Trending Content - Hedge Fund Forum
Career Resources
WSO Free Modeling Series - Now Open Through
June 30, 2026
9 Free Financial Modeling Lessons
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
+Bonus: Get 27 financial modeling templates in swipe file
+Bonus: Get 27 financial modeling templates in swipe file
High Finance Applications
Guaranteed
Get at least one offer GUARANTEED
- 1:1 support
- 92% success rate
- 2,000+ mentor network
- Unlimited Live bootcamps
- AI for resume + LinkedIn
- Networking automation tools
- HireVue simulation tool
- Full course library
- Private Slack community
- 20hrs of mocks
- + much more...
Quite hard to say because it’s very much team and product dependent. Over time most pods seems to move towards taking less “macro” risk in favour of low-vol RV type strategies. Most people who do “macro” would still have some RV tilt if you were to decompose their book. So the line is very much blurred. All I can say is try to go for products where you can generate alpha and have capacity. RV rates, systematic futures are ok. RV credit or equity vol arb can be tough. Quanty-ness depends mostly on the team’s approach, but everything else being equal I would say RV is slightly more quanty.
Thank you ! Very helpful.
Do you have any books to recommend for RV rates?
RV is far more stable and you can always tilt towards a directional macro thesis when risk/reward is compelling.
Very helpful thank you
Macro is a bit of catch-all that can mean different things to different people. As someone mentioned above, the lines can be very blurred. I would focus on the difference between directional vs. relative value risk-taking in macro products. My advice would be that it is generally easier to be in a directional macro seat and occasionally take advantage of relative value opportunities than it is to be in a relative value seat and take advantage of directional macro opportunities. The former is often a downshift in risk profile vs. the latter and this makes it more palatable to all involved - management, LPs, whatever... I think its similar to a discretionary macro person wanting to build out more systematic structure to better inform risk-taking vs. a systematic macro person wanting to veer into discretionary risk-taking where again the former is a lot easier to sell.
One last comment - the personality types / risk-taking experience are quite different between the two. I would chat with people a bit more about what they do to try to understand the differences and what might be better for you.
This is actually a very good advice.
Quos aliquid neque aut alias et repellat. Voluptatem velit et sed nulla est excepturi molestiae hic. Voluptatem molestiae nemo accusantium esse sequi.
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...