MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122796928 · doi:10.3905/jai.2008.712595

Replicating the Properties of Hedge Fund Returns

2008· article· en· W3122796928 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Alternative Investments · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHedge fundReplicatePortfolioReturns-based style analysisEconometricsReplicating portfolioAlternative betaVolatility (finance)EconomicsStochastic gameComputer scienceFund of fundsFinancial economicsActuarial sciencePortfolio optimizationOpen-end fundMicroeconomicsFund administrationIncentiveFinanceMathematicsInstitutional investor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, the authors implement a multivariate extension of the Dybvig [1988] Payoff Distribution Model that can be used to replicate not only the marginal distribution of most hedge fund returns but also their dependence on other asset classes. In addition to proposing ways to overcome the hedging and compatibility inconsistencies in Kat and Palaro [2005], the authors extend the results of Schweizer [1995] and adapt American option pricing techniques to evaluate the model and also derive an optimal dynamic trading (hedging) strategy. The proposed methodology can be used as a benchmark for evaluating fund performance, as well as to replicate hedge funds or generate synthetic funds. <b>TOPICS:</b>Portfolio theory, volatility measures, portfolio construction

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.190
Threshold uncertainty score0.221

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.210
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.058 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it