The Big Picture

Transcript: Paul Zummo, CIO, JPMAAM



 

 

The transcript from this week’s, MiB: Paul Zummo, Chief Investment Officer of J.P. Morgan Alternative Asset Management, is below.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, SpotifyYouTube, and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

~~~

Barry Ritholtz: On the latest Masters in Business podcast. I sit down with Paul Zumo, he’s Chief Investment Officer at JP Morgan’s Alternative Asset Management. He co-founded this group back in 1994 with essentially pocket change. It now runs over $35 billion in assets for institutions and high net worth investors at JP Morgan. Really just a fascinating concept of everything about how to stand up a division within a large company, how to think about alternatives, how to recognize when an industry may be average, but the best players in that industry generate significant alpha. I thought this was fascinating, and I think you will also, with no further ado, JP Morgan’s. Paul Zummo,

Welcome to Bloomberg.

Paul Zumo: Thanks for having me. Great to be here.

Barry Ritholtz: I’m so excited about this because I just fell in love with your 30 pearls of wisdom. We’ll get to that later. Let, let’s start with your background. Sure. Bachelor’s from SUNY Albany and then an MBA from New York University. What was the original career plan?

Paul Zumo: Sure. So, yeah, when I was young, I was always into, always into investments or at least intrigued by investments, but also into technology as well. Like arguably my, to, to the extent we have a, a gift in life. It was probably technology, but the technology was so early stage. I, I didn’t exactly know what it, what it was. So I wound up, I wound up pursuing, obviously an investment side, but kind of used that technology from time to time, especially as we were, we were building a group, but originally I, I really wanted to get into, into equity research. And, and not that I knew exactly what it was, but it was the most like tangible and aligned with who I am in terms of, you know, problem solving and analytics and, and things like that. And wound up instead falling into the, the hedge fund world and doing what I do today as hedge fund solutions, which actually has a lot of elements in, in a sense of what equity research is. Again, you know, you, you, you’re problem solving at, at, at its core and doing analytical work. You,

Barry Ritholtz: You get the chartered financial analyst designation and you start at Chase as an analyst. What sort of work were you doing there?

Paul Zumo: Yeah, so at a outta a school I was in a pension fund consulting group. And so really what you’re doing is a, a couple things, I mean, one performance measurement across client accounts and, you know, also you’re doing some, some research stock rather manager selection on a traditional side. But I think what was helpful about it is it kind of gave you a really good purview of all different asset classes and all different styles of management. And I remember in our early days really appreciating like the, the importance of stylistic differences in equities as an example. This was, again, early days, but like recognizing, you know, small cap world versus small cap value and a drastic differences. But it really, it really has just set the stage to understand the industry and styles and types and approaches at a, at a much deeper level.

Barry Ritholtz: So you were a manager of retirement plans at the Interpublic group. Tell us a little bit about that.

Paul Zumo: Yeah, so after Chase, so I spent about two years at, at, at Chase and then went to the anti-public group. So this is a, a, a plan sponsor and maybe a, a somewhat unusual move at that stage in my career. And what attracted me to it was they, they were at a point where they were, so again, this, this is an advertising agency, but I worked in the pension fund group and they were, they were looking to revise their asset allocation materially. So, you know, change the whole asset allocation, change the manager lineup. And importantly they, they didn’t have a consultant, so they were doing it in-house. So they were affording me, I mean, not solely, but affording me a lot of responsibility to help restructure the whole plan, terminate managers, onboard managers.

Barry Ritholtz: What year was that?

Paul Zumo: So that was 1992 to 1994. And interesting.

Barry Ritholtz: I’m curious what led them to say, “Hey, we’re just going to start over.”

Paul Zumo: Well, that was, yeah, I mean, that was before, I mean, that was a kind of a decision I’d had already been made and they were changing, you know, again, changing their asset allocation and, and looking at the whole manager holistically. And interestingly, that’s when I first got involved in hedge funds, or at least first met hedge funds. So this is again, you know, early days, right? 19, 19 92.

Barry Ritholtz: Everybody was producing Alpha back then, right?

Paul Zumo:  Well Then, yeah, I mean then it was, that’s true, but it was so unknown, you know, so I, we, I met with a number of kind of market neutral equity managers, a couple long short matches. And then, and then importantly David asin. So, you know, David asin, for those that don’t know, was one of the, really the first hedge fund, for lack of a better word, blowups, where it was a mortgage backed derivative manager and, you know, obviously a quirky ish market and, and, and wound up having significant problems. So it was, you know, we did not invest with him, but it was really a, a very, you know, valuable early kind of lesson from a due diligence standpoint that, you know, obviously we didn’t pay for. So all, all, all the better, but it, it really like, I dunno, may maybe tells you two things. I mean, one, if you don’t completely understand something, and admittedly at age 24, I, I didn’t at the time then, you know, stay away, don’t put money, don’t put money there and, and, and just have the courage to say, to say no. You know, there’s, there’s a lot of choices out there and you need to be disciplined and, and walk away. But we did invest in an equity market neutral fund. And again, that was 1993.

Barry Ritholtz: So that’s the initial exposure to hedge funds. How did you go from there to JP Morgan?

Paul Zumo: Yeah, so this is probably another, you know, never burn your bridges, which, which  I’ll come to. So I had, I had, as I mentioned, I’d worked at Chase once before and at the time I was looking to leave because once you restructure the plan, there’s only so much to to do, especially when you, when you’re young. So it’s ready, you know, it’s ready to, to do something different.

Barry Ritholtz: Do you literally put yourself out of a job through the restructuring process?

Paul Zumo: Well, I mean, I could have stayed, but then you’re just, you know, you’re just overseeing the investments as opposed to-ing more actively. It’s a little less interesting. And so any any case, I was interviewing at a hedge fund solutions, a fund of funds out on Long Island and, you know, really liked the guys, couple of great guys that were there. But at the end of the day, I, I decided I didn’t want to go, you know, I didn’t want to reverse commute ’cause I was living a sit-in, I didn’t wanna go out to Long Island, so I wound up not pursuing it. But the relevance of that is that what would become my, my boss, Joel Katzman was distributing that, that fund of funds. And he was at Chase. So when it came time to do a, a reference check on me, they asked Joel to do a reference check on me. ’cause he was at Chase. I used to work at Chase and the reference check I assume was good, but it turned out I didn’t pursue it any further. And Joel, who was distributing the fund of funds at the time, got the idea of, you know what, rather than distributing it, maybe we should start this up anew. And if you wanna work in a city, why don’t you come work for me.

Barry Ritholtz: So you’re at Chase, which even back in the early nineties is still a very large bank. This seems very entrepreneurial, very startup like what was it like building this division inside a giant money center bank?

Paul Zumo: Yeah, no, it, it was great. You know, I mean, you know, bear, bear in mind it was a different world back then in many ways. Not only from an investment standpoint, but like what it takes to launch a new business. So yeah, we, we launch with a whopping $7.4 million, right? Which is, you know, which is unusual to say, to say at least walking around

Barry Ritholtz: Pocket money.

Paul Zumo: And, and I’d say yeah, maybe a, a couple. So like from an investment standpoint, it was the perfect time to start. You had ar you know, orange County issues, issues. You had, you had rates going up, you had, well David asking, as I mentioned before, you had dislocation and that created opportunities. The problem was, you know, not many people knew about hedge funds and I’d say three quarters of the people that did had a negative view. Oh really? Even in

Barry Ritholtz: Even in the early nineties. ’cause yeah, my bias is that the golden era of hedge funds was from the early nineties, right up to the financial crisis. There’s been far more challenging period, financial crisis for alpha generating the nineties, it seemed like everybody was making money.

Paul Zumo: Well, so two thing, I mean, maybe we’ll get to those points later about, about different, different cycles. But again, from an investment standpoint, I, I, there were, people were making money, there’s no question about it. I think the public’s view, and partially like what had often been written in, in, in the press was the negative side of, of hedge, you know, hedge funds going after this currency or that currency. And I, I think the perception was one of, you know, I either it was negative or just a lack of understanding. So a lot of what we did early days was just educationally, like, we would write newsletters internally and educate people on alternatives, but eventually, you know, eventually you put it together and performance kind of speaks to itself and you, you know, you build it, you build it over time. But it was great from an entrepreneur entrepreneurial standpoint, this kind of goes back to my tech side as well. I mean, one building infrastructure broadly and process,

You know, early days building technology as well. Like there was no per track, which is something people use like, so, you know, we, and I kind of built it all. So built a research database, built a a built a a system to analyze returns and yeah, that was, that was great. It was a lot of, a lot of fun.

Barry Ritholtz: So today it looks like the industry is much better known. There’s been a giant movement to try to democratize access to all sorts of alternatives from hedge funds to private credit, private equity, real assets. What do you think led to this massive interest in alternatives? It’s not like it’s been a terrible equity market for the past 15 years.

Paul Zumo: Yeah, it’s been great. So , two things.

I’d say even, let’s go back early days, like part of the vision, this is really, you know, Joel’s vision first and foremost, that was that alternatives were gonna become mainstream, which, you know, sitting back and hedge funds were gonna become mainstream eventually. And then, you know, back in 1994, that was a novel concept, you know, it was just this little thing off to the side. And, and look, we’ve more or less kind of arrived at that, right? So I think the vision is true. And then the second part is, well, why not retail investors? Right? And if you think about 2022 and you think about rising stock bond correlations, you know, there’s so many investors, many of ’em were retail oriented or, or, you know, high net worth oriented that just don’t have alternatives or enough alternatives in their portfolios. So yeah, that’s led to the democratization and, you know, launch of interval funds and, and, and tender off of funds, which is I think really interesting. So it’s giving those investors access to alternatives which are really valuable in overall portfolio context. And so it it’s about building, yeah, I mean, yeah, just to, to, to respond like, sure, equity markets are going up today, but they didn’t in 2022. And I think the takeaway is that you need to build a more resilient portfolio rather than just look at these things in isolation.

Barry Ritholtz: So you start with barely $7 million today, you have over $35 billion that you’re directly overseeing JP Morgan Chase’s giant with trillions of dollars. It sounds like there’s a whole lot more headroom for alternatives at JP Morgan to continue growing. Like, where do you see this going?

Paul Zumo: Yeah, I mean, you know, alternatives are, are definitely the fastest growing or one of the fastest growing areas within, and not, not just hedge funds, but more broadly. And there’s a tremendous amount of support for it. So, yeah, I like, I, I think, you know, for us and for other alternatives, we’re gonna, you know, continue to build, continue to launch new product, continue to, you know, get, get a larger reach into, in, you know, in, into other client types and, and, and geographies. So yeah, the future is extremely exciting. So

Barry Ritholtz: I mentioned earlier 30 pearls of wisdom for 30 years. I wanna dive into that in a moment. I have to start with one quote that kind of caught my eye, and we talk about this all the time. “Culture is king, the road to failure is paved with poor cultures”. Explain what led you to that conclusion?

Paul Zumo: Well, experience. I mean, you, you, I don’t know, I mean, hedge funds fail for and, and succeed for, for different reasons, but culture is definitely at, at the heart of many of it. And I’d say more importantly, like sometimes people ask what are, you know, what, what’s, like, what do you think about most as, as your takeaway having been doing over 30 years? Like for, for us it’s, for me it’s culture. Like the culture that we’ve built as an organization has been spectacular and clearly a differentiator.

Barry Ritholtz: But is that what’s kept you at JP Morgan Chase for 30 years? That’s kind of rare these days. Most people don’t stay at one shop almost their entire career.

Paul Zumo: Yeah, it’s a, it’s a couple things. I mean, culture and, and the team, you know, it’s like a family for sure. And we, we make each other better. We challenge each other respectfully. We, we really enjoy each other’s company and, and appreciate our, our differences. So yeah, that, that’s been, that’s been great. Leadership of Jamie is, is unparalleled. So that Jamie,

Barry Ritholtz: Jamie…?

Paul Zumo: Jamie Dimon

Barry Ritholtz:  I’ve heard of him. Remind me to tell you a funny story about him later.

Paul Zumo: And, and then lastly, like, you know, the, the job itself allows you obviously to meet with some of the, you know, best investment minds in the world, right? Which is just such a privilege. And then to be able to like, dig in deep on so many different asset classes, so many different geographies, you’re, you’re constantly learning. Hmm. So those, those three things for sure.

Barry Ritholtz: I mentioned you are not exactly very public facing, you’re a little below the radar, but you publish these really interesting things. And one of my favorite pieces you wrote was 30 Pearls of Wisdom from our last 30 years.

We don’t have time to go through all 30, but I picked a few that they’re just so simple and yet so insightful and we tend to overlook things like this. This one just jumped out,

Don’t buy the portfolio, buy the process:  Stories change, positions are fleeting, but a robust investment process should endure.”

Like that just sums up so much in, in two sentences. Tell us about that.

Paul Zumo: Yeah, no, it’s definitely one of my favorites as well. I, I, I mean it applies to like all different types of hedge funds, but I’d say especially discretionary macro, right? So you’re interviewing a discretionary macro manager. The vast majority of ’em are very smart. They tell a very good story, they have great views, but it doesn’t necessarily mean they’re a money maker, right? And, and again, I think sometimes people make the mistake of agreeing with the view, agreeing with the manager, getting, you know, seduced by someone having insight. And that obviously it’s really important. But again, it doesn’t necessarily speak to the process. And especially in something like discretionary macro, where it’s, it’s not a high sharp strategy. It tends to be more volatile strategy. And if you don’t develop that conviction, and again, first and foremost in the process, you can get shaken from, you know, from that idea, right? The ideas change, the process should endure. So really, really important for sure,

Barry Ritholtz: “Have the courage to make mistakes, mitigate unnecessary risks, but take calculated bets.”

Again, two simple sentences, so much involved in that. Yeah. I find a lot of people in our business don’t like to admit mistakes.

Paul Zumo: Yeah, I think it’s, it’s, it, it’s something not, not the admitting mistakes so much, but the, the, the courage to make mistakes. When I think about take a risk, a calculated risk,

When, when I think about like, things that I’ve done better over the years, that that is definitely one of ’em that comes to mind where I, I’ve given myself more freedom to, to, to make mistakes and to maybe size and lean into themes or, or high conviction managers to a greater degree as well, where I think, you know, maybe there’s a perfectionist in many of ’em, many of us. And sometimes the flip side of that, or the problem with that is you become too conservative, right? So now, yeah, if you make a mistake, you need to, you need to figure it out quickly and, and change course. But allowing yourself to maybe make mistakes is, is, is definitely helpful.

 

Barry Ritholtz: I really like this. “Don’t be afraid to run into fires.” Some of the greatest investment opportunities and manager access are sourced during dislocation. Tell us about running into fires.

Paul Zumo: Yeah, so this, you know, is, is obviously really important. Like I, I I love behavioral issues and behavioral finance and, and, and like the challenges that come to that. Of course, we’re all wired, you know, inappropriately from an investment standpoint and that we’re, you know, we’re wired to avoid avoid pain, which is why many people make the wrong decisions during, you know, periods of crisis or periods of heightened volatility. I think some managers do a great job. You know, I wrote it about, you know, I guess the manager had in mind was David Tepper, you know runs into fires all the time, you know?

Barry Ritholtz: He moved to Florida kind of chilled out a little bit,

Paul Zumo: But he, I, you know, like he, he, again, having watched things play out over 30 years, I always thought he, he did, you know, he’s done a really good job. But, and again, like this is something I think we’ve done a better job at over time as well. When I think about, you know, the crisis, you 1998, 2008, 2020, like, you know, as they say, many of these things rhyme and you’ve seen it before. Like, you know, you, you know, what it feels like kind of coming out of it and going in. And if you’re playing appropriate defense, like you should afford yourself the opportunity to really lean into where you think there is dislocation, especially more technical oriented dislocation. So yeah, it’s, it, it’s critically important. I mean, that’s where you make outsized returns during those inflection points.

Barry Ritholtz: Let’s talk about outsized returns. Success can be a dangerous achievement. Complacency, distractions and misalignments can be silent killers.

Paul Zumo: Yeah. So I guess you could come at that one from a, a, a couple of different ways, but one of, one of which the most important is like when you find success, sometimes people, you know, the, the firm grows, the number of analysts grow, the complexity of the business grows, and the portfolio manager, you know, goes from managing portfolios to managing people. And you like, I’ve seen that movie so many times like that. Maybe

00:20:44 [Speaker Changed] They have that skillset, maybe they don’t

00:20:45 [Speaker Changed] And maybe they don’t, and that, and that’s probably not where you want them to spend their time, you know? So I think like if you think about the hedge fund graveyard and like what the issues have been over this like that, there’s a big area that kind of has that, that footprint if, if you will. So yeah. People, you know, the star portfolio portfolio manager no longer spending the appropriate time on a portfolio, managing people, getting distracted, or the second piece of it is just quite frankly, making too much money, right? So, you know, when, when I, when I bought the third yacht, I

00:21:17 [Speaker Changed] Was about to say, it’s that

00:21:19 [Speaker Changed] It’s time to leave, you know, it’s probably time to leave after, before the first yacht, but the

00:21:23 [Speaker Changed] First time I heard that has to be like 20, 25 years ago. Hey, when your fund manager buys a 40 foot or a 50 foot boat, it’s time to move on.

00:21:33 [Speaker Changed] Yeah. I mean, it, it’s more than that. But yes, you have to, you, you have to watch the personal lifestyle at times as well, and it makes sure people are focused. Now, you know, there are people that, that are, are billionaires and they’re still in the office, right? 70 hours a week. Right? But, and it’s, it’s just an eight. They don’t, they couldn’t do anything but that. But yeah, you have to, you know, you, you have to understand what, what am I buying? And, and maybe it changes, right? So maybe that star portfolio match is built out enough of a team and you’re not buying anyone singularly, you’re buying something broader and that process

00:22:09 [Speaker Changed] You mentioned earlier,

00:22:10 [Speaker Changed] But, but yeah, it’s, it’s, it’s a risk for sure. And it’s, and it’s an area where many of successful hedge funds have kind of either become, you know, potentially mediocre or have had challenges because they’ve taken her eye off the ball in one way or another.

00:22:24 [Speaker Changed] Huh, really, really interesting. I love this one. The opposite of long is, in short, great short sellers are wired differently. Don’t expect success on the long side to necessarily translate to a successful short book. First. I love the quote. Second, are there really any short sellers left? I think this last run feels like it. They steamrolled over everybody.

00:22:47 [Speaker Changed] So yeah, maybe a couple things. So I mean, just on the quote itself, I have to like, of all the lessons learned and all the mistakes we’ve seen people make, that that one has probably right at the top or certainly right toward the top. Like the, the opposite of a long is definitely not a short, and, you know, sometimes people will, will suggest it is, I mean, the math is different, risk management is different. It like the, the timing is different. And like, I I would even say like, successful shorting is about risk management first and stock picking second. And you see that, I mean, you’ve seen that when the, you know, 1999 when the internet is blowing is, you know, going nuts. You see that in the meme stocks, you see that today with quantum computing and some of the AI names, again, it’s risk management first. Stock picking second timing is critical. Timing and sizing is just

00:23:41 [Speaker Changed] Critically,

00:23:42 [Speaker Changed] Critically important.

00:23:44 [Speaker Changed] Go ahead. I was gonna say, I have a buddy who used to run a hedge fund trading desk, and he always used to say the opposite of love is in hate. The opposite of love is indifference. There you go. And it, it’s the same basic kind. And he was talking about stocks, but it’s the same sort of thing. They’re not mirror images, are they?

00:24:01 [Speaker Changed] No, definitely not. Are

00:24:03 [Speaker Changed] Are there any short sellers around, I know like one 30 thirties have become popular. Yeah. There and a lot of quants approach it that way. So

00:24:10 [Speaker Changed] Maybe there’s two, you know, two different aspects of it. So there, there are successful and, and good short sellers out there. I’d say there are, there are, you know, less that are dedicated short sellers. So from 1995 to 2008, we used dedicated short sellers and short bias managers. And it was really interesting and actually a tremendous source of overall alpha after 2008. We no longer use dedicated short sellers and short bias managers. So I, I don’t follow the space nearly as much, but there are, you know, there, there are certainly good ones within long short equities, you know, maybe, you know, I’m sure there is some on a standalone basis. It’s a, it’s a very difficult business model. Yeah. Tough, tough gig. And one, one of the interesting things in short Sound, which I think people don’t, you know, I don’t know, I’ve never heard it spoken about before, is, you know, and this, again, this is dated, but the, when you, when you looked at again, let’s say pre 2008 where there were probably, I don’t know, I don’t know, there’s, you know, a certainly a few dozen dedicated short sell and short bias managers.

00:25:10 I wanna say like 40% of them were women, really? Which, which people own. That’s fascinating. You know, so Charlotte, you, Stephanie, Ross, Dana Ante, like all, all these, you know, very successful short sellers and in an industry that was more male dominated, it, it always struck me as just really interesting that in that segment that, you know, an an overwhelming amount, at least on a percentage basis, right? Maybe, you know, maybe it wasn’t greater than 50%, but like,

00:25:38 [Speaker Changed] But compared to the rest of

00:25:39 [Speaker Changed] The industry, it was outsized. It was, it, it was outsized, you know, which is, it is interesting, there

00:25:43 [Speaker Changed] Have been a number of academic studies that say female fund managers outperform their male counterparts by anywhere between 50 and a hundred basis points. And it’s always, you know, the joke is testosterone poisoning. But it’s fascinating to hear. I’m, I’m curious as to why female short sellers, I, is it an objectivity? Is it just a different approach? It’s kind of really intriguing. Yeah.

00:26:13 [Speaker Changed] Well my wife would probably say it’s, it’s, it’s because they don’t have the egos of the man, right? That’s the poisoning. It’s absolutely, if

00:26:20 [Speaker Changed] It doesn’t work out, they cover it and move on.

00:26:21 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, I, you know, I think there’s probably some, you know, of, of course there’s great examples of both, but I, you know, again, risk management and discipline is definitely, is definitely the key to successful short selling. So let’s, that has to be something about it. Let’s,

00:26:36 [Speaker Changed] Let’s go with another bullet point that speaks directly to that. I love this one. Avoid casinos. Black isn’t on a roll and red isn’t due. Very few managers add value over time through timing the market. Even if it sometimes look like, looks like it. Don’t reward a manager for gambling. Yeah. Again, so much insight in two sentences, explain how you reach this conclusion, which I just think is brilliant.

00:27:04 [Speaker Changed] Yeah. So I, I give credit to Chris Marshall on the team. He ca I think he, he’s the one that came up with that quote. But it, it really again, is the observation that the vast majority of managers are, are, you know, the vast majority of of them are good stock pickers, but bad portfolio managers and

00:27:26 [Speaker Changed] Two, making skills. It’s two different

00:27:28 [Speaker Changed] Skills. Yeah. And timing decisions, you know, the vast majority of managers are, are, are subtracting value from that portfolio manager decision.

00:27:36 [Speaker Changed] Really? The vast ma you’re gonna say top quartile. Top decile. Where, where’s the alpha coming from?

00:27:41 [Speaker Changed] I mean, the alpha’s coming from, like, if, if you look at, let’s put it this, if you look at fundamental long short equities that live within the pods, and you look at alpha generation with them on, on, you know, eternal leverage or whatever you wanna say. And then you look at the standalone long short universe and the alpha that’s generated there, there’s a disconnect, right? And it’s not because they’re not good stock pickers. The disconnect I, I think is because the portfolio manage, you know, bad portfolio management or subpar portfolio management is subtracting value from their stock picking. So maybe they’re adding, you know, 5% of alpha in the stock picking and decaying that by 3% from, from portfolio management decisions. And I just think it’s, it’s difficult and, you know, there, there’s been tremendous factor moves in the last number of years. There’s also issues when you’re operating on a standalone basis. Like there’s business considerations rightly or wrongly, right? So if someone’s operating in a 10 vol and markets are going down and they’re, you know, in a hole by 8%, now are they acting differently from a po You know, they should be buying a lot more ’cause the markets are down and things look interesting. But are they, are they, you know,

00:28:52 [Speaker Changed] They’re playing scared,

00:28:53 [Speaker Changed] They’re playing scared, you know, and I, I think it’s, again, it’s not, it’s not everybody for sure. And there’s some that do it. Well, I just think it is very challenging to do, you know, it’s, it’s much easier to find good stock pickers that are adding alpha than it is for someone to consistently be able to make, you know, I dunno, contrarian or, or correct portfolio management systems. Well,

00:29:18 [Speaker Changed] The, the old joke is the crowd is right most of the time. So if you’re, if you’re constantly fighting the crowd, you’re on the wrong side of the trend. Yeah,

00:29:25 [Speaker Changed] There you go.

00:29:26 [Speaker Changed] Last one. And, and again, another, another brilliant one, dinosaurs go extinct. Innovation must be constant.

00:29:34 [Speaker Changed] Yeah. And this is for, you know, this is for hedge funds as well as us. And you know, and part of it relates to the managers themselves part, it relates to strategies, and again, part of part of it is business model. But when I think about, you know, I think about strategies that we used to invest in in 1995, where you can make a lot of money, like let’s say merger arbitrage, you know, like merger arbitrage. Again, you could, you could make double digit returns. It was less competitive. Plus you need mergers and you, well, yeah, that, that, that helps for sure. But now, like the strategy, I mean, there are some very successful people that do it on a standalone basis. Usually they do it with credit or other events, but like, it’s a much more difficult place to make money. It’s, it’s become largely commoditized. When it becomes interesting, there’s a swarm of money that will kind of go into it, right? Isn’t That true?

00:30:20 [Speaker Changed] For every style of is sector,

00:30:22 [Speaker Changed] Which well, eventually, which is why you need to innovate, you need to, you know, so let’s take you like machine learning quant, right? Like machine learning quant started investing 10 years ago, like that was novel. And, and you know, today it’s obviously gaining a lot momentum. People understand it more, but you have to kind of continue to reinvent, like from our perspective, need to continue to do, look after different strategies, different types of managers to find kind of high alpha. And then from a manager standpoint, again, let’s think about quant again. The managers need to re reinvent themselves and refine themselves from an alpha standpoint. So like alpha’s decay, you know, yesterday’s alpha’s, tomorrow’s beta, right? And, you know, a lot of what has made them successful from an alpha standpoint is gonna decay. So if you don’t, you know, maybe it’s 15, 20% is gonna decay and, and be irrelevant each year. So you need to constantly kind of reinvent

00:31:22 [Speaker Changed] Yourself. So, so when you start putting together the next 30, over the next 30 years, yesterday’s alpha is tomorrow’s beta. That, that’s number 31 for you. There. There you

00:31:31 [Speaker Changed] Go. That’s right.

00:31:32 [Speaker Changed] So let’s talk about what’s going on today. Hedge funds have had to adapt to a very challenging era, certainly since the financial crisis. I, I’ve heard financial repression and all sorts of reasons for why some funds have been underperforming, less volatility, increased dispersion and equity returns, what’s going on in the world of, of hedge funds today. So

00:32:02 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, the, the last five years especially have been a great time for, for hedge funds. So let, let me, let me maybe frame it and, and actually we just came out with a paper called hedge funds in the end of the Alpha winter. And I, I should do a shout out for Emmy Hodges who did a, a great job on, on, on putting the piece together. But maybe it’s just taking a step back. There, there were, we identified kind of three big picture variables that really drive excess return in hedge funds. So one of them is volatility. Everything else you could want volatile higher, that creates dislocation, sloppy trading, you know, it’s kind of opportunity. Opportunity. It’s the fuel, the fuel of what drives alpha, right? The second is dispersion. So equity dispersion for first and foremost, but wider dispersion as well. So more winners and losers.

00:32:48 You know, obviously if you’re a stock picker, that’s helpful. And the third is, is rates being higher than 2%? And higher rates help in a number of ways, but both kind of mechanically. If you, obviously if you have floating rate debt, it’s hopeful higher rates, but also, again, we’ve seen this like in a period of rising inflation where rates are going higher, that’s gonna fuel increased volatility. So it’s a little circular, right? But elevated volatility, or at least normal volatility, elevated dispersion and rates that are greater than 2% when you have those three elements. So even two of those three variables kind of as a, as a tailwind rather than a headwind. Alpha generation is really, really strong. So what we’ve done is like, we looked at three different periods. The first starting with, with 2000 ish, kind of a 10 year period, you know, I forgot exact percentage, but like a large percentage at the time, two of those three variables were, were at your back, they were helpful and you saw excess return that was very, very high. The middle period, which is the alpha winter, you had

00:33:55 [Speaker Changed] 2010s, is that what we’re talking about essentially?

00:33:57 [Speaker Changed] Yeah. To, to two 2000 and, and 10, right? The middle period, which is I think, you know, nine-ish or year, you know, eight, nine year period, which in middle is quite long, was one that where you saw a lot of central bank intervention where those variables were generally, you know, depressed. You could think about 2017 realized valve being really low. Obviously we had rates at zero for a chunk of that period as well. That was difficult to generate alpha, not only for hedge funds, but more broadly. And that’s kind of the alpha winter we would suggest that that period is abnormal. And you know, even if rates go down, even if all comes down, like you are not, not likely to go back to a period that’s so dominated by that period of central bank intervention. And you know, most importantly, the postscript to that is for the last five-ish years, you’ve gone back to kind of the good old days of alpha generation, right? So last five years you’ve had volatility that’s, you know, generally normal or, or or higher dispersion that’s really high and rates that are are accommodative as well. And excess return on alpha has resumed and looks very much like what it looked like 20 years ago versus that kind of middle alpha winter period.

00:35:13 [Speaker Changed] So, so the past five years have been really interesting. 2022 obviously stocks and bonds down double digits. That seems to happen once every 40 years or so. Yep. What, what about 2025, what sort of role is deglobalization and shifting trade policies playing in shaping hedge fund returns?

00:35:33 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, I mean it, well obviously you have a lot of different, so, you know, it’s a lot of different strategies, a lot of different sub strategies. So it’s very difficult to talk about the whole hedge fund industry, right? As, as, as one thing. But like when I think about excess return, you know, all the things that you mentioned are generally good for hedge funds, right? So the rest of the world is getting worried. Like that is again, the fuel of what drives hedge hedge fund returns, right? So when you see, when you see, you know, rising, rising vol and that’s, that’s gonna be good from Cisco arbitrage, it’s gonna be good generally for balanced stock pickers. It’s gonna be good for discretionary macro managers. When you see deglobalization and some of the trends that come out of that, whether it’s onshoring, whether you see some of the moves in, you know, in, in, in, in gold and like that, that’s good from a trend falling standpoint. It’s good for discretionary macro managers. When you see Japan rise increasing rates, the US decreasing rates, that’s hopeful because it’s two bets that you discretionary macro mags took in place. It’s not just like everyone operating in the same way. So those things are, are good. I mean, generally because it gives people more of a, a palette to, you know, an alpha pal to which to choose from place, more bets, diversify more, and also heightened volatility and heightened uncertainty is gonna be positive for the vast majority of strategies, especially from a excess return alpha standpoint.

00:36:58 [Speaker Changed] So you mentioned Japan. I’m curious what regions around the world are attracting the most new capital. We’ve seen Europe suddenly catch a bid. Yeah. Obviously Japan has been doing well, the rest of Asia and the Middle East and even the US Yeah. What, what areas are attracting new capital and what’s driving that

00:37:16 [Speaker Changed] Trend? Yeah, I mean, the thing, one of the areas that we’re most excited about for sure, and have been leaning in for the last three years is Japanese corporate governance. Now, interestingly, if you look at dollar flows into Japan, it’s actually not, I mean, it, it is positive, but it’s kind of modest in the grand scheme of things, which kind of shocks me honestly. And like, I, I don’t, I don’t mind because we’re playing events first and foremost, but you, you really haven’t seen that many dollar flows in, which again, is unusual given like everyone in the world in, in, in every way, shape or form is probably underweight Japan, right? And it’s, and it’s obviously inexpensive, but most importantly you have a material dramatic catalyst that’s driving value through, through Japan. And yeah, we’re excited about it. I mean, corporate, corporate governance has been talked about in Japan for decades.

00:38:01 The reality is until, you know, Abe had his third arrow and you, you’ve, you know, which really set off a, a number of regulatory and policy changes and, and importantly like cra cross shareholder relationships started to unwind that really set the stage for increased corporate governance. So it, it’s, you know, we, we, again, we’ve been there for three years. I think we’re maybe halfway through what needs to be done and, and there’s still a very, very fertile opportunity set. So that’s, that, that’s one. The other thing I I would point out is just the Middle East. Now, obviously, you know, it’s not, it’s not to say that there’s a lot of money from an investment standpoint going into the Middle East, but I had just come back from a, a, you know, week long trip in the Middle East and, you know, got there maybe 18 months prior and it’s really exciting what’s going on. I mean, clearly there’s a lot of interest from an investment standpoint in hedge funds and alternatives in the Middle East. There’s no question about it.

00:38:58 [Speaker Changed] Is this because all the sovereign wealth funds located in Qatar and, and Arab Emirates and Yeah, go down the list. It, it’s coming

00:39:07 [Speaker Changed] Dubai, it’s certainly coming from, from them, but it’s broader. It’s broader as well. I mean, it’s, it’s family office money in, in addition to the, the sovereigns and, and they’re interested in alternatives. They’re interested in hedge funds, local

00:39:19 [Speaker Changed] Family office or Europe and American Family Office

00:39:22 [Speaker Changed] In the Middle East. All, all, all of the above. You know, I mean, there’s also been, which is a maybe to tie together one other part. I mean, there’s also been a lot of movement of people of, of hedge funds setting up businesses in Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and people moving there with wealth and in turn they become, you know, potential investors in alternatives. So that’s a definitely a, a prominent story as well, the number of people that are setting up in, in, in, in the region or open up offices.

00:39:48 [Speaker Changed] So when, when we used to talk about New York, London, Tokyo, Hong Kong as centers, do you put Abu Dhabi or Dubai in that list? Is the,

00:39:58 [Speaker Changed] It’s it’s, you know, for the larger, for the larger hedge funds for sure. I think it’s becoming, you know, the, the vast majority of ’em are opening offices or have offices in regions. So it is definitely an area that is attracting a lot of, a lot of interest. And then from an investment standpoint, you know, again, it’s a much smaller market, but there, I think the, you know, the, the policy changes and regulatory changes which allow foreign ownership and as derivatives market starting is encouraging as well. It’s early days, and again, it’s not, you know, the breadth and depth of the market still needs to improve, but again, it’s exciting from that standpoint as well.

00:40:35 [Speaker Changed] Hmm. Real, really kind of intriguing. What are hedge funds thinking about with assets like crypto or gold? How are they dealing with, what are some of the biggest winners past couple of years?

00:40:47 [Speaker Changed] So you, you’ve seen, I mean, on, on gold and precious, but I mean, discretionary macro managers have, you know, many have had that bet on, it’s been a very successful bet and theme given, you know, concerns on in inflation and debt levels. So you, you know, you can, you continue to see that, that theme in people’s portfolios. Crypto’s a little more, you know, interesting and, and specific, some managers, again, mostly discretionary, macro managers have invested in crypto mostly, you know, mostly bitcoin or e more from that inflationary, you know, debt standpoint, although others have from other standpoint as well, from a, you know, from like a trend follow standpoint on futures, people have done it a bid on statistical arbitrage side. Some people play from like a cash future standpoint, from an ARB standpoint as well, but it, it’s still small, at least let’s say the traditional hedge funds investing in crypto, it, it’s still small. That being said, obviously you have a large number of like dedicated crypto funds that are trading both directionally as well as as, as well as on the A side as well.

00:41:55 [Speaker Changed] Coming up, we continue our conversation with Paul Zumo, chief Investment Officer at JP Morgan, alternative asset management, discussing the state of hedge fund investing today. I’m Barry Riol, your listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

00:42:26 I’m Barry Ritholtz. You are listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My extra special guest today is Paul Zumo, he’s chief investment officer at JP Morgan, alternative asset manager helping to oversee $35 billion in external hedge fund assets. He’s also chair of the alternative asset Management investment committee. He co-founded the group back in 1994. So what styles in hedge fund worlds are doing well in 2025? I’ve noticed over the past few years emerging managers have made some consistent gains. Quants have done well, some of the multi-strat have done well. What, what are you seeing in, in the rest of the field? Some of which even in this high volatility, high alpha market have been struggling.

00:43:14 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, I’d say so we, we look at Pivotal path as the, you know, their indices first and foremost. I think it’s, they’re the, their very, very good quality indices and I think paints a very good picture. And that’s kind of what I have in mind. So like when you, when you look at it, you’d find that most strategies and sub strategies have done pretty well this year in the grand scheme of things. You know, the one exception to that is, is CTAs, which have struggled even

00:43:38 [Speaker Changed] With gold running away. And

00:43:41 [Speaker Changed] C CTAs got hurt in, in April where they were very, very long equities. And yet, you know, liberation Day, right? And you markets correct a lot. So you, you saw, you know, a, a bit of a, a retrenchment in, in CTAs performance in April, they got hit pretty hor and they’ve been trying to like piece it together and they, and they have, the last couple months have been, have been stronger. To

00:44:04 [Speaker Changed] Be fair, it’s very challenging to follow a trend when the trend is dependent on the whims of one person.

00:44:11 [Speaker Changed] That that is true for

00:44:13 [Speaker Changed] Sure, right. Doesn’t show up what,

00:44:14 [Speaker Changed] But the good news is most other strategies are actually doing, are doing quite well, right? So if you look at across relative value as you mentioned quant, the multi-Strat pods, convertible bond arbitrage has been good with, with strong issuance, discretionary macro as we talked about some of the themes, whether it’s, you know, whether it’s gold or you know, or, or, or rates themes has, has done well as well,And you might say, okay, well the markets are up, but it’s not just beta alpha. So a couple people have come up with, you know, if, if you, if you look at the alpha generation this year, it’s about 5%, five and a half percent in Longshore, which is quite healthy. And even, you know, merger arbitrage events done well, you know, credit’s done fine. So I’d I’d say it’s been a good year overall with most strategies generating, you know, strong, kind single, mid single digit to high single digit returns or high single digit returns. And, you know, overall definitely a good year for the industry.

00:45:12 [Speaker Changed] So we’ve seen the rise of multi-strategy managers over the past few years, and there have been a number of very large multi strats and it seems to be a direction a lot of funds are heading. How has that changed competition within the industry? Are, is there more collaboration within a multi-strategy shop amongst all the different pods? How, how is that playing out?

00:45:36 [Speaker Changed] Well, I think collaboration amongst themselves. Yeah, I think like, I think there’s a pretty,

00:45:40 [Speaker Changed] I’m assuming they’re not competing, they’re not collaborating with the fund across the street. It’s all internal, right?

00:45:47 [Speaker Changed] I’m sorry, collaboration for the pods, pods within with the pod or within the pods.

00:45:52 [Speaker Changed] Collaboration within a multi-strat from, hey, here’s the macro, here’s the long short, here’s the quant group, here’s the trend group. What, yeah. Are we, are we seeing,

00:46:02 [Speaker Changed] So like cross polarization across, across teams? I think it depends on the model. You know, like if you, if you look at the pods, obviously there’s some prominent ones out there. They, they differ materially from like strategies that they pursue. They differ materially from the culture that they pursue. They, they, you know, they, they just differ in the risk management approaches is different. So it, it really depends. I I, there there are some managers where the, you know, where they are benefiting from maybe cross polarization a, you know, across teams or a center book that’s maybe drawing upon best ideas. So, but it, it’s really gonna differ kind of pod to pod based on the style and how they, how they operate

00:46:43 [Speaker Changed] F Fair enough. Let, let’s talk about risk management. There were obviously some lessons learned this year in April and plenty of lessons learned in 2022. What do you think are gonna be the most impactful lessons for managers looking forward?

00:46:59 [Speaker Changed] Looking forward? I mean, things we’re worried about today is just complacency. You know, I mean, mark, anytime you have markets going up for a, you know, for, for a while, inevitably complacency develops in some way, shape or form. So we’re certainly being, you know, front footed and, and having discussions. Where is that? And whether it’s credit or equity markets and like how do we or, or specific areas with hedge funds and how do we guard against that a little bit? But I think some of the events last year, like we’re talking about, you know, liberation day or maybe the deep seek event and, and some managers being, you know, God

00:47:32 [Speaker Changed] Was deep seek 2025 it seems like decade, years and

00:47:35 [Speaker Changed] Years ago, you know, maybe it was, you know, so no,

00:47:36 [Speaker Changed] It was, it was January this year and blew everybody’s minds.

00:47:41 [Speaker Changed] I I mean, I, I think it really underscores a a couple things. I mean, one risk management first and foremost, right? And certainly, you know, certainly on Liberation Day, I think a lot of people were, were caught off balance in, in, in their books. And then again, oftentimes kind of retrench after that. Lock and losses, it’s not a great recipe. So like sizing positions and sizing risk across areas, you know, in, in which people invest are obviously always critically important. And then on deep seek, look, a AI is extremely exciting. It, it creates tremendous opportunities. But going back to what we were saying about short selling before, it also creates tremendous risk and, you know, risk of be just being one-sided bet, but also risk of again, operating in a long, short fashion and getting, thinking about like offsetting risks and, and, and basis and sizing. So those things are cri critically important. Hmm.

00:48:36 [Speaker Changed] So speaking of ai, I just overheard Paul Tudor Jones speaking to somebody on Bloomberg saying, you know, maybe AI might be developing into a small bubble, but it’s not a giant headache. How are you looking at all this bubble chatter, high valuation, concentrated markets? This seems to be part of the wall of worry that markets are, are climbing. What’s your perspective on this?

00:49:04 [Speaker Changed] I mean, if Paul said it, it must be right, so

00:49:07 [Speaker Changed] You could do worse than following Paul Ju Jones.

00:49:10 [Speaker Changed] That’s right, that’s right. I mean, look, is is it a bubble? And I obviously it’s, it’s real, it’s gonna be impactful. It, it’s, you know, it’s gonna be enormously important. It’s gonna reshape how we do so many, so many things for sure. Is there excess in certain areas related to it that there has to be for sure. I, again, I think it comes down to risk management first. And for, you know, assuming you want to set up a balanced book, it comes down to risk management first and foremost. And if you don’t, if you just want to play it from a thematic standpoint, again, it also comes down to risk manage, just from a sizing standpoint, you need to size it to be able to handle the inherent vol volatility of it. But is it rich? Well, of course it’s rich. Is it a bubble? I, I, I don’t, you know, I I

00:49:55 [Speaker Changed] I’m not

00:49:55 [Speaker Changed] Best one to say, but it’s certainly is real. It’s certainly gonna revolutionize and change our lives.

00:50:00 [Speaker Changed] Every time someone asks me about it, I, I like to remind them, Greenspan’s irrational exuberance speech was 96. You still had a long way to go right before that really became a bubble. But also

00:50:12 [Speaker Changed] Look, look at, you know, we were talking about, you know, dot com, right? So I mean, as a little bit of your, you know, your model and your playbook, right? So I mean, obviously Amazon came out of that, but there’s a lot, you know, pets.com, you know, know dating myself, but, you know, and I have

00:50:29 [Speaker Changed] Metromedia fiber, Juniper Networks, I

00:50:31 [Speaker Changed] Stock puppet on, on my desk, you know, like really it is gonna be win, it is gonna be winners and losers, right? And, and it, it is extremely important, extremely powerful, but it’s not gonna lift all boats at all, all times. So you need to be selective and you need to size it. Right. Huh.

00:50:46 [Speaker Changed] Make makes great sense. Last question before we get to our favorite questions. What do you think hedge fund managers and investors are not talking about, but really should be? What, what topics, assets, policies are getting overlooked but shouldn’t.

00:51:04 [Speaker Changed] Well, I mentioned complacency a little bit just ’cause where we are in the cycle, but maybe I, if it’s okay, I’ll take in a different direction to say like, it’s more of a misnomer about the hedge fund industry, which is, if that’s okay. Sure. It’s a little, a little different. So I like, one thing I would say that’s, that’s frustrating I think a lot of people get wrong is they look at the hedge fund industry as an asset class. And what I mean by that is if you have an asset class, then the, you know, everything in an asset class should be more or less, you know, highly correlated to each other, right? It’s the same, it’s the same thing. And if you take the 10,000 or so hedge funds that are out there, the correlation across correlation, pairwise correlation is, is something like point 0.2 or 0.25, nowhere

00:51:46 [Speaker Changed] Near one.

00:51:46 [Speaker Changed] It’s nowhere near one, right? So what you really have is a collection of strategies, a collection of sub strategies. Importantly, the characteristics of those strategies are just vastly different from each other in many cases. And the way you use them in a portfolio is vastly different. So when people think about the hedge fund industry and they’re then, and they’re looking at like a hedge fund benchmark, which is, or you know, like 10,000 funds cobbled together, oftentimes they look at it and they’re like, well, I don’t, I dunno what to make of this. It has an okay return and an okay volatility with okay characteristics, maybe I don’t need it, and it’s the right conclusion to the wrong answer. Right? And, and, and, oh, I’m sorry, the right conclusion from the wrong question. Right? And, and like, again, the observation’s correct, but really the question is, can I look at subsets of this industry that are deeply valuable rather than just looking at the whole thing as a whole? And we would strongly suggest that if people are just looking at the aggregate industry, that missing a point that beneath that there are strategies and substrates and certainly managers that are adding enormous, enormous value that’s being overlooked by, you know, someone who’s plugging the average into an optimizer.

00:53:08 [Speaker Changed] I, I’m, I’m so glad you said that because over the course of 25, 30 years, I’ve watched the hedge fund industry change so dramatically and my own views on it have evolved. It’s very easy to look at a broad index and say, gee, this is expensive and doesn’t generate great returns. But again, depending on where you wanna draw the line, top quartile, top decile, when you look at the top performing funds, there is genuine alpha generation. Yeah,

00:53:38 [Speaker Changed] For sure. And interesting, like if, if we would’ve met, you know, 25 years ago, 15 years ago, like I would’ve said the same thing. Is that like, I, I’m not here to say the hedge fund industry as a whole is such a tremendous value proposition. Like that was never the thesis, you know, the thesis is more, are there a hundred or 200 managers out there that are adding enormous value? Yes. And, you know, can, through great due diligence, like, can myself and other people find them if they, if they spend their time and do a great job? Yes. And is that tremendously value in portfolios? Yes. You know, but it’s not about the hedge fund industry as a whole, and the averages are gonna knock the lights out.

00:54:23 [Speaker Changed] Jim, Jim Chanos has this quote I love. He says, you know, when he started out in the late eighties, early nineties, there were a couple hundred hedge funds and they all generated Alpha. Today there’s 11,000 hedge funds and it’s the same 200 hedge funds generating Alpha. Which do you know, there’s a lot of truth to sturgeon’s law. There’s a lot of truth to 90% of everything is not great.

00:54:46 [Speaker Changed] Yeah. Yeah. I don’t know if it’s the same 200, but Yeah. No, no, you

00:54:49 [Speaker Changed] Said the same number. Not necessarily the same number. Right. Funds they come and go. Yeah.

00:54:54 [Speaker Changed] Look, it, it’s a, it’s an industry and an asset class and a, a, a fee structure that attracts a lot of people. But, and, and, you know, and, and, and many of ’em deserve that fee structure and many of ’em are, are, are great, but yeah, they, you know, obviously you need to be selective

00:55:12 [Speaker Changed] A Absolutely. All right, let’s jump to our favorite questions that we ask all of our guests starting with. Tell us about your mentors who helped shape your career.

00:55:23 [Speaker Changed] Sure. I think, so two, two come to mind. I mean, if I go back really, you know, back to high school, and I’m forgetting, I’m forgetting his name, it’s my wrestling coach. I swear

00:55:34 [Speaker Changed] To God, I knew you were gonna

00:55:35 [Speaker Changed] Say that, you know, as my, yes, my wrestling coach, he was my economics professor. And, and this is when I first started getting interested in, in investments and started reading, you know, I dunno, some of like the classic books from, from way back, way back when, one

00:55:53 [Speaker Changed] Reminiscences of stock,

00:55:54 [Speaker Changed] Reminisce of a stock, you know, and he was the one that kind of encouraged, and we actually played this game at the end of the year, which was like a stock market game. And I actually found an arbitrage and we made, made more money than anyone had ever made, you know, and he is like, you know, that’s kind of like real life finance. You should, you know, if you is that interesting, you should explore. So I, I, I credit him for kind of pushing, helping push me in, in that direction. And then from a career standpoint, I, I mentioned Joel Katzman, you know, you know, hired me to, you know, start the visit with him. And yeah, he was really instrumental. I mean, one of the things I, I don’t think we spend as much time, but like skepticism is really important. I’m a deeply skeptical person. I think it helps you navigate things. It’s one of the pearls of wisdom, Joel,

00:56:40 [Speaker Changed] Be a skeptic approach. Due diligence from the perspective, where does this break?

00:56:44 [Speaker Changed] Where, where does it break? Yeah. And I mean, it’s like approaching due diligence. I, I give an analogy of like thinking about a balance sheet where people, again, behavioral biases. You, you, you, you know, too many people say, approach it from the asset side. How much can I make? What’s the story? Da da, da. You need to approach it from the liability side. Like, what can go wrong with this manager? What can go wrong with the strategy? Where does it break? And then turn to the asset side and effectively say, am I getting compensated for, for that? Right? And you could teach people some of that, but part of it has to be innate as well. Like you need to be innate skeptic maybe. So any case, Joel, you know, Joel I think shared my skepticism for sure. He certainly taught me a lot about the business and, and, you know, running a business. So Yeah. You know, props to Joel.

00:57:31 [Speaker Changed] Hmm. Let’s talk about books. Since you mentioned some books. What are some of your favorites? What are you reading currently?

00:57:37 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, so books. So I have a, I, so we invest around 120 hedge funds. And that’s what you’re reading. The vast majority of what I’m reading is their letters, their research, you know, my, my analyst research. And that’s the very, you know, that’s the vast majority. And then like Michael sandblast does great work. Yep.

00:57:55 [Speaker Changed] Love his work, you

00:57:56 [Speaker Changed] Know, really, really good work. So I have to say, that’s consuming the vast majority of my time. The la the only thing that stands out, there’s a book, what is it? Speak like Churchill and Stan, like Lincoln that my old boss Jamie Ra gave to me, which is about public speaking, which is actually really, really good insightful, like easy, easy read book that speak

00:58:17 [Speaker Changed] Like Churchill, stand like Lincoln. Yeah.

00:58:19 [Speaker Changed] Huh. And it’s a real, real easy read to, you know, just some like reinforcing some good lessons of, of public speaking. You,

00:58:29 [Speaker Changed] You mentioned Michael Sist, so I consume his regular output. And then the JP Morgan quarterly Guide to the Markets is just a spectacular, spectacular resource. Agreed. Really, really find it. Amazing. Let’s, let’s talk about what’s keeping you entertained these days? Are you watching or listening to anything? Well, interesting. Well,

00:58:54 [Speaker Changed] Like Netflix and, you know, so Yeah, well I, so I have a five and a half year old, and so she’s, she’s dominating my, the Netflix account. Usually it, it’s a K-pop, demon hunters. That’s

00:59:08 [Speaker Changed] The number one thing on Netflix

00:59:09 [Speaker Changed] Now, I guess I was gonna say, I don’t know if you know what that is. Oh.

00:59:12 [Speaker Changed] Every time I’m searching for anything. There you go. I put, put it on for 30 seconds and my wife is, what are we watching? Can you take this off

00:59:19 [Speaker Changed] Please? Yeah. So unfortunately it’s, it’s a little, it’s, it’s a little too much of K-pop demon haunts, but you know, away from, away from work. I like wine. So it’s probably some podcasts or, or related to wine, just to, when I’m not reading the, you know, or the, the all notes. So, but there’s a, there’s a great one called Wine with Jimmy, which is

00:59:44 [Speaker Changed] Wine with Jimmy,

00:59:45 [Speaker Changed] If you wanna do a deep dive on wine.

00:59:47 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, yeah. That’s, that’s, I literally just bought the, I forgot the name of it, but during Amazon Prime, it was on my wishlist and it was like 98 bucks and it showed up for 30 books, the 30 bucks the Atlas guy. Oh, yeah. To wine around the world.

01:00:05 [Speaker Changed] That’s a, that’s a fat book

01:00:07 [Speaker Changed] Fat. And I’m like, all right, that’s absolutely worth having on the, on the dry bar. So now,

01:00:11 [Speaker Changed] Now you have to read it. You look, you look, look good, look it, look smart with it

01:00:15 [Speaker Changed] At least. Yeah, absolutely. It’s more of a re a reference guy, but give us some of your favorite wines. If you’re not gonna give us more books, give us some wines. What do you, what do you drink? What do you like?

01:00:24 [Speaker Changed] Well, this is, I mean, I, I like, I like red more than white. I like, you know, a, I dunno, a a a a tan, like a Barolo. So a a a tan nice tannic red, red wine. So I, yeah, I drink Barolo Tempranillo.

01:00:40 [Speaker Changed] So we’re always looking for a house wine, just like something reasonable that you could pop open any time. This, this Intre Natali Virga is about a $20 bottle and it drinks like a $50 bottle.

01:00:56 [Speaker Changed] Nice. Finding those values. What, where is it from?

01:00:58 [Speaker Changed] Italy. Okay. But you, they, they only like, it’s a small winery they make Yeah. You know, a few thousand cases you can’t get, like I’ll get a case and that’s it. It’s, you’re done until next year. We’ll,

01:01:09 [Speaker Changed] We’ll swap great value wines after ab

01:01:11 [Speaker Changed] Excellence. There, there was another one called Santos that was a Meritage X-A-N-T-H-O-S. Okay. And the 2017 was spectacular. You can’t find anything. Yeah. It was like a $15 bottle of wine, drank like a $50 bottle of wine. I love it. I don’t feel like I have a palate to go much beyond that. Like, all right. I appreciate,

01:01:32 [Speaker Changed] Listen, if you could find $20 bottles of wine and drink like $60 wine, but you know, my, my, I have a, I’m forgetting the name, but I have a sangiovese like that. Yeah. Which I found at one of the wine. You know, you, you, you go to these like wine tasting events where you, you go around and you could taste

01:01:47 [Speaker Changed] Stuff, wine tasting, tasting things, right.

01:01:48 [Speaker Changed] You could blind, but this is like a James Suckling one where you taste all different types of wines and, and then you, you know, you, you, you, I dunno, for me, I take pictures of the ones I like, and then you go back and then you look it up and some of ’em are like $150 and you’re like, oh, I didn’t find anything. And then you, you know, you see one that’s like 20 bucks and you’re like, all right, maybe I, maybe I found the, the, the, the jewel.

01:02:09 [Speaker Changed] Right. You, it’s easy to get disappointed in $150 bottle wine, a $20, it’s, there’s

01:02:15 [Speaker Changed] A lot of great wine out there.

01:02:16 [Speaker Changed] And, and then you go to Italy and you sit at a cafe and you get an $8 carafe and it’s the best thing you’ve had and it’s spectacular. Exactly. Right. It’s, it’s just so crazy trying to figure, figure that out. So our final two questions. What sort of advice would you give to a recent college grad interested in a career in either in investing or hedge funds or alternatives?

01:02:39 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, so I mean, first, you know, and I guess it’s, it’s cliche, but like the, like, do what you love thing is so real and valuable, but I think you have to like find what you love first. Like when you’re, when you’re 20 years old, I don’t know that anyone, it’s a big world.

01:02:53 [Speaker Changed] Yeah.

01:02:54 [Speaker Changed] Like, has a great vision on it. I, I would say like, trust your instinct, you know? So like, it’s obvious to me today why I am doing what I’m doing. It’s like I, this is, I don’t know, I’m, I’m, I’m skeptical, I’m structured, I’m creative, I’m like curious, like it makes sense today. It didn’t make sense completely at the time, but like, you follow your instinct. You’re like, oh, I, I love to do this. So I’m working on the weekend every week because like, this really intrigues me and it’s interesting and like, you know, the, the, I don’t know, like, like not pay me and I’m still doing this, right? So like, I think being true to yourself and really exploring, like what makes you happy, what makes you in, you know, in, in intrigued what really makes you di dive deep on things. And then continuing to lean in and continue to pursue it and learn, learn more and more.

01:03:43 Maybe the second part of it is just be a student of history. So whether you, so I, I like baseball and, you know, I think like I was young, like how much I learned about the, you know, Ty Cobbs and Diaggio and Ruth and everybody. Like, I think if you are a baseball player, like you should know the history. If you’re going into the hedge fund industry, like, you should know the history. When I say David Asin, you know, you should know that it, you know, so like, take the time to understand the history ’cause of it, it, it, I mean, a number of reasons. One, it gives you context, but two, like the mistakes and the opportunities often, you know, often rhyme with each other. Right? So like, how do you like investing in 2020, in March of 2020? Turns out it looked a lot like 2018, 2008, 1998. Like, there were elements that are very, very similar. And being a student of history helps you navigate much better in the future.

01:04:35 [Speaker Changed] Hmm. To, to say the, say the very least. Final question, what do you know about the world of investing in hedge funds today that would’ve been useful back in 1994 when you were first launching JP Morgan? Yeah. Alternative asset. Well,

01:04:49 [Speaker Changed] Wait a minute. I mean, there was no internet, right? Right. So, I mean, so back in 1995, I mean, I, I don’t know, you, like you, we knew a fraction, we knew 5% of what we knew today, but it was 50% more than next person knew, right? So, I mean, it’s all about, it’s all about getting, you know, it’s all about getting an edge and continue to reinvent yourself. I think the biggest, the biggest lessons learned for, you know, for us, but for the industry is, and what I would have taken back if I could, is just the, the depth of understanding on financing. So, you know, in, in financing agreements, right? Like prime broker agreements and term and triggers and all, all sorts of things that have caused problems over the years. If you could take that one, you know, and, and it’s caused a lot of, you know, pain historically from time to time. I mean, if you had that knowledge and you pull that back to 1995, wow. You would be able to, you know, navigate near seamlessly across the industry in a way that, you know, was much bumpier for everybody along the way.

01:05:57 [Speaker Changed] Paul, thank you. This has been absolutely fascinating and thank you for being so generous with your time. We have been speaking with Paul Zumo, he’s Chief Investment Officer at JP Morgan Alternative Asset Management. If you enjoy this conversation, well check out any of the 600 we’ve done over the past 12 years. You can find those at Spotify, iTunes, Bloomberg, YouTube, wherever you find your favorite podcasts. And be sure to check out my new book, how Not to Invest the ideas, numbers, and behaviors that destroy wealth and how to avoid them wherever you buy your favorite books. I would be remiss if I did not thank the crack team that helps put these conversations together each week. Alexis Noriega is my video producer, Anna Luke is my regular producer. Sage Bauman is the head of podcasts here at Bloomberg. Sean Russo is my researcher. I’m Barry Riol. You’ve been listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

 

~~~

 

 

 

 

The post Transcript: Paul Zummo, CIO, JPMAAM appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Monday AM Reads

My back-to-work morning train WFH reads:

Trump’s Tariffs Could Be Overturned. Companies Are Rushing to Get Refunds. Dozens of importers, including major companies, are filing lawsuits to preserve their right to tariff refunds ahead of a key December 15 deadline.The Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on the legality of tariffs, with potential refunds exceeding $30 billion.The administration has a backup plan to re-create the tariff structure using other types of tariffs if the current ones are struck down. (Barron’s)

How Netflix stole Warner Bros from David Ellison: Old-guard Hollywood underestimated streaming pioneer that has upended the industry over two decades. (Financial Times) see also How the “Albanian Army” Took Over the World Or: How an infamous quip by Time Warner’s former CEO dismissing Netflix became one of the most infamous quotes in entertainment history. (Hollywood Reporter)

For Gen Z, cash isn’t king. It’s a joke. ‘It’s money that doesn’t exist”: Gen Z is treating cash like fake money. (Business Insider)

The wealthy 1% are turning to new status symbols that can’t be bought—and it’s hurting Dior, Versace, and Burberry. Having a Hermès Birkin was once the litmus test for being extremely wealthy. With yearslong wait-lists and eye-popping price tags, the purse was the ultimate symbol of luxury—until Walmart started selling an aesthetically identical version for $80 instead of $25,000. (Fortune)

Americans Are Microdosing Obesity Drugs, Driven by ‘Thin Is In’ Marketing Blitz: Telehealth companies are aggressively marketing GLP-1s as cosmetic elixirs for anyone who wants to lose a few pounds. (Bloomberg)

She Managed His Fortune. How Did She End Up Inheriting It? After the death of his first wife, Gulf & Western president David Judelson married his former banker and left her millions when he died. Now his kids are accusing their stepmom of something sinister. (Wall Street Journal)

In the Line of Fire: During the Trump era, political violence has become an increasingly urgent problem. Elected officials from both parties are struggling to respond. (New Yorker) see also Mike Johnson’s red alert on members quitting Congress. Members of the House of Representatives are quitting Congress at a record rate, with Republican retirements and resignations outpacing Democrats by a nearly 2-to-1 ratio in the first 11 months of the year. (Axios)

Blame Our Love of Booze on Our Primate Ancestors: Our preference for alcohol stems from ancient primates’ fruit-munching habits, research indicates. (Wall Street Journal)

Steve Bannon Was Epstein’s Comeback Consultant. Where’s the Uproar? The MAGA architect is escaping opprobrium for his chummy relationship with the notorious pedophile. (The Bulwark) see also Stephen Miller Is an Immigration Hypocrite. I Know Because I’m His Uncle. If my nephew’s ideas on immigration had been in force a century ago, our family would have been wiped out. (Politico)

Netflix Is Gambling $72 Billion on Buying Instead of Building. Netflix Inc. has won the fight for Warner Bros. Discovery Inc. with a $72 billion cash-and-stock deal, which is worth $83 billion including debt. The strongest logic for the deal lies in giving Netflix subscribers more content to keep them glued to the platform, including phenomenal franchises like Harry Potter and the DC Universe. (Bloomberg)

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business interview with Paul Zummo, Chief Investment Officer and Co-founder of JPMorgan Alternative Asset Management. The JPM group manages $35 billion in external hedge fund solutions for institutional and high-net worth investors. He also heads the Portfolio Management Group, and is a member of the JPMAAM Investment Committee.

 

How Couples Meet, 1940-2020

Source: @SteveStuWill

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

 

The post 10 Monday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Sunday Reads

Avert your eyes! My Sunday morning look at incompetency, corruption and policy failures:

Legendary short seller James Chanos on the problem with Strategy’s business model: The noise has grown louder about Strategy being in trouble, but most experts think Strategy can weather the current bitcoin downturn, though one critic predicts this is “the beginning of the end.” (Sherwood) see also In a crisis, Strategy stacks dollars: A $1.44bn dividend reserve raises new concerns for shareholders of the bitcoin treasury company. (Financial Times)

Americans Are Losing Their Homes to Zombie Mortgages: Private equity and debt collectors are making millions on home loans once thought canceled.  A growing number of debt collectors across the US specialize in buying a certain type of loan, often referred to as a “zombie” mortgage, which have lain dormant for years. Borrowers took them out before the Great Recession, and after home prices crashed, these loans became all but worthless. But as we show on this episode of Bloomberg Investigates, the market eventually came roaring back, and with it a cottage industry looking to bring these loans back to life. (Bloomberg)

What will the cost of Trump’s bank deregulation be? Potentially  Catastrophic: Unfortunately, the Trump administration is tearing away every layer of protection that was designed for the next economic crash. (MS Now)

Summers Banned for Life: The American Economic Association. has imposed a lifetime prohibition on Mr. Summers’ attending, speaking at, or otherwise participating in AEA-sponsored events or activities. (AEA) see also How Could Larry Summers Be So Stupid? The remarkable rise and fall of a domineering public figure appears complete. (Politico)

How the dollar-store industry overcharges cash-strapped customers while promising low prices: Dollar General and Family Dollar stores often fail to honor their shelf prices – charging more at checkout for everything from frying pans to Frosted Flakes (The Guardian)

This company charges disabled vets millions, even after VA said it’s likely illegal: NPR investigation revealed Trajector Medical, a company that started with a mission to help disabled vets, but that former workers say now is intent on aggressive debt collection and maximizing profits. Despite repeated written warnings from the VA that it may be breaking that law, the company continues to operate. (NPR)

The U.S. Is Funding Fewer Grants in Every Area of Science and Medicine: A quiet policy change means the government is making fewer 41% bets on long-term science. (New York Times)

Sex Crimes. State Crimes. War Crimes. We’re detecting a pattern with this administration. (The Bulwark) see also War Crime…or Murder? Killing shipwreck survivors is patently illegal and morally abhorrent. (The Contrarian)

‘We had six MPs and four factions’: inside Your Party’s toxic power struggles: Some say Jeremy Corbyn is too non-committal for project to work, while others blame Zarah Sultana’s combative nature. (The Guardian)

Why One Man Is Fighting for Our Right to Control Our Garage Door Openers: If companies can modify internet-connected products and charge subscriptions after people have already purchased them, what does it mean to own anything anymore? (New York Times)

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business interview this weekend with Paul Zummo, Chief Investment Officer and Co-founder of JPMorgan Alternative Asset Management. The JPM group manages $35 billion in external hedge fund solutions for institutional and high-net worth investors. He also heads the Portfolio Management Group, and is a member of the JPMAAM Investment Committee.


Childhood deaths to rise for first time this millennium

Source: Semafor

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

~~~

To learn how these reads are assembled each day, please see this.

 

The post 10 Sunday Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

MiB: Paul Zummo, Chief Investment Officer of J.P. Morgan Alternative Asset Management



 

This week, I speak with Paul Zummo, Chief Investment Officer of J.P. Morgan Alternative Asset Management. They discuss the state of alternatives and Paul’s “30 Pearls of Investment Wisdom.” They also discuss the early days of hedge funds, investing in the 90’s and building a hedge fund division.

We discuss how his career evolved, and the ways the industry has changed.

A list of his current reading is here; A transcript of our conversation is available here Tuesday.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, SpotifyYouTube, and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business next week with Stephen Cohen, BlackRock Chief Product Officer and Head of Global Product Solutions. He is a member of BlackRock’s Global Executive Committee. Previously, he was Global Head of Fixed Income Indexing (iShares); and Chief Investment Strategist for International Fixed Income and iShares. Blackrock manages $13.5 trillion in AUM; its iShares division is over$5 trillion.

 

 

 

Favorite Books

 

 

 

 

 

 

The post MiB: Paul Zummo, Chief Investment Officer of J.P. Morgan Alternative Asset Management appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Weekend Reads

The weekend is here! Pour yourself a mug of Danish Blend coffee, grab a seat outside, and get ready for our longer-form weekend reads:

In the Shadow of Jane Street and Citadel Securities, Hudson River Mints Billions: The quiet flash boy has morphed into a powerhouse among non-bank market makers. (Bloomberg free)

In every corner of the country, the middle class struggles with affordability. The nation’s affordability crisis has not spared middle-class families, one-third of which struggle to afford basic necessities such as food, housing, and child care. Across the 160 U.S. metro areas studied, at least 20% of middle-class earners cannot afford to live in that place, after adjusting for local income ranges and price variations. The share of struggling middle-class families varies by race: 27% of white families, 39% of Black families, 41% Asian, 46% Native American, and 50% of Latino are unable to afford basic necessities. (Brookings) see also ‘The New Price of Eggs.’ The Political Shocks of Data Centers and Electric Bills: Democrats zeroed in on utilities and affordability to win Republican support in upset elections in Georgia and Virginia. Can the same playbook work in 2026? (New York Times)

When Donald Trump Fired David Rubenstein: The private-equity billionaire spent decades building influence in the capital. Then his philanthropy collided with the president. (The Atlantic)

The Airport-Lounge Wars: When you’re waiting for a flight, what’s the difference between out there and in here? (New Yorker)

Is Gen X Actually the Greatest Generation? (no): How one era changed everything about the culture — and why we’re so nostalgic for its creations. (New York Times Magazine)

Ozempic is changing how we spend money and time, plus what we eat: In just over a year, the percentage of U.S. adults taking drugs such as Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro and Zepbound more than doubled to 12.4 percent, according to Gallup. The survey also reported that the obesity rate fell from almost 40 percent in 2022 to 37 percent in 2025. Some companies are already responding by acquiring health food brands, renovating hotel gyms and changing lunch menus. But that’s only scratching the surface, said Diana Melencio, a partner at XRC Ventures, an early-stage venture capital firm. (Washington Post) see also Ozempic and Other GLP-1s Are Now Being Marketed to People Who Aren’t Obese: “You don’t need to be obese to start a GLP-1,” reads an ad from a telehealth startup, the words scrawled in icing on a cake. Another one features a slender woman excited to lose a little weight before her wedding. Yet another says patients can drop 17 pounds in two months by microdosing copycat Ozempic. (Bloomberg) see also Calories In, Calories Out is Preventing You From Understanding Ozempic. People are more likely to talk about GLP-1s as appetite suppressants that happen to have a lot of mysterious, incomprehensible side effects. Why, they ask, do the brain, the heart, the reproductive system, and other organs seem to respond to GLP-1s, sometimes in the absence of significant weight loss? (Eurydice Lives)

The New German War Machine: After World War II, Germany embraced pacifism as a form of atonement. Now the country is arming itself again. (The Atlantic)

The Oceans Are Going to Rise—but When? The uniquely vulnerable West Antarctic Ice Sheet holds enough water to raise global sea levels by 5 meters. But when that will happen—and how fast—is anything but settled. (Wired)

A Mechanistic Framework for Targeted Intervention in Single-Gene Mental Illness: The statistical signatures are unambiguous: individuals carrying GRIN2A: loss-of-function variants face an 87-fold increased hazard ratio for psychotic disorders, 11.8-fold for anxiety disorders, and 5.84-fold for depressive disorders relative to the general population.  The GRIN2A Paradigm: Monogenic Psychiatry and the Precision Phytochemical Revolution. (Shanaka Anslem Perera)

Why One Man Is Fighting for Our Right to Control Our Garage Door Openers: If companies can modify internet-connected products and charge subscriptions after people have already purchased them, what does it mean to own anything anymore? (New York Times)

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business interview this weekend with Paul Zummo, Chief Investment Officer and Co-founder of JPMorgan Alternative Asset Management. The JPM group manages $35 billion in external hedge fund solutions for institutional and high-net worth investors. He also heads the Portfolio Management Group, and is a member of the JPMAAM Investment Committee.

 

How much equity are founders selling to VCs per round

Source: @PeterJ_Walker

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

~~~

To learn how these reads are assembled each day, please see this.

 

The post 10 Weekend Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

Michael Burry Speaks to Michael Lewis

 

 

Fascinating conversation updating the book, The Big Short:

“Of all the characters in The Big Short, fund manager Michael Burry (depicted by Christian Bale in the movie version) seemed the least likely to grant Michael Lewis a follow-up interview. Burry was one of the first to see the subprime housing market crisis coming, and he actually helped Wall Street banks develop the credit-default swap, the instrument that allowed short sellers to make their bets against the market. Lately, Burry has been in the news again because his fund has taken short positions against tech giants Nvidia and Palantir. Now he finally sits down with Lewis as part of this series.”

 

 

The post Michael Burry Speaks to Michael Lewis appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Friday AM Reads

My end-of-week morning Miami/Art Basel reads:

How Much Will the Stock Market Fall in 2026? What will the worst drawdown look like? Going back to 1928, the average peak-to-trough drawdown in a given calendar year is -16%. Drawdowns were worse than average in 2025 (-18.9%), 2022 (-25.4%) and 2020 (-33.9%). Peak-to-trough drawdowns were better than average in 2024 (-8.5%), 2023 (-10.3%) and 2021 (-5.2%). (A Wealth of Common Sense)

The End of the Lunch Bowl Era: Diners have bowl fatigue, with some deriding them as ‘slop.’ Even Chipotle’s founder has moved on by starting a sandwich chain. (Bloomberg free)

Basic statistical flaws of bitcoin’s four-year price ‘cycle’ The idea that BTC follows a four-year cycle at all originates from the cadence of its coinbase reward halving every four years. Because the supply of BTC issuance programmatically decreases every four years, it is easy to invent a statistical model about that halving’s supposed effect on price. However, this ignores the reality of financial markets where millions of investors discount future prices based on all presently known information. (Protos)

Game Theory Explains How Algorithms Can Drive Up Prices: Recent findings reveal that even simple pricing algorithms can make things more expensive. (Wired)

Everything Is Not Fine in the Art World: Auction headlines offer a picture of health that hides a body in crisis. (Hyperallergic)

The Price of Remission: When I was diagnosed with cancer, I set out to understand why a single pill of Revlimid cost the same as a new iPhone. I’ve covered high drug prices as a reporter for years. What I discovered shocked even me. (ProPublica)

It’s their job to keep AI from destroying everything. Spoiler: the nine-person team works for Anthropic. What happens when just a handful of employees at one of the world’s leading AI companies — one that nearly tripled its valuation to $183 billion in less than a year, and is now valued in the range of $350 billion — are given the blanket task of figuring out how the ultra-disruptive technology is going to impact society? (The Verge)

• Would You Track Your Stools Like You Track Your Steps? Equipped with sensors and AI, smart toilets promise to monitor hydration, gut health and even cancer risk — if users can get past the ick factor. (Bloomberg free)

Will new physics affect our Universe’s far future? We have a picture of how and when it will all come to an end. These three big ideas could still profoundly change how our cosmos evolves. (Big Think)

The NBA Superstar Who’s Kobe, Steph, Wilt and Jordan—All Rolled Into One: Nikola Jokic, the three-time NBA MVP, is having the best season of his entire career. He’s also surpassing some of the best players of all time in several statistical categories. (Wall Street Journal)

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business interview this weekend with Paul Zummo, Chief Investment Officer and Co-founder of JPMorgan Alternative Asset Management. The JPM group manages $35 billion in external hedge fund solutions for institutional and high-net worth investors. He also heads the Portfolio Management Group, and is a member of the JPMAAM Investment Committee.

Will Netflix be the winner of the Warner Bros. Discovery contest?

Source: Sherwood

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

The post 10 Friday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

Sturgeon’s Corollary

 

 

Sturgeon’s Law states, “90% of everything is crap.” 1

Theodore Sturgeon was a science fiction writer in the 1950s and 60s. He was frequently annoyed by critics who dismissed the genre based on its worst examples. When asked, “Why is so much science fiction so bad?” his answer became known as Sturgeon’s Law.

I have taken it upon myself to craft “Sturgeon’s Corollary,” which states the following:

90% of all investment products are crap.”

The reason for this becomes clear across nearly every type of financial product: Mutual funds, SPACs, hedge funds, private investments, ETFs — you name it. The simple truth is that beating a broad benchmark net of fees and taxes over a long-term investment horizon (5 to 10 years +) is incredibly difficult. Add high(er) fees, investment strategies that fall in and out of favor, and human behavioral errors, and you have a formula that makes it difficult to beat a mostly indexed portfolio.

This is not to say that there aren’t excellent examples of all these products. There are some wonderful ETFs and a handful of outstanding mutual funds. Many hedge funds, especially those run by emerging managers, quants, and multi-strategy shops can and do generate alpha. However, we need to acknowledge that selecting the funds that will outperform in advance is a long shot. Only a rare few sustain outperformance over the long term.

Sturgeon’s Corollary is especially true in private markets. Private credit, private debt, and private equity have experienced tremendous growth over the past decade. This has resulted in a land grab, as many players rush into the space to secure assets and fees.

For UHNW investors and RIAs interested in this space, there are five areas they should focus on when considering adding alternative investments to their platform.

Uncorrelated returns Risk Survivorship bias Illiquidity Costs

The most significant appeal of alternative investments is the claim of uncorrelated returns versus publicly traded equities and bonds. While one might assume that the underlying economic cycle will impact everything, there are instances where this has proven not to be the case. This is the most favorable aspect of private alternatives.

The second issue is risk, especially leverage. While we see many proposals showing better-than-index-based returns, many have achieved this Alpha through additional leverage. On a risk-adjusted returns basis, the outperformance often disappears.

Illiquidity and costs are well understood, so let us consider survivorship bias. The most recent analysis of Jeffrey Ptak of Morningstar shows:

“On Jan. 1, 2015, there were 1,345 alternative mutual funds in existence. Only 341 still existed on June 30, 2025 – a 75% mortality rate.”

That is quite a stat: Three out of four funds folded across a decade, with most going belly up within the first five years. This creates a situation where the remaining fund performance across the entire asset class appears better historically than it is prospectively, because the typical fund that closes does so due to poor performance and an inability to attract capital.

My attitude toward private investments has evolved over the decades; I believe that if you can access the top decile of funds, you absolutely should. Opportunities to invest in the top quartile should also be considered. Anything below that should be approached skeptically, as they tend to be expensive, illiquid, risk-laden, and underperforming.

I expect this will be a challenging area for investors over the next decade. High-net-worth investors tend to hear about the best funds in the media while either ignoring or not learning about the rest of the field. As we have seen elsewhere, mutual funds, ETFs, hedge funds, SPACs, and so on, this is not a formula for success.

Your mileage may vary.

 

 

Previously:
10 Quotes That Shaped My Investment Philosophy (October 2, 2023)

Why Most SPACs Suck (October 26, 2020)

90% of Everything is Crap (July 25, 2013)

 

Sources:
75% of Alternative Mutual Funds Have Died. There Are Lessons in That for Would-Be Private Market Investors
Jeffrey Ptak,
Morningstar, Aug 11, 2025

The State of Semiliquid Funds 2025 (Morningstar 2025)

 

 

__________

1. See Effectiviology, which notes that Sturgeon formalized it further in the March 1958 issue of Venture, calling it “Sturgeon’s Revelation.”

 

The post Sturgeon’s Corollary appeared first on The Big Picture.

10 Thursday AM Reads

My morning train WFH reads:

Time to admit the truth: Brexit has been an unmitigated economic failure: Leaving the EU has reduced Britain’s GDP by up to 8pc, according to a devastating US study. GDP down up to 8%; Investment down 18%; Productivity down 4%; Employment down 4%; No upside whatsoever. (The Telegraph)

Office-to-Residential Conversions Are Booming and New York Is the Epicenter: A tour of Manhattan buildings you can now call home, and a peek inside the architectural hacks that make transformations possible. (Wall Street Journal) see also When Home Sellers Set Prices Too High, They’re Paying for It: More than half of homes sold in 2025 through October had at least one price cut. (Wall Street Journal)

America is Flying Blind on Immigration: Nobody Knows How Many Immigrant Workers Have Left the US Amidst Trump’s Mass Deportations. That’s Incredibly Bad. (Apricitas Economics)

I love AI. Why doesn’t everyone? Anti-AI sentiment might or might not be rational, but it certainly relies on a lot of bad arguments. (Noahpinion)

Inside the Ostrich Effect: How Ignorance Has Become a Survival Strategy: Research suggests our tendency to ignore bad news isn’t irrational — it’s self-preservation, and could help explain why older people are often happier. (Bloomberg)

Cities Panic Over Having to Release Mass Surveillance Recordings: Flock’s ‘licence plate readers’ read much more than license plates. A judge says what they record must be released. (God’s Spies)

The Data on Self-Driving Cars Is Clear. We Have to Change Course. If Waymo’s results are indicative of the broader future of autonomous vehicles, we may be on the path to eliminating traffic deaths as a leading cause of mortality in the United States. (New York Times)

What Is the “Bean Soup Theory” on TikTok? Bean soup is sparking conversations about the rise of egocentrism. (Inside Hook)

Russia Gains the Upper Hand in the Drone Battle, Once Ukraine’s Forte: Moscow’s military has gotten better at using the war’s deadliest weapons: small, cheap drones. (Wall Street Journal)

Pete Hegseth Needs to Go—Now: A man with such contempt for the military should not run the Pentagon. (The Atlantic) see also Hegseth, with White House help, tries to distance himself from boat strike fallout: As Congress vows accountability, the Trump administration emphasized it was a top military commander — not the defense secretary — who directed the engagement. (Washington Post)

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business interview this weekend with Paul Zummo, Chief Investment Officer and Co-founder of JPMorgan Alternative Asset Management. The JPM group manages $35 billion in external hedge fund solutions for institutional and high-net worth investors. He also heads the Portfolio Management Group, and is a member of the JPMAAM Investment Committee.

 

Money-Market Assets Rise to Record $8 Trillion


Source: Bloomberg

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

 

The post 10 Thursday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

At The Money: Finding the Hidden Alpha in SEC filings



 

 

At The Money: Finding the Hidden Alpha in SEC filings with Michelle Leder of Footnoted (December 3, 2025)

Is there Alpha to be found hidden in SEC filings? Management does seem to hide lots of bad news by just barely complying with the law. Recent indicators are this is getting worse…

Full transcript below.

~~~

About this week’s guest: Michelle Leder is a researcher covering Corporate SEC-filings; she founded the research service “Footnoted” focusing on uncovering material information hidden in corporate SEC filings.

For more info, see:

Footnoted *

Book: “Fine Print, Uncovering A Company’s True Value.”

LinkedIn

Twitter

~~~

Find all of the previous At the Money episodes here, and in the MiB feed on Apple PodcastsYouTubeSpotify, and Bloomberg. And find the entire musical playlist of all the songs I have used on At the Money on Spotify.

 

 

 

TRANSCRIPT:

 

Intro:  “Honesty is such a lonely word, Everyone is so untrue
Honesty is hardly ever heard, And mostly what I need from you”

 

Have you ever wondered what management buries in their SEC filings. Do they faithfully follow their obligations to their shareholders, or do they see how much they could get away with either not disclosing or hiding?

To help us unpack all of this and what it might mean for your portfolio, let’s speak to Michelle Leder. She is an SEC-filings wonk and specialist; she founded the research Service footnoted, focusing on uncovering material information hidden in corporate SEC filings. She’s also the author of the book, financial “Fine Print, Uncovering A Company’s True Value.”

So Michelle, let, let’s just start out with a basic definition.

What is disclosure? What are the rules that the SEC requires all companies to provide to their in investors?

Michelle Leder: Believe it or not, a lot of the main rules or the framework, if you will, it dates back to 1933. Think about that for a minute. That’s the basic framework, if you will. Like the foundation of the house is dates back to 20, 1933, which is kind of amazing.

It’s 92 years ago. Think about how much has changed in the markets. There’s the, the internet, for example, and you don’t have to call your broker and say, buy me some pork bellies or whatever. It, it’s really kind of amazing that the, the primary framework dates back over 90 years. Um, of course it’s been updated, over the years, but, this is sort of the, the foundation of the house.

This is what. Companies go back to companies and their attorneys go back to time and time again. They’ll talk about the 1933 act, which of course came after 1929 and the Great Depression.

Barry Ritholtz: So let, and that was what? Started the SEC, so let’s talk a little bit about the various filings. Most of us are familiar with the quarterlies, the 10 Qs, but there are also eight Ks and 10 Ks and merger proxies.

Tell us the broad documents that every company is either required to file with the SEC or when a specific event happens is triggered and then has to do a filing.

Michelle Leder: At a bare minimum, publicly traded companies have to file three 10 Qs a year. That’s the quarterly report and one 10 K, and that’s the annual report.

And then 8Ks are filed on an as needed basis, and those are often thought of as material events, but it’s also earnings releases or a press release. A lot of people think that press releases are equivalent to 8Ks, and that’s actually not true. Companies will often put out a press release and maybe they’ll attach it to an 8K, maybe they won’t, but there’s a difference between them.  Companies will often disclose something. In an AK that they never intend to put a press release out on.

Barry Ritholtz: To that point, I love this quote of yours. “Companies know they have to disclose bad news, but they also know they don’t have to post it on a billboard.”

Explain what, what, what other obligations, what do they have to say and when?

Michelle Leder: In general, if something is the, the, the definition is basically something that a reasonable investor would want to know, and that’s what triggers an eight k. A lot of people think that, that, the shorthand is like something material, but materiality is in the eye of be of the beholder.

Something that might be material to me may not be material to you. And there’s a lot of judgment calls. There’s no real like tests. I mean, of course, like. If the CEO resigns and he, absconds with like, $500 million, that’s a pretty easy test.

But you don’t see a lot of those, right?

There’s something a lot less, significant. And then there’s a discussion of like, well, do we need to disclose this, do we not? And I’ve seen it, quite frankly, all over the map. I mean, I’ve seen companies, for example, the most minor enforcement thing that a company can do is get a comment letter from the SEC.

And that’s basically like. Hey, we noticed this thing. Can you explain it a little bit more? And then the more serious thing is a wells notice. And I’ve seen companies like, for example, which is, pretty serious. It’s, it’s, it involves, uh, providing much more detailed information. Attorneys are involved, blah, blah, blah.

And I’ve seen some companies not disclose a wells notice, and I’ve seen some companies disclose a comment letter. So it really can be all over the map. That’s what makes it a little bit confusing and a little bit, hard to figure out. You can’t always say, if this happens, we have to disclose.

Sometimes there’s a lot of wiggle room in there

Barry Ritholtz:  For people who are just curious. The comment letters tend to be pretty minor, a wells notice. Typically gets sent to a firm when the SEC has concluded an investigation and is planning on bringing an enforcement action.

I would imagine that’s fairly material all the time. Am I wrong?

Michelle Leder: You would think, but I’ve seen companies wait instead of like, instead of putting out an 8k that they’ve received a Wells notice, they’ll say that they, uh, they’ll wait until the queue to disclose that. And, of course the Q is all focused on the earnings. So it’s like, buried in there somewhere, usually in their legal disclosure or maybe a risk factor,

Other tricky things that companies will do, all of a sudden, I’ve seen this over and over again, like instead of a subpoena. They’ll say subpoenas, they’ll suddenly make something plural. They won’t put out a press release and say, oh, hey, by the way, we got another subpoena. And companies play these kind of tricks. I mean, they do subtle changes andit’s really up to you as the investor to catch ’em.

Barry Ritholtz:  So what are some of the more common tricks you see that management uses to technically comply with the law and disclose material bad news to investors while at the same time trying to minimize attention to that?

Michelle Leder: Probably the number one thing, um, I see is like companies waiting until late on a Friday or the Wednesday before Thanksgiving with some reason they can choose when they wanna disclose. The rule is actually you have to disclose within four business days.

But of course with holidays and, and other things that can often be, stretched, it’s not as if like, the CFO suddenly resigns and you’ve gotta disclose at that minute. I’ve seen companies wait four days to disclose that, and that’s following the letter of the law.

Now, I would think that if the CFO suddenly resigns from the company as an investor, you wanna know about that right away.

Barry Ritholtz: So the Friday night data dump. After four o’clock, but before the SEC closes at 5:30 is legal, but sounds a little sketchy. How often do you find these sorts of things are disclosing information that ultimately affects the stock’s price?

Michelle Leder: I would say, pretty often, although it’s not an instantaneous thing, um, a lot of what I do is I see an early warning sign. here I’m out in LA and I often think about it as going to the dermatologist and saying, “Hey, I see this mole on my upper arm. Is that cancer? Or do I not have to worry about it?” that’s the type of thing.

It’s an early warning sign that there could be a potential problem. Rarely I would say, do you find like a, what I would call, like what someone might call a smoking gun. It’s not like, like, oh, the CEO embezzled, $500 million, whatever, and we’re filing for bankruptcyMonday morning type of thing.

Barry Ritholtz:  Tell us about the non-disclosure. Disclosure. I love that phrase.

Michelle Leder: Companies know that they have to disclose stuff, and what they often do is they’ll give you the bare minimum of facts, and that’s what they do.

They might say, like, for example, director Alan Smith resigned on a Friday. But they don’t tell you that, oh, maybe he was a member of the audit committee, or maybe he was the former CEO of the company, or maybe he was chairman of the audit committee, or any number of other information and that requires you to go to another filing the proxy statement really to figure out was he a long time director?

Had he only served on the board for three months? All of these things are, information that companies have, but they’re not providing it to their investors. So that’s like, that’s what I would call non-disclosure disclosure. It’s like they’re giving you the bare minimum, but not giving you anything more.

Barry Ritholtz:  Let’s talk about some metadata, red flags. A phrase I’ve picked up from you. I’ve read discussions about repeated amendments of, of various filings or reports that are consistently late. How much of this is just, “Hey, the world is complex and sometimes these things don’t happen on time,” and how much of this is Potentially predictive of real problems at the company?

Michelle Leder: I would say anytime a company can’t get its 10 K or 10 Q in on time, that’s a potential problem. If that happens repeatedly, that’s pattern recognition, right? Like if it goes on for a quarter for, several quarters, or longer that’s a potential problem, right? Companies know, for the most part, they have to get their queues in 40 days after the close of the quarter. And so, if they don’t, those companies that don’t get their filings, they’re 10 queues in on time. If they’re on a September quarter, that’s an indication of a potential issue.

If it’s the third time they haven’t been able to get their 10 Q in on time? And of course there’s exceptions, maybe the company’s going through a big merger, right? Like, when you saw like. For example, like the Albertsons-Kroger thing, a couple years ago, there was like problems there because they were trying to merge the company and there was all this regulatory stuff

If you can easily explain a late filing. I wouldn’t say that every single time a late filing is a problem, but I would say more often than not, it is.

Barry Ritholtz: Your website is called Footnoted. Tell us an example of what looked like a minor footnote in a company filing, or disclosure that. You spotted that later turned out to be a really big story.

Michelle Leder: There’s a couple of examples. One is like, Zoetis, the major animal pharmaceutical company. I started looking into them earlier, well late last year, I would say the, to toward, toward the tail end of 2024. And I put out some research to my clients, back in February of this year.

At the time, they were underplaying their, the dangers associated with one of their so-called blockbuster drugs.

Barry Ritholtz:  If I recall, their drug was causing seizures and deaths on in dogs that had no previous, history of that. There, there literally should not have been released to the veterinary community.

Give us another example that, that. A footnote turned out to be a big story.

Michelle Leder: Back in in 2022, Nicola had like a, uh, what I would call a seemingly minor disclosure. It was about a sudden resignation, by an executive, not the CEO or CFO, just another, like another.

Person who was a “named executive” – that’s a formal term, which is usually the five top executives of the company. Suddenly, and it seemed kind of unimportant, but then it turned out to be an early sign of like basically rats abandoning the ship. And of course we all know Nicolo wound up filing for bankruptcy.

And so it’s kind of like following those breadcrumbs and trying to figure out, figure out what’s really going on at the company. What are they disclosing? What are they trying to tell investors? How can I, try to figure out what’s going on.

Barry Ritholtz: How do you separate what’s really a material red flag and and something that might actually be tradable to just a normal CYA language? That’s in every legal document a corporation produces.

Michelle Leder: I think that’s a great question. And quite frankly, it’s kind of tricky, right? Like it’s, it’s, there is a lot of CYA language in the filings and, um, it can be problematic.

I’d like to think that. after 20 years of reading, SEC filings pretty intensively, that I’m pretty good. My BS meter is pretty well defined and I can kind of tell when something is CYA versus something is, more serious. Of course there is a lot of that language. the filings are ultimately written by lawyers. Now, maybe they’re written by lawyers. I’ve seen a lot more these days. Maybe they’re written by, chat GPT or whatever AI, whatever AI platform they wanna use to write these filings. But ultimately it’s the lawyers that are signing up and lawyers are obviously, tend to be risk averse

Barry Ritholtz: Given the ubiquity of AI these days. How significant is AI in things like corporate filings and how do you use AI to kind of figure out what’s going on with, with all these different things?

Michelle Leder: Well, I think AI is pretty significant in corporate filings. You’re seeing it, more and more, and I’ve certainly, I think I read a journal story like, two or three weeks ago that talked about filings in quarterly work. Or it’s an even conference call, trans, conference call scripts are being written by AI and being used to kind of train, um, executives on how to answer questions, whereas before it used to be sort of in person and, kind of that thing.

I think like AI is of course, becoming much more common in this type of thing. And then of course there’s the tools that are being used to uncover what’s going on in the filings.

I do use AI. There’s a tool that I been using, um, a lot lately. It’s called Fin Tool. And, it’s, interesting because it’s really AI definitely designed around SEC filings as opposed to a more generic AI like a Chat or like, Claude or, pick your AI tool of choice. This one’s strictly focused on SEC filings and, and financial disclosures. And I find it to be pretty good.

Of course, AI is not perfect and so you have to kind of, figure things out. It’s not gonna get everything. But I think, increasingly it can be a helpful tool in trying to detect patterns.

So, like, for example, if I wanted to know, like, how many CFOs, let’s just say, company X has had in the past 10 years. in the past I would’ve had to dug through different filings, I mean, Bloomberg would of course have that information on the terminal, but, that’s the type of thing that AI can really help you with.

Things like that —  going through and, and putting the pieces together.

Barry Ritholtz: To wrap up, if you’re an active trader or if you buy speculative stocks or. Even if you have questions about the management of some of the companies you own, it might be useful to pay attention to their SEC filings, especially the things they may not want you to see items they’re dumping on a Friday evening.

Or barely meeting the minimum disclosure requirements. There’s a, there’s gold in them. There are hills if  where to look, and if  how to interpret it. I’m Barry Ritholtz. You are listening to Bloomberg’s At the Money.

 

Outro:  “Honesty is such a lonely word, Everyone is so untrue
Honesty is hardly ever heard, And mostly what I need from you”

 

~~~

Find our entire music playlist for At the Money on Spotify.

 

The post At The Money: Finding the Hidden Alpha in SEC filings appeared first on The Big Picture.

Transcript: Wilhelm Schmid, A. Lange & Söhne CEO

 

 

The transcript from this week’s MiB: A. Lange & Söhne CEO Wilhelm Schmid, is below.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple PodcastsSpotifyYouTube, and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

~~~

Barry Ritholtz: This week on an extra special live edition of Masters in Business, I’m at the Audra Newport Concourse de Elegance, and my conversation is with Wilhelm Schmidt. He is the CEO of Ang Zona, one of the finest watch companies in the world. They’re located in Glashutte, Germany.

Our conversation talked about everything from collectible timepieces to collectible cars. I found it fascinating, and I think you will also, with no further ado, my discussion with Alan’s owners, Wilhelm Schmidt. Wilhelm Schmidt, welcome to Bloomberg

Wilhelm Schmid:   Thank you so much, Barry. Thank you.

Barry Ritholtz: Thank you so much for this, for hosting this event and, and participating in our conversation. I have, I have so many things to talk to you about, but I have to start with this prestigious concourse in this spectacular setting on what could be the nicest day of the year. What is the connection between classic cars and fine mechanical time pieces?

Wilhelm Schmid:  Some mean people say me because I like cars and watches and watches and cars, but I think it’s of course more than that. You know, watchmaking is, that’s what we emphasize on and 90% of our energy will go into watchmaking. That, that’s, that’s, that’s our home turf. But I believe as a global brand, you also need to find a world that is focused on something else, but where you have sort of a common ground that you can walk on.

And about 14 years ago, we were looking for a platform where we can show the brand and where we can bring customers to entertain. And if you look at these cars, let’s start with the cars and, and look at the word concourse of elegance. So we are not in vintage cars or racing, it’s about concourse of elegance. You know, it’s about beauty, it’s about heritage, it’s about craftsmanship, it’s about design. And if you look onto the pillars on which our brand rests, it is exactly, it’s it’s history, heritage, it’s design, and it’s of course the craftsmanship. And trust me, these cars that you see here, as they were built, they were built by proper craftsmen. And even today, without proper craftsman, you will not keep them on the road.

Barry Ritholtz: I know that you studied as an engineer and mechanic before eventually moving over to, to watches, obviously the design ethos of some of these cars. Yeah. They’re just so phenomenal and spectacular. What sort of inspiration do you running a, a fine watchmaker take from the designs of these cars?

Wilhelm Schmid: I don’t think you can immediately take something from that world into our world, but if you look at these cars, well, the first thing that comes to mind is some of them are 50, 60, 80, a hundred years old. And we look at them today and they still fascinate us. So obviously that design survived all the different fashion change of taste, odds of time. They’re here today and they’re as attracted as they were probably back then when they were brand new.

If you look at specifically the purpose-built car, you know, the race cars, they were built for only one purpose and that’s what they were perfect in. And I think in watches you also have to identify what is it that you emphasize on, and then don’t compromise too much on it because if you start making big compromises, you end up with something which is, you know, a little bit of everything, but nothing particularly really good. So I think that’s what you can take from cars into watches, identify the purpose, and then everything should direct to achieve that. If I call it the North Star, you know that purpose and for watches, it’s exactly the same. So

Barry Ritholtz: There’s a lovely white Mercedes going out there. (Yes. With the red interior.) And I once heard someone ask you to compare A Lange to a car, and you thought about it and said the gull wing, because the design was purposeful from start to finish. Tell us what you mean by purposeful in either watch or car design.

Wilhelm Schmid: You know, if you, if you go back and think about the mid fifties in Germany, I mean, I wasn’t born there. I’m not that old, but you know, I can, I see, I saw pictures, I saw pictures of the Autobar and I saw the cars on the road back then. And then think about very suddenly something like the gold wing appears. I mean, an alien could have landed and caused the same result.

Barry Ritholtz: Tubular frame up racing an,

Wilhelm Schmid: d 210 horsepower you know, the 235 kilometers an hour high speed. You know what it did, the doors.

Barry Ritholtz: ’cause you couldn’t have a door over that frame exactly for the body, they were too wide.

Wilhelm Schmid: Right. So they just came up with the doors and you know what they did at limit? They wanted to permit that because in the book it, it didn’t say explicitly, it’s not allowed, but, you know, no got much Negotiated.

Barry Ritholtz:  And they did very well,

Wilhelm Schmid: Absolutely they did. Absolutely did it. No, but I think the car was made for one purpose and it was winning races in the first place and, and, and paving the way for Mercedes internationally to be back where they wanted to be. And that is very high up. Don’t forget the price of these cars. I mean, you could probably bought streets for the same price, not houses or streets in, in, in the mid fifties ar

Barry Ritholtz: Arguably the first supercar ever made. So you’re a connoisseur of vintage cars. I know you have a couple of Porsches. Tell us what else you like in, in classic automobiles?

Wilhelm Schmid: I do like the, what I call the odd balls. The Porsche that I have are actually the exceptions because everybody knows what a nine 11 is. And probably many people know what a 356 is. So that’s, I don’t say utility, but these cars are, you know, the, the, the 356 is my Swiss pocket knife.  Because you know, you can go on a tour with it, which I take that car a lot and if the weather is nice, you just open the roof and it takes you 30 seconds and if the rain comes, it takes you 30 seconds to bring the roof back on. It is not as watertight as you think it is. I have to say. There’s still a lot of water coming through, but at least you’re roughly protected against the environment.

And the 911 is the car that I never wanted and I will never sell. It’s just a fantastic driving car. But you know, the other cars that I have are more for people that really know about cars. You know, if I share somebody, I have a Fraser Nash, most people right. Wouldn’t even know what that is. And that’s not a surprise because I think they build about 600 cars pre-war and then about 83 post-war. So the likelihood that you know it, if you’re not into the hobby is very high.

Barry Ritholtz: So I keep me meeting people here, chatting about cars, chatting about watches. When I was doing a little research on you, it turns out that you really know the firm’s clients, both customers and collectors. What do you do in an event like this? How much time do you spend with some of the longer collectors and people who are so enthusiastic about the brand?

Wilhelm Schmid: I would say 90%. You know, really, if I’m not in interviews with you, then I’m out there and, and, and talking to our customers, you know, that’s the most important for us because at the end we mustn’t forget all that is not paid by Lang and Zuna. This is paid by our customers.

Barry Ritholtz: there’s a quote of yours I really enjoyed. We wanna surprise, inspire and enchant our clients with an unprecedented imagination and ingenuity. How do you go from those lofty goals to turning it into a mechanical time piece?

Wilhelm Schmid: Yeah, well first of all, it takes strict discipline. The moment you do things that are not in line with who you are, you may surprise people, but probably not positively. And, and for sure eventually will dilute your, your your brand equity. So the third thing is you have to apply this simply. That’s why we have six different watch families and we have sort of a horizon of seven years and we wanna apply each watch family at least once, let’s say within 24 months rolling. So that’s, you know, sort of the, the engineering structure all attempts. That doesn’t answer your question. I know staying traditional, but thinking out of the box because our value set is very traditional, but our thinking is often very much out of the box.

I give you a good example. The torubillion has been invented by Breguet, I think about 280 years back or so, something like this. It was there to enhance the accuracy of a watch by, you know, eliminating the mistake that happened through gravity, basically

Barry Ritholtz: Mostly pocket watches, which we’re always facing downwards,

Wilhelm Schmid: and of course it’s a very delicate mechanism. It it does do the job because think about you put your watch on desk next to your bed, so at least for 10 hours it is exposed to gravity without moving. Anyhow, I wanna argue the necessity of a ion. What we found very interesting is that it was there to enhance the accuracy, but it was impossible to set time correctly. Because if you do that with a running second, it is pure luck that you hit exactly the point. So we were the first in 2009 to come up with a mechanism that makes the toon stop. So the second hand comes to a stop and you can adjust the time properly. We then went one step further with the 1815 tobe beyond where you’re not only stopped the moment you pull the crown, that second then goes to zero, which is the best way to adjust your watch properly.

Now that sounds easy, but if you take into consideration that that tour beyond has about 85 little parts, the total weight is about oh 0.75 gram wow. You, you know, any impact and the mechanism will be destroyed. So you have to be very careful in what you do. That is just one example where we think out of the box, a chronograph with sort of a, a running minute, which most of them do, you know, the second hand goes and it’s catching the, the minute counter. And then as, as the second hand goes on, the minute counter slowly moves, which makes it quite difficult. Is it now two minutes or three minutes or four minutes. So hours in most cases have the jumping. So it’s the second hand crosses the 12th, it jumps by one minute. So you absolutely clear it’s one minute, two minute, three minute or four minute, not is it two and a half or is it three? Just little things that don’t mean a lot for people that are not into fine watches, but they mean the world for our customers.

Barry Ritholtz: I want to talk about the Odysseus in a little bit. Yes. And that particular chronograph, which is fairly unique, but we’re, we’re not quite there yet. I wanna stay with the fact that Longa is famously a German watchmaker. What advantages are there or disadvantages Yeah. For being a German maker in an industry dominated by giant Swiss brands?

Wilhelm Schmid: I think it’s more an advantage than a disadvantage. First of all, I always say there is no Swiss watchmaking and there’s no German watchmaking. Because think about it. I mean, you can find Swiss made watches for a hundred euro and then you find, find the same for a few million. How, how, how can, how can be there any common denominator that covers the Swiss mate from there to there. So same for Germany. You know, we have watches that are very inexpensive and then you have us with sometimes watches up to 2 million obviously at the, at the top end. It’s like a package, it’s like a box of chocolate, you know. And our chocolate is craftsmanship, history and design. And we stay very strict to it.

00:13:00 [Speaker Changed] So some of the bigger brands put out watches in the millions of units. Rolex famously two to 3 million. Patek is known to do about 75,000 watches. Longa does a small fraction. Every piece is made by hand assembled twice.

Barry Ritholtz: And not because we can’t get it right first time — its assembled first and then the pieces are taken apart and hand engraved and decorated.

Wilhelm Schmid: It’s you know, because we use the original sources, we believe that anything that nothing is much better than, than German silver. You know, that’s the perfect material. It’s been, it’s been good for the last 150 years.  So we believe in this and we don’t want to coat it. Which means over time it will develop a very nice patina, you know, the silver will get that little golden glow, which is beautiful.

Problem is you breathe on it or you touch it, it will look very ugly very soon. And you cannot even clean it. You have to machine it. So that means to, to, to to, to maintain a statical and technical perfection, you first have to make sure your movement is absolutely up to scratch. All tolerances are there, everything is adjusted, everything works.

You go through the test and if you have assurance, you know, that movement is like, it has to be, it goes back to the watchmaker. He or she will disassemble it, clean it, put in the final decoration because now you know you don’t have to adjust anymore because that’s done. You clean it, you oil it, you put the final decoration in case it goes again through the test, and only then it ends up in a, on a, on a happy wrist.

Barry Ritholtz: So inherently the way you build watches, you’re gonna be somewhat limited in production. How, how does that affect the decision making process of what sort of watches you make? And I know there are a number of Longo watches that are limited editions of a hundred or 50 or even 25. Yes. What’s the thinking behind that?

Wilhelm Schmid: Very easy. You know, sometimes let’s take the minute repeater perpetual calendar that we launched this year in April. We know it’s gonna take us three to four years to build to 50 watches.

Barry Ritholtz: Meaning from start to finish you’ll do a couple of watches every year wow

Wilhelm Schmid: You know, so, and we know that. So in today’s world to come up now with this sort of capacity and say we produce a hundred means the last one will get to watch in eight years.

Barry Ritholtz:  That’s a long time

Wilhelm Schmid: Right. So what that’s, you know, capacity balanced by what we think we can expect from a customer to wait, that usually gives an idea about the limitation.

Barry Ritholtz: I was looking at the Lange Perpetual In black. Yes. And I stopped by the boutique and they said figure somewhere between 12 and 15 months. Before yours is ready. So when someone orders a watch. That goes into the system and my watch is moving. Yeah. it’s literally that specific

The Odysseus came out very unique looking sports watch then a lightweight titanium version.

Wilhelm Schmid: No, first the white gold. White gold. So it was 24th of October 19 stainless steel in April, 2020. White gold, then titanium,

Barry Ritholtz: Then the honey gold,

Wilhelm Schmid: Then the honey gold. No then the odys chronograph.

Barry Ritholtz: Ah The chronograph

Wilhelm Schmid: And then the honey gold.

Barry Ritholtz: So I, let’s talk about the chronograph. Most people are familiar with Chronos ’cause they typically have two or three sub dials. YesNot with the Odysseus

Wilhelm Schmid: Now it wouldn’t work because of the design of the dial. You know, if you look at

Barry Ritholtz: ’cause of the big day and date?

Wilhelm Schmid: If you take the dial off and you look at the movement, the upside of the movement, you will see it’s almost all blocked. So there is no way that you come through. And of course we also didn’t want to increase the size by much, you know, we wanna have a wearable watch. So the only way was to utilize the center even more than we usually do. And that’s why the chronograph, the second and the minute hand comes out of the center.

Barry Ritholtz: And when you reset the chronograph, it does a little bit of a dance. Yeah. That’s kind of unusual. I’ve spoken to a lot of people about this. Nobody has been able to explain that to me. You are my last hope.  Tell us about that.

Wilhelm Schmid: It’s very easy because they are yet together. So if you reset it, the, the minute hand will do as many turns as the second because it’s linked. Right. And it’s so quick that you can’t see. It probably would take a good camera and then you slow it down to see it. But basically, if you have stopped 17 minutes and let’s say 30 seconds, what works? Like this is factually seven times going around to come to zero.

Barry Ritholtz: Why does it, why does it do that?

Wilhelm Schmid: Because it’s geared together. It’s, there’s, you know, because it comes out of the,

00:19:05 [Speaker Changed] It’s strictly because of it’s a centen center hands. I think that’s

00:19:07 [Speaker Changed] Exactly the point.

00:19:08 [Speaker Changed] Huh. That, that’s really, that’s really fascinating. So a watch like the Zet work or the Odysseus, how long is that process when someone first conceives of this, take us through how long it is from idea till the finished product in the boutique.

00:19:24 [Speaker Changed] Very different. You know, Odysseus, as I said, took us 25 years. Basically. I think that the real process where we identify, that’s the phase, you know, that looks different to anything else in the market that will not cannibalize anything within our own range. To to to, to launch, to watch it. The 24th of October, in, in, in, in 2019. I was good. Seven years,

00:19:53 [Speaker Changed] Seven years from start to finish. That’s, that’s amazing. Yeah. So, so yesterday at the event two new longest dropped the Axia thin. Yes. In black Onyx and platinum. Is that

00:20:05 [Speaker Changed] Right? Yes. True. Onyx honey, gold and platinum. Yeah.

00:20:08 [Speaker Changed] Really striking dress watches. The Saxon are sort of, I don’t wanna call it entry level, but they’re less pricey than some of the other watches.

00:20:19 [Speaker Changed] They are more simple, simple. That’s how I show it, you know, it’s, for us, it’s all about the amount of parts the years it take to develop the, the hours it takes to assemble that at the end will define whether it’s a complicated watch or I would say more simple watch and two hands. I think we don’t go more simple than two hands.

00:20:40 [Speaker Changed] And my first nice dress watch was a rose gold Saxon mood phase, you see over black. Yes. And one of the things that people are genuinely surprised is the same level of detail and finishing what, what you describe as simple a lot of people think of in terms of price point. There seems to be no difference. No, no, no. It’s,

00:21:03 [Speaker Changed] You know, if you look at our, our process in the manufacturing, we can, you know, the people that work on finish, they sometimes have no idea where that part will end up. So they will not say, oh, that goes into grand complication. We do it a little better. Or that goes into thin. How we do it a little, that’s

00:21:22 [Speaker Changed] The same thing regardless. Million dollars or entry level.

00:21:25 [Speaker Changed] It, we do not distinguish in quality at all. It’s all the same emphasized on lofty detail, craftsmanship, hand polishing, decoration, hand engraving. There is no difference. Double assembly, it’s one process. It doesn’t matter whether the watch would cost 25,000 euro or 2 million.

00:21:47 [Speaker Changed] And when people say to me, I’m looking for an elegant dress watch, but something that’s not too pricey. My answer is always the Saxon, it’s just timeless, so elegant and continues to just, yes, the design gets better over time.

00:22:03 [Speaker Changed] And, and it’s, it’s, it’s ama you know, people, you look at it and you see it’s an Alan on Zuna watch. If you have something complicated like this, you have a lot of hands to work with. You have the sub dials, you know, you have to push back. You can do a lot. But I think one of the biggest challenge for designers is you have two hands to work with and not a lot on the on the dial. Make it an Alan Zuna.

00:22:28 [Speaker Changed] So the data graph has been called one of the best chronographs ever designed. What’s the core of that Watches appeal? What makes that so special?

00:22:39 [Speaker Changed] I think it’s, it’s, it’s, it’s more than just a watch. You know, I, I’m a watch collector for a long, long time. I can remember when I opened a newspaper in, in, in, in, in 20, in, in 94. And I saw the at with the four lunga watches. 99 were, most companies around the world were still using somebody else movement and often the same supplier. Here comes a chronograph, which is one of the crown things in watchmaking from Germany in a very unique design with an outsized date. I think it was a wake up call. And, and, and we must not estimate what that watch started in the watch industry because before that chronograph didn’t play a role. There were two supplier and that was it basically after that. And if you then go and, and, and, and analyze what happened from then to the following 5, 6, 7 years, a lot of chronograph movements came out. So that’s why this watch is so important for us because that was the first real complication other than the tobe beyond polymer that we worked on. And I think that was a wake up call and it, it, it just gave us a reputation as a solid watchmaker that it’s the next level up

00:24:20 [Speaker Changed] For sure. Absolutely. The next level up. So you get to spend a lot of time with, with clients, with customers. Absolutely. With collectors. How are you seeing the, their expectations and desires changing? What does the client base look for from Longo over the next decade? I think it

00:24:38 [Speaker Changed] Does. It never changed.

00:24:40 [Speaker Changed] Never

00:24:41 [Speaker Changed] Changes. No, you know, first of all, do you have any idea what you will like in three years from now, one

00:24:50 [Speaker Changed] Who does?

00:24:50 [Speaker Changed] Exactly. So when people say, oh, you come with a small watch because you follow trend, I say, look, I mean, I wish we had known seven years ago and we started developing the movement. We are not in the fashion industry. Business, you know, our processes and the time it takes to come to market is so long that you maybe can anticipate, but maybe you have to stay true to yourself. And I think the one thing which our customers expect from us is authenticity. It has to be in Lan Zuna. And if you had followed the discussion after we launched the Odysseus, because you know, we always said, we only precious metal in here, can we steal? And later on with titanium, say, of course there was a heated debate. Of course there was. And we were aware of it because that is a tension that on purpose we wanted, there were a lot of people that said, ah, it’s not for me. I see Langa as dress watch only there were luckily a lot more people that say, I want that watch desperately where we can produce fine. However, it just opened up a new chapter in our design language because now we have a playground to try out things that we would never do with our classical watch families.

00:26:19 [Speaker Changed] And every car enthusiast knows when the Porsche nine 11 came out, the 3 56 purists were upset. What, what are you giving us such a big car who needs six cylinders?

00:26:32 [Speaker Changed] Absolutely. That’s why they built a nine 12. Right. Put the four cylinder in. You know, that’s, that’s exactly what they did. So yeah. That’s funny. Sometimes I

00:26:41 [Speaker Changed] I I love this quote of yours and I’m wondering if it still applies. You said part of longer’s success is that we’re a secret. Yeah. So question number one is what makes that an asset? And question number two is look at this event. How much longer is this a secret? Oh,

00:26:58 [Speaker Changed] It is, it is, it is in the white world. We are still absolutely unknown and I think that’s a good place to be. There are, there are three reasons to it. The one is, what we do is very difficult to understand specifically at the price point that we request for people that are not into fine watchmaking. Why would you spend so much money on a watch when your iPhone gives you the time? More precisely. You know, that the general thinking for sure. The second is, in today’s world, you don’t want to show off too much. At

00:27:40 [Speaker Changed] Least these are very much under the radar. And I am always shocked at people who haven’t the slightest idea when I’m wearing this, as opposed to the better known

00:27:49 [Speaker Changed] Brands. Why isn’t that nice? I mean, that gives you a certain confidence and a certain, it’s, it’s, you know, you don’t need to shout. And on the other hand, and I’m sure you can agree on it, if you see somebody that is also having a una it’s not difficult to, to get the communication started. Isn’t it

00:28:08 [Speaker Changed] Immediate, immediately have something to shout about if you know, you know,

00:28:12 [Speaker Changed] You know for sure. And, and that’s why I believe it is so important to remain a secret. I also admit the real challenges to secret, to share the secret with, you know, the right crowd of people. Because at the end, you know, I mean I’m fine, but whenever we take the new apprenticeship trainees in in August, I feel the duty on my shoulders because now they start a career as watchmaker and they’re in for the next 40 years. So we need to make sure that the next generation knows what we do and we stay relevant for this.

00:28:46 [Speaker Changed] So I only have you for a few more minutes. I want to get to my last couple of questions. Speaking of the next generation. Yeah. How do you appeal to younger buyers and and what sort of approach do you have as all these tastes seem to shift amongst the 20 and 30 something crowd?

00:29:07 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, I gladly we don’t have a real issue here. We have a surprisingly young customer base. I always say that and I never understood it. I mean, if you are young and you’re interested, what speaks against quality, longevity, classless and timeless design. Robustness, value creation. Yeah. I mean, it doesn’t matter whether you are a hundred years old or 10. If you are into that, you’re gonna like it. The way we connect with these people is different to the way, let’s say I was connected to the watch industry because, and as, as I grew up, it was very difficult to find even specialized magazines for, for watches. Today you have everything you can think of. I believe we live in absolute paradise times for for watch enthusiast because never ever in history have there been more watch brands, higher quality, more information, right. More information and easy accessible information. You know, you can do your research without leaving your room. That was impossible in times, you know, where I started to get into the hobby,

00:30:21 [Speaker Changed] Although I, I would tell people go see the watch. Go try it on, make sure that’s

00:30:26 [Speaker Changed] The only thing that matters. That’s right. It’s the only, I would just say the natural habitat of a wrist watch is, is the wrist a wrist? So forget about looking at thumbing and ah, I like it. That’s a good start. But the moment of truth is you grab that watch, you put it around your wrist, you look at yourself and see is it me or is it not?

00:30:46 [Speaker Changed] So how do you have access to every longer watch? Yeah, there is. How do you decide what you’re gonna grab that day to wear? I,

00:30:54 [Speaker Changed] You know, this one because of, you know, chronograph, we’re in a car world. It’s the 1815, so that’s the more classical line. I’m a huge fan of chronographs and it doesn’t get any better than a Chronograph Raton. So you know that. And I, it’s admit, I think it works very nice with my tan color right now.

00:31:17 [Speaker Changed] So our last question. Tell us what’s next for Longa and Sona? What surprises are coming up down the road? What should we be looking for?

00:31:27 [Speaker Changed] I think it’s always good to look for, but if I now share secrets, there’s no surprise. And that’s the one thing people love surprises. But I can share with you as much as is, this is not the last surprise for this year.

00:31:44 [Speaker Changed] Oh, really? So the, the Saxon Finns not the last surprise of 2025. That’s

00:31:50 [Speaker Changed] What I should

00:31:50 [Speaker Changed] Fantastic. That was my conversation with Wilhelm Schmidt, CEO of Langan Zona at the Newport Oring concourse to Elegance. Extra special thanks to the team that came up to Newport to help film this. Alexis Noriega is my video producer. Sebastian Escobar is my videographer. Anna Luke is my producer. Sage Bauman is the head of podcast at Bloomberg. I’m Barry ols. You’ve been listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

~~~

 

 

The post Transcript: Wilhelm Schmid, A. Lange & Söhne CEO appeared first on The Big Picture.