Hedge Fund Rich List: Who Stayed Afloat in Worst Year Since 2008?
Every year, Institutional Investor’s Alpha documents the performance of the world’s most elite investors: hedge fund managers. The Hedge Fund Rich List, in its 14th year of publication, is a “who’s who” of the industry and highlights the performances of the most successful investment managers in the world.
Our infographic today is based on this report, and it breaks down the last year for this elite group.
The Worst Year Since the Financial Crisis
The performance of this collective of top-notch investors was the worst as a whole since the Financial Crisis in 2008. In the previous five years, their total earnings averaged $19.3 billion. Last year, the group brought in a paltry $11.6 billion. This brought average earnings per person down to $467 million over the year from $846 million in 2013.
This is counterintuitive based on the fact that the S&P 500 gained an impressive 13.7% on the year in 2014. Interestingly, only about half of the managers beat the index’s performance, with the rest falling into single-digit return territory.
The minimum amount of earnings to make the list dropped significantly from $300 million to $175 million. This is the lowest minimum earnings in the last three years.
David Tepper, of Appaloosa Management, is barely staying afloat. After having one of the best five-year stretches of performance in hedge fund history, he saw his earnings decline 88.6% in 2014. He had finished #1 overall in 2013, but only saw a 2.2% gain over the last year.
Many managers were not even lucky enough to get the “minimum wage”.
John Paulson of Paulson & Co., who famously made his fortune betting against the US Housing Market in 2007, ended up tanking in 2014 with his second worst year ever. His Advantage Plus fund fell 36% while his Advantage fund dropped 29%.
The Top 10 Investors
The managers that had the highest returns were as follows:
10. Charles (Chase) Coleman III of Tiger Global Management – $425 million
9. O. Andreas Halvorsen of Viking Global Investors – $450 million
8. David Shaw of D.E. Shaw Group – $530 million
7. Larry Robbins of Glenview Capital Management – $570 million
6. Michael Platt of BlueCrest Capital Management – $800 million
5. Israel (Izzy) Englander of Millennium Management – $900 million
4. Bill Ackman of Pershing Square Capital Management – $950 million
3. Ray Dalio of Bridgewater Associates – $1.1 billion
2. James Simons of Renaissance Technologies – $1.2 billion
1. Kenneth Griffin of Citadel – $1.3 billion
Profiles on those that broke $1 billion:
Ray Dalio, the legendary founder of Bridgewater Associates, along with two of his associates, made the full list of 25 earners. Bridgewater uses computers and humans to make decisions in 199 markets. Ray took home $1.1 billion.
Renaissance’s intense data focus helped James Simons qualify to the Rich List every year for the last 14 years. He finished #2 with $1.2 billion in earnings.
Kenneth Griffin has made the Rich List 13 times, however this is his first time finishing #1 overall. The founder and CEO of Citadel posted gains of 18.3% in its multistrategy funds driven largely by profits related to the equity markets.
What’s Ahead for 2015?
While 2014 was a tumultuous year for hedge fund managers, it is clear 2015 will be at least as challenging and interesting. Global headwinds such as the Greek Crisis and volatile Chinese equity markets will test even the most seasoned investors.
The 7 Major Flaws of the Global Financial System
Since the invention of banking, the global financial system has increasingly become more centralized. Here are the big flaws it has, as a result.
The 7 Major Flaws of the Global Financial System
Since the invention of banking, the global financial system has become increasingly centralized.
In the modern system, central banks now control everything from interest rates to the issuance of currency, while government regulators, corporations, and intergovernmental organizations wield unparalleled influence at the top of this crucial food chain.
There is no doubt that this centralization has led to the creation of massive amounts of wealth, especially to those properly connected to the financial system. However, the same centralization has also arguably contributed to many global challenges and risks we face today.
Flaws of the Global Financial System
Today’s infographic comes to us from investment app Abra, and it highlights the seven major flaws of the global financial system, ranging from the lack of basic access to financial services to growing inequality.
1. Billions of people globally remain unbanked
To participate in the global financial sector, whether it is to make a digital payment or manage one’s wealth, one must have access to a bank account. However, 1.7 billion adults worldwide remain unbanked, having zero access to an account with a financial institution or a mobile money provider.
2. Global financial literacy remains low
For people to successfully use financial services and markets, they must have some degree of financial literacy. According to a recent global survey, just 1-in-3 people show an understanding of basic financial concepts, with most of these people living in high income economies.
Without an understanding of key concepts in finance, it makes it difficult for the majority of the population to make the right decisions – and to build wealth.
3. High intermediary costs and slow transactions
Once a person has access to financial services, sending and storing money should be inexpensive and fast.
However, just the opposite is true. Around the globe, the average cost of a remittance is 7.01% in fees per transaction – and when using banks, that rises to 10.53%. Even worse, these transactions can take days at a time, which seems quite unnecessary in today’s digital era.
4. Low trust in financial institutions and governments
The financial sector is the least trusted business sector globally, with only a 57% level of trust according to Edelman. Meanwhile, trust in governments is even lower, with only 40% trusting the U.S. government, and the global country average sitting at 47%.
5. Rising global inequality
In a centralized system, financial markets tend to be dominated by those who are best connected to them.
These are people who have:
- Access to many financial opportunities and asset classes
- Capital to deploy
- Informational advantages
- Access to financial expertise
In fact, according to recent data on global wealth concentration, the top 1% own 47% of all household wealth, while the top 10% hold roughly 85%.
On the other end of the spectrum, the vast majority of people have little to no financial assets to even start building wealth. Not only are many people living paycheck to paycheck – but they also don’t have access to assets that can create wealth, like stocks, bonds, mutual funds, or ETFs.
6. Currency manipulation and censorship
In a centralized system, countries have the power to manipulate and devalue fiat currencies, and this can have a devastating effect on markets and the lives of citizens.
In Venezuela, for example, the government has continually devalued its currency, creating runaway hyperinflation as a result. The last major currency manipulation in 2018 increased the price of a cup of coffee by over 772,400% in six months.
Further, centralized power also gives governments and financial institutions the ability to financially censor citizens, by taking actions such as freezing accounts, denying access to payment systems, removing funds from accounts, and denying the retrieval of funds during bank runs.
7. The build-up of systemic risk
Finally, centralization creates one final and important drawback.
With financial power concentrated with just a select few institutions, such as central banks and “too big too fail” companies, it means that one abject failure can decimate an entire system.
This happened in 2008 as U.S. subprime mortgages turned out to be an Achilles Heel for bank balance sheets, creating a ripple effect throughout the globe. Centralization means all eggs in one basket – and if that basket breaks it can possibly lead to the destruction of wealth on a large scale.
The Future of the Global Financial System?
The risks and drawbacks of centralization to the global financial system are well known, however there has never been much of a real alternative – until now.
With the proliferation of mobile phones and internet access, as well as the development of decentralization technologies like the blockchain, it may be possible to build an entirely new financial system.
But is the world ready?
The World’s Most Valuable Bank Brands
These charts visualize the most valuable bank brands around the world, while also showing the rise of China’s financial services sector over time.
Visualizing The World’s Most Valuable Bank Brands
When most people think about brands, they often picture iconic consumer marks like Coca-Cola or Apple.
But in the realm of financial services, the importance of having a strong consumer brand is also rapidly growing. After all, with hundreds of new fintech entrants positioning themselves to be the “banks” of the future, it seems that brand awareness may be one of the major competitive advantages that incumbent banks can use to protect themselves.
Which financial institutions have the strongest brands, and which brands are the most valuable?
Valuable Bank Brands in 2019
Today’s chart looks at the world’s most valuable bank brands, according to a recent report from Brand Finance.
It should be noted that brand value in this context is a measure of the “value of the trade mark and associated marketing IP within the branded business”. In other words, it’s measuring the value of intangible marketing assets, and not the overall worth of a business itself.
Here are the top bank brands by value in 2019:
For the third year in a row, the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) takes the top spot, with a brand value of $79.8 billion.
Wells Fargo is the top U.S. bank by brand value, coming in 5th place – however, the bank actually fell two spots from last year’s ranking while simultaneously losing 9% of its brand value. This is not surprising in light of the recent publicity challenges faced by the bank.
The Ascent of Chinese Banks
It’s also interesting to note that Chinese banks have taken all four of the top spots on the list, with ICBC, China Construction Bank, Agricultural Bank of China, and Bank of China having a combined brand value of over $250 billion.
Here’s a look at the ascent of Chinese banks over time:
In contrast, in the entire span of 2009-2014, there were zero Chinese banks that cracked the top five.
The Strongest Bank Brands
Finally, here is a look at the strongest bank brands.
It’s worth noting that in contrast to value, these are banks that have executed on their branding, marketing, and sales strategies to have brands that ultimately create a competitive advantage for their business.
Brand Finance measures brand strength by looking at a balanced scorecard of metrics evaluating marketing investment, stakeholder equity, and business performance.
For more insights, don’t forget to check out Brand Finance’s report.
Markets3 months ago
The Jeff Bezos Empire in One Giant Chart
Maps6 months ago
Mercator Misconceptions: Clever Map Shows the True Size of Countries
Advertising2 months ago
Meet Generation Z: The Newest Member to the Workforce
Misc5 months ago
24 Cognitive Biases That Are Warping Your Perception of Reality
Technology4 months ago
The 20 Internet Giants That Rule the Web
Environment2 months ago
The World’s 25 Largest Lakes, Side by Side
Advertising4 weeks ago
How the Tech Giants Make Their Billions
Chart of the Week3 months ago
Chart: The World’s Largest 10 Economies in 2030