Prop vs MM PM terms
I have a good sense of standard PM terms for the large MM platforms (15-20% payout, top line expenses etc.), but have no idea if those translate to the top prop shops (Tower, Jump, DRW etc.). Given that a lot of these firms are trying to move into non HFT/ lower frequency strategies would be interesting to hear anyone's input.
Much higher payouts. Need to be negotiated and very artisanal. Leverage used is also much higher. Not sure how good Tower is these days but generally a better deal if you have high sharpe.
Disagree. Higher payouts, yes (2x?). But much, MUCH larger books at MMs (10x? 20x?). Net net, pretty clear what the better deal is.
How do risk limits compare at prop shops to classic MM? I genuinely have no clue.
Thanks for the info - so is the expectation that the larger prop shops pay around 35-40% take home vs the 15-20% take home from a MLP or Citadel?
Agree that MM theoretically can run much larger books, but from what I've heard (at least in the mid-frequency realm), the prop shops seem to start you out at around the same size. Assuming your strategy is somewhat capacity constrained, it could make sense for one to go to a prop shop (also assuming that the payouts are actually higher).
That said, I'd guess if you have ambitions to expand strategy scale and capacity, certainly a place like MLP with unlimited capital would be better if you are able to perform at the higher capacity.
Prop shops also have looser risk limits (don’t need to be beta neutral, vol doesn’t need to be as smoothed out) although drawdowns are even stricter just considering that it is firm money
So the “effective” risk limits are tighter than even if factor risk limits are more loose. Assuming the goal of not striking out / blowing up is high on the PM’s agenda.
I would say overall risk is tighter at prop firms. Being forced to run beta neutral isn't that bad and there are allowances to how much loading you can have on each factor. At prop, at the first sign of trouble they'll cut.
Main consideration for OP is how many strats/ frequency/ capacity/ turnover
But operating in a beta-neutral portfolio with focus on sharpe means that a high return is ~5%.... if you can run 100% net long you can return more than that from beta alone.
All I’m saying is I’m not entirely sure it’s as clean cut as saying that mm is always better than prop funds. Both are probably just as risky because both models are about producing returns on a consistent basis.
EDIT: I’m referring to fundamental shops so maybe quant is different.
Qui doloremque praesentium dignissimos autem. Et necessitatibus sapiente nostrum fugiat et eligendi. Nesciunt dolorem voluptate similique nemo vel qui. Delectus velit provident et aut quae. Quia quia vero voluptatum omnis quas voluptatem. Distinctio incidunt et et quia aut quia praesentium. Voluptas sit vitae suscipit quis quibusdam distinctio.
Velit animi et at eligendi. Consequatur magni voluptas est et corporis quae. Aspernatur possimus voluptas sit nulla cum fuga id. Temporibus sit et quia consequatur ea amet neque repellat. Consectetur fuga iste aut illum suscipit.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...