Got a bit tired of research today, switched on the telly and this is what I found. Was practically drooling over the TV and now waiting ot try it over the weekend.
Chilean fish stew
4 Tomatoes
1 litre fish stock
about 3 tbsp Olive oil
500g small Potatoes, thinly sliced
1 Onion, finely sliced
2 Carrots, finely sliced
300g halibut fillets, skin removed, cut into 3cm squares
4 cloves Garlic, finely chopped
2 medium-hot green Chillies, seeds removed, finely chopped
200ml dry White wine
4 sprigs Coriander, leaves only
4 sprigs flat-leaf Parsley, leaves only
1 Lemon, juice only
Prepare the fish stock - that is boil it and then leave it simmering. Score, boil, cool, peel, deseed and chop tomatoes.
Chop potatoes with skin. Thats the first layer in a deep dish. Slice onions long and carrots and add salt, pepper and a dash of olive oil. Thats the second layer. Add the chopped pieces of fish. Third layer. Mix the tomatoes, garlic, salt, pepper and green chilli. Add some white wine. Repeat and top with potatoes, salt, pepper and olive oil. Pour the fish stock over the mix. Cover and cook for about 20 minutes.
Before serving add corainder, parsley and lemon juice.
Waiting to make and eat this......
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Saw an advert by Vodafone recently talking about the launch of their femtocell gateway. It caught my attention because B was designing the gateway last year - was exciting seeing something finally enter the market. There are two Vodafone pricing models - a one-off purchase and a monthly rental. But I do wonder if the product will ever take-off.
Will the customer really be willing to invest in a femtocell gateway for their home?
Unless the user has atrocious signal at home and it is imperative that they have cellular connectivity, I doubt it will pick up. There may certainly be the early-adopters but for a mass adoption, there has to be a strong buying rationale.
The key question for me is - what is the business model? Who is getting the benefit and who will pick up the cost of the gateway? Were it a feature of the triple-play gateway provided by BT, France Telecom etc, I can see a demand for it - I can also see people talking about the feature and wanting it - along with their exisiting box with is provided by the operator. But to go out and purchase and additional piece of equipment..well...
And then we come to the small offices which may have been another market. But here you have fixed mobile converged solutions wherein all the mobile traffic can be diverted on an IP network.
Of course, thats where the business model comes in. The gateway is provided to the end user by the cable/ IP service provider who may or may not have an interest in providing a femtocell connectivity in the gateway. Do we see any joint opportunities say between a BT and a Vodafone?
Just talking about me, I am already pained by the fact that with the Sky box, I have to use an additional wireless modem unlike the BT triple-play gateway....
Will the customer really be willing to invest in a femtocell gateway for their home?
Unless the user has atrocious signal at home and it is imperative that they have cellular connectivity, I doubt it will pick up. There may certainly be the early-adopters but for a mass adoption, there has to be a strong buying rationale.
The key question for me is - what is the business model? Who is getting the benefit and who will pick up the cost of the gateway? Were it a feature of the triple-play gateway provided by BT, France Telecom etc, I can see a demand for it - I can also see people talking about the feature and wanting it - along with their exisiting box with is provided by the operator. But to go out and purchase and additional piece of equipment..well...
And then we come to the small offices which may have been another market. But here you have fixed mobile converged solutions wherein all the mobile traffic can be diverted on an IP network.
Of course, thats where the business model comes in. The gateway is provided to the end user by the cable/ IP service provider who may or may not have an interest in providing a femtocell connectivity in the gateway. Do we see any joint opportunities say between a BT and a Vodafone?
Just talking about me, I am already pained by the fact that with the Sky box, I have to use an additional wireless modem unlike the BT triple-play gateway....
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
Phrases
I love the one-liners in Mash - they never seem to age..
Alan Alda to a gun pointing Korean - 'I know I'm dressed to kill but you dont have to take it so seriously' :-)
Alan Alda to a gun pointing Korean - 'I know I'm dressed to kill but you dont have to take it so seriously' :-)
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Fingers crossed
Will I .....wont I.......cant seem to get over with the question and move on. And just when I will manage to forget and get life started again, the results will be out....and then....
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Passively enhancing the active monitoring of valued growth opportunities
Let’s assume the investor’s IPS is being put in effect – so the risk return parameters have been decided. The constraints of time horizon, liquidity, legal and regulatory requirements, taxes and other unique circumstances have been determined and recorded. On the basis of the above, we have now determined the asset allocation strategy. The requisite process now has to be initiated for investing the proportion of the funds earmarked for equities.
For starters, the simplistic question – why would one look at equities? Not only do they have a higher return and greater diversification, if we target international markets as well, but they also provide a useful inflation hedge. Fixed income instruments have a fixed cash flow, the value of which will decrease with increasing inflation. However, in the case of securities, there is a useful hedge, particularly if the firms can pass on the inflation to the end-customer, depending on their industry and competitive position.
So now we have determined the asset allocation for equities. Next step, what is the approach to be followed for investing the funds – passive, enhanced indexing or active investment. Passive investing is preferred when the manager believes in the efficiency of the market, doesn’t have sufficient information about international or small/mid-cap markets or does not want to take on the burden of taxes due to the increased turnover associated with active management. The active approach varies depending on the active return to be generated and the acceptable active risk i.e. the standard deviation of the active return over the benchmark. The propensity of the investor to accept active risk depends on their belief that the selected portfolio manger can generate that active return or alpha. However alpha is not easily generated and in a lot of cases, the manager is measured against a passive benchmark and hence will be further hesitant to take on active risk or deviate from the benchmark.
The two strategies that can be followed are the core-satellite approach and the completeness fund approach. In the core-satellite approach, the investor has a core holding with passive or enhanced indexing. This is supported by a satellite of active holdings. The satellite holdings generate the active returns and the core holdings mitigate the active risk. In the completeness fund, the investment manager has an active portfolio which is supported by the completeness fund such that the combined portfolios have a risk exposure similar to the benchmark. The problem as I understand is that the active fund will be benchmarked to a relevant benchmark rather than the broader market benchmark. Hence from the investor’s perspective, there will be a misfit risk i.e. variation with respect to the broader market benchmark which is the required performance measurement criteria.
Before we move any further, let’s define these benchmarks that we have been talking about. There are various broad market indices that we are all familiar with which are used for passive indexing. There are also institutions which create a range of indices for mutual funds, ETFs etc to measure their performance against. Indices can be categorised as price weighted, market weighted and equal weighted i.e. one share of all securities in the market, equal value and equal amounts invested in all shares in the market. The most preferred is the free float adjusted value weighted index. When the indices are needed for active management, they can be constituted based on their style as value stocks, growth stocks, high earning stocks, high price multiple stocks etc. A stock can be allocated to a single index. It can also be allocated across various indices if the style of the security is measured as a quantity. Indices can also be reconstituted depending on requirement but that may cause a drift away from the intended purpose of the index.
And what is this style that we were just talking about: the investor has the option to follow value/ growth or market strategies depending on the ‘style’ of the security. (While I’ve covered this in a previous blog, just a summary once again) Value investing is when the stock is undervalued (looking at the multiples) and the investor expects it to revert to the mean. The kind of stocks that would be looked at would be high dividend yield stocks, low priced or contrarian to the market. It may also be investment in high volatility cyclical stocks which are down at a certain cycle in the market. The growth investor would invest in stocks which have historically been exhibiting high growth numbers – i.e. long term high growth, high sales, high earnings – i.e. momentum or constant performance stocks. Market of course is the average and could just be a sector rotation, reasonably priced growth or a slight tilt to any of the other two.
The investor would monitor various managers and their style preference either on the basis of their total return analysis with respect to mutually exclusive and exhaustive benchmark indices over a single period of time, over multiple periods of time or analyse their holdings to determine the strategy that they are following.
So, going back to the investment of the funds – what are the strategies for passive investing? One could have a portfolio invested along the lines of a selected index, invest in mutual funds, buy ETFs, buy index futures, or equity swaps. The last is the preferred option for international index exposure or for avoiding withholding tax. If we consider the first i.e. manually indexing to a selected index – the question arises – how do you select the securities that you should be buying. The options are - buy them all, select them in a stratified manner or try various models and map the factor exposures of the index.
For enhanced indexing, the investor can go long/short index stocks, depending on their beliefs of the stock or the industry, thus changing their weighting in the benchmark index being followed. They could also use the cash position to change the duration of the portfolio by investing in equity futures or short term fixed income securities.
And then we move on to active investment. After undertaking active fundamental analysis – either top-down or down up – to identify mispriced securities, the investor can either go long under priced securities or use the long-short approach which can generate two alphas, allow symmetric distribution of weights, allow elimination of systematic risk but also increase the risk due to the leveraged component i.e. securities which may have to be returned when the pricing is not conducive. Now, lets assume that the investor has decided on the long-short strategy and created a market neutral portfolio but now wants to add some systematic risk or duration to the portfolio. She could then go long either ETFs or futures – the options (or rather derivatives) are always there.
Moreover, there are numerous theories and disciplines around active investing. So to categorise when the investor would sell – we have given them various names – opportunity cost, target price reached, valuation reached, deteriorating fundamentals, down from cost, up from cost. The only fact which has been analysed and observed is that value investors typically have much lower turnovers as compared to growth investors.
So to summarise – what is equity portfolio management all about? Deciding how much of the portfolio should be under passive, enhanced, active management. Is the focus on value, growth, mid-cap, large-cap etc? What is the tool to be used for the passive fund investment? What are the tools to be used for the enhanced fund investment? What are the tools for active fund investment? For each of these, how will the performance be monitored? If temporary changes are to be wrought, how can the investment manager go about it?
Et voila – c’est tout.
For starters, the simplistic question – why would one look at equities? Not only do they have a higher return and greater diversification, if we target international markets as well, but they also provide a useful inflation hedge. Fixed income instruments have a fixed cash flow, the value of which will decrease with increasing inflation. However, in the case of securities, there is a useful hedge, particularly if the firms can pass on the inflation to the end-customer, depending on their industry and competitive position.
So now we have determined the asset allocation for equities. Next step, what is the approach to be followed for investing the funds – passive, enhanced indexing or active investment. Passive investing is preferred when the manager believes in the efficiency of the market, doesn’t have sufficient information about international or small/mid-cap markets or does not want to take on the burden of taxes due to the increased turnover associated with active management. The active approach varies depending on the active return to be generated and the acceptable active risk i.e. the standard deviation of the active return over the benchmark. The propensity of the investor to accept active risk depends on their belief that the selected portfolio manger can generate that active return or alpha. However alpha is not easily generated and in a lot of cases, the manager is measured against a passive benchmark and hence will be further hesitant to take on active risk or deviate from the benchmark.
The two strategies that can be followed are the core-satellite approach and the completeness fund approach. In the core-satellite approach, the investor has a core holding with passive or enhanced indexing. This is supported by a satellite of active holdings. The satellite holdings generate the active returns and the core holdings mitigate the active risk. In the completeness fund, the investment manager has an active portfolio which is supported by the completeness fund such that the combined portfolios have a risk exposure similar to the benchmark. The problem as I understand is that the active fund will be benchmarked to a relevant benchmark rather than the broader market benchmark. Hence from the investor’s perspective, there will be a misfit risk i.e. variation with respect to the broader market benchmark which is the required performance measurement criteria.
Before we move any further, let’s define these benchmarks that we have been talking about. There are various broad market indices that we are all familiar with which are used for passive indexing. There are also institutions which create a range of indices for mutual funds, ETFs etc to measure their performance against. Indices can be categorised as price weighted, market weighted and equal weighted i.e. one share of all securities in the market, equal value and equal amounts invested in all shares in the market. The most preferred is the free float adjusted value weighted index. When the indices are needed for active management, they can be constituted based on their style as value stocks, growth stocks, high earning stocks, high price multiple stocks etc. A stock can be allocated to a single index. It can also be allocated across various indices if the style of the security is measured as a quantity. Indices can also be reconstituted depending on requirement but that may cause a drift away from the intended purpose of the index.
And what is this style that we were just talking about: the investor has the option to follow value/ growth or market strategies depending on the ‘style’ of the security. (While I’ve covered this in a previous blog, just a summary once again) Value investing is when the stock is undervalued (looking at the multiples) and the investor expects it to revert to the mean. The kind of stocks that would be looked at would be high dividend yield stocks, low priced or contrarian to the market. It may also be investment in high volatility cyclical stocks which are down at a certain cycle in the market. The growth investor would invest in stocks which have historically been exhibiting high growth numbers – i.e. long term high growth, high sales, high earnings – i.e. momentum or constant performance stocks. Market of course is the average and could just be a sector rotation, reasonably priced growth or a slight tilt to any of the other two.
The investor would monitor various managers and their style preference either on the basis of their total return analysis with respect to mutually exclusive and exhaustive benchmark indices over a single period of time, over multiple periods of time or analyse their holdings to determine the strategy that they are following.
So, going back to the investment of the funds – what are the strategies for passive investing? One could have a portfolio invested along the lines of a selected index, invest in mutual funds, buy ETFs, buy index futures, or equity swaps. The last is the preferred option for international index exposure or for avoiding withholding tax. If we consider the first i.e. manually indexing to a selected index – the question arises – how do you select the securities that you should be buying. The options are - buy them all, select them in a stratified manner or try various models and map the factor exposures of the index.
For enhanced indexing, the investor can go long/short index stocks, depending on their beliefs of the stock or the industry, thus changing their weighting in the benchmark index being followed. They could also use the cash position to change the duration of the portfolio by investing in equity futures or short term fixed income securities.
And then we move on to active investment. After undertaking active fundamental analysis – either top-down or down up – to identify mispriced securities, the investor can either go long under priced securities or use the long-short approach which can generate two alphas, allow symmetric distribution of weights, allow elimination of systematic risk but also increase the risk due to the leveraged component i.e. securities which may have to be returned when the pricing is not conducive. Now, lets assume that the investor has decided on the long-short strategy and created a market neutral portfolio but now wants to add some systematic risk or duration to the portfolio. She could then go long either ETFs or futures – the options (or rather derivatives) are always there.
Moreover, there are numerous theories and disciplines around active investing. So to categorise when the investor would sell – we have given them various names – opportunity cost, target price reached, valuation reached, deteriorating fundamentals, down from cost, up from cost. The only fact which has been analysed and observed is that value investors typically have much lower turnovers as compared to growth investors.
So to summarise – what is equity portfolio management all about? Deciding how much of the portfolio should be under passive, enhanced, active management. Is the focus on value, growth, mid-cap, large-cap etc? What is the tool to be used for the passive fund investment? What are the tools to be used for the enhanced fund investment? What are the tools for active fund investment? For each of these, how will the performance be monitored? If temporary changes are to be wrought, how can the investment manager go about it?
Et voila – c’est tout.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Is this true?
Different philosophical approaches. This is from someone's philosophy to life. If he follows it, I can bet he has a very happy life:
"Work-life and social-life (non-work-life) are part of the same continuum. Behaviour unacceptable in your social life, e.g. lying and treating people with disrespect, should be considered equally as heinous at work. Similarly, laughing, having fun, and showing emotion, should be equally acceptable in your work life."
But somehow I doubt it's really possible.
"Work-life and social-life (non-work-life) are part of the same continuum. Behaviour unacceptable in your social life, e.g. lying and treating people with disrespect, should be considered equally as heinous at work. Similarly, laughing, having fun, and showing emotion, should be equally acceptable in your work life."
But somehow I doubt it's really possible.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
