Live data from Hacker News

Renaissance Technologies

en.wikipedia.org

241–250 of 261 posts

Re: Renaissance Technologies

#241
post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US economy (to which RenTech contributes with profits made on foreign markets) is a national security interest. Working to be very rich and then donating a large chunk of money to promote science - and maths education, also advances technological knowledge. Those depricated CRUD apps I wrote a few years back served neither. We'd all like our opponent Poker players to play with their cards open, but if they did, t…

trading is largely a zero sum game. Companies like rentech earn money through speculation. If a craftsman makes a chair you have a char in the economy. If renetch extracts a few billion by betting on the stock market someone else has lost a few billion. The only hypothetical benefit is some liquidity but that is pretty meaningless in today's economy and there's even some evidence that high-frequency trading has negat…

Pretty sure the zero sum game trope is overplayed/inaccurate.

Re: Renaissance Technologies

#242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for this. What you say about proportion of compensation makes a sort of sense, but I don't have the chops or the knowledge of the field to evaluate it. The 'easy to measure' thing is definitely insightful and useful to me as I think about it. Money does have that clarity to it. The "hacking a casino" thing I'll defend, though: to the extent that getting better at gambling games and finance both can involve pre…

My experience is limited, so take with a grain of salt: my sense so far is that it helps stamp out any statistical/numerical inefficiencies in the markets that humans would otherwise be inefficient/slow to adjust to. For instance, if a straight up arbitrage opportunity exists across exchanges, automated strategies ensure that it goes away very quickly, much more quickly than discretionary human traders would. If ther…

Basically this. I'll slightly elaborate on why an efficient market is a good thing.

It means that anyone can change money into a different currency without having to worry about being ripped off. There is one exchange rate and you'll be paying that plus a small margin.

It means that anyone can invest in publicly traded companies without having to spend an inordinate amount of time and effort trying to value them. Pension funds would be next to impossible without this. To the extent that the market is efficient, you don't have to worry about the imminent collapse of IBM. If anybody knew, the prices will reflect it even if the rest of the world has no idea why the prices are as they are. (The further markets get from being efficient, the further this gets from being true. Compare investing in the S&P 500 to the shenanigans happening with penny stocks. Be glad that your pension fund gets to invest in the former so it can pass on the latter.)

It means that companies can raise money without too much difficulty. They'll sell a part of themselves, and a legion of quants will give them as fair a price as humanly possible. If the price were unfair, someone could exploit it to make money , correcting the price in the process. Ergo the price will be fair. While this sounds far removed from the welfare of the people, this is what greases the engine that runs the jobs of virtually everyone in the developed world. It also lets people pool risk to try risky but worthwhile things. The impact this has on innovation cannot be overstated.

Of course, I agree with the above poster that finance probably isn't the best place for smart people to spend their lives. I'm just claiming that finance people aren't overpaid, everyone else is ludicrously underpaid.

Re: Renaissance Technologies

#243
post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really don’t know what you are saying. The leverage is to boost absolute returns. Sharpe isn’t changed by leveraging. They are automated black box strategies making 1000s of trades a day with massive undeniable statistically significant information content.

> You really don’t know what you are saying. There's no need for the aggressive tone. > Sharpe isn’t changed by leveraging. Indeed, volatility is, however.

A change in volatility implies a change in Sharpe due to volatility drag. This only applies if you are compounding the returns though.

Re: Renaissance Technologies

#244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not necessarily, they could be money laundering instead.

Continuing the speculation, they could be just "picking" the stocks after the fact when the returns are already known, iff there is no external record of their positions and transactions

There is an external record, 13F filings. Every quarter funds above a certain AUM have to disclose to the public their top long equity holdings. I’ve personally analyzed these holdings at my old quant job, they definately trade.

Re: Renaissance Technologies

#245
post #199
post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget the yachts in the Stony Brook marina! I always smiled as I passed the giant 'Matrix Rose'. No need to ask where the money for that one came from.

Just googled the yacht - its pretty small for someone of his wealth. Check out the late Paul Allen's yacht Octopus or MY Eclipse for what some billionaires go for.

Allen's Octopus was for research as well, remember. Simons funds plenty of giant expensive research things - just not in yacht form. I wouldn't expect something worthy of Larry Ellison from him.

Re: Renaissance Technologies

#246

Someone's going to say this eventually, so it may as well be me. Rentech is not the only hyper successful fund. There are others, like TGS management ( https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2014/05/09/mys... ) that are just as successful and who you've never heard of. What rentech has done is to have built an excellent data processing engine that automatically extracts signal from noise. Other, much more secr…

Very cool. Do you have any info/resources on how the signal extraction works?

whenever i heard of stuff like this, i think of ligo, the gravitational wave detectors. from what i understand, their signals are just huge amounts of noise, other signals, and then finally the actual signals (gravitational waves) that thy are looking for. but it so happens the gravitational waves is a miniscule amplitude compared to the other signals and noise. so what they do is model all the possible types of noise that is happening in the world, and then they have many models of the type of physical situations that can generate gravitational waves (like a black hole - black hole collision). so they do fancy dsp and filtering and do matches against expected events.

my naive assumption and pure guess would be that a lot of trading schemes looking for patterns do this thing to. they model what shows up as noise and other signals and also model what determines value, and then look for the signals that point to or away from value.

https://www.gw-openscience.org/GW150914data/LOSC_Event_tutor...

Re: Renaissance Technologies

#247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very cool. Do you have any info/resources on how the signal extraction works?

whenever i heard of stuff like this, i think of ligo, the gravitational wave detectors. from what i understand, their signals are just huge amounts of noise, other signals, and then finally the actual signals (gravitational waves) that thy are looking for. but it so happens the gravitational waves is a miniscule amplitude compared to the other signals and noise. so what they do is model all the possible types of nois…

Yes, you're 100% correct. In fact, if I remember correctly that David Donaho was a co author on many of the papers for the LIGO detection technique

Re: Renaissance Technologies

#248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience is limited, so take with a grain of salt: my sense so far is that it helps stamp out any statistical/numerical inefficiencies in the markets that humans would otherwise be inefficient/slow to adjust to. For instance, if a straight up arbitrage opportunity exists across exchanges, automated strategies ensure that it goes away very quickly, much more quickly than discretionary human traders would. If ther…

Basically this. I'll slightly elaborate on why an efficient market is a good thing. It means that anyone can change money into a different currency without having to worry about being ripped off. There is one exchange rate and you'll be paying that plus a small margin. It means that anyone can invest in publicly traded companies without having to spend an inordinate amount of time and effort trying to value them. Pen…

This is a really good case for quantitative finance, and it's also really clear, so thanks for both. Consider my perspective changed for the better.

There's still a bit of dissonance in this for me, but it's abstract and strays a bit what you're saying, so don't feel a need to respond: I think, for example, about the friends and acquaintances I have in finance who I've often heard lament about the lack of meaning, utility, and social value in their work despite the good pay. They're smart men and women, every single one, so I'm sure they know they case you're making - so what gives? (This is clearly more a question for them than for you.)

I also wonder idly what proportion of the explosion in the finance industry since the 1970's is taken up by the sorts of plainly beneficial and useful efforts you describe, and what proportion is simply craven, greedy bullshit. Clearly the latter is more salient in the cultural and moral imagination, in no small part because of the Madoffs and the Beskys and the Milkens of the world, not to mention everyone involved in the 08 crisis. That the former isn't as salient makes me think, like, how many Jack Bogles are there for every Gordon Gekko? I know a ton of Gekkos - I went to college with them! - but few Bogles.

Re: Renaissance Technologies

#249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am sure I have no idea why this it is the case. But I would characterise the "novel intelligence" as a combination of creativity and common sense. RenTech aren't hiring smart people. They are hiring people with technical ability and with a proven track record for solving very open-ended problems. AHL is mainly hiring grads, definitely very smart people with strong postgrad quals but with no real track record. This…

Right, I've worked at quant funds and met a ton of people at different funds. The weird thing about hedge funds, is that until recently, prestige and outward appearance have been traditionally more important than returns. This is changing now, especially with ETFs and the explosion of passive management and the media exposure/public discussion about how finance has really been about money managers making themselves r…

Thanks. That is very useful. I come from the other side i.e. looking at funds so it is great to get an idea from the inside.

I can only add that I have seen the same thing with prestige outside hedge funds. A fun example is Andreessen Horowitz: no-one feels stupid underperforming with these guys, I mean look at Marc's head...he has to be a genius, right? Lul.

Re: Renaissance Technologies

#250
post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Winton is fundamentally dissimilar to AHL. Winton have a reputation for skill and outperformance. AHL have a reputation for blundering incompetence (that is why the 'H' in AHL left to start Winton, and became a billionaire doing so). The only goal is to make money. I understand your point in that AHL are dissimilar to RenTech but I didn't say any way was correct. The right way is whatever makes money. You have firms…

Thanks, interesting and insightful comment. Regarding analyst/graduate rotations, what do you think is the actual value there? To me it seems just a way for the team to lose a potentially decent employee just as they’re done training him/her. If the idea is to familiarize juniors with the firm, what it does and how it works, wouldn’t a shorter program with direct lessons work better (e.g. what some investment banks d…

The value is that they hire a ton of people with a very low bar. The smartest go into investment research, the next lot go into sales, the next into marketing, the rest into admin.

The effect, I believe, is two-fold: one, these guys are cheap. And two, you don't have to rely on someone's education, you can see if they actually can function in the workplace.

But this places a huge burden on actually being able to train people who aren't particularly intelligent to do a complex job and creating a team-based culture (i.e. where the sum is greater than the parts).

One example of this is Aberdeen Asset Management. They went from one guy in an office to one of the largest asset managers in the UK (and the world) by hiring this way. A big part of their growth came from acquiring firms with lots of lazy Oxbridge types, firing them all, and moving in their low-cost team of guys.

This isn't like what IBs do, it isn't what Jane Street. Both are highly selective, and hire into specific jobs. IBs will do a big training program over a few weeks to get everyone up to speed (i.e. on accounting, whatever) but what I am talking about is 3-month rotations through every part of the business.

HR at IBs hire "geniuses", they hire the best of the best...if you do this, it makes no sense to pay them a big salary and then stick them in the back office (they will probably get poached). Now most of these people aren't actually any good, most will get promoted up to VP because they have been there X years, and then get laid off during a recession...but the hiring culture is totally different (and btw, massively overstates the ability of HR too). And btw, it is semi-efficient because most IBs understand they will end up with a bunch of overpaid turnips...it is worth it to find the next rainmaker (but the rainmaker in asset management never pays off because they get poached).

Post reply on HN