正文
大概兩個月前, financial markets爆出一個驚天的news: 一家叫做Amaranth的hedge fund因為做natural gas futures判斷失誤,在不到一個月內虧掉$6 billion,而該公司的總資產還不到$10 billion. 接下來的事情就顯而易見了,該公司的投資者們慌作一團,紛紛要求歸還剩餘的帳麵資產,而且很多lawsuits可能還在後麵等著呢.一時間風雲變幻,人仰馬翻,該公司恐怕最終難逃清償或破產的命運...
乍一聽到這樣的market terrorism,不禁會驚呼: what the heck?! 據說Amaranth在hedge fund圈內名頭頗響,尤其在投資energy derivatives方麵,過往曾有顯赫的戰績. 但這次致命失敗凸顯出其risk control is very scattered. 它怎麽會允許一位交易員動用天文數字一樣的資金去一意孤行地speculate natural gas,以至於最終虧掉了公司超過半數的資產? 盡管這位老兄used to be a brilliant star,但無論其本人還是Amaranth,都顯得太過over-confident. 聯想到以前出現的另外幾起hedge fund的重大挫折, 不禁會疑問: is hedge fund hedged?
Hedge fund, 有別於傳統的investment portfolios,屬於近年來倍受青睞的另類投資(alternative investments)的範疇.它和一般portfolios的區別,除了投資的對象更加多元,更加靈活,在我看來更重要的是對風險的理解和處理. 傳統的investment portfolios致力於diversify and eliminate "unsystematic risk",也就是把投資組合中每一個individual issue所攜帶的specific risk化解掉,這樣餘下來的無法diversify的風險就隻剩下市場本身所不可避免的那部分(隻要是投資就必須麵對的),也就是所謂的market risk或systematic risk. The overall risk of a well-diversified portfolio相對單個投資已經是大大降低而且更加consistent, 因此由於risk vs. return之間的相輔相成關係,該portfolio的return正常情況下不會高的離譜,但會比較穩定.
而hedge fund就大相徑庭了.我相信hedge fund manager們是歡迎每個投資個體所攜帶的unsystematic risk的,隻有這種risk才可能給hedge fund帶來比其他portfolios更高的回報. 因此,hedge fund注定不是well-diversified portfolio,相反它所麵對的overall risk是驚人的.既然這樣,hedge fund該如何manage or control它的risk呢? 我覺得hedge fund對每筆投資的風險分析判斷極其重要,也就是通過各種analysis and educated guess to maximize the chance of winning upon every single decision making. 這樣一來, theoretically speaking, 既然每筆投資在出手伊始就有較高的贏利概率(ideally over 50%), then overall the hedge fund itself has better chance to realize much higher return. 即便某些投資最終是失敗的,most likely這些損失也會被其他成功的投資(有些可能是暴利)offset. 我想,這大概就是為什麽中文把hedge fund翻譯成"對衝基金"的緣由吧.
簡言之,傳統的portfolios強調穩紮穩打,步步為營,以實現market return為己任;而hedge fund is more risk-taking,希望在大起大落之間獲取beyond market return的超額回報. 至於whether hedge fund may nicely hedge itself, it all depends how it feel or judge the market risks.當然,盡管判斷很重要, timing and luck may often play an important role as well.
由hedge fund或其他的portfolios, 不禁想到所謂投資(investment)和投機(speculation)的爭論. Is there any difference between the two? 看起來似乎有差別,至少投資聽起來更冠冕堂皇些,而投機似乎令人嗤之以鼻.真的這樣嗎? 在我看來,投資和投機both involve with betting on something uncertain. There is no difference in nature, however. 如果說有差別,隻在risk tolerance level: investment is relatively risk-averse, but speculation is more risk-bearing. 這其實也就是一般的portfolios和hedge fund之間的本質區別.
我對於投資vs.投機的認識也是逐漸改變的. 記得在business school讀書時,對投資之說是深信不疑,奉若金科玉律,而且頗以正統自居,自豪.一說到投機,便覺得是旁門左道,且隱約有不太正大光明之感: speculation is nothing different from gambling! 直到有一天,幾位友人教我play casino, 玩一種很popular的叫作"Texas Hold'em"的game,我才發現,gambling(或speculation)也有很多學問!同樣需要對risk的analyze, judge and adjust. 就拿"Texas Hold'em"來說,the risk of winning or loss changes whenever every new card is placed on the table. 所以,對風險的判斷和應變要求很高,而且必須在瞬間作出決斷. 所有這些,對於投資不是同樣必不可少嗎? So, finally I start to realize: investment is nothing different from gambling. 因此,投資vs.投機的界線模糊了,甚至不存在了, 'cuz all matters is how you look at risks and behave accordingly.
說來說去,對於投資vs.投機的認識似乎也關係到人生的態度. 人的一生到底應該怎樣麵對各種各樣的risk呢? 是應該努力化解各種風險,穩健一生還是應該風雨無阻,躍上浪頭幹一場?相信每個人的選擇都是不一樣的.但不管作何選擇,as long as you feel comfortable with your risk-taking and don't bother others, that's fine. 但竊以為,縱觀人的一生,從表象上來說,更像hedge fund,很難沒有大的起伏(不管是主動的還是被動的),因為很多risk是無法預期也非人力可以左右的. So, is or will your life be well hedged? 我覺得,說到hedge,關鍵是要hedge the bottom line, 也就是盡量避免孤注一擲,以免萬劫不複,就像Amaranth的遭遇一樣.如果能夠記取前進道路上的並非致命的挫折和失敗,"野火燒不盡,春風吹又生"還是有可能的.
當然人生和hedge fund還是有很多不一樣,首先麵對的risk很難量化,也更加錯綜複雜.其次,對return的理解也不一樣. To hedge fund and other investment portfolios, return is a purely financial or monetary concept. But to life, what "return" means? 人生的目標或追求倒底是什麽? 儒家說修身齊家治國平天下,道家說清靜無為羽化升天,佛家說明心見性回頭是岸,etc., 沒有統一的標準.所以, 每個人的成功與失敗都不具有可比性,更不應該等量觀之.隻要你在追求自己人生目標的過程中很好地manage all risks involved,並且認真的付出了, then it's proper to say: your life is well hedged...
乍一聽到這樣的market terrorism,不禁會驚呼: what the heck?! 據說Amaranth在hedge fund圈內名頭頗響,尤其在投資energy derivatives方麵,過往曾有顯赫的戰績. 但這次致命失敗凸顯出其risk control is very scattered. 它怎麽會允許一位交易員動用天文數字一樣的資金去一意孤行地speculate natural gas,以至於最終虧掉了公司超過半數的資產? 盡管這位老兄used to be a brilliant star,但無論其本人還是Amaranth,都顯得太過over-confident. 聯想到以前出現的另外幾起hedge fund的重大挫折, 不禁會疑問: is hedge fund hedged?
Hedge fund, 有別於傳統的investment portfolios,屬於近年來倍受青睞的另類投資(alternative investments)的範疇.它和一般portfolios的區別,除了投資的對象更加多元,更加靈活,在我看來更重要的是對風險的理解和處理. 傳統的investment portfolios致力於diversify and eliminate "unsystematic risk",也就是把投資組合中每一個individual issue所攜帶的specific risk化解掉,這樣餘下來的無法diversify的風險就隻剩下市場本身所不可避免的那部分(隻要是投資就必須麵對的),也就是所謂的market risk或systematic risk. The overall risk of a well-diversified portfolio相對單個投資已經是大大降低而且更加consistent, 因此由於risk vs. return之間的相輔相成關係,該portfolio的return正常情況下不會高的離譜,但會比較穩定.
而hedge fund就大相徑庭了.我相信hedge fund manager們是歡迎每個投資個體所攜帶的unsystematic risk的,隻有這種risk才可能給hedge fund帶來比其他portfolios更高的回報. 因此,hedge fund注定不是well-diversified portfolio,相反它所麵對的overall risk是驚人的.既然這樣,hedge fund該如何manage or control它的risk呢? 我覺得hedge fund對每筆投資的風險分析判斷極其重要,也就是通過各種analysis and educated guess to maximize the chance of winning upon every single decision making. 這樣一來, theoretically speaking, 既然每筆投資在出手伊始就有較高的贏利概率(ideally over 50%), then overall the hedge fund itself has better chance to realize much higher return. 即便某些投資最終是失敗的,most likely這些損失也會被其他成功的投資(有些可能是暴利)offset. 我想,這大概就是為什麽中文把hedge fund翻譯成"對衝基金"的緣由吧.
簡言之,傳統的portfolios強調穩紮穩打,步步為營,以實現market return為己任;而hedge fund is more risk-taking,希望在大起大落之間獲取beyond market return的超額回報. 至於whether hedge fund may nicely hedge itself, it all depends how it feel or judge the market risks.當然,盡管判斷很重要, timing and luck may often play an important role as well.
由hedge fund或其他的portfolios, 不禁想到所謂投資(investment)和投機(speculation)的爭論. Is there any difference between the two? 看起來似乎有差別,至少投資聽起來更冠冕堂皇些,而投機似乎令人嗤之以鼻.真的這樣嗎? 在我看來,投資和投機both involve with betting on something uncertain. There is no difference in nature, however. 如果說有差別,隻在risk tolerance level: investment is relatively risk-averse, but speculation is more risk-bearing. 這其實也就是一般的portfolios和hedge fund之間的本質區別.
我對於投資vs.投機的認識也是逐漸改變的. 記得在business school讀書時,對投資之說是深信不疑,奉若金科玉律,而且頗以正統自居,自豪.一說到投機,便覺得是旁門左道,且隱約有不太正大光明之感: speculation is nothing different from gambling! 直到有一天,幾位友人教我play casino, 玩一種很popular的叫作"Texas Hold'em"的game,我才發現,gambling(或speculation)也有很多學問!同樣需要對risk的analyze, judge and adjust. 就拿"Texas Hold'em"來說,the risk of winning or loss changes whenever every new card is placed on the table. 所以,對風險的判斷和應變要求很高,而且必須在瞬間作出決斷. 所有這些,對於投資不是同樣必不可少嗎? So, finally I start to realize: investment is nothing different from gambling. 因此,投資vs.投機的界線模糊了,甚至不存在了, 'cuz all matters is how you look at risks and behave accordingly.
說來說去,對於投資vs.投機的認識似乎也關係到人生的態度. 人的一生到底應該怎樣麵對各種各樣的risk呢? 是應該努力化解各種風險,穩健一生還是應該風雨無阻,躍上浪頭幹一場?相信每個人的選擇都是不一樣的.但不管作何選擇,as long as you feel comfortable with your risk-taking and don't bother others, that's fine. 但竊以為,縱觀人的一生,從表象上來說,更像hedge fund,很難沒有大的起伏(不管是主動的還是被動的),因為很多risk是無法預期也非人力可以左右的. So, is or will your life be well hedged? 我覺得,說到hedge,關鍵是要hedge the bottom line, 也就是盡量避免孤注一擲,以免萬劫不複,就像Amaranth的遭遇一樣.如果能夠記取前進道路上的並非致命的挫折和失敗,"野火燒不盡,春風吹又生"還是有可能的.
當然人生和hedge fund還是有很多不一樣,首先麵對的risk很難量化,也更加錯綜複雜.其次,對return的理解也不一樣. To hedge fund and other investment portfolios, return is a purely financial or monetary concept. But to life, what "return" means? 人生的目標或追求倒底是什麽? 儒家說修身齊家治國平天下,道家說清靜無為羽化升天,佛家說明心見性回頭是岸,etc., 沒有統一的標準.所以, 每個人的成功與失敗都不具有可比性,更不應該等量觀之.隻要你在追求自己人生目標的過程中很好地manage all risks involved,並且認真的付出了, then it's proper to say: your life is well hedged...
評論
shengli
2006-12-05 13:07:42
回複
悄悄話
一'生'歎息
登錄後才可評論.
