Thursday, June 17, 2010

Hedge Fund Meltdown

This week on ABC TV the Current Affairs programme 4 Corners ran a story on the Australian based hedge fund Basis Capital. The premise behind the story was that the Hedge fund had lost a significant amount of capital for its investors based on a dodgy deal with the US Investment Bank Goldman Sachs. Caveat Emptor comes to my mind but we’ll let the courts decide that matter.
Of more interest to me was the fact that two investors in the Basis Yield Fund were interviewed and asked if they were aware what the fund had invested in. Of the two investors interviewed, one had been recommended the fund by a Financial Adviser, and the other had chosen the fund himself. So how obvious was it that the Basis Yield fund was not the safe fixed interest investment that some touted it as? I decided to Google and get a copy of the Product Disclosure Statement (PDS) dated 2nd April 2007 (just 3 months before it went belly up).
What I like to look for is Red flags that would indicate the riskiness of the investment or otherwise. This is important because all PDS’s have to be approved by the Australian Securities and investments commission (ASIC) and they will happily approve a PDS if the risks are disclosed.
It did not take long for the alarm bells to start ringing. It was clearly disclosed that;
1. The fund invested in a sole fund registered in the Cayman Islands;
2. The fund invested in CDO’s (Collateralised Debt Obligations) including the equity tranche of structured credit special purpose vehicles which are often the first loss position in event of default (much like an ordinary share);
3. The fund used LEVERAGE (Borrowings) to further diversify the portfolio. The PDS clearly stated that any forced selling of this portfolio would result in capital loss;
4. In the calendar year 2006 the fund returned 26.41% before fees of 6.08% leaving the investor a return of 20.33%;
5. The ratings of the securities held show that 61.93% of the portfolio was invested in “unrated securities”. There were no AAA, AA, or A securities at all!
So to me, it was obvious that with such high returns, a large amount of risk had been taken. To put in perspective, in the same calendar year (2006) a diversified portfolio of AAA bonds returned about 4.61%. High fees are also a warning sign, particularly when performance fees are involved as this may encourage risk taking for the sake of trying to outperform. The fact that the fund was using borrowings to enhance return was also a big warning sign. Borrowing can magnify the gains and in this case magnified the losses.
The simple rule is that risk and return are related and you should only take on risks that you are rewarded for. Taking extra risk in fixed interest portfolios quite often does not result in the extra reward that you are expecting. Was the Basis yield fund safe? – quite clearly, the PDS states that it is not.
Julian McLaren is a Representative of the Shadforth Financial Group (AFS Licence No. 318613) Julian may be contacted on 69317488. This is general advice and readers should seek their own professional advice in regards to their individual circumstances.

No comments:

Post a Comment