Jump to content

Friedberg up 60% this quarter, nailed it


moore_capital54
 Share

Recommended Posts

moore, I am not familiar with this fund at all.  Thanks for posting it.

 

This is a bit chilling:

 

"Odds for another worldwide Great Depression of a length and magnitude similar to the one begun

almost 80 years ago have risen considerably. I do not believe that markets have properly discounted this horrifying prospect"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest misterstockwell

http://friedberg.ca/webpieces/reports/quarterly/Third%20Quarter%202011-%20Quarterly%20Report.PDF

 

Quarterly letter attached, I don't agree with his prediction but in full disclosure am an LP in his funds.

 

His CAGR is now almost 26% since 1995.

 

His views clash markedly with your own. Do you chastise him for being an investing noob like you did to bmichaud?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://friedberg.ca/webpieces/reports/quarterly/Third%20Quarter%202011-%20Quarterly%20Report.PDF

 

Quarterly letter attached, I don't agree with his prediction but in full disclosure am an LP in his funds.

 

His CAGR is now almost 26% since 1995.

 

He posts that return for Global Macro since 2001, not 1995.  Am I missing something?  Performance of his closed funds is mixed.  The worst is Global from 1997 to 2005 that lost about half its value. 

 

All in all, his performance is positive, even without the exceptional returns this year.  He seems to be very nimble, and he may be getting better with experience.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Twacow the full returns are on bloomberg, the fund was formerly known Toronto Trust as well. He hasnt had one down year since 2000.

 

Also hes been doing this for 30 years so hardly a noob or "getting better with age" , the guy is a legend and a lot of the more well known Macro investors like Caxton and Tudor call him up for advice.

 

Misterstockwell, you have to put things in perspective from where Albert is looking at things with a Macro hat on, he is positioning himself for the worst, but I can tell you that he is extremely nimble as well, and when push comes to shove will reverse course, but he is not a value investor and is not interested in the fundamentals of companies which is what I focus on. His job is to bet on price discrepancies in bond markets and futures markets, and in this environment he is simply riding the wave and if and when he chooses to change course he can do so pretty quickly. For all we know he has already laid off some of those catastrophic bets as I am sure they hurt him these past few weeks.

 

A lot of you keep mentioning the great depression or a prolongued bear market, but you have to understand that from a value investors perspective even such periods present incredible opportunities for profit. People still consume goods and services and every year even in the worst of years new billionaires are formed and there are at least 100-200 stocks that double in price or better.

 

The markets represent every segment of the economy, as investors we just need to find the best segment.

 

This year take a look at these companies: Ubiquity Networks, Teavana, SkullCandy, Vera Bradley

 

Those are four companies that just went public and have created billionaires centamillionaires and multi millionaires, which you will see show up on the next list of Forbes but you won't hear about on CNBC or Bloomberg.

 

That is why I focus on being optimistic when it comes to business and markets, no matter how grim things look I never let myself get excited by negative environments. A lot of times investors will trick their minds into being happy when things go down because they are in cash or even short, thinking they are just so smart for making money or preserving their capital while the rest of the world goes to shit. In reality those guys are just a different form of sheep.

 

The lion retains his optimism and gets even more excited as his positions drop in value so long as he believes he is right on the fundamentals.

 

So in summary, Friedberg is a friend and I am an LP, he has made my family tubs of dough, and his insight into Macro is phenomenal but yes I do disagree with him that we are entering the next great depression, and even if I am wrong it won't change one aspect of how I invest.

 

Where Friedberg and I share the same views is with regards to gold and hard money. Keep in mind Friedberg has made over $500 million dollars personally investing in junior gold companies, including Arizona Star and Seabridge. He is surely a billionaire after this monster year.

 

His Buckingham Foundation is the 3rd largest in Canada at $350 million.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how he is doing for the year now.

 

He writes:

 

As I write these lines, the fund has lost 18.60% for the month of October thus far, reducing gains to date to 31.40%.

 

Then he writes:

 

Over the past nine and three months, the fund’s volatility, measured as a 10-day moving average of daily percentage moves, has equaled 1.81x and 1.56x respectively of the S&P 500, arguably the best proxy for combined global asset markets. This means that a sudden and rapid adverse move of, say, 10% in the S&P 500 would be expected to translate into a loss of 15% to 18%, given the almost perfect correlation between assets noted earlier.

This is, in fact, what roughly happened between September 30 and October 14, 2011. The S&P 500 gained 8.2% in 10 short trading days, and our fund lost 18.6%. But this holds true only in the short term.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how he is doing for the year now.

 

He writes:

 

As I write these lines, the fund has lost 18.60% for the month of October thus far, reducing gains to date to 31.40%.

 

Then he writes:

 

Over the past nine and three months, the fund’s volatility, measured as a 10-day moving average of daily percentage moves, has equaled 1.81x and 1.56x respectively of the S&P 500, arguably the best proxy for combined global asset markets. This means that a sudden and rapid adverse move of, say, 10% in the S&P 500 would be expected to translate into a loss of 15% to 18%, given the almost perfect correlation between assets noted earlier.

This is, in fact, what roughly happened between September 30 and October 14, 2011. The S&P 500 gained 8.2% in 10 short trading days, and our fund lost 18.6%. But this holds true only in the short term.

 

You always see these big numbers, but there's always a catch.  I'm much more impressed by people who bat with high consistent averages, rather than just the occasional big swing.  It helps reduce the likelihood of luck playing a larger role than skill.  Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...