Eurekahedge Report - March 2017

EUREKAHEDGE
THE EUREKAHEDGE REPORT

MARCH 2017
Asset Flows Update 3

Hedge Fund Performance Commentary 11
Activist Hedge Funds Strategy Profile 19
2016 Overview: Key Trends in North American Hedge Funds 23
Top 10 Tables 40
Index Return Matrix 43
THE EUREKAHEDGE REPORT AUGUST 2016 1
linear_print_ad_09-03-17_cmyk.pdf 1 09/03/2017 16:39
Capital
Introduction
Outsourced
Trading
Regulatory
Umbrella
DMA &
Trading Desk
Prime Execution
Brokerage
& Custody
Hedge Middle &

Fund Hotel Back Office
Linear Investments
Boutique Prime Brokerage
Linear is your specialist prime broker and hedge fund

incubator. Linear’s integrated platform is made up of Home of the Hedge
seven core services, bringing together all the skills Fund community
and expertise hedge funds require for a full solution
– significantly reducing your operational costs and
Contact:
helping bring you to market faster and more efficiently.
Linear Sales
info@linearinvestment.com
Linear Investments offers the complete suite of front- +44 020 3603 9809
to-back office services, from execution, prime brokerage,
custody and settlement, regulatory umbrella through to www.linearinvestment.com
capital introduction. This unique service provides our

small to medium-sized fund groups and brokerage clients
with a cost effective way to run their business, and grow
their AUM.
Linear Investments Limited. Regulated by FCA. Registered in England and Wales No. 7330725. 8-10 Grosvenor Gardens, London SW1W 0DH
FLOWS
ASSET
EUREKAHEDGE
ASSET FLOWS UPDATE
NORTH AMERICAN HEDGE FUNDS AUM (2005 – 2017 YTD) US$22.7 billion investor outflows in 2016
US$1.1 billion investor inflows in 2017 YTD
US$1.49 trillion AUM 67% GLOBAL MANDATE 35 Net Flows
Performance
25
80% % change of year-on-year AUM
15
60%
5
40%
20% -5
0% -15
-20%
-25
-40%
2016 2017 YTD
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
YTD Source: Eurekahedge
Source: Eurekahedge
LAUNCHES AND CLOSURES SINCE 2008

800 Number of Launches
Number of Closures
600
400
200
0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Source: Eurekahedge
AUM BY GEOGRAPHY, 2017 AUM BY STRATEGY, 2017
Global Arbitrage
CTA / Managed
North American Futures
Distressed Debt
Event Driven
Latin America
Fixed Income
Asia Pacific Long / Short Equities
67% Europe
39% Macro
Multi-Strategy
Source: Eurekahedge Emerging Markets Others

Source: Eurekahedge
FUND SIZE BY NUMBER OF FUNDS HEAD OFFICE LOCATIONS BY AUM
76%
68% United States
United Kingdom
Jersey
24%
19%
8% 5% Bermuda
90%
2017 2009 Canada
Less than or equal to US$100 million

US$101-500million Source: Eurekahedge Others
More than US$500million
Source: Eurekahedge
BEST AND WORST STRATEGY, 2017 BEST AND WORST REGIONAL MANDATE, 2017
2017 YTD
CTA / Managed Futures ,

2017 YTD
Global,
-0.08% 0.53%
Event Latin
Driven America,
3.51% 3.03%
-0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% 4.0% 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5%
Source: Eurekahedge Source: Eurekahedge
THE EUREKAHEDGE REPORT MARCH 2017 2

FLOWS
ASSET
EUREKAHEDGE
ASSET FLOWS UPDATE
“Investor subscriptions Introduction

for the hedge fund
industry have picked up The Eurekahedge Hedge Fund Index was up 0.97% in February1 while underlying markets
as represented by the MSCI World Index2 gained 2.72% over the same period. Among
pace since the start of
regional mandates, Latin American managers led the table, up 2.75% during the month
2017 with managers followed by Asia ex-Japan managers with 1.43%. Across strategies, distressed debt hedge
recording net inflows of funds were in the lead with 1.34% gains followed by event driven hedge funds with 1.26%.
US$17.1 billion.”
Final asset flow figures for January 2017 revealed that managers reported performance-
based gains of US$3.2 billion while recording net asset inflows of US$5.2 billion.
“CTA/managed futures Preliminary data for February shows that managers have posted performance-based
gains of US$14.1 billion. Preliminary net asset flows were positive in February with
hedge funds attracted
US$11.9 billion of inflows into the industry. Redemption pressure appears to have eased
the bulk of investor though a clearer picture should emerge in coming months on the outlook for investor
interest since the start allocation into hedge fund regional and strategic mandates. The current assets under
management (AUM) of the global hedge fund industry stand at a total of US$2.26 trillion.
of the year with net
investor inflows of Figure 1a: Summary monthly asset flow data since January 2012
US$8.4 billion.” 2,500 60
2,300 40
“AUM for North
Total assets in US$ billion
Asset flow in US$ billion

American hedge fund 2,100 20
industry has reached a

record high of US$1.52 1,900 0
trillion as at February
1,700 (20)
2017.”
1,500 (40)
“Over the past three

Jan-12
Jul-12 Jan-13 Jul-13 Jan-14 Jul-14 Jan-15 Jul-15 Jan-16 Jul-16 Jan-17
Performance-based growth Net asset flows Total assets
months, billion dollar Source: Eurekahedge
hedge funds recorded

net outflows of US$7.7 Key highlights for February 2017:
billion whereas hedge
 Hedge funds were up 0.97% in February with year-to-date gains coming in at
funds managing 1.87%. Investor subscriptions have picked up pace since the start of 2017, with
between US$100 million net inflows coming in at US$17.1 billion.
to US$1000 million saw
 AUM for the North American hedge fund industry has reached a record high of
US$3.6 billion inflows.” US$1.52 trillion. Investor subscriptions for 2017 year-to-date stood at US$15.8
billion, with US$11.7 billion of performance-based gains recorded over the
“AUM for long/short same period of time.
equities strategies grew  The US$261.0 billion CTA/managed futures mandated hedge fund industry saw
by US$10.1 billion over the highest net investor inflows among strategic mandates for 2017 (US$8.4
the year, with US$8.6 billion). Managers posted modest performance-based gains totalling US$1.4
billion over the same period.
billion attributed to
performance-based  AUM for long/short equities hedge fund managers grew by US$10.1 billion over
gains.” the first two months of the year with strength led by performance-based gains
of US$8.6 billion. Long/short equities hedge fund managers are up 2.72% over
the past two months.
1
Based on 61.361% of funds which have reported February 2017 returns as at 15 March 2017
2
MSCI AC World Index (Local)
3 THE EUREKAHEDGE REPORT MARCH 2017

FLOWS
ASSET
EUREKAHEDGE
ASSET FLOWS UPDATE
 Asian managers saw investor subscriptions of US$1.5 billion on a year-to-date basis, with performance-based gains of
US$1.9 billion. On a year-to-date basis, Asia ex-Japan managers were up 3.55% with underlying Greater China and
Indian managers up 5.49% and 6.76% respectively. Japan focused funds were up 1.67% over the same period.
 European managers gained 0.52% during the month, with year-to-date gains coming in at 1.16%. The US$507.5 billion
European hedge fund industry was the only region to witness year-to-date investor redemptions of US$1.2 billion while
performance-based gains of US$2.8 billion were recorded.
 Sub-billion dollar hedge funds recorded strong investor interest as of 2017 year-to-date, with net inflows totalling
US$9.1 billion. Within sub-billion dollar hedge funds, mid-size funds managing between US$100 million and US$500
million have seen inflows of US$4.9 billion.
Figure 1b: Contribution by hedge fund performance and investor flows for the global hedge fund industry since 2006
100% 400
80% 300
Total change in AUM (US$ billion)

60% 200
40%
100
20%
0
0%
(100)
(20%)
(200)
(40%)
(60%) (300)
(80%) (400)
(100%) (500)
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Performance-based growth/decline (LHS) Investor flows (LHS) Total change in AUM (US$ billion) (RHS)
Source: Eurekahedge
Figure 1b shows the share by performance-based growth/decline and net investor flows for the global hedge fund industry since
2006. During the pre-financial crisis period, the share of performance-based growth and investor inflows was almost evenly split
with total asset growth coming in at US$343.4 billion. During the financial crisis in 2008, investor outflows accounted for over
half of the total loss of capital for the global hedge fund industry as investors grew nervous over the prospect of their
investments.
The years following the financial crisis saw accommodative central bank policies largely on the back of asset purchases and low
interest rates, setting the momentum for an economic recovery. Investor sentiment improved with positive investor inflows in
2010 and 2011 but the height of the Eurozone crisis witnessed further redemptions in 2012 which were less severe than those in
the post-global financial crisis period. In 2013, hedge funds recorded the strongest growth in their AUM since 2007 with assets
increasing by US$240.4 billion during the year on the back of strong performance-based gains and investor inflows.
This happened against the backdrop of a global equity market rally and a recovery in the US economy that saw investors scale
up their allocations to hedge funds. While the Greek and Ukrainian crisis contributed to some investor nervousness in 2014,
investor inflows remained positive with modest performance-based gains resulting in the industry’s asset base growing by half
the levels seen in 2013. In annual year 2016, performance-based gains of US$35.1 billion were recorded while investor outflows
stood at US$55.1 billion over the same period. As of 2017 year-to-date, managers posted performance-based gains of US$17.3
billion with net investor inflows coming in at US$17.1 billion.

FLOWS
ASSET
EUREKAHEDGE
ASSET FLOWS UPDATE
Table 1: Performance-based changes in assets and asset flows in February 2017
Assets at Net growth

Net flows Assets at end % change in assets
start (performance)
Hedge funds 2233.2 14.1 11.9 2259.2 1.17%
By geographic mandate
Asia ex-Japan 154.5 1.1 0.3 156.0 0.96%
Japan 16.8 0.1 0.1 17.0 1.35%
Europe 506.2 2.3 (1.0) 507.5 0.26%
Latin America 54.9 0.5 0.5 56.0 1.93%
North America 1500.8 10.0 11.9 1522.7 1.46%
By strategic mandate
Arbitrage 136.9 0.2 0.9 138.0 0.79%
CTA/managed futures 249.3 3.0 8.6 261.0 4.67%
Distressed debt 58.7 0.3 0.1 59.1 0.70%
Event driven 211.7 0.4 0.7 212.8 0.50%
Fixed income 160.3 0.8 (0.9) 160.3 (0.05%)
Long/short equities 779.2 5.3 (0.4) 784.1 0.63%
Macro 150.6 0.7 (0.9) 150.3 (0.17%)
Multi-strategy 359.3 2.9 1.5 363.7 1.24%
Relative value 65.9 0.4 0.2 66.4 0.87%
Others 61.3 0.1 2.1 63.6 3.71%
By fund size (US$ millions)
≤20 18.0 0.0 0.3 18.4 1.78%
<20-≤50 40.1 0.1 0.1 40.3 0.58%
<50-≤100 54.5 0.1 0.2 54.8 0.59%
<100-≤250 228.3 0.9 1.5 230.7 1.02%
<250-≤500 310.8 1.5 1.2 313.6 0.88%
<500-≤1000 462.5 1.7 0.6 464.9 0.51%
>1000 1118.9 9.7 8.1 1136.6 1.59%
Note: All figures are in US$ billion, and rounded off to 1 decimal place Source: Eurekahedge
North American funds recorded net asset inflows of US$11.9 billion while posting performance-based gains of US$10.0 billion
during the month of February. Net asset outflows to the region since the start of the year stand at US$15.8 billion, while
managers have posted performance-based gains of US$11.7 billion over this time period. Total assets in North American hedge
funds currently stand at US$1.52 trillion for the year – the highest recorded AUM to-date.
European fund managers recorded net outflows of US$1.0 billion, while registering performance-based gains of US$2.3 billion
during the month with total assets in European hedge funds stand at US$507.5 billion. As of 2017 year-to-date, European hedge
fund managers have seen performance-based gains of US$2.8 billion while net outflows stood at US$1.2 billion. European hedge
funds have been facing 10 consecutive months of redemptions for the period ending February 2017, with redemptions totalling
US$42.0 billion over this period.

FLOWS
ASSET
EUREKAHEDGE
ASSET FLOWS UPDATE
Asian funds saw inflows of roughly US$0.4 billion in February with Asia ex-Japan funds posting performance-based gains of
US$1.1 billion. Japanese funds saw performance-based gains of US$0.1 billion during the month. As of February 2017, Japanese
managers have seen performance-based gains of US$0.1 billion while US$1.8 billion of performance-based gains were recorded
for Asia ex-Japan managers.
Figure 2: February 2017 asset flow by geographic mandate
14
12
10
(2)
Asia ex-Japan Japan Europe Latin America North America
Performance-based growth / (decline) (US$ billion) Net flows (US$ billion)

Source: Eurekahedge
Figure 3: 2017 asset flows by geographic mandate
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
(2)
(4)
Asia ex-Japan Japan Europe Latin America North America
Source: Eurekahedge
Figure 4 gives a breakdown of performance-based figures and net flows for the hedge fund industry by various strategies for the
month of February. CTA/managed futures mandated hedge funds saw the highest net flows this month, up US$8.6 billion,
followed by multi-strategy and arbitrage mandated hedge funds with net inflows of US$1.5 billion and US$0.9 billion over the
same period. Event driven mandated strategies also saw net inflows with a US$0.7 billion gain. On the other hand, fixed income
and macro mandated hedge funds posted steep declines in February with net outflows of US$0.9 billion each, followed by
long/short equities managers with outflows of US$0.4 billion this month.
As of 2017 year-to-date, CTA/managed futures hedge funds recorded the most inflows of US$8.4 billion followed by arbitrage
and event driven hedge funds with inflows of US$2.7 billion and US$1.7 billion respectively. On the other hand, macro hedge
funds saw the steepest redemptions, with US$1.9 billion of outflows, followed by fixed income US$0.2 billion of redemptions.

FLOWS
ASSET
EUREKAHEDGE
ASSET FLOWS UPDATE
Performance figures were positive across all strategic mandates this month, with long/short equities hedge funds seeing the
highest performance-based gains of US$5.3 billion in February, followed by CTA/managed futures and multi-strategy mandates
with gains of US$3.0 billion and US$2.9 billion respectively. As of 2017 year-to-date, long/short equities managers reported
US$8.6 billion in performance-based gains, the highest performance figures among all strategic mandates. This is followed by
multi-strategy and CTA/managed futures hedge funds with an increase of US$2.5 billion and US$1.4 billion respectively.
Figure 4: February 2017 asset flow by strategy employed
10
(2)
Arbitrage CTA/managed Distressed Event driven Fixed income Long/short Macro Multi-strategy Relative value Others
futures debt equities
Source: Eurekahedge
Figure 5: 2017 asset flow by strategy employed
10
(2)
(4)
Arbitrage CTA/managed Distressed Event driven Fixed income Long/short Macro Multi-strategy Relative value Others
futures debt equities
Source: Eurekahedge

FLOWS
ASSET
EUREKAHEDGE
ASSET FLOWS UPDATE
Table 2: Performance-based changes in assets and asset flows 2017
Assets at Net growth

Net flows Assets at end % change in assets
start (performance)
Hedge funds 2224.8 17.3 17.1 2259.2 1.55%
By geographic mandate
Asia ex-Japan 152.9 1.8 1.3 156.0 2.02%
Japan 16.7 0.1 0.2 17.0 1.83%
Europe 505.9 2.8 (1.2) 507.5 0.32%
Latin America 54.1 0.9 1.0 56.0 3.50%
North America 1495.3 11.7 15.8 1522.7 1.84%
By strategic mandate
Arbitrage 134.7 0.7 2.7 138.0 2.47%
CTA/managed futures 251.1 1.4 8.4 261.0 3.90%
Distressed debt 58.0 0.7 0.4 59.1 1.86%
Event driven 210.2 0.8 1.7 212.8 1.19%
Fixed income 159.2 1.2 (0.2) 160.3 0.64%
Long/short equities 774.0 8.6 1.5 784.1 1.31%
Macro 151.7 0.5 (1.9) 150.3 (0.94%)
Multi-strategy 359.6 2.5 1.6 363.7 1.14%
Relative value 65.9 0.5 0.0 66.4 0.83%
Others 60.3 0.3 3.0 63.6 5.55%
By fund size (US$ millions)
≤20 17.7 0.1 0.5 18.4 3.44%
<20-≤50 39.7 0.3 0.3 40.3 1.51%
<50-≤100 54.2 0.3 0.2 54.8 1.01%
<100-≤250 225.4 2.1 3.1 230.7 2.32%
<250-≤500 309.0 2.8 1.8 313.6 1.47%
<500-≤1000 459.2 2.6 3.1 464.9 1.25%
>1000 1119.5 9.2 8.0 1136.6 1.53%
Note: All figures are in US$ billion, and rounded off to 1 decimal place Source: Eurekahedge
In Figure 6 the cumulative investor flows since 2013 is displayed, with the past six months of 2016 showing a pronounced decline
in investor flows for billion dollar hedge funds. Since June 2016, billion dollar hedge funds have seen steep investor redemptions
for seven consecutive months between June 2016 to December 2016, totalling US$74.9 billion. Sub-billion dollar hedge funds
have also recorded steep redemptions over the same period, totalling US$8.82 billion between June 2016 and December 2016.
Overall, managers within the sub-billion dollar bracket have seen a US$9.19 billion growth in assets for the year. As of February
2017, billion dollar hedge funds have seen an inflow of US$7.9 billion. Sub-billion dollar funds have also seen an encouraging
start to the year, with US$9.1 billion of inflows.

FLOWS
ASSET
EUREKAHEDGE
ASSET FLOWS UPDATE
Figure 6: Cumulative investor flows since 2013
200
Net asset flows (US$ billion) (cumulative)
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0 Aug-14
Aug-13
Aug-15
Aug-16
Feb-13
Apr-13
May-13
Sep-13
Feb-14
Apr-14
May-14
Sep-14
Feb-15
Apr-15
May-15
Sep-15
Feb-16
Apr-16
May-16
Sep-16
Feb-17
Jun-13
Jul-13
Jun-14
Jul-14
Jun-15
Jul-15
Jun-16
Jul-16
Jan-15
Nov-16
Jan-13
Mar-13
Nov-13
Jan-14
Mar-14
Nov-14
Mar-15
Nov-15
Jan-16
Mar-16
Jan-17
Oct-13
Dec-13
Oct-14
Dec-14
Oct-15
Dec-15
Oct-16
Dec-16
>1000 Sub-Billion Dollar
Source: Eurekahedge
Over the 50 month period depicted in Figures 7 and 8, the global hedge fund industry has raked in performance-based gains of
US$269.4 billion, with billion dollar hedge funds accounting for over half of these gains – delivering cumulative performance-
based gains of US$149.5 billion since the start of 2013. Funds managing assets in the US$100 million to US$500 million range
have seen performance-based gains of US$68.3 billion while those managing assets below US$100 million have delivered gains
of US$12.1 billion over the period under consideration.
A similar picture emerges based on net asset flows, with the global hedge fund industry attracting US$215.1 billion since January
2013, out of which billion dollar hedge funds accounted for US$131.8 billion of these net capital allocations, while funds with
assets under US$500 million collectively recorded net asset inflows of US$15.7 billion over this period.
Funds less than US$500 million collectively saw US$80.4 billion in performance-based gains and US$15.7 billion in investor
inflows as of February 2017, which compares to US$39.5 billion in performance-based gains and US$67.5 billion in investor
inflows for funds managing between US$500 million to less than US$1 billion. This also compares to US$149.5 billion in
performance-based gains and US$131.8 billion in investor inflows for funds managing upwards of US$1 billion over the same
period. When compared to 2014, we noticed that billion dollar hedge funds are more successful at capital-raising with more than
half of the assets raised contributed to investor inflows.
Over the past three months, billion dollar hedge funds recorded net outflows of US$7.7 billion whereas hedge funds managing
between US$100 million to US$1000 million saw inflows of US$3.6 billion. Smaller-sized hedge funds (AUM less than US$100
million) saw inflows of US$0.9 billion over the same period. In terms of performance-based gains and losses, billion dollar hedge
funds saw performance-driven gains of US$20.2 billion while funds managing US$100 million to US$1000 million saw
performance-based gains totalling US$13.1 billion over the past three months ending February 2017. Smaller-sized hedge funds
(AUM less than US$100 million) saw performance-based gains of US$1.1 billion over the past three months.

FLOWS
ASSET
EUREKAHEDGE
ASSET FLOWS UPDATE
Figure 7: Performance based gains/losses by fund size
Monthly Performance Flows Cumulative Performance Flows

30
Performance gains / losses (US$ billion)

Performance gains/loses (US$ billion)
20 150
10
100
0
(10)
50
(20)
(30) 0
Jan-13 Aug-13
(40) Mar-14 Oct-14
May-15 Dec-15 Jul-16
Feb-17
≤100 >500-≤1000 >100-≤500 >1000 ≤100 >500-≤1000 >100-≤500 >1000
(US$ million) (US$ million)

Figure 8: Net asset flows by fund size
Monthly Asset Flows Cumulative Asset Flows

50
Net asset flows (US$ billion)
40 200
30 150
Net asset lows (US$ billion)
20 100
10
50
0
0
(10)
(50)
(20) Jan-13 Aug-13
(30) Mar-14 Oct-14
May-15 Dec-15 Jul-16
Feb-17
≤100 >500-≤1000 >100-≤500 >1000 ≤100 >500-≤1000 >100-≤500 >1000
(US$ million) (US$ million)


PERFORMANCE
COMMENTARY
EUREKAHEDGE
HEDGE FUND PERFORMANCE COMMENTARY
”Distressed debt Introduction

managers posted the
best gains during the Hedge funds gained 0.97% during the month of February. Meanwhile underlying markets
as represented by the MSCI AC World Index (Local) gained 2.72% over the same period.
month, up 1.34% in February was marked by strong performance in US equities on the back of Trump’s fiscal
February.” and monetary policy announcements with the S&P 500 ending the month up 3.78%.
Economic data out of the US also shed a positive light on the region with a pick-up in
inflation bolstered by retail activity. Investor expectations of the rate hike by the Fed were
“Latin American also shaped by an increasingly hawkish Fed suggesting that the next rate hike could occur
managers reported the in the very near future. Among regional mandates Latin American hedge funds managers
best returns in gained 2.75%, while among strategic mandates distressed debt hedge funds topped the
table with 1.34%, followed by event driven hedge funds which gained 1.26% during the
February, up 2.75% with month. On a year-to-date basis, hedge funds are up 1.87%, with roughly 11% of managers
strength led by posting returns greater than 5% over the same period.
underlying long/short
Figure 1: February 2017 and January 2017 returns across regions
equities managers who
posted gains of 3.23%.”
4.0%
3.5%
“Asia ex-Japan
3.0%
managers gained 1.43%
2.5%
in February with
2.0%
underlying Greater
1.5%
China and Indian
1.0%
managers up 2.75% and
0.5%
2.98% respectively.”
0.0%
North America Europe Japan Asia ex-Japan Latin America EH Hedge Fund
Jan-17 Feb-17
“The CBOE Eurekahedge
Index
Source: Eurekahedge
Short Volatility Hedge
Fund Index gained 0.57%
All regional mandates were in positive territory during the month, with Latin American
in February marked by mandated hedge funds topping the table, up 2.75%. Latin American equity markets
lower volatility levels performed well in February with the Ibovespa Index up 3.08%. Asia ex-Japan managers
during the month.” were up 1.43% followed by North American managers with gains of 0.76%. European and
Japanese managers also ended the month in positive territory and were up 0.52% and
0.40% respectively.
“Among CTA/Managed
Futures sub-strategies, On a year-to-date basis, Latin American hedge fund managers gained 6.56% followed by
Asia ex-Japan hedge fund managers which were up3.55%. North American hedge funds
trend-following hedge managers were up 1.76% followed by Japanese and European managers with gains of
funds gained 2.46% 1.67% and 1.16% respectively.
followed by commodity
and FX focused
managers which were
up 0.59% and 0.18%
respectively.”

PERFORMANCE
COMMENTARY
EUREKAHEDGE
Figure 2: 2017 year-to-date returns across regions
7%
6%
5%
4%
3%
2%
1%
0%
North America Europe Japan Asia ex-Japan Latin America EH Hedge Fund Index
Source: Eurekahedge
Mizuho-Eurekahedge Asset Weighted Index

The asset weighted Mizuho-Eurekahedge Index gained 0.63% in February. It should also be noted that the Mizuho-Eurekahedge
Index is US dollar denominated, and during months of strong US dollar gains, the index results include the currency conversion
loss for funds that are denominated in other currencies. The US Dollar Index gained 1.62% in February.
Performance was positive across the board among the suite of Mizuho-Eurekahedge Indices with the Mizuho-Eurekahedge Emerging
Markets Index posting the best gains, up 1.82% during the month. The Mizuho-Eurekahedge Asia Pacific Index and the Mizuho-
Eurekahedge Top 100 Index came in second and third with gains of 1.34% and 0.78% respectively. The Mizuho-Eurekahedge Multi-
Strategy Index grew 0.61% followed by the Mizuho-Eurekahedge Long/Short Equities Index with gains of 0.42% over the same period.
On a year-to-date basis, Mizuho-Eurekahedge Emerging Markets Index led the tables with 4.34% followed by the Mizuho-
Eurekahedge Asia Pacific Index with 3.34%. The Mizuho-Eurekahedge Long/Short Equities Index was up 2.41% followed by the Mizuho-
Eurekahedge Multi-Strategy Index and the Mizuho-Eurekahedge Top 100 Index which was up 1.39% and 1.26% respectively.
Figure 3a: Mizuho-Eurekahedge Indices Figure 3b: Mizuho-Eurekahedge Indices

February 2017 returns 2017 year-to-date returns
2.0% 4.5%
1.8% 4.0%
1.6% 3.5%
1.4%
3.0%
1.2%
2.5%
1.0%
2.0%
0.8%
1.5%
0.6%
0.4% 1.0%
0.2% 0.5%
0.0% 0.0%
Feb-17 2017 YTD
Main Top 100 Main Top 100
Asia Pacific Long Short Equities Asia Pacific Long Short Equities
Multi-Strategy Emerging Markets Multi-Strategy Emerging Markets

PERFORMANCE
COMMENTARY
EUREKAHEDGE
CBOE Eurekahedge Volatility Indexes

The CBOE Eurekahedge Volatility Indexes comprise four equally-weighted volatility indices – long volatility, short volatility, relative
value and tail risk. The CBOE Eurekahedge Long Volatility Index is designed to track the performance of underlying hedge fund
managers who take a net long view on implied volatility with a goal of positive absolute return. In contrast, the CBOE Eurekahedge
Short Volatility Index tracks the performance of underlying hedge fund managers who take a net short view on implied volatility
with a goal of positive absolute return. This strategy often involves the selling of options to take advantage of the discrepancies
in current implied volatility versus expectations of subsequent implied or realised volatility. The CBOE Eurekahedge Relative Value
Volatility Index on the other hand measures the performance of underlying hedge fund managers that trade relative value or
opportunistic volatility strategies. Managers utilising this strategy can pursue long, short or neutral views on volatility with a goal
of positive absolute return. Meanwhile, the CBOE Eurekahedge Tail Risk Index tracks the performance of underlying hedge fund
managers that specifically seek to achieve capital appreciation during periods of extreme market stress.
During the month of February, the CBOE Eurekahedge Short Volatility Hedge Fund Index led the tables with gains of 0.57%, while all
other volatility strategies languished into negative territory. The CBOE Eurekahedge Relative Value Volatility Hedge Fund Index
posted the steepest decline, down 0.85% followed by the CBOE Eurekahedge Long Volatility Hedge Fund Index and the CBOE
Eurekahedge Tail Risk Hedge Fund Index which declined 0.69% and 0.30% respectively. It should be observed that tail risk and long
volatility strategies are designed to deliver outsized returns during periods of extreme market volatility thereby providing overall
portfolio level protection, hence losses can be expected during normal market conditions.
On a year-to-date basis, the CBOE Eurekahedge Short Volatility Hedge Fund Index topped the table, gaining 2.04% followed by the
CBOE Eurekahedge Relative Value Volatility Hedge Fund Index which was up a marginal 0.06%. On the other hand, the CBOE
Eurekahedge Tail Risk Hedge Fund Index and the CBOE Eurekahedge Long Volatility Hedge Fund Index declined 2.96% and 2.05%
respectively.
Figure 4a: CBOE Eurekahedge Volatility Indexes Figure 4b: CBOE Eurekahedge Volatility Indexes
0.8% 3.0%
0.6% 2.0%
0.4%
1.0%
0.2%
0.0% 0.0%
(0.2%) (1.0%)
(0.4%)
(2.0%)
(0.6%)
(3.0%)
(0.8%)
(1.0%) (4.0%)
Feb-17 2017 YTD
Long Volatility Relative Value Long Volatility Relative Value
Short Volatility Tail Risk Short Volatility Tail Risk
Strategy performance
All strategy mandates ended the month in positive territory for the month of February with distressed debt mandated hedge
funds topping the table with gains of 1.34%. This is followed by event driven and long/short equities mandated hedge funds
which grew 1.26% and 1.14% respectively. Multi-strategy and CTA/manged futures hedge funds were also up gaining 1.04% and
0.99% respectively. This is followed by fixed income and macro mandated hedge funds which were up 0.85% and 0.54%
respectively. Arbitrage and relative value hedge funds ended the month in positive territory, with gains of 0.37% and 0.34%.

PERFORMANCE
COMMENTARY
EUREKAHEDGE
On a year-to-date basis, event driven mandated hedge funds were up 3.34% followed by distressed debt hedge funds with 2.88%
gains. Long/short equities and multi-strategy mandated hedge funds followed behind with 2.72% and 2.27% respectively. Fixed
income, relative value and arbitrage mandated hedge funds were also up year-to-date, gaining 1.76%, 1.53% and 0.71%. Macro
and CTA/managed futures hedge funds posted modest year-to-date figures, gaining 0.56% and 0.34% respectively.
Figure 5: February 2017 and January 2017 returns across strategies
2.5%
2.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.0%
(0.5%)
(1.0%)
Arbitrage CTA/Managed Distressed Event Driven Fixed Income Long/Short Macro Multi Strategy Relative Value EH Hedge
Futures Debt Equities Fund Index
Jan-17 Feb-17
Source: Eurekahedge
Figure 6: 2017 year-to-date returns across strategies
3.5%
3.0%
2.5%
2.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.0%
Arbitrage CTA/Managed Distressed Event Driven Fixed Income Long/Short Macro Multi Strategy Relative Value EH Hedge Fund
Futures Debt Equities Index
Source: Eurekahedge
Arbitrage and relative value
The Eurekahedge Arbitrage Hedge Fund Index was up 0.37% in February with European arbitrage funds gaining 0.36%. North
American arbitrage funds were also positive during the month with a 0.15% increase. On a year-to-date basis, both European
and North American managers were up 0.83% and 0.45% respectively. The index is up 0.71% over the past two months with over
three-quarters of managers in positive territory.
The Eurekahedge Relative Value Hedge Fund Index gained 0.34% during the month with North American managers reporting a
0.86% growth while European managers declined 0.44%. On a year-to-date basis, North American relative value managers
gained 2.96% while European managers declined 0.38%. The index is up 1.53% over the past two months with roughly 80% of
managers posting positive year-to-date returns, averaging 2.00%.

PERFORMANCE
COMMENTARY
EUREKAHEDGE
Figure 7a: Arbitrage and relative value Figure 7b: Arbitrage and relative value
1.0% 3.5%
0.8% 3.0%
0.6% 2.5%
2.0%
0.4%
1.5%
0.2%
1.0%
0.0%
0.5%
(0.2%)
0.0%
(0.4%) (0.5%)
(0.6%) (1.0%)
Arbitrage Relative value Arbitrage Relative value
All regions North America Europe All regions North America Europe
Long/short equities and fixed income
The Eurekahedge Long/Short Equity Hedge Fund Index was up 1.14% in February with performance among regional mandates in
positive territory this month. Latin American long/short equities hedge fund managers posted the best gains, up 3.23% with
positive performance of underlying Latin American equity markets. The Ibovespa Index gained 3.03% during the month. Strength
in equity markets were led by North American markets in February with the Dow Jones Index ending the month past the 20,000
mark. It could be argued that fiscal and tax stimulus announced by President Trump have injected some optimism into the
markets. At the same time, macro data out of the US and the pick-up in inflation figures have also instilled confidence in an
improving outlook for the economy. North American long/short equities managers gained 1.12% during the month. Over in Asia,
Asia ex-Japan mandated hedge funds were up 1.50% with underlying Greater China and Indian mandated funds gaining 2.82%
and 3.75% respectively. Japan mandated hedge funds managed to post positive returns for the month despite modest
performance of the Nikkei 225 Index (0.41%) with managers gaining 0.40%. European long/short equities hedge fund managers
posted gains of 0.50%.
On a year-to-date basis, Latin American long/short equities hedge fund managers topped the tables, gaining 8.44% followed by
Asia ex-Japan managers which were up 3.89%. North American, Japanese and European long/short equities hedge funds were
also in positive territory, up 2.30%, 1.75% and 1.09% respectively. The index is up 2.72% over the year with 75% of managers
posting year-to-date returns in positive territory.
The Eurekahedge Fixed Income Hedge Fund Index was up 0.85% in February. Latin American fixed income managers led the table
this month, gaining 1.42%. European fixed income managers followed behind with 0.98%. North America and Asia ex-Japan
managers were also up this month with gains of 0.86% and 0.84% respectively. Growing political instability in the European
region and concerns over French elections have resulted in investors fleeing into German sovereign debt. While yet to trigger
Article 50, the UK is not entirely isolated from the developments of its European neighbours with investors increasing their
demand in the Gilts as part of safe haven asset holdings. Indeed, movements within the fixed income space were backed by
investor concerns amidst evolving European politics.
On a year-to-date basis, Latin American fixed income managers topped the tables and were up 3.15% followed by North
American and European managers which gained 1.98% and 1.95% respectively. Asia ex-Japan fixed income managers were also
up year-to-date, gaining 1.70%. The index is up 1.76% over the year with 88% of managers in positive territory for the year.

PERFORMANCE
COMMENTARY
EUREKAHEDGE
Figure 8a: Long/short equities and fixed income Figure 8b: Long/short equities and fixed income
3.5% 9%
8%
3.0%
7%
2.5%
6%
2.0% 5%
1.5% 4%
3%
1.0%
2%
0.5% 1%
0.0% 0%
Long/short equities Fixed income Long/short equities Fixed income
Latin America Asia ex-Japan Japan Latin America Asia ex-Japan Japan
Event driven and distressed debt
The Eurekahedge Event Driven Hedge Fund Index was up 1.26% in February, with performance led by Japan event driven managers
posting returns of 1.07% followed by European, North American and Asia ex-Japan managers who were up 0.98%, 0.84% and
0.75% respectively over the same period. On the other hand, Latin American mandated event driven hedge funds lost 0.60%
during the month. On a year-to-date basis, Asia ex-Japan hedge funds gained 6.88% followed by North American hedge funds
which were up 4.38%. Latin American hedge funds gained 4.01% year-to-date followed by Europe and Japan mandated hedge
funds which gained 2.22% and 1.24% respectively. As of February 2017 year-to-date, 82% of event driven hedge fund managers
were in positive territory. The index is up 3.34% over the same year-to-date period.
The Eurekahedge Distressed Debt Hedge Fund Index gained 1.34% in February while underlying high yield1 markets increased by
1.56%. North American distressed debt managers were up 1.42% during the month, with 43% of managers beating the index
average in February. On a year-to-date basis, North American distressed debt managers were up 2.75% with the index up 2.88%.
Roughly 90% of distressed debt hedge fund managers posted positive returns over the first two months of the year.
Figure 9a: Event driven and distressed debt Figure 9b: Event driven and distressed debt
1.5% 8%
7%
1.0%
6%
0.5% 5%
4%
0.0% 3%
2%
(0.5%)
1%
(1.0%) 0%
Event driven Distressed debt Event driven Distressed debt
Asia ex-Japan Japan Asia ex-Japan Japan
1
Bank of America Merrill Lynch US High Yield Master II Index

PERFORMANCE
COMMENTARY
EUREKAHEDGE
CTA/managed futures and macro
The Eurekahedge CTA/Managed Futures Hedge Fund Index was up 0.99% during the month with strength led by Asia ex-Japan
CTA/managed futures hedge funds which were up 2.13% whereas European and North American CTA/managed futures hedge
funds declined 0.81% and 0.05% over the same period respectively. Optimism surrounding Trump’s address on fiscal and tax
stimulus led to strong equity market performance, while improving macro and inflation data out of the US lend some support to
the greenback with managers exposed to long USD currency pairs and equity futures realising good gains during the month. On
a year-to-date basis, all regional mandates languished into negative territory with European CTA/managed futures hedge funds
declining 1.23%. Asia ex-Japan and North American mandated hedge funds were down 0.20% and 0.12% over the same year-to-
date period. The index is up a modest 0.34% over the past two months.
The Eurekahedge Macro Hedge Fund Index was up 0.54% this month with Latin and North American mandated hedge funds
leading much of the strength, up 2.47% and 1.46% respectively. On the other hand, European macro managers declined 0.90%
during the month. On a year-to-date basis, Latin American macro managers gained 4.53% followed by North American managers
who posted gains of 1.44%. European macro managers declined 1.14% during the past two months of the year. The index is up
0.56% with 56% of managers posting positive year-to-date returns.
Figure 10a: CTA/managed futures and macro Figure 10b: CTA/managed futures and macro
3.0% 5%
2.5% 4%
2.0%
3%
1.5%
1.0% 2%
0.5% 1%
0.0%
0%
(0.5%)
(1%)
(1.0%)
(1.5%) (2%)
CTA/managed futures Macro CTA/managed futures Macro
Latin America Asia ex-Japan Latin America Asia ex-Japan
Multi-strategy and insurance-linked securities
The Eurekahedge Multi Strategy Hedge Fund Index was up 1.04% in February with Latin American managers posting the best gains
this month, up 2.75% followed by Asia ex-Japan and Japan managers which gained 1.12% and 0.73% respectively for the month.
European managers were also up a modest 0.68% whereas North American managers grew a marginal 0.02% over the same
period. On a year-to-date basis, Latin American managers gained 6.26%, followed by Asia ex-Japan managers which gained
1.80%. Japan and North American hedge fund managers were also up 1.39% and 1.32% respectively followed by European
mandated hedge funds which gained 0.98% over the same period. The index is up 2.27% over the past two months of the year
with 81% of managers posting year-to-date returns in positive territory.
Insurance-linked securities (ILS) offer investors direct access to the reinsurance market, which can include various insurance
perils such as catastrophic event. ILS registered gains of 0.21% in February with its year-to-date gains coming in at 0.57%.

PERFORMANCE
COMMENTARY
EUREKAHEDGE
Figure 11a: Multi-strategy and insurance-linked Figure 11b: Multi-strategy and insurance-linked securities
securities February 2017 returns 2017 year-to-date returns
5% 7%
4% 6%
3% 5%
2% 4%
1% 3%
0% 2%
(1%) 1%
(2%) 0%
CTA/managed futures Macro Multi-strategy Insurance-linked securities
Latin America Asia ex-Japan
Latin America Asia ex-Japan Japan
Sub-strategies
During the month of February, strong equity market performance have overall worked in the favour of long-bias managers with
the Eurekahedge Equity Long Bias Hedge Fund Index gaining 2.03% whereas the Eurekahedge Equity Short Bias Hedge Fund Index
declined a marginal 0.06% over the same period. Equity market neutral hedge funds, as represented by the Eurekahedge Equity
Market Neutral Hedge Fund Index declined 0.13% in February. While equity market neutral strategies tend to maintain low
directional exposures to underlying markets, manager performance is very much affected by large market moves.
Trend-following hedge funds, a sub-group of the broad CTA index gained 2.46% in February, the best gains among CTA/managed
futures sub-strategies, as managers with exposure to equity futures and long USD currency pairs posted good gains during the
month. Depending on the nature of a trend-following program, some very short-term trend-following hedge funds are able to
quickly capture returns despite market fickleness, thereby stemming extended losses. Commodity focused hedge funds gained
0.59% this month helped in part by the strength in base metals. Managers utilising an FX-focused strategy were in positive
territory this month with the Eurekahedge FX Hedge Fund Index up 0.18% in February with long positions in USD pairs among
performance contributors. Managers shorting the Euro also realised profits this month as the uncertainty in the region’s political
developments resulted in weakness in the currency.
Figure 12a: Sub-strategies February 2017 returns Figure 12b: Sub-strategies 2017 year-to-date returns
3.0% 5%
2.5% 4%
3%
2.0%
2%
1.5% 1%
1.0% 0%
(1%)
0.5%
(2%)
0.0% (3%)
(0.5%) (4%)
Feb-17 2017 YTD
Long-Bias Market Neutral Short-Bias Long-Bias Market Neutral Short-Bias
Trend-Following FX Commodity Trend-Following FX Commodity

A CT I V IS T
EUREKAHEDGE
ACTIVIST HEDGE FUNDS STRATEGY PROFILE
2016 Roundup - Activist Hedge Funds

Activist hedge funds, a sub-strategy of event driven hedge funds, deploy shareholder activism as a key cornerstone of their
investment strategy and have closer interactions with management of the companies which they invest into. Cultural differences
also play a part in the adopted style of activism with Western activist hedge funds pursuing a dynamic approach, while their
Asian counterparts adopt a more engagement-styled activism. This special feature takes a quick look at activist hedge funds,
which have markedly outperformed their global hedge fund peers in 2016.
Activist hedge funds have seen their assets under management (AUM) dip below US$100 billion as of February 2017, with AUM
currently standing at US$97.9 billion. Investor redemptions have been picking up pace over the past three years with net
outflows of US$5.8 billion recorded since 2015. Strong investor redemptions were recorded over the past year with net outflows
of US$5.3 billion attributed to the closure of some big names within the activist hedge fund scene. This coupled with modest
performance-based figures have led to less gusto for the activist hedge fund sphere. With uncertainty around Brexit, prospect of
rates hikes coming sooner than expected and deregulation in the US around financials, healthcare and commodity (oil/shale)
sectors, activists could be chasing some interesting themes in the near future.
Figure 1 shows the performance of activist hedge funds versus the Eurekahedge Hedge Fund Index since December 2006. The
average activist hedge fund posted annualised gains of 6.20% during this period, slightly ahead of the Eurekahedge Hedge Fund
Index which was up 6.02%. In terms of volatility, activist hedge funds posted an annualised standard deviation of 9.17% while
that of hedge fund peers have come in at 4.99%, resulting in Sharpe ratios of 0.57 and 1.01 respectively.
Figure 1: Activist hedge funds vs. Eurekahedge Hedge Fund Index
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
Dec-06
Jun-07
Dec-07
Jun-08
Dec-08
Jun-09
Dec-09
Jun-10
Dec-10
Jun-11
Dec-11
Jun-12
Dec-12
Jun-13
Dec-13
Jun-14
Dec-14
Jun-15
Dec-15
Jun-16
Dec-16
Feb-07
Feb-09
Oct-07
Feb-08
Oct-08
Oct-09
Feb-10
Oct-10
Feb-11
Oct-11
Feb-12
Apr-12
Oct-12
Feb-13
Oct-13
Feb-14
Apr-14
Oct-14
Feb-15
Oct-15
Feb-16
Oct-16
Feb-17
Apr-07
Aug-07
Apr-08
Aug-08
Apr-09
Aug-09
Apr-10
Aug-10
Apr-11
Aug-11
Aug-12
Apr-13
Aug-13
Aug-14
Apr-15
Aug-15
Apr-16
Aug-16
Activist hedge funds Eurekahedge Hedge Fund Index

Source: Eurekahedge
Table 1 summarises the key performance statistics for activist hedge funds versus global hedge funds. Key takeaways include:
1. Activist hedge funds posted annualised gains of 6.20% slightly ahead of global hedge funds which posted annualised
gains of 6.02%.
2. Activist hedge funds have outperformed their peers for most of the time period under consideration, barring 2008,
2011 and 2015 to which activist funds posted steep losses.
3. In recent years, activist hedge funds posted the impressive returns in 2013, gaining 13.42% on the back of an active
M&A scene with managers reporting performance-based gains of US$13.1 billion during the year.
4. In 2015, activist hedge funds posted their first negative annual returns in five years, down 0.34%, with some M&A deals
failing to close citing legislative hurdles.

A CT I V IS T
EUREKAHEDGE
5. Returns for activist hedge funds have been less stellar post-2013 with a number of high profile M&A deals failing to
close, particularly within healthcare sector.
6. On a risk-adjusted basis, activist hedge funds posted Sharpe ratio of 0.57 while global hedge funds posted Sharpe ratio
of 1.01.
7. Volatility levels of activist hedge funds were almost twice that of global hedge funds, with the former at 9.17% while the
latter at 4.99%.
8. Maximum drawdown of activist hedge funds is more than double that of global hedge funds. Activist hedge funds
posted maximum drawdown of close to 30%, while global hedge funds posted maximum drawdown of close to 13%.
Table 1: Performance statistics – Activist hedge funds vs. global hedge funds
Key Stats Global Hedge Funds Activist Hedge Funds
Correlation of returns with global hedge funds 1 0.91
Annualised returns 6.02% 6.20%
Downside deviation 3.19% 6.53%
Annualised volatility 4.99% 9.17%
Sortino Ratio (RFR = 1%) 1.57 0.80
Sharpe Ratio (RFR = 1%) 1.01 0.57
Maximum drawdown (12.53%) (29.66%)
Positive months 83 80
Negative months 39 42
Average monthly positive return 1.25% 1.92%
Average monthly negative return (1.08%) (2.09%)
*All statistics for period covering December 2006 to February 2017

**Based on 48.00% of funds which have reported February 2017 returns as of 17 March 2017
Source: Eurekahedge
In Table 2 the performance of activist hedge funds versus global hedge funds over the past 10 years is displayed. Activist hedge
funds have outperformed global peers over the period analysed barring 2008, 2011 and 2015 where the strategy posted losses.
Activist hedge funds posted impressive returns in 2013 on the back of an active M&A scene however this was short-lived in the
years following that when some high profile M&A deals within healthcare sector fell through. In 2015, activist hedge funds
posted their first negative annual returns in five years, down 0.34%, with some M&A deals failing to close citing legislative
hurdles.

A CT I V IS T
EUREKAHEDGE
Table 2: Performance of activist hedge funds vs. global hedge funds over the past 10 years
Year Global Hedge Funds Performance of Activist Hedge Funds
2007 13.62% 15.88%
2008 (9.69%) (28.14%)
2009 20.97% 46.97%
2010 11.44% 16.38%
2011 (2.01%) (5.44%)
2012 6.85% 9.09%
2013 8.45% 13.42%
2014 2.82% 2.91%
2015 1.94% (0.34%)
2016 4.53% 7.13%
2017 1.87% (0.74%)
Source: Eurekahedge
Table 3 below shows the correlation matrix between activist hedge funds and other hedge fund strategies. Activist hedge funds
have the highest correlation to event driven and long/short equities hedge fund returns based on the allocations into underlying
assets and investment philosophy.
Table 3: Correlation Matrix
Activist CTA/ Long/

Distressed Event Fixed Multi- Relative
Hedge Arbitrage Managed Short Macro
Debt Driven Income Strategy Value
Funds Futures Equities
Activist Hedge Funds 1
Arbitrage 0.87 1
CTA/Managed Futures 0.05 0.04 1
Distressed Debt 0.84 0.8 -0.01 1
Event Driven 0.97 0.9 0.08 0.87 1
Fixed Income 0.88 0.9 0.02 0.88 0.91 1
Long/Short Equities 0.93 0.83 0.16 0.79 0.95 0.84 1
Macro 0.59 0.56 0.68 0.43 0.61 0.55 0.69 1
Multi-Strategy 0.91 0.86 0.25 0.8 0.93 0.87 0.96 0.78 1
Relative Value 0.91 0.87 0.08 0.82 0.92 0.88 0.9 0.6 0.9 1
Source: Eurekahedge
Displayed in Figure 2 is the risk-return performance across all strategies inclusive of activist hedge funds since December 2006.
Over this period, macro mandated hedge funds posted the lowest volatility (3.43%) while posting annualised returns of 5.78%.
Activist hedge funds posted an annualised volatility of 9.17% while annualised returns for the strategy have come in at 6.20%.
Distressed debt hedge funds posted the best annualised gains across all strategies (7.34%), with annualised volatilities of 7.23%.

A CT I V IS T
EUREKAHEDGE
Figure 2: Risk-return performance across all strategies
7.50%
7.00%
Annualised returns
6.50%
6.00%
5.50%
5.00%
3.00% 4.00% 5.00% 6.00% 7.00% 8.00% 9.00% 10.00%
Activist hedge funds Arbitrage CTA/managed futures Distressed debt Event driven
Fixed income Long/short equities Macro Multi-strategy Relative value
Source: Eurekahedge
The AUM for the industry has dipped slightly below US$100 billion as of February 2017, brought about by a spate of investor
redemptions with investors redeeming US$5.3 billion in 2016 alone. The industry has recorded net investor outflows of US$5.8
billion since 2015, while managers posted performance-driven gains of US$2.2 billion over the same period.
Figure 3: Asset flow breakdown for activist hedge funds
15 120
Total assets under management (US$ million)

Performance/investor flows (US$ billion)
10 100
5
80
0
60
(5)
40
(10)
(15) 20
(20) 0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Net performance-based flows Net asset flows (investors) Total ending AUM
Source: Eurekahedge

A ME R I CA N
N OR T H
EUREKAHEDGE
2016 OVERVIEW: KEY TRENDS IN NORTH AMERICAN HEDGE FUNDS
Introduction
“Assets for the North Assets for the North American hedge fund industry grew by US$19.1 billion for annual
American hedge fund year 2016, with strength led by manager performance as opposed to investor interest.
Managers posted performance-based gains of US$34.0 billion in 2016, with the
industry grew by Eurekahedge North American Hedge Fund Index was up 7.77% over the same period,
US$19.1 billion for outperforming regional peers. Event driven mandated hedge funds led performance
annual year 2016, with across strategic mandates, up 18.19% in 2016 followed by distressed debt and multi-
strategy hedge funds which gained 12.86% and 11.17% respectively. Among geographic
strength led by manager mandates, North American managers with exposure to emerging markets led
performance as performance with gains of 21.04% in 2016. Going into 2017, an interesting year lies
opposed to investor ahead for North American hedge fund managers as we await for ‘Trumponomics’ to take
effect though it is too early to tell the extent to which campaign promises would be
interest.” fulfilled. Economic data out of the US in early 2017 has been rather positive with inflation
picking up pace, thus warranting the case for further tightening from the Fed. A series of
“Launch activity for the fiscal and monetary stimulus announced by President Trump have so far led to stronger
equity market performance in North America, though the extent of this rally remains to
North American hedge be seen.
fund industry has been
rather weak in 2016, Figure 1a: Industry growth over the years
with a total of 407

1,600 6,000
launches – the lowest
1,400
number of fund 5,000
1,200
launches since 2007” 4,000
Number of funds
1,000
AUM (US$ billion)
800 3,000
“As of annual year 2016,
600
long/short equities 2,000
400
account for a third of 1,000
200
total launch activity for
0 0
the year, while 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Jan-
CTA/managed futures AUM Number of funds 17
Source: Eurekahedge
funds account for close
to 15% of total
launches.” The pre-financial crisis period witnessed unprecedented growth in the North American
hedge fund industry with assets under management (AUM) growth from US$275 billion
in 2000 to reach its peak at US$1.19 trillion in 2007. However, this period of growth was
“Small sized hedge funds interrupted by the global financial crisis in 2008 with AUM declining close to 20% from its
(below US$50 million) 2007 high. Investors redeemed US$94.2 billion in 2008 alone with five consecutive
months of outflows ending December 2008. Unnerved investors continued to redeem
have seen their market their capital going into 2009 with a four-month uninterrupted outflows of US$135.8
share decline by 8.9%, billion in the period ending April 2009. With governments stepping to salvage a marred
with the proportion of global economy, investor panic somewhat abated in the following months. However, the
intensity of the redemptions in the first four months of 2009 left an indelible mark on the
smallest-size hedge North American hedge fund industry for the rest of the year, with investors redeeming a
funds within this tier total of US$100.7 billion for 2009 annual year, despite an impressive US$88.5 billion in
(below US$20 million) performance-based gains in the same year.
seeing their share During the bull market run of 2013 and 2014, North American managers posted good
decline by 5.0%.” returns while providing downside protection while investor inflows also saw a strong pick
up with inflows totalling US$82.0 billion in the two years. Volatility was a key theme
towards the second half of 2015 amid plunging commodity prices, global economic
slowdown and concerns about the Chinese economy. Nonetheless, the industry grew by

A ME R I CA N
NORTH
EUREKAHEDGE
2016 OVERVIEW: KEY TRENDS IN GLOBAL HEDGE FUNDS
US$51.7 billion in 2015 with investor inflows attributing to three-quarters of the total gain in assets during the year.
Performance-based gains were rather modest at US$14.4 billion with long/short equity and CTA/managed futures strategies
drawing strong investor interest. As of end 2016, investors have redeemed US$22.7 billion out of the industry. On the contrary,
performance-based gains were positive in at an impressive US$34.0 billion, when taking into account the volatile nature of the
financial markets thus far.
Figure 1b: Contribution of performance and investor allocation to industry growth
250
200
Performance and asset flows (US$ billion)
150
100
50
0
(50)
(100)
(150)
(200)
(250)
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Jan-17
Net growth (performance) Net flows Total asset growth

Source: Eurekahedge
Industry composition and growth trends

Asset flows
Figure 2 shows the breakdown of North American hedge fund assets since 2012 based on the quarterly asset flows and
performance-based growth/decline. North American hedge funds witnessed strong performance-based gains of US$47.0 billion
in 2012 as the Eurekahedge North American Hedge Fund Index gained 8.67%. However, net asset inflows remained weak with
strong redemptions of US$10.9 billion in the last quarter of the year alone. In 2013, investor appetite picked up with the
industry’s asset base growing by US$132.7 billion driven by both good investor inflows and performance-based gains.
Despite witnessing asset outflows in the last two quarters of 2014, fund managers posted strong performance-based gains of
US$60.5 billion during the year as markets continued to rally. Investor inflows were strong in 1H 2015, accounting for more than
half of the total investor inflows for the year as allocation activity slowed down in the second half of the year. Global economic
and political events in the second quarter of 2015 were indeed a difficult time for hedge funds as the swings in equity markets
created much uncertainty while slowing worldwide economic growth, lacklustre global demand and sell-off activity in equity
markets further added to investor nervousness. The industry witnessed two consecutive quarters of performance-based losses
totalling US$28.2 billion in the second and third quarters of 2015.
Despite lacklustre performance, investors allocated US$33.0 billion over the same period leading to an AUM growth of US$4.8
billion over the two quarters. Towards the end of the year, cautious investors piled into safe haven assets, a trend which
continued into 2016. AUM contracted in the first quarter of 2016, down US$2.3 billion with performance-based losses of US$7.6
billion while investors allocated into US$5.3 billion over the same period of time. The recovery in oil and commodities prices
have helped buoy market sentiments going into the second and third quarters of 2016. Over these two consecutive quarters,
performance-based gains of US$27.9 billion and investor outflows of US$9.4 billion were recorded. In the final quarter of 2016,
investor redemptions picked up pace with outflows totalling US$18.6 billion and performance-based gains of US$13.7 billion.

A ME R I CA N
N OR T H
EUREKAHEDGE
Figure 2: Quarterly asset flows in North American hedge funds
60 1,600
50 1,400
40
1,200
Asset flows (US $ billion)
30
1,000
20
800
10
600
0
400
(10)
(20) 200
(30) 0
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1
2012 2012 2012 2012 2013 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 2016 2017
Net growth (performance) (LHS) Net flows (LHS) Change in AUM (LHS) Assets at end (RHS)
Source: Eurekahedge
Launches and closures
Figure 3a gives a clear profile of the growth and attrition rate of the industry over the last nine years on a quarterly basis.
Launches peaked in the period just prior to the global financial crisis before falling rapidly in the latter half of 2009 with the
number of liquidations also picking up in the aftermath of the financial crisis. Subsequently, launch activity picked up
significantly in 2011 and 2012, driven by two underlying trends – increasing risk appetite among institutional investors and an
increase in the number of proprietary traders who left banks to set up their own funds as a result of financial regulatory reforms
which added restrictions to banks from engaging in speculative investments (Volcker Rule).
The attrition rate among North American hedge funds spiked in Q4 2008 as the financial crisis saw steep fund liquidations.
Closures have remained high since then and have exceeded launches in eight out of the 37 quarters illustrated below. Volatile
markets post 2008 have made it difficult for smaller hedge funds to run their operations on management fees alone whereas
the bulk of asset inflows from institutional investors have been allocated to the largest hedge funds. Eurekahedge research on
hedge fund asset allocations across fund size categories shows that almost 80% of investor allocations posts 2010 have gone
towards hedge funds managing in excess of US$1 billion.
Financial market reforms post-2008 and accompanying volatility in the market have also changed the financial landscape,
causing many ex-bank traders; who left to start their own funds, to not perform as well as they have hoped, thus pushing them
to leave the industry altogether. Increasing regulations and a competitive environment have also impacted hedge funds in
driving down their profit margins. As seen in the figure, launches have managed to outpace closures since Q3 2014, although
closures have remained high as a difficult market environment has pushed smaller hedge funds out of the industry. Investors
are increasingly opting for the larger and well-established hedge funds instead of smaller boutique firms given the well-
resourced nature of larger hedge funds.
Launch activity for the North American hedge fund industry has been rather weak in 2016, with a total of 407 launches – the
lowest number of fund launches since 2007. At the same time, liquidation activity remained hot on the heels of launch activity
with 408 funds closing in 2016. Much is yet to be seen on the markets going into 2017 and should there be a pick-up in the
outlook of the global economy, we could see stronger launch activity during the year.

A ME R I CA N
NORTH
EUREKAHEDGE
Figure 3a: Launches and closures of North American hedge funds
250
200
Launches/closures
150
100
50
Launches Closures
Source: Eurekahedge
Long/short equity and CTA/managed futures strategy have seen the strongest launch activity since 2008, although in recent
years, CTA/managed futures mandated funds have declined in popularity as their performance over the past few years has been
disappointing. long/short equity mandated funds continue to see strong growth as global equity markets witnessed rallies
especially in 2013 and 2014. Despite weak launch activity in 2016, fund population for long/short equities mandated hedge funds
has seen the strongest growth among all strategic mandates (454 funds).
Figure 3b: Launches and closures of North American hedge funds by strategic mandate
Relative Value
Others
Multi-Strategy
Macro
Long Short Equities
Fixed Income
Event Driven
Distressed Debt
CTA/Managed Futures
Arbitrage
0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800
Launches since 2008 Closures since 2008

Source: Eurekahedge
Figures 3c and 3d show the fund launches and closures respectively classified by major strategies (excluding 2017). Long short
equity mandated hedge funds suffered during the global financial crisis as closures outpaced launches between 2008 to 2010,
after which growth was moderate at best as launches barely outpaced closures. Relatively stronger launch activity was seen in
2014 as markets continued to rally. In 2015, the long/short equities mandate witnessed the highest net fund population growth
among strategies (104 funds) followed by multi-strategy and relative value hedge funds (17 and 13 funds respectively). On the
other hand, the fund population for CTA/managed futures contracted during the year with closures almost double that of the
strategy’s launches. Launch activity was rather muted in 2016, with fund liquidations numbers closely trailing fund launches.
Long/short equities account for a third of total launch activity for the year, while CTA/managed futures funds account for close to

A ME R I CA N
N OR T H
EUREKAHEDGE
15% of total launches. Liquidation activity has also been catching up with roughly one-third of closures for the year attributed to
long/short equities mandated funds, and another 20% of closures coming from CTA/managed futures hedge funds.
Figure 3c: Fund launches of North American hedge funds across major strategies
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Long/short equities Macro Multi-strategy Fixed income CTA/managed futures Others
Source: Eurekahedge
Figure 3d: Fund closures of North American hedge funds across major strategies
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Long/short equities Macro Multi-strategy Fixed income CTA/managed futures Others
Source: Eurekahedge
Annual launch and liquidation activity
Figures 4a-4b shows the annual number of launches and closures respectively. In the years following the global financial crisis,
the overall fund population for the North American hedge fund industry is still growing even though launches in the pre-crisis
levels are somewhat a thing of the past. In 2008, the North American hedge fund industry had 675 launches, a historical high
when compared to the launch activity over the following eight years. Launch activity has also been declining each year between
2012 and 2015 from 571 to 474 launches. For annual year 2016, net fund population for the North American hedge fund
industry fell flat with closures slightly outpacing launches.

A ME R I CA N
NORTH
EUREKAHEDGE
Figure 4a: North American hedge fund launches
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Source: Eurekahedge
Figure 4b: North American hedge fund closures
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Source: Eurekahedge
Fund size
Historically, asset allocation towards larger hedge funds in the region have remained considerably strong even though only a
small proportion of hedge funds fall within the large hedge fund category. The proportion of hedge funds overseeing assets
above US$500 million are up by around 3.1% since 2009. Medium-sized hedge funds managing AUM between US$101 million
and US$500 million have also seen their share increase by 5.0% since 2009. On the other hand, small sized hedge funds (below
US$50 million) have seen their market share decline by 8.9%, with the proportion of smallest-size hedge funds within this tier
(below US$20 million) seeing their share decline by 5.0%. While these small-sized hedge funds account for the biggest share by
fund numbers (38% in 2017), this group is also more vulnerable to closing shop as small funds struggle with raising sufficient
capital and navigating through a tough trading environment. Smaller sized hedge funds struggle to raise capital as investors
bypass them in favour of the larger players in which investors can scale up their allocation. On the whole, increasing competition
in the hedge fund industry has resulted in declining hedge fund fees as managers compete for a limited pool of investors, while
financial market reforms have also resulted in increasing compliance cost thus increasing the breakeven AUM for operating a
hedge fund.

A ME R I CA N
N OR T H
EUREKAHEDGE
Figure 5: Breakdown of fund population by fund size (US$ million)
100% 2% 2% 4%
3% 4% 4%
90% 8% 8%
10%
80% 10% 10%
14%
70% 13% 14%
60% 13%
21% 20%
50%
17%
40%
30%
20% 43% 41% 38%
10%
0%
2009 2011 2017
<=20 21-50 51-100 101-200 201-500 501-1000 >1000
Source: Eurekahedge
Geographic mandates
Figure 6 shows the composition of hedge fund AUM by geographic mandate. Globally mandated funds account for the majority
of the total assets under management in the North American hedge fund industry with its current share in early 2017 standing
at 67.0% compared to a share of 61.3% in 2009. A primary factor for this trend is the increasing interest from investors looking
for diversification in the aftermath of the global financial crisis, and the fact that the largest hedge funds, which see the bulk of
investor allocations are invested in multiple geographies. Assets under North America have also declined from 33.4% in 2009 to
30.9% in early 2017. While other regions account for a much smaller percentage of AUM for the North American hedge fund
industry, managers have also been reducing their exposure into emerging markets and Asia-dedicated mandates in favour of a
more diversified global mandate.
Figure 6: Geographic mandates by assets under management
100% 3.1% 2.4% 0.6%

90% 0.8% 0.9%
0.5%
0.1% 29.6% 30.9% 0.0%
80% 33.4% 0.1%
70%
60%
50%
40%
66.9% 67.0%
30% 61.3%
20%
10%
0%
2009 2011 2017
Global North American Latin America Europe Emerging Markets
Source: Eurekahedge
Head office location
90.4% of North American hedge funds have their head office in the United States, while the United Kingdom commands another
3.8% of the market share followed by Jersey and Bermuda with a collective market share of 2.9%. A majority of hedge fund
managers in North America prefer to base their operations onshore as setting up an office in the US gives managers access to
the largest pool of hedge fund investors globally. Hedge funds have been part of the North American investor portfolio for a long
time and North America remains the most developed hedge fund market with the greatest number of financial products, service

A ME R I CA N
NORTH
EUREKAHEDGE
providers and financially-trained talent. While there are a number of hedge funds in Europe and Asia that invest in North
America, it is pertinent to note that most of these hedge funds invest with a global mandate rather than a dedicated North
American mandate.
Figure 7: Head office locations by assets under management
United Kingdom
3.8%
United States
90.4% Jersey
1.6%
Bermuda
Canada 1.3%
0.8%
Others
2.0%
Source: Eurekahedge
Domicile
Figure 8 shows the breakdown by country of domicile for the North American hedge fund industry. The United States continues
to be the premier choice, taking up 72.4% of the entire market share by itself. Offshore hedge funds are also a popular choice,
with the Cayman Islands and the British Virgin Islands capturing about 18.1% of the market share between these two. Tax and
regulatory concerns are usually the deciding factor when choosing in between an onshore or offshore fund, with offshore
jurisdictions having more lenient tax laws and hedge fund regulations.
Figure 8: Fund domiciles by number of funds
British Virgin Bermuda

Islands 1.6% Ireland
2.9% Canada 1.6%
2.5%
Cayman Islands Not
15.2% disclosed
1.0%
Luxembourg
1.0%
Bahamas
0.2%
Australia
0.2%
United States Others

72.4% 1.3%
Source: Eurekahedge
Strategic mandates
Long/short equities mandated hedge funds manage 38.6% of the total AUM for the North American hedge fund industry in 2017,
up from 30.6% in 2009. While long/short equities managers suffered drawdowns during the global financial crisis, the strategic
mandate has recovered largely on the back of strong performance-based growth and net investor allocations as a result of a bull
market run. Macro mandated hedge funds have also seen their market share increase by 3% from 2009 as investors seek a
more diversified exposure in their portfolio. On the other hand, arbitrage mandated hedge funds have seen their share of the
AUM decline by 3.2% from 11.02% in 2009 to 7.86% in 2017.

A ME R I CA N
N OR T H
EUREKAHEDGE
Figure 9: Strategic mandates by assets under management
100% 0.87% 2.54% 1.10%

3.00% 1.02% 3.26%
4.36% 1.93% 2.74% 4.78%
90% 2.98% 3.46%
4.59% 4.99% 2.67%
80% 11.02% 10.05% 7.86%
70% 10.45%
12.51% 14.03%
60% 12.52%
13.04% 11.88%
50%
16.02%
40% 17.91% 17.29%
30%
20% 38.59%
30.62% 31.90%
10%
0%
2009 2011 2017
Long / short equities Multi-strategy CTA / managed futures Event driven Arbitrage
Distressed debt Fixed income Macro Others Relative value
Source: Eurekahedge
Fees
Table 1 shows the average performance and management fees charged by hedge funds based on their inception and serves to
give an idea of how the fee structure for hedge funds has evolved over the last 10 years (excluding data from beginning 2017).
Before the financial crisis, hedge fund performance fees have remained above 19%, but in the aftermath of the global financial
crisis the average fees have declined. Although hedge funds outperformed underlying markets in 2008, managers posted grave
losses and as a consequence their fee structure came under serious scrutiny. Another trend that has put downward pressure on
fees has been the preference among large institutional investors to allocate to larger hedge funds in comparison to their smaller
sized peers. As a result, newly launched hedge funds with a small AUM base have lowered their fees in order to attract investors
and secure more funding. The average performance fees for funds launched in 2016 have been higher compared to the
previous years (17.43%) and although this seem to be the case, around 80% of these funds have a high water mark in place
which indicates that performance fee is only paid when the fund crosses the high water mark amount.
Table 1: Average hedge fund fees by launch year
Year Average performance fees (%) Average management fees (%)
2004 19.37 1.61
2005 19.69 1.60
2006 18.96 1.62
2007 19.68 1.68
2008 18.34 1.56
2009 18.33 1.62
2010 17.93 1.62
2011 18.24 1.63
2012 17.55 1.53
2013 16.95 1.47
2014 16.30 1.49
2015 15.33 1.48
2016 17.43 1.38
Source: Eurekahedge

A ME R I CA N
NORTH
EUREKAHEDGE
Lifespan of North American hedge funds
Figures 10a-10b displays the distributions of North American hedge funds in the Eurekahedge database by their lifespan. For
this exercise we have used the data of 11,676 funds, with 2,905 closed funds and 8,771 live funds.
The lifespan distributions of both active and obsolete hedge funds listed in the Eurekahedge database show that active funds
have a median track record of 7.1 years while that of obsolete funds is 4.7 years. The data also shows that the first few years are
the most crucial for determining if a fund will survive, with 53% of obsolete funds closing shop within the first five years,
indicating that they were unable to raise sufficient assets to cover their costs or deliver returns, or a combination of both factors.
Among live funds, 39% of them have a track record of 10 years or more with 5% of them have a track record of at least 20 years.
Figures 10a-10b: A distribution of active and obsolete funds by their lifespan
Lifespan of active funds

120% 9%
8%
Number of funds by percentage

100%
7%
Cumulative frequency
80% 6%
5%
60%
4%
40% 3%
2%
20%
1%
0% 0%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 >28
Number of years
Source: Eurekahedge
Lifespan of obsolete funds

120% 16%
14%
Number of funds by percentage

100%
12%
Cumulative frequency
80%
10%
60% 8%
6%
40%
4%
20%
2%
0% 0%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 >28
Number of years
Source: Eurekahedge
Prime brokers
The prime brokerage industry continues to be dominated by the investment banks most of which are based in the US. JP
Morgan, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley continue to be the top three choices of prime brokers for North American
mandated hedge funds, accounting for roughly 54.1% of the market share between them in 2017. The three prime brokers have

A ME R I CA N
N OR T H
EUREKAHEDGE
roughly maintained their market share since 2008 which accounted for 56.8%. JP Morgan purchased Bear Stearns in the fallout
from the global financial crisis to take a front seat in the global hedge fund prime brokerage industry.
Tables 2a-2b: Market share of prime brokers by assets under management
2008 2017
Prime Broker Market Share Prime Broker Market Share
JP Morgan 24.74% Goldman Sachs 20.99%
Goldman Sachs 17.33% JP Morgan 20.09%
Morgan Stanley 14.75% Morgan Stanley 13.03%
Barclays Capital 7.53% Credit Suisse 10.68%
UBS 5.28% Deutsche Bank 6.90%
Citi 4.71% Merrill Lynch Bank of America 4.76%
Deutsche Bank 3.75% Citi 4.50%
BNP Paribas 3.75% UBS 3.47%
Bank of America Merrill Lynch 2.93% Barclays 3.17%
HSBC 2.47% National Financial 1.91%
Others 12.77% Others 10.51%
Figure 11a shows the number of prime brokers used by a hedge fund, with the data broken down across new hedge fund
launches over the years (excluding 2017 data). The idea is to see if an increasing number of new hedge fund launches utilise
multiple brokers in order to reduce their counterparty risk. Interestingly, the proportion of hedge funds utilising just one broker
has held steady over the years. It is pertinent to note that most hedge fund launches will generally start out small, and as a
consequence of their small asset base are likely to be turned down in their initial years by brokers seeking larger hedge fund
clients given low margins and the competitive nature of the prime brokerage industry. For hedge funds with assets greater than
US$250 million, a sizeable proportion of these funds use at least 2 prime brokers or more, with data as of 2016 indicating
roughly 62% of them.
Figure 11a: Number of prime brokers by launch year per fund

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
1 2 3 or more
Source: Eurekahedge

A ME R I CA N
NORTH
EUREKAHEDGE
Figure 11b: Number of prime brokers by launch year per fund (>US$ 250 million)
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
1 2 3 or more
Source: Eurekahedge
Administrators
Tables 3a-3b shows the current breakdown of the administrators by assets under administration of North American mandated
hedge funds. Despite a slightly declining market share, State Street is in the lead among administrators with a market share of
13.15% in 2017. The firm had also decided to acquire General Electric’s (GE) asset management unit in Q1 2016, adding
substantial assets under State Street. CITCO has also remained a top fund administrator, with a market share of 11.86% in 2017.
Together, both State Street and CITCO have a market share of more than one quarter of the entire fund administration space.
Indeed, M&A activity has been picking up within the fund administration space with a number of acquisitions announced
between 2015 and 2016. SS&C GlobeOp’s acquisition of Citi’s Alternative Investor Services Business and Mitsubishi UFJ’s
acquisition of UBS Alternative Fund Services are among some M&A activities happening within the industry.
Tables 3a-3b: Market share of administrators by assets under management
2008 2017
Administrator Market Share Administrator Market Share
CITCO 16.10% State Street 13.15%
HSBC 8.50% CITCO 11.86%
Citigroup 8.40% Bank of New York 8.82%
Bank of New York 8.20% Wells Fargo 7.34%
Custom House Administration
State Street 5.50% 4.70%
& Corporate Services Ltd
Custom House 3.40% JP Morgan 4.44%
Fortis 3.10% SS&C Technologies 4.21%
Goldman Sachs 2.70% SS&C 4.13%
IFA 2.20% HSBC 3.27%
SEI Investment Services 1.90% SEI Investment Services 3.20%
Others 40.00% Others 34.88%

A ME R I CA N
N OR T H
EUREKAHEDGE
Performance review
This section of the report will evaluate the overall performance of the North American hedge fund industry by geographic and
strategic mandates; and will also explore key themes regarding their performance distribution.
Figure 12: Performance of North American hedge funds vs. market index and other investment vehicles
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Dec-99 May-01 Oct-02 Mar-04 Aug-05 Jan-07 Jun-08 Nov-09 Apr-11 Sep-12 Feb-14 Jul-15 Dec-16
Eurekahedge North American Hedge Fund Index Eurekahedge North America Fund of Funds Index
Eurekahedge North America Absolute Return Fund Index MSCI North America IMI (Large+Mid+Small Cap)
Eurekahedge Hedge Fund Index
Source: Eurekahedge
In Figure 12 it is displayed that North American hedge fund managers have outperformed competing investment vehicles and
have yielded a return of 379.44% since December 1999, while the Eurekahedge North America Fund of Funds Index trails behind at
133.57% which is weighed down by their double fee structures, while the MSCI North America IMI 1 Index has eked out 69.54%
over the same period. In addition, North American fund managers have also outperformed their global peers in the hedge fund
industry, beating the Eurekahedge Hedge Fund Index which rose 327.80% over the same period.
North American hedge funds offer the best risk reward over both the three and five year time horizon with a Sharpe ratio of 0.76
and 1.26 respectively. With regards to volatility, North American fund managers have posted the lowest three and five year
annualised standard deviation of 3.80% and 3.46% which is lower than underlying markets. Multi-managers also tend to have
lower volatility because of their ability to diversify their allocations. Volatility levels of multi-managers were also considerably low
across the three and five year period – 3.93% and 3.61% respectively.
Table 4: Performance across alternative investment vehicles
Eurekahedge Eurekahedge Eurekahedge

MSCI North
North American Hedge North America Fund of North America Absolute
America IMI
Fund Index Funds Index Return Fund Index
January 2017 year-to-date returns 0.97% 1.21% 1.95% 1.82%
2016 returns 7.77% 3.22% 13.86% 10.73%
2015 returns 0.09% (1.33%) (4.81%) (1.97%)
3 year annualised returns 4.87% 2.24% 6.78% 7.86%
3 year annualised standard deviation 3.80% 3.93% 10.97% 10.51%
3 year Sharpe Ratio (RFR = 2%) 0.76 0.06 0.44 0.56
5 year annualised returns 6.36% 4.42% 11.88% 11.06%
5 year annualised standard deviation 3.46% 3.61% 10.23% 10.18%
5 year Sharpe Ratio (RFR = 2%) 1.26 0.67 0.97 0.89

Source: Eurekahedge
1
Ibid

A ME R I CA N
NORTH
EUREKAHEDGE
2017 year-to-date returns for geographic mandates were positive across the board; with Latin America focused hedge funds the
best performer – up 3.03%, followed by Asia Pacific and emerging market focused funds which gained 1.60% and 1.23%
respectively. North American, European and global focused hedge funds were up 0.99%, 0.93% and 0.53% over the same year-
to-date period respectively.
Figure 13: Performance of geographic mandates
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
(5%)
Asia Pacific Emerging Markets Europe Global Latin America North America
January 2017 year-to-date returns 2016 returns 2015 returns 3 year annualised returns
Source: Eurekahedge
Fund managers investing with a North American mandate had the best risk-reward profile – a Sharpe ratio of 0.74 and 1.24 over
both the three and five year time period respectively. Globally focused funds which utilise a more diversified mandate, posted
the lowest annualised volatilities over both time periods. Emerging market focused funds posted the highest annualised
volatilities over the three and five year time periods – 13.12% and 14.14% respectively.
Table 5: Performance of geographic mandates
Asia Pacific Emerging Market Europe Global Latin America North America
focused focused focused focused focused focused
January 2017 year-to-date returns 1.60% 1.23% 0.93% 0.53% 3.03% 0.99%
2016 returns (2.06%) 21.04% 0.82% 4.98% 1.28% 7.78%
2015 returns 4.06% 8.59% (0.11%) (0.32%) (1.10%) 0.04%
3 year annualised returns 2.55% 8.53% (1.51%) 3.50% 1.76% 4.83%
3 year annualised standard deviation 6.59% 13.12% 5.92% 3.08% 5.63% 3.83%
3 year Sharpe Ratio (RFR = 2%) 0.08 0.50 (0.59) 0.49 (0.04) 0.74
5 year annualised returns 4.10% 10.90% 3.10% 4.27% 2.74% 6.33%
5 year annualised standard deviation 6.68% 14.14% 7.38% 3.07% 5.18% 3.48%
5 year Sharpe Ratio (RFR = 2%) 0.31 0.63 0.15 0.74 0.14 1.24
Source: Eurekahedge
Among the performance of North American hedge fund managers by strategic mandates, returns as of 2017 year-to-date were
mixed across the board with event driven mandated funds leading the tables, up 3.51%. This is followed by relative value and
distressed debt mandated hedge funds which were up 1.68% and 1.31% respectively. Improving economic outlook have led to
improvements in the valuations of underlying assets allowing distressed debt managers to realise returns on their asset
holdings. Relative value mandated hedge funds with volatility strategies have also done well during the year, with the CBOE
Eurekahedge Relative Value Volatility Hedge Fund Index up 0.92% year-to-date. In terms of three year annualised returns, multi-

A ME R I CA N
N OR T H
EUREKAHEDGE
strategy and long/short equities mandated hedge funds led the table, up 6.84% and 4.89% respectively. This is followed by
CTA/managed futures and macro mandated hedge funds with 4.86% and 4.77%.
Figure 14: Performance across strategic mandates
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
(5%)
(10%)
(15%)
Arbitrage CTA / managed Distressed debt Event driven Fixed income Long / short Macro Multi-strategy Relative value
futures equities
Source: Eurekahedge
In terms of three year risk-adjusted returns, multi-strategy mandated hedge funds posted the best Sharpe ratio of 1.13 while
over the five year period, fixed income mandated hedge funds posted the best Sharpe ratio of 1.96. In terms of volatility, fixed
income hedge funds posted the lowest three and five year annualised volatility levels – 2.36% and 2.39% respectively.
Table 6: Performance across strategic mandates
CTA/managed Distressed Event Fixed Long/short Multi- Relative

Arbitrage Macro
futures debt driven income equities strategy value
January 2017 year-to-date
0.29% (0.08%) 1.31% 3.51% 1.06% 1.16% (0.03%) 1.19% 1.68%
returns
2016 returns 7.03% 2.91% 12.86% 18.19% 6.32% 9.10% 0.56% 11.17% 8.06%
2015 returns 4.38% 2.61% (13.13%) (8.40%) (0.32%) (0.34%) 3.27% (1.13%) (1.64%)
3 year annualised returns 3.80% 4.86% (0.12%) 4.40% 4.24% 4.89% 4.77% 6.84% 3.29%
3 year annualised standard
2.82% 3.16% 6.13% 8.64% 2.36% 5.81% 6.34% 4.30% 5.47%
deviation
3 year Sharpe Ratio
0.64 0.91 (0.35) 0.28 0.95 0.50 0.44 1.13 0.24
(RFR = 2%)
5 year annualised returns 5.43% 4.20% 5.89% 7.54% 6.68% 7.58% 4.27% 7.28% 6.28%
5 year annualised standard
2.55% 2.96% 5.62% 7.26% 2.39% 5.60% 6.12% 3.92% 5.18%
deviation
5 year Sharpe Ratio
1.35 0.74 0.69 0.76 1.96 1.00 0.37 1.35 0.83
(RFR = 2%)
Source: Eurekahedge
Figure 15 shows the performance of North American hedge funds across different fund sizes. Returns as of 2017 year-to-date
were positive with large-sized hedge funds posting the best returns of 1.34% followed by medium and small-sized hedge funds
which were up 0.91% and 0.79% respectively. In terms of three year annualised returns, medium-sized hedge funds topped the
table, and were up 4.66% followed by small and large-sized hedge funds which posted gains of 4.59% and 4.18% respectively
over the same annualised period.

A ME R I CA N
NORTH
EUREKAHEDGE
Figure 15: Performance across fund size
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
(2%)
Eurekahedge Small North American Hedge Fund Index (< US$100m)
Eurekahedge Medium North American Hedge Fund Index (US$100m - US$500m)
Source: Eurekahedge Eurekahedge Large North American Hedge Fund Index (> US$500m)
Among risk-adjusted returns, small sized hedge funds posted the best three-year risk adjusted returns – Sharpe ratio of 0.69
whereas large-sized hedge funds posted the best five year risk-adjusted returns with Sharpe ratio of 1.44. Large-sized hedge
funds also post the lowest three and five year volatility among fund sizes – 3.21% and 3.00% respectively.
Table 7: Performance across fund size
Eurekahedge Small North Eurekahedge Medium North Eurekahedge Large North

American Hedge Fund Index American Hedge Fund Index American Hedge Fund Index
(< US$100m) (US$100m - US$500m) (> US$500m)
January 2017 year-to-date returns 0.79% 0.91% 1.34%
2016 returns 7.26% 7.54% 7.77%
2015 returns (0.09%) (0.24%) (1.10%)
3 year annualised returns 4.59% 4.66% 4.18%
3 year annualised standard deviation 3.75% 4.46% 3.21%
3 year Sharpe Ratio (RFR = 2%) 0.69 0.60 0.68
5 year annualised standard deviation 3.47% 3.91% 3.00%
Source: Eurekahedge
Figure 16 presents the analysis of North American long-only funds, long/short equities hedge funds and MSCI North America IMI
(USD) Index since December 1999. We have chosen funds from the said strategy as they invest in similar underlying assets which
are mainly equities. For this analysis, we have taken funds which have at least US$20 million at the time of launch. Looking at the
period since December 1999, North American long-only fund managers had returned an impressive 446.07% compared to their
long/short equities hedge fund managers who returned 352.21% over the same period. Comparatively, the MSCI North America
IMI (USD) Index gained 70.4% since December 1999.

A ME R I CA N
N OR T H
EUREKAHEDGE
Figure 16: Performance across investment vehicles (funds with at least US$20m at launch)
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Dec 99 May 01 Oct 02 Mar 04 Aug 05 Jan 07 Jun 08 Nov 09 Apr 11 Sep 12 Feb 14 Jul 15 Dec 16
North American long/short equities hedge funds North American long-only funds MSCI North America IMI
Source: Eurekahedge
In Table 8 we detail the performance across North American long/short equity hedge funds, long-only funds and the MSCI North
America IMI Index over the five, eight and 10 year period. Throughout the period analysed, long/short equities hedge funds have
posted the lowest annualised volatilities while also posting the lowest maximum drawdown compared to its counterparts. On
the contrary, volatility level for long-only funds is much on par with that of underlying markets. Long-only funds are much more
susceptible to volatility accompanied by market movements as funds within this investment mandate are not as actively
managed as hedge funds. In terms of risk-adjusted returns, long/short equities hedge funds have posted better Sharpe ratio
than their long only counterparts as well as underlying markets over the five, eight and 10 year periods.
Table 8: Performance across investment vehicles (Funds with at least US$20m at launch)
North American long/short North American long-only MSCI North America IMI (USD)
equities hedge funds funds Index
5 year volatility 6.14% 10.46% 10.50%
5 year maximum drawdown (%) (11.00) (17.56) (14.10)
8 year volatility 8.29% 13.08% 14.33%
10 year volatility 9.13% 14.79% 16.00%

TABLES
TOP 10
EUREKAHEDGE
NORTH AMERICAN HEDGE FUNDS TOP TEN TABLES
February 2017 Returns (%)* 3-Month Returns (%)
Green Energy Metals Fund LP 29.63 Brandywine Symphony Preferred Fund LP 52.53
Teraz Fund 21.50 Green Energy Metals Fund LP 50.40
Silver 8 Partners LP 19.51 G10-Rosseau Special Situations Fund (US) LP 46.03
V2M Life Sciences Fund LP 15.70 Silver 8 Partners LP 44.79
AlphaNorth Partners Fund - Class A 14.98 Rosseau LP 44.17
Brandywine Symphony Preferred Fund LP 13.68 SYW LP 38.98
Adaws Eagle Fund LP 12.31 Maglan Distressed Master Fund 36.36
Opus Point Healthcare Innovations Fund LP 11.98 Teraz Fund 30.08
SYW LP 10.95 AM Capital Opportunity Fund I LLC 28.15
Juniper Targeted Opportunity Fund LP 10.23 Kinkopf Capital S&P 27.87
2017 YTD Returns (%) 2016 Returns (%)
Green Energy Metals Fund LP 46.44 G10-Rosseau Special Situations Fund (US) LP 156.33
G10-Rosseau Special Situations Fund (US) LP 45.72 Rosseau LP 128.90
Rosseau LP 36.85 Teraz Fund 85.81
Adaws Eagle Fund LP 31.28 Primevestfund 85.31
Teraz Fund 30.73 DSAM Kauthar Global Resources & Mining Fund Ltd 84.34
V2M Life Sciences Fund LP 27.59 Silver 8 Partners LP 74.98
SYW LP 26.99 AIS Gold Fund LP 64.45
Brandywine Symphony Preferred Fund LP 25.67 Devon Program 56.93
Silver 8 Partners LP 24.64 Quantitative Global Fund - 3x 56.72
AM Capital Opportunity Fund I LLC 21.96 JLP Credit Opportunity Fund LP 56.42
Annualised Returns (%)** Annualised Standard Deviation**
Silver 8 Partners LP 99.18 W Financial Fund LP 1.11
Goldenwise Quantitative Multi-Strategy 38.94 MS TCW Unconstrained Plus Bond Fund - Class I EUR 1.12
Dairy Advantage Program 38.56 Blake Capital Management - SRD Currencies 1.12
Devon Program 33.32 MS TCW Unconstrained Plus Bond Fund - Class B1 EUR 1.14
Krensavage Partners LP 31.70 DB Platinum MidOcean Absolute Return Credit - Class I1C U 1.21
Tianyou Fund LP 31.29 Dipsea Capital Fund LP 1.45
JW Partners LP 29.74 KWK Merger Arbitrage Fund LP 1.52
QSF Systematic US Equity 28.18 KWK Partners LP 1.53
Cane Island Global Macro 27.43 GAM Star Cat Bond - EUR Institutional 1.65
Mariner Investment Diversifying Alternative UCITS Fund - Class
HiProb-I 26.52 1.71
B USD
Sharpe Ratio** Sortino Ratio**
W Financial Fund LP 8.64 BlackBox Master Fund LP 69.09
KWK Partners LP 6.81 DB Platinum MidOcean Absolute Return Credit - Class I1C U 55.67
Schroder GAIA II NGA Turnaround - USD C Acc 5.03 KWK Partners LP 41.25
CKC Credit Opportunity Fund 4.72 Ellington Mortgage Opportunities Fund Ltd 38.45
Mariner Investment Diversifying Alternative UCITS Fund - Class
BlackBox Master Fund LP 4.65 22.35
B USD
Ellington Mortgage Opportunities Fund Ltd 3.57 Polygon Convertible Opportunity Fund Ltd 18.71
Hillair Capital Investments LP 3.41 GAM Star Cat Bond - EUR Institutional 15.72
Ruyi Capital Partners LP 3.30 Silver 8 Partners LP 11.05
GAM Star Cat Bond - EUR Institutional 3.27 Kassirer Merger Arbitrage Strategy 11.04
Mariner Investment Diversifying Alternative UCITS Fund - Class B
3.26 24 Program (Proprietary) 10.33
USD
* Based on 61.36% of funds which have reported February 2017 returns as at 15 March 2017
** For funds with a track record of at least 2 months as at end-February 2017

TABLES
TOP 10
EUREKAHEDGE
HEDGE FUNDS STRATEGY TOP TEN TABLES (FEBRUARY YTD)**
Arbitrage CTA/Managed Futures

Barnegat Fund Ltd 5.74 Brandywine Symphony Preferred Fund LP 25.67
Windmill Partners LP 3.43 SafePort Silver Mining Fund 23.48
R-SQUARED Fund - Class B JPY 3.07 SafePort Gold & Silver Mining Fund 21.34
Academy Quantitative Global UCITS Fund - Class B USD 3.01 Quantitative Global Fund - 3x 13.02
The Bliss Fund LP 2.92 Kinkopf Capital S&P 12.72
Academy Quantitative Global Fund LP - Class A 2.80 Octane Gold Alpha Program 11.28
Wolverine Flagship Fund LLC 2.50 Devon Program 11.06
Man AHL Volatility Alternative IN USD 2.15 AIS Futures Fund LP (3x-6x) 11.01
Estee I-Alpha 2.12 SteppenWolf Capital Systematic Intelligence Standard 9.67
Palisade Strategic Master Fund (Cayman) Ltd 1.99 Seven BlackSnake (Share S) 9.09
Distressed Debt Event Driven

Candlewood Puerto Rico SP 9.10 G10-Rosseau Special Situations Fund (US) LP 45.72
Hof Hoorneman Phoenix Fund 8.36 Rosseau LP 36.85
JLP Credit Opportunity Fund LP 7.60 V2M Life Sciences Fund LP 27.59
Simplon International Ltd 6.14 CIAM Opportunities Fund 12.05
ASM Asia Recovery Fund 4.62 UG Hidden Dragon Special Opportunity Fund 9.85
Schroder GAIA II NGA Turnaround - USD C Acc 3.26 Accendo Capital 8.70
Orchard Landmark 2.31 Helium Rising Stars Fund - Class GBP 8.52
BlueBay Event Driven Credit Fund Ltd - Class A EUR 1.91 KG Investments Fund LLC 7.64
Dalton High Yield Opportunities Fund Ltd 1.34 Sherborne Investors LP 7.62
Polygon Distressed Opportunity Fund Ltd 1.00 Polo Fund 7.36
Fixed Income Long/Short Equities

Sanchi Credit Value Fund SP 11.58 Tarascon Asia Absolute Fund (Cayman) Ltd 238.92
IP All Seasons Asian Credit Fund 8.77 Green Energy Metals Fund LP 46.44
Serica Credit Balanced Fund 8.59 Adaws Eagle Fund LP 31.28
Mahogany Credit Fund USD Class A 8.01 Teraz Fund 30.73
Magna New Frontiers Fund - Class N 7.56 SYW LP 26.99
SCIO Fund SICAV-FIS - SCIO Partners Fund I 6.82 Silver 8 Partners LP 24.64
Storm Bond Fund 6.41 AlphaNorth Partners Fund - Class A 21.64
Double Haven Asia Absolute Bond Fund 5.44 Opus Point Healthcare Innovations Fund LP 18.28
MKP Credit Offshore Ltd 5.37 Quest TOP Long Biased FIC FIA 17.58
Vontobel Fund - Emerging Markets Debt I USD 4.91 AccessTurkey Opportunities Fund LLC 17.28
Macro Multi-Strategy
Global Advisors Bitcoin Investment Fund Ltd 15.48 Bresser Fund - Class Brazil Equities 22.76
Finamatrix Quant Fund 14.68 Fujiwara Global Fund - Class USD Series 1 20.62
Quantedge Global Fund 8.17 BNY Mellon ARX Income FIA 11.48
Phase II Fund LP 6.47 BNY Mellon ARX Long Term FIA 11.21
Robust Methods 6.46 Bresser Fund - Class Brazil Equities Hedge 10.54
AIS Balanced Fund LP 6.46 Oceana Selection FIA 10.24
Ibiuna Hedge STR FIC de FIM 6.30 Areca Real Estate Partners Ltd 9.81
Geneva Global Macro 5.77 Bresser Hedge Plus FIM 9.71
Sunrise US Equity and Bond Optimized Growth Program 5.70 Dynamo Cougar 8.87
Sunrise US Equity Optimized Growth Program 5.59 Friedberg Asset Allocation Fund Ltd 8.78
Relative Value
AM Capital Opportunity Fund I LLC 21.96
Q India Equity Fund Ltd - Class A 8.13
LGT Alpha Generix Convergence Sub-Fund - Class A USD 7.01
Teak Hill Fund LP - Class A1 4.68
Pine River Liquid Rates Fund LP 3.47
DB Platinum MCP Terra Grove Pan Asia - Class I1C-U 3.32
Danske Invest Hedge - Fixed Income Strategies Fund - DKK Class 3.30
III Credit Opportunities Fund LP - Seed Series 3.14
Danske Invest - Fixed Income Relative Value - DKK Class 3.04
Zafiro Capital Commodities Trading Fund - Class A 2.96

TABLES
TOP 10
EUREKAHEDGE
ISLAMIC FUNDS TOP TEN TABLES
February 2017 Returns (%)* 3-Month Returns (%)
AlAhli Healthcare Trading Equity Fund 5.18 Al-Ameen Shariah Stock Fund 17.26
Amana Growth Fund 4.64 Atlas Islamic Stock Fund 14.64
Azzad Ethical Fund 4.58 Meezan Islamic Fund 14.40
AlAhli Global Real Estate Fund 4.35 Al Meezan Mutual Fund 14.27
Precious Metals Securities 4.14 Alfalah GHP Islamic Stock Fund 13.87
DJ Islamic Market Titans 100 Theam Easy UCITS ETF - USD 4.11 Atlas Pension Islamic Fund - Equity Sub Fund 13.49
Amana Income Fund 3.82 Meezan Tahaffuz Pension Fund - Equity Sub Fund 13.25
AMB Dana Yakin 3.79 Al-Ameen Islamic Active Allocation Plan - I 11.43
BNP Paribas Islamic Fund Equity Optimiser - Classic 3.67 Al-Ameen Islamic Active Allocation Plan - II 11.38
Al Mokdam Sharia Compliant Fund 3.63 Al-Ameen Islamic Active Allocation Plan - III 11.35
2017 YTD Returns (%) 2016 Returns (%)
Al Fursan BRIC Equity Trading Fund 10.06 Al Baraka Fund 58.57
Precious Metals Securities 9.56 Deutsche Noor Precious Metals Securities - Class A 51.95
AlAhli Emerging Markets Trading Equity Fund 9.15 Faisal Islamic Bank of Egypt Mutual Fund 46.64
QInvest Edgewood Sharia'a Fund 9.01 Precious Metals Securities 43.89
AlAhli Healthcare Trading Equity Fund 8.58 Atlas Islamic Stock Fund 43.03
CIMB Islamic Small Cap Fund 8.54 Atlas Pension Islamic Fund - Equity Sub Fund 42.13
CIMB Islamic Greater China Equity Fund 8.45 Meezan Tahaffuz Pension Fund - Equity Sub Fund 39.50
Al Naqaa Asia Growth Fund 8.37 Meezan Islamic Fund 38.92
Azzad Ethical Fund 8.37 Al-Ameen Shariah Stock Fund 38.54
Hang Seng Islamic China Index Fund 8.23 Al Meezan Mutual Fund 38.09
Annualised Returns (%)** Annualised Standard Deviation**
Al-Ameen Islamic Active Allocation Plan - IV 29.74 Boubyan KD Money Market Fund 0.06
Al-Ameen Islamic Active Allocation Plan - III 24.12 Boubyan USD Liquidity Fund 0.07
Atlas Pension Islamic Fund - Equity Sub Fund 22.77 Public Islamic Money Market Fund 0.14
Al-Ameen Islamic Active Allocation Plan - II 22.17 PB Islamic Cash Management Fund 0.15
Meezan Tahaffuz Pension Fund - Equity Sub Fund 20.60 CIMB Islamic Deposit Fund 0.16
Al-Ameen Islamic Active Allocation Plan - I 17.89 CIMB Islamic Money Market Fund 0.20
Al-Ameen Shariah Stock Fund 17.74 PB Islamic Cash Plus Fund 0.22
Emirates Islamic Money Market Fund Limited Institutional
Atlas Islamic Stock Fund 17.45 0.23
Share Class I USD
Public Islamic Opportunities Fund 12.41 FALCOM SAR Murabaha Fund 0.28
AlAhli Saudi Trading Equity Fund 11.95 Watani USD Money Market Fund 0.33
Sharpe Ratio** Sortino Ratio**
Public Islamic Money Market Fund 20.88 Commodity Trading Fund - SAR 50.52
PB Islamic Cash Management Fund 17.64 AlAhli Diversified US Dollar Trade Fund 26.49
Boubyan KD Money Market Fund 17.24 Atlas Pension Islamic Fund - Debt Sub Fund 26.15
PB Islamic Cash Plus Fund 12.59 Meezan Tahaffuz Pension Fund - Debt Sub Fund 25.04
Boubyan USD Liquidity Fund 9.91 Al-Ameen Islamic Active Allocation Plan - IV 14.06
Rasmala Trade Finance Fund 9.48 CIMB Islamic Money Market Fund 12.20
Meezan Tahaffuz Pension Fund - Money Market Sub Fund 9.39 Public Islamic Income Fund 8.53
Al Rajhi Commodity Mudarabah Fund - USD 6.35 Al-Ameen Islamic Active Allocation Plan - III 6.76
Atlas Pension Islamic Fund - Debt Sub Fund 6.28 Public Islamic Bond Fund 6.00
Meezan Tahaffuz Pension Fund - Debt Sub Fund 6.26 Public Islamic Select Bond Fund 5.74

EUREKAHEDGE
EUREKAHEDGE REGION/STRATEGY INDEX RETURN MATRIX
Insurance-linked
Arbitrage CTA/managed futures Distressed debt Event driven Fixed income Long/short equities Macro Multi-strategy Relative value All strategies
securities
February 2017 YTD February 2017 YTD February 2017 YTD February 2017 YTD February 2017 YTD February 2017 YTD February 2017 YTD February 2017 YTD February 2017 YTD February 2017 YTD February 2017 YTD
2017 Returns 2017 Returns 2017 Returns 2017 Returns 2017 Returns 2017 Returns 2017 Returns 2017 Returns 2017 Returns 2017 Returns 2017 Returns
Asia 0.82 1.58 0.15 (0.17) 2.24 3.54 0.81 2.68 1.50 2.77 1.02 3.01 0.15 (0.53) 1.37 2.31 2.19 4.28 1.08 2.80
Asia ex Japan 0.40 0.95 2.13 (0.20) 0.75 6.88 0.84 1.70 1.50 3.89 1.12 1.80 2.16 5.43 1.43 3.55
Asia inc Japan 0.40 0.95 1.68 1.45 2.24 3.54 0.62 3.24 1.64 2.99 1.26 3.45 0.15 (0.53) 1.47 2.46 2.19 4.28 1.30 3.14
Australia / New Zealand 0.36 0.92 (0.04) (0.54) 0.29 (0.18) 0.01 (0.33)
Emerging markets 0.40 1.50 2.13 0.57 3.79 6.85 (1.82) 2.89 1.35 2.66 1.89 4.41 1.35 2.31 2.26 4.86 2.16 5.83 1.78 4.07
Europe 0.36 0.83 (0.81) (1.23) 0.98 2.22 0.98 1.95 0.50 1.09 (0.90) (1.14) 0.68 0.98 (0.44) (0.38) 0.52 1.16
Greater China 2.82 5.76 1.75 1.86 2.75 5.49
India 3.75 8.14 1.30 3.13 2.98 6.76
Japan 1.07 1.24 0.40 1.75 0.73 1.39 0.40 1.67
Korea (6.97) (6.54) (5.19) (5.14)
North America 0.15 0.45 (0.05) (0.12) 1.42 2.75 0.84 4.38 0.86 1.98 1.12 2.30 1.46 1.44 0.02 1.32 0.86 2.96 0.76 1.76
Latin America (0.60) 4.01 1.42 3.15 3.23 8.44 2.47 4.53 2.75 6.26 2.75 6.56
Latin America (Offshore) (0.60) 4.01 3.41 9.46 4.47 10.13 3.39 8.64
Latin America (Onshore) 1.42 3.05 3.16 8.02 2.34 4.56 2.43 5.53 2.57 5.98
All Regions 0.37 0.71 0.99 0.34 1.34 2.88 1.26 3.34 0.85 1.76 1.14 2.72 0.54 0.56 1.04 2.27 0.34 1.53 0.21 0.57 0.97 1.87
Disclaimer
The contents of this Report are for information purposes only. The information contained in the Report (the “Information”) is based entirely on information and data received from the relevant subjects and from other third party sources
unless otherwise specified. Eurekahedge Pte Ltd has not verified the factual accuracy, assumptions, calculations or completeness of the Information. Accordingly, Eurekahedge makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy or
completeness of the Information. This Report does not constitute investment advice or counsel or solicitation for investment in any fund or product mentioned or any associates thereof. This Report does not constitute or form part of, and
should not be construed as, any offer for sale or subscription of, or any invitation to offer to buy or subscribe for, any securities, nor should it or any part of it form the basis of, or be relied on in any connection with, any contract or
commitment whatsoever. Eurekahedge expressly disclaims any and all responsibility for any direct or consequential loss or damage of any kind whatsoever arising directly or indirectly from: (i) the use of this Report, (ii) reliance on any
Information contained herein, (iii) any error, omission or inaccuracy in any such Information or (iv) any action resulting therefrom.
Copyright
Copying all or any part of the Report is strictly prohibited under copyright law. All breaches of copyright law will be prosecuted. No part of this Report may be reproduced, or transmitted by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwise, or passed on to any other person or published, in whole or in part, for any purpose, without the prior written approval from Eurekahedge.
THE EUREKAHEDGE REPORT MARCH 2017

AN EXCLUSIVE ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT
THINK TANK FOR ASIA’S DISCERNING INVESTORS
20—21 APRIL 2017

ALTINVESTOR APAC 2017
GRAND HYATT SINGAPORE
For more information on Altinvestor APAC 2017 and sponsorship opportunities available,
please contact our team
+65 6212 0925 (Singapore) | +1 646 380 1932 (US)

contact@altinvestor.net
www.altinvestor.net

Eurekahedge Report - March 2017

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Eurekahedge Report - March 2017

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

EUREKAHEDGE

THE EUREKAHEDGE REPORT

Asset Flows Update 3

Hedge Middle &

Linear is your specialist prime broker and hedge fund

capital introduction. This unique service provides our

LAUNCHES AND CLOSURES SINCE 2008

AUM BY GEOGRAPHY, 2017 AUM BY STRATEGY, 2017

Source: Eurekahedge Emerging Markets Others

FUND SIZE BY NUMBER OF FUNDS HEAD OFFICE LOCATIONS BY AUM

Less than or equal to US$100 million

CTA / Managed Futures ,

THE EUREKAHEDGE REPORT MARCH 2017 2

“Investor subscriptions Introduction

Asset flow in US$ billion

industry has reached a

“Over the past three

hedge funds recorded

3 THE EUREKAHEDGE REPORT MARCH 2017

Total change in AUM (US$ billion)

THE EUREKAHEDGE REPORT MARCH 2017 4

Table 1: Performance-based changes in assets and asset flows in February 2017

Assets at Net growth

Asia ex-Japan 154.5 1.1 0.3 156.0 0.96%

Japan 16.8 0.1 0.1 17.0 1.35%

Europe 506.2 2.3 (1.0) 507.5 0.26%

Latin America 54.9 0.5 0.5 56.0 1.93%

North America 1500.8 10.0 11.9 1522.7 1.46%

Arbitrage 136.9 0.2 0.9 138.0 0.79%

CTA/managed futures 249.3 3.0 8.6 261.0 4.67%

Distressed debt 58.7 0.3 0.1 59.1 0.70%

Event driven 211.7 0.4 0.7 212.8 0.50%

Fixed income 160.3 0.8 (0.9) 160.3 (0.05%)

Long/short equities 779.2 5.3 (0.4) 784.1 0.63%

Macro 150.6 0.7 (0.9) 150.3 (0.17%)

Multi-strategy 359.3 2.9 1.5 363.7 1.24%

Relative value 65.9 0.4 0.2 66.4 0.87%

Others 61.3 0.1 2.1 63.6 3.71%

By fund size (US$ millions)

≤20 18.0 0.0 0.3 18.4 1.78%

<20-≤50 40.1 0.1 0.1 40.3 0.58%

<50-≤100 54.5 0.1 0.2 54.8 0.59%

<100-≤250 228.3 0.9 1.5 230.7 1.02%

<250-≤500 310.8 1.5 1.2 313.6 0.88%

<500-≤1000 462.5 1.7 0.6 464.9 0.51%

>1000 1118.9 9.7 8.1 1136.6 1.59%

5 THE EUREKAHEDGE REPORT MARCH 2017

Figure 2: February 2017 asset flow by geographic mandate

Performance-based growth / (decline) (US$ billion) Net flows (US$ billion)

Figure 3: 2017 asset flows by geographic mandate

THE EUREKAHEDGE REPORT MARCH 2017 6

Figure 4: February 2017 asset flow by strategy employed

Figure 5: 2017 asset flow by strategy employed

7 THE EUREKAHEDGE REPORT MARCH 2017

Table 2: Performance-based changes in assets and asset flows 2017

Assets at Net growth

Asia ex-Japan 152.9 1.8 1.3 156.0 2.02%

Japan 16.7 0.1 0.2 17.0 1.83%

Europe 505.9 2.8 (1.2) 507.5 0.32%

Latin America 54.1 0.9 1.0 56.0 3.50%

North America 1495.3 11.7 15.8 1522.7 1.84%

Arbitrage 134.7 0.7 2.7 138.0 2.47%

CTA/managed futures 251.1 1.4 8.4 261.0 3.90%

Distressed debt 58.0 0.7 0.4 59.1 1.86%