Taking CTAs Mainstream | Systematic Investor | Ep.421
The discussion examines the case for managed futures and CTAs as portfolio diversifiers, particularly when stocks and bonds may not provide the protection investors expect. The speakers compare historical returns and correlations across market crises, while also stressing CTA drawdowns, wide fund dispersion, and the difficulty of choosing managers or timing strategies. They also question conventional asset-allocation assumptions and argue for judging investments by their actual contribution to a portfolio.
Preview · 29 more points in the app
Read the Full SummaryKey Takeaways
The speaker argues that AI tools such as Claude could let one person handle work that once required four people and $500,000 to $1 million in working capital, potentially encouraging entrepreneurship. Separately, the speaker characterizes equity markets as having become a venture-capital-like bet in part because of the AI theme.
Asset allocation requires projecting returns and relationships across 25 to 40 asset classes over a 10-year horizon, yet the speaker says models often rely on 20 to 50 years of historical data and have repeatedly produced mistaken assumptions that contributed to periodic crises.
The speaker says the standard 60/40 portfolio depended partly on a historically short period when stocks and bonds were negatively correlated, which he characterizes as a historical accident fueled by a 20-year bond bubble. As that relationship breaks down, investors are reconsidering the bond allocation or adding alternatives, even as the speaker maintains that diversification helps limit catastrophic drawdowns.
The dot-com crisis illustrates how alternatives behaved differently from falling equities: the S&P 500 fell 40%, the Nasdaq 80%, and non-U.S. developed equities about 45%, while REITs rose 49% and gold and the GSCI index also rose as interest rates fell. Over the cited 27-year period, the guest reports lower equity correlations for GSCI (0.3), gold (roughly zero), and CTAs (slightly negative) than for REITs (0.65) or U.S. investment-grade bonds (0.36).
During the GFC, equities fell 40% to 50%, while bonds held their value rather than rising because interest rates were already lower; high yield fell 22%, which the guest attributes to its substantial equity exposure. The episode's account of the 60/40 portfolio also emphasizes that bonds' diversification role had depended on a particular historical period of negative stock-bond correlation.
The speaker argues that CTAs can benefit when markets move substantially away from consensus by holding rising markets or shorting falling ones, and says their tactical approach need not stay long an asset during a severe decline. If investors fear a 40% equity drop over the next year, he says he would put his money on managed futures making money during that period, while acknowledging that other assets could also gain and unexpected assets could be crushed.
TECHNOLOGY
“and what I think is going to happen with AI, is, you know, the business that used to require a million dollars of working capital, $500,000 of working capital, you…”—
MARKETS
“Anyways, what is also a little bit unpredictable but probably in line with expectation is the fact that the trend barometer finished at 52 yesterday which is still pretty strong…”—
“So basically you I mean you think about it you say I'm gonna define these 25 or 30 or 40 different asset classes and what you're really doing is you're…”—
“what I think is interesting having looked at this the asset allocation business a lot since the early 2000s it has an enormous amount of what's called recency bias and…”—
FORECASTS
“but again it's but again if your focus is on a crisis right and you're worried about the equity markets going down 40% over the next year…”—
Why portfolios may need a more tactical approach
Nils and Andrew frame tactical strategies as a possible complement to slow-moving portfolios, emphasizing that changing markets may reward adaptability.
AI, entrepreneurship and the changing world of work
Andrew sees AI lowering startup costs and weakening the old expectation of stable corporate careers, potentially encouraging entrepreneurship and economic growth.
Complex systems and why the future is so difficult to predict
Nils uses an unexpected political reaction in Spain to illustrate how complex systems can amplify small events, while Andrew links this unpredictability to markets.
Trend following performance and what is driving returns
Andrew attributes recent CTA gains to shifting trends across oil, equities, and rates, describing a more balanced return pattern than the concentrated 2022–23 theme.
Why the traditional 60/40 portfolio is being questioned
They question the 60/40 portfolio after bonds failed to provide dependable protection, and argue that portfolios should begin with goals, risks, and diversification needs.
The problem with long-term asset allocation assumptions
Andrew says asset allocation relies on unreliable long-term return and correlation forecasts, and that recent history helped make 60/40 seem like a universal answer.
Diversification, market timing and the historical advantage of bonds
They acknowledge diversification’s value while criticizing rigid, slow allocation models; behavioral comfort with bond income also helps explain persistent bond ownership.
What 27 years of managed futures data tells us
Andrew uses nearly 27 years of SocGen CTA Index data to assess managed futures as a broad category, rather than relying on individual-manager anecdotes.
Crisis alpha across the dot-com crash, GFC and 2022
The dot-com crash, global financial crisis, and 2022 selloff show how bonds and other diversifiers can fail across different regimes, while CTAs repeatedly generated crisis gains.
Correlation, alpha and the diversification case for CTAs
Andrew argues CTAs have low correlations with traditional assets and meaningful alpha, giving allocators a statistical reason to consider them in diversified portfolios.
Drawdowns and why tactical strategies can preserve capital
The index’s modest historical drawdowns reflect tactical risk management, but manager-level losses vary widely, so diversification across CTA funds remains important.
Sharpe ratios and the problem of lumpy returns
CTAs have a respectable but not exceptional Sharpe ratio, and their uneven returns can make them difficult to defend through long periods without gains.
Why choosing the right managed futures manager is so difficult
Wide manager dispersion and little performance persistence make selecting CTAs challenging; recent winners may owe results to differing exposures or luck rather than durable skill.
How managed futures can finally grow the pie
Andrew urges the industry to present managed futures in portfolio-level terms, highlighting tactical diversification and real-world opportunities instead of abstract technical language.
Why the industry needs to stop getting lost in the technical details
They argue that jargon-heavy explanations and detailed model comparisons can confuse allocators, and that the industry should communicate the portfolio benefit more clearly.
The danger of betting everything on one manager
Andrew warns that concentrating an allocation in one celebrated manager can magnify disappointment and damage confidence in the entire managed-futures category.
Why timing managed futures can make a good strategy look bad
Because CTA returns are lumpy, investors may enter or exit at poor moments; Andrew recommends evaluating the strategy over a long horizon and pairing managers thoughtfully.
Related Episodes
Important Disclaimers
Not Investment Advice: For education only — not financial, tax or legal advice.
AI-Generated: Made by AI from source transcripts and may contain errors.
No Guarantees: Past performance does not predict future results; investing carries risk.
Our Commentary · Request Removal