amadurecimento da indústria.
"Os investidores estão mais confortáveis com esse tipo de aplicação, uma vez que entendem melhor o nível de risco a que estão sujeitos e, conseqüentemente, suportam melhor a volatilidade desses fundos, em troca de melhores retornos", explica. Além disso, ele ressalta o amadurecimento do ponto de vista da gestão, uma vez que os multimercados começam a formar um histórico, ainda que recente, e com isso ganhar mais credibilidade.
Isso explicaria, inclusive, o fato de os multimercados terem resistido bem à volatilidade do mês de maio, provocada pela indefinição quanto ao juro americano. No geral, esses fundos não sofreram resgates, nem mesmo com o fato de algumas carteiras terem perdido rentabilidade. "Também para o analista da Hedging-Griffo, Luiz Parreiras, esse movimento reflete o amadurecimento do investidor. "Em anos anteriores, qualquer sinal de volatilidade e fraca performance gerava uma ondas de resgates", informa.
Parreiras afirma que os multimercados ganharam muito dinheiro no início do ano, por conta do cenário claro para os ativos (juro em queda, apreciação do real e performance positiva para a Bolsa), da forte liquidez, do fluxo intenso de estrangeiros e da ausência de crises. "Já maio foi um mês difícil, mas boa parte dos gestores conseguiu proteger seus ganhos no ano, ou seja, já estava colocando o dinheiro no bolso", destaca. E os investidores, acrescenta Tigre, perceberam que fez sentido ter mantido suas aplicações. A média de retorno dos multimercados em 2006 está em 11%, acima dos 9,37% do CDI. Fundos como o Hedging-Griffo Verde e o multimercado da Mauá, por exemplo, acumulam ganhos bem superiores, de 18,53% e 20,89%, respectivamente.
O sócio da Quantum, Maxim Wengert, acrescenta que a captação significativa dos multimercados neste ano é reflexo do desenvolvimento da indústria de fundos ao longo dos anos, por conta da evolução da legislação, de divulgação de informação, ferramentas de análise disponíveis aos investidores e estratégias sofisticas adotadas pelos gestores.
Para os especialistas, a tendência continua favorável para esses fundos. Segundo Parreiras, com fundamentos da economia positivos e o juro em queda, os multimercados tendem a ganhar cada vez mais espaço, como uma alternativa de retorno maior.
Para Ganme, da Capital, o multimercado é "sempre um bom produto", uma vez que pode ganhar tanto num cenário positivo ou pessimista. "O que se compra, no caso do fundo multimercado, é a visão do gestor em relação ao cenário e não o cenário." Segundo o especialista, esse é o tipo de aplicação que o investidor tem de colocar o dinheiro e esquecer.kicker: Com R$ 18,2 bilhões e retorno médio de 11% (contra 9,37% do CDI), categoria atinge volume de R$ 152,3 bilhões, ou 18,6% do setor

Argucia Capital

Link para matéria do Valor Econômico com nova asset de ações Argucia Capital.

Macquaire

Macquarie combines hedges in a boutique
(From The Australian (Australia), provided by LexisNexis)
Publication: The Australian (Australia)
Robert Clow
Investment
MACQUARIE Bank has rebranded and simplified its hedge fund offering, grouping just over $1 billion in funds under the newly designated MQ Specialist Investment Management umbrella.
Consistent with the investment bank's freedom within limits strategy, and its strategy of attaching alternative investment management operations to its investment bank, Macquarie is trying to create an internally managed boutique hedge fund management firm.
It was important that the group had a boutique feel because Macquarie was aiming to create a group that was entrepreneurial and flexible in its investment strategies, but grounded with the bank's strong risk management and operations disciplines, said Cathy Kovacs, a division director in the equity markets group.
Macquarie is already one of the world's largest alternative asset managers through its infrastructure and property funds and it is increasingly venturing into private equity.
Building the bank's hedge fund offering and leveraging off its distribution and risk management strengths fits with Macquarie's broader plan. Ms Kovacs also acknowledged there had been client confusion over Macquarie's varied hedge fund brands. ''What we wanted was to combine the various hedge fund activities that we have been involved in,'' she said.
MQ will rank in the top five Australian hedge fund managers by assets under management.
The MQ funds are comprised of $602.5 million in funds which invest in a portfolio of other hedge funds (funds of funds), $327.3 million in single-strategy funds and $136.8 million in fund structured products.
MQ will offer a variety of different Australian, Asian and Japanese equity-based strategies as well as a global commodity futures fund and a multi-strategy fund which will group together a number of MQ's different hedge fund offerings.
Aside from their regional flavour, the funds' other distinguishing element will be their quantitative bias.
MQ's growth strategy will focus on attracting more offshore fund of funds money and more Australian superannuation fund money.
Despite producing two months of unimpressive performance, hedge funds globally attracted a record $US42 billion ($55.6 billion) in new investments over the past quarter, according to HFR.

Entrevista

Link para interessante entrevista com Robin Bowie da Dexion Capital.

Custódia

Matéria publicada na Gazeta Mercantil de 24 de Julho de 2006.

Estrangeiro puxa crescimento do setor de custódia de títulos

São Paulo, 24 de Julho de 2006 - Desde o final de 2002, os ativos "guardados" para o investidor externo saltaram 327%. A expansão e o desenvolvimento dos mercados de capitais e investimentos nos últimos anos têm sido acompanhados de perto pelo setor de prestação de serviços, como o de custódia qualificada de títulos e valores mobiliários. Desde o final de 2002, o total de ativos sob guarda em bancos mais que dobrou, passando de R$ 516,7 bilhões para R$ 1,319 trilhão em junho, segundo a Associação Nacional dos Bancos de Investimento (Anbid). A custódia para o cliente local, como fundos de pensão e gestores de recursos, ainda representa a maior parte do volume de títulos custodiados - cerca de 75% -, mas é o serviço para o mercado externo o que mais cresce. Com o interesse crescente pelo Brasil, a custódia para o investidor estrangeiro deu um salto de cerca de 327% em três anos e meio, com o total de ativos passando a R$ 337,6 bilhões em junho; no mesmo período, o aumento da custódia local cresceu 124,5%, a R$ 982,2 bilhões. Para Pedro Guerra, superintendente de custódia do Citibank, o crescimento da atividade no mercado local está muito associado à expansão do setor de investimentos, com o aumento do patrimônio tanto pela valorização dos preços dos ativos quanto pela entrada de recursos novos de fundos de pensão, gestores, entre outros. Nesse segmento, segundo Guerra, é mais difícil haver uma explosão de ativos, até porque os principais clientes já estão no mercado. "O conceito de custódia, que é a segregação da guarda e controladoria dos ativos, já está inserido entre os investidores locais", afirma. "O crescimento no mercado nacional é orgânico", reforça o superintendente executivo do departamento de ações e custódia do Bradesco, Cassiano Ricardo Scarpelli. Segundo ele, tende a acompanhar a indústria de investimentos, que continua em franca expansão, com o surgimento de novos produtos, como fundos de recebíveis e de private equity. O desafio internamente, segundo Scarpelli, é garimpar novos clientes dia-a-dia, roubando-os da concorrência. O Bradesco, por exemplo, conseguiu um salto de R$ 12 bilhões em ativos custodiados, com a conquista recente dos fundos exclusivos da Petrobras. O potencial maior de crescimento é na área de custódia internacional. "Esse é um mercado grande e pouco explorado, especialmente com o Brasil caminhando para o investment grade", afirma Guerra. O executivo conta que neste ano conquistou 620 novos clientes estrangeiros. Segundo ele, ainda são contas pequenas, de alguns milhares de reais, mas a tendência é de crescimento. Com a isenção, no início do ano, da alíquota de IR sobre os investimentos estrangeiros em títulos públicos federais foi zerada. Isso atraiu muitos investimentos ao País e fez as instituições se mexeram. O Itaú, por exemplo, anunciou em abril a criação de uma gerência de produtos internacionais para atender exclusivamente esse cliente, que investe no Brasil, via Resolução 2.689. "A avalanche de recursos, no médio prazo, virá do mercado externo", diz Scarpelli. Segundo ele, o Brasil disputa apenas 2% dos trilhões de dólares de patrimônio dos fundos internacionais que podem aplicam em países considerados mais arriscados. Mas, com o grau de investimento, esse percentual pode passar a 10%. O Brasil, acrescenta, está preparado para receber grandes volumes: tem regulamentação e infra-esturura.(Gazeta Mercantil/Finanças & Mercados - Pág. 1)(Alessandra Bellotto)

Mercado concentrado

24 de Julho de 2006 - Apesar do tamanho do setor de custódia - R$ 1,319 trilhão -, o mercado é bastante concentrado. O líder Itaú, um dos mais antigos players, detém participação de 22,79%, com a custódia de R$ 300,8 milhões em ativos; o Bradesco tem uma fatia de 16,85% (R$ 222,33 milhões) e o Citibank, 16,43% (R$ 216,90 milhões). Com margens apertadas e necessidade constante de investimentos em tecnologia, escala é a alma do negócio. Segundo o superintendente executivo de ações e custódia do Bradesco, Cassiano Ricardo Scarpelli, os grupos financeiros têm mais vantagens. "Com assets próprias, conseguem ganhos de processamento e sinergia." Em maio, o banco chegou à vice-liderança do setor, posição que era ocupada pelo Citibank. A diferença, no entanto, é relativamente pequena (R$ 5,5 bilhões). "O forte do Citi é a custódia para terceiros", diz o superintendente de custódia Pedro Guerra. Nessa área, o banco é o segundo no ranking, atrás do Itaú. Também, lidera a custódia para estrangeiros, serviço que marcou sua estréia nesse mercado em 1991. "A expertise internacional é a grande vantagem competitiva do Citi." O mercado é concentrado, mas nem por isso menos competitivo. "A custódia é uma importante alavanca de negócios", argumenta Scarpelli. Segundo ele, representa a oportunidade para oferecer outros serviços, como cobrança, operações estruturadas de caixa, serviço de controle para acionistas. Nos EUA, o Citi faz a gestão do portfólio para o cliente, com foco na performance dos investimentos, por exemplo. Desde 2003, o Bradesco investiu R$ 35 milhões em tecnologia. O orçamento do Citi para 2006 e 2007 é de da ordem de US$ 4 milhões.(Gazeta Mercantil/Finanças & Mercados - Pág. 1)

Santander

Entrevista com o Diretor de Estratégia da América Latina do Santander que saiu na Gazeta Mercantil de 18 de Julho.

"O juro pode baixar porque subiu na hora certa"

Santander (Espanha), 18 de Julho de 2006 - BC foi "valente", diz diretor do Grupo Santander; agora, vai na boa contramão do resto do mundo. O Brasil vem crescendo menos que América Latina que, por sua vez, cresce menos do que o mundo. Pode haver muitas respostas, nem sempre satisfatórias, para essa questão - da baixa taxa de investimentos ao ambiente de negócios e aos juros altos. Mas não adianta culpar o Banco Central por isso, afirma José Juan Ruiz, diretor de Estratégia para a América Latina do Grupo Santander. Ao contrário, o BC foi muito "valente" ao aumentar os juros quando a inflação recrudesceu e o dólar disparou na virada 2002/2003, quando o presidente Lula assumiu. Por tê-lo feito naquela época, o BC brasileiro "comprou credibilidade". Agora, é o único Banco Central do mundo que está baixando os juros, enquanto os outros caminham na direção contrária: Estados Unidos, Europa, Japão, para não falar em emergentes como a Turquia. Essa credibilidade, na opinião de Ruiz, permite ao BC brasileiro agir com independência também no câmbio - mesmo que o dólar "de equilíbrio" devesse estar em qualquer ponto entre R$ 2,20 e R$ 2,35.

Ruiz, 48, conhece bem o Brasil. Entrou por concurso no Ministério da Economia e ganhou espaço no governo de Felipe González (1982/1996), então líder do Partido Socialista Operário Espanhol (PSOE), ao qual era filiado. Conheceu lá Francisco Luzón, com quem trabalha até hoje: diretor-geral para as Américas, Luzón (que foi presidente do Banco Exterior de Espanha, então estatal, e também passou pelo governo González) é seu chefe no Santander. Ruiz viveu, portanto, experiências que o tornam um bom conselheiro para políticos e economistas brasileiros. Fala com o senador Aloizio Mercadante (PT) e o ex-prefeito José Serra (PSDB), ambos candidatos ao governo de São Paulo e ambos oriundos da esquerda católica, como ele próprio. De sua passagem pelo governo, recolheu, entre outras, uma lição que repassa: os ganhos da social-democracia espanhola só se tornaram possíveis a partir da estabilidade macroeconômica, que zelosamente perseguiu e conquistou. Com José Luiz Zapatero, o PSOE voltou ao poder há dois anos e mantém políticas que produziram um crescimento ininterrupto: desde então, a Espanha cresce 3% ao ano (projeção de 3,3% para 2006), bem acima da média da Eurozona, 1,9%. A seguir, trechos da entrevista:

Gazeta Mercantil - O senhor diz que muitos mitos estão sendo derrubados. Por exemplo: não dá para crescer com inflação baixa, nem dá para crescer com superávit nas contas correntes e ou só com poupança interna. De fato, com superávits e acumulação de reservas, a América Latina vem crescendo nos últimos anos a taxas entre 4% e 5% ao ano, com inflação caindo da média de 11,9% (em 1997) para 5,8% em 2006. Mas isso não se aplica inteiramente ao Brasil: a inflação é cadente, baixando a menos de 4,5% ao ano, mas o crescimento é pequeno, de 2,2% nos últimos anos, enquanto o mundo bate nos 5%. Por quê?
José Ruiz - Temos que ver as coisas numa perspectiva de longo prazo. Há níveis de inflação a que é preciso chegar antes de aspirar a crescer. À parte os últimos anos (inflação de 6% ou 7%), o Brasil vem tendo há 25 anos baixo crescimento com taxas de inflação médias de 400% anuais, que custaram muita desigualdade social. O problema não é dizer: crescemos pouco porque a inflação é baixa ou porque os objetivos de inflação muito baixa exigem juros altos. Nego-me a admitir isso. O Brasil tem crescido pouco, porque a cicatriz, a memória inflacionária é muito difícil de apagar. O que digo é o Brasil teve que levar a inflação a níveis normais a outros países que estão crescendo e esse processo foi muito custoso em termos de crescimento.

Gazeta Mercantil - As metas de inflação são consideradas muito rígidas.
O importante não é se o número é 4%, 3,5% ou 5,5%. O importante é saber quanto custa ter um Banco Central com credibilidade, num país com a história inflacionária do Brasil. O BC provavelmente pagou um preço há dois, três anos, quando todos queriam baixar os juros a 14%. Disse não, as expectativas de inflação estão elevando-se e tenho novamente que apertar. Naquele momento, demonstrou sua independência política, mostrando que efetivamente levava a sério seu trabalho de fazer a inflação convergir para a meta. O mundo tem uma taxa de inflação de 5%. O Brasil não pode crescer a 7% se sua taxa de inflação é de 8%. Aí, o BC comprou credibilidade. Foi uma decisão muito valente, importante. Provavelmente tirou do Brasil um ponto, 1,5 ponto de crescimento nos últimos dois anos. Mas agora, num momento em que todos aumentam os juros, o brasileiro é o único do mundo que está baixando, diante de uma inflação que deve ficar abaixo de 4%, porque subiu antes. A tarefa do Banco Central não é molestar os políticos aumentando os juros. É, como recomenda a Constituição, manter o valor da moeda e sustentar a estabilidade de preços.

Gazeta Mercantil - Isto vem custando muito aos brasileiros.
Sim, custa. Seria possível reduzir o custo se houvesse mercados mais flexíveis, maior dinamismo empresarial privado, melhor distribuição dos impostos. Nem digo que os impostos são altos. Digo que se poderia aumentar a arrecadação com impostos mais simples. Sei dos problemas polícos, mas tem que fazer. A população acabará se convencen-do de que ter impostos desordenados, complexos, casuísticos, também custa e muito. Mas há outros obstáculos. Apesar da estrutura econômica e do dinamismo da população, é muito difícil fazer negócios no Brasil, que tem um modelo microeconômico muito complicado. O peso do setor público é muito alto e a competição, muito baixa. Isto vai ter que se corrigir. E mais: não dá para pensar em crescer 5% se o Brasil não investir pelo menos 21% do PIB.

Gazeta Mercantil - Cresce o desconforto no Brasil quanto à taxa de câmbio, que desestimula as exportações. O que fazer? O BC deve intervir? O que o senhor faria?
O Banco Central identificou corretamente o problema. Não esqueçamos de que o Brasil recuperou reservas que lhe permitiram pagar o FMI, pagar parte da dívida e, ao mesmo tempo, apreciar sua moeda. De novo, muita gente está vendo só o curto prazo. A moeda se apreciou em relação aos R$ 4 por dólar, mas concordemos que isso é o que o mundo pensava naquele momento, quer dizer, que o Brasil daria calote. Aí valeu a credibilidade do Ministério da Fazenda, que disse: vamos nos comportar bem, respeitar as regras. Mudou o quadro. O BC agiu bem deixando apreciar, isso ajudou a inflação a cair e impediu alta maior dos juros. Agora, lhe permite graduar o descenso dos juros. Creio que o câmbio real hoje deve estar entre R$ 2,20 e R$ 2,35. Quase todos os modelos de avaliação dos fundamentos do país estão aí. Não em R$ 3, nem naquele 1 a 1 argentino.

Gazeta Mercantil - Intervir, não?
O que se deve é evitar que o câmbio, por razões extraordinárias, como entradas de capital, possa no curto prazo cair a R$ 1,80 por dólar. Não creio que esse seja o câmbio de equilíbrio do país. Pode-se intervir em algum momento, por curto tempo. Mas a flexibilidade cambial é muito boa. Diz ao mercado que o BC joga com as regras que diz que joga e não as muda no meio da partida.

Gazeta Mercantil - O senhor defende que se reconheça um "novo modelo" para toda a região. Além da estabilidade macroeconômica e da sustentabilidade financeira, esse novo modelo envolve uma reavaliação do papel do Estado, que supõe: a transição do "laisser-faire do neo-liberalismo" dos anos 1990 para um regime de parcerias público-privadas; um reforço da capacidade regulatória do Estado, com "eventual redefinição" das regras do jogo; políticas de redistribuição de renda, para crescer com mais igualdade; investimentos na área social. O que está acontecendo com os países ricos? Até Davos já colocou esses temas em sua agenda. A pregação de Lula, a partir do Fome Zero, está surtindo efeito?
Creio que, num mundo mais inseguro, sabemos hoje mais sobre os custos da desigualdade. Os latino-americanos também sabem que necessitam de mais coesão. Viver em países tão segmentados, regionalmente e de classes, tem custos. Metade do continente está fora dos mercados, do consumo, e esse contingente tem que ser incorporado. Do nosso ponto de vista, falo do banco, não vamos deixá-los de fora. Já estamos buscando novas formas de fazer negócios. Primeiro, por razões econômicas, depois por razões morais. O que é muito importante. Quando essas razões morais entram cena, elas reforçam minha esperança no futuro do gênero humano.

Gazeta Mercantil - Não há, no mundo rico, uma parcela de hipocrisia nisso?
Suponho que haja de tudo, da hipocrisia à indústria da pobreza. Um historiador de economia, Robert Fogel, Prêmio Nobel (1993), demonstrou que a escravidão era rentável, ao contrário do que todo mundo acreditava, e que só acabou porque era moralmente melhor que isso acontecesse. Dizendo não, a sociedade sairia à procura de outros tipos de relações do trabalho e isso deu lugar ao crescimento dos EUA na segunda metade do século 19. Vivemos hoje uma situação parecida. O que é economicamente ineficiente começa a ser perigoso. Ademais, moralmente o mundo começa a se dar conta de que é um perigo essa diferenciação na renda. A desigualdade na AL só é comparável à da África sub-sahariana. Não é possível. Conseguimos enfrentar o nível de desigualdade da Espanha, que em 1950 era maior que o da AL.

Gazeta Mercantil - O senhor trabalhou no governo de Felipe González, do Partido Socialista Operário Espanhol (PSOE), que arrumou a casa e preparou a Espanha para os anos de crescimento sustentado que vieram a seguir. Conhecendo bem o PT, o PSDB e alguns de seus políticos, o que pode dizer a eles?
Todos os avanços que a social-democracia conquistou para a Espanha, em termos de educação, saúde, ganhos sociais, investimentos em infra-estrutura, só foram tornados possíveis pela racionalidade econômica. As reformas na economia permitiram que se fizesse tudo o mais. Creio que no Brasil há muita consciência a respeito disso.

kicker: "Nego-me a admitir que o Brasil cresce pouco porque a inflação é baixa; a memória inflacionária é que é muito difícil de apagar"

kicker2: "Creio que o câmbio deve estar entre R$ 2,20 e R$ 2,35. Quase todos os modelos de avaliação estão por aí. Não em R$ 3" (Gazeta Mercantil/Finanças & Mercados - Pág. 2)(José Roberto Nassar)

Supervisão de Hedge Funds

Segue artigo de Chet Currier - Bloomberg - sobre a supervisão de hedge funds nos EUA.

Hedge Funds Will Be Regulated, One Way or Another: Chet Currier
July 14 (Bloomberg) -- Don't be misled by the recent news that a U.S. court blocked the Securities and Exchange Commission from regulating hedge funds.
The hot-as-a-pistol $1.2 trillion hedge fund business hasn't permanently escaped the clutches of regulators. It has only postponed the inevitable.
As these fast-moving, risk-prone vehicles keep attracting a wider following, they present a higher and higher profile politically as well as financially and economically. In the words of the old jungle metaphor, the higher the monkey climbs the tree the more he exposes his rear.
The SEC's plan mandating that hedge funds register with the agency and submit to random inspections was really quite a cautious step.
``It's the mildest kind of regulation,'' said Arthur Levitt Jr., a former SEC chairman and a director of Bloomberg LP, parent of Bloomberg News. ``If there is a hedge fund scandal, and there probably will be some time in the future, Congress will step in with something much more draconian.''
Court decision or no court decision, scrutiny of hedge funds is increasing from all directions. Morningstar Inc., the Chicago-based mutual-fund and stock research firm, has started tracking investment results and fees at 3,000 of the estimated 8,000 hedge funds now in operation.
Into the Light
``Hedge funds are coming downstream trying to appeal more to Middle America,'' said Don Phillips, a Morningstar managing director. ``You can't do that and operate in the secrecy that this industry has today.''
If politicians, independent researchers and the press aren't enough to contend with, hedge funds also face pressures from their customers -- at least that growing part of their customer base represented by investing institutions operating under the strictures of fiduciary responsibility.
As Paul Atkins, an SEC commissioner, observed recently, many hedge-fund advisers will remain registered at the insistence of their pension-fund clients.
Just possibly, hedge fund managers themselves will also come to see regulation as a beneficial thing. That may seem hard to imagine, especially if you think of the regulation in question as costly, bureaucratic meddling that fails to recognize how the business works and denies fund managers the free hand they need to do their jobs.
Heavy Hand
Regulation can certainly be like that. And hedge funds are a complex business to understand, what with the many different styles and strategies they pursue.
So a key first step in any workable system for regulating hedge funds is to define the term. Where, for starters, can we sensibly draw a line of demarcation between a private individual investor, handling money for a few family members or friends, and a hedge-fund manager?
Sooner or later, these questions will demand to be answered. Sooner may work out better for the hedge-fund business, if it means getting to those answers through a voluntary cooperative effort rather than an inquisition.
Though hedge funds differ from mutual funds in many important ways, the hedge funds can always look to the history of mutual funds for instructive precedent.
Law and Order
The early, wild-and-wooly days of mutual funds and their cousins, closed-end funds, in the 1920s ended in disaster with the Crash of 1929 and the Great Depression of the 1930s.
That set the stage for the Investment Company Act of 1940, which today is acclaimed as an exemplar of good regulation. By shutting the door on such temptations as using funds as a dumping ground for unwanted stocks and bonds, the '40 act made it possible for mutual funds to enjoy storybook growth and prosperity.
In the early 2000s, that prosperity -- indeed, the funds' very image as trustworthy -- proved strong enough to withstand a scandal over trading and sales practices. The SEC, even though it was criticized for being slow to spot the abuses and take action against them, played a key role there. If Congress hadn't been satisfied that a reasonable system of regulation was already in place, it would have imposed one.
Events now are pushing hedge funds toward their own version, in some form, of the 1940 act and SEC regulation. If they don't move willingly in that direction, the day may come when they wish they had.
(Chet Currier is a Bloomberg News columnist. His opinions are his own.)