Secular trends in L/S investing

How do L/S shops and pods think about secular trends? How much does the underlying sector story matter in investment decision?

Many hedge funds claim they are looking for idio opps and operating market neutral / sector neutral strategies. How do they implement it in reality? Do they always execute pair trade or under what circumstances they don’t? For example, do investors long NVDA and short AMD, intentionally not caring about the tailwind in advanced chips?

Appreciate any insights!

13 Comments
 

Don’t always do pairs

Play tailwinds via exposure and positioning I.e X’s product mix is superior and will take pricing vs Y as demand grows from thematics. Mkt underestimating Y ability to scale as a result, and X has limited earnings upside due to estimates being high. Long Y short X.

Simplifying a lot but the story does matter. Stocks are stories

 

Analyst 2 in HF - EquityHedge:

Don’t always do pairs



Play tailwinds via exposure and positioning I.e X’s product mix is superior and will take pricing vs Y as demand grows from thematics. Mkt underestimating Y ability to scale as a result, and X has limited earnings upside due to estimates being high. Long Y short X.





Simplifying a lot but the story does matter. Stocks are stories


Plz excuse me if I misunderstood, but it seems like what you just described is a pair trade. Maybe that was the intention, but you started off by saying you don’t always do pairs. Would you mind giving an example of how you’d approach the same secular tailwind (AI hype generating heightened demand for advanced chips) with a L/S investment and achieve the ideal exposure and positioning without executing a pair trade? Thanks!

 
Most Helpful

Bottom line is that secular trends matter. But you're solving for mispricings relative to views rather then betting on a secular trend per se.

Rarely will a portfolio be only long-term secular geared just as it's rarely only near-term catalyst / earnings-based. They could be tilted to one or the other depending on PM skill/expertize, style, or simply current read on the market. Different stocks trade on different things. E.g. thematic/secular views (positive and negative) with earnings serving as interim proof points towards the secular bet (perhaps more prone to sizing alpha then ideation alpha)... And flipside being "show me" stocks where I need clear earnings evidence / metrics to gain conviction in the thesis.

I find that most PMs, for a lack of a better word, conduct "risk bucketing" and try to have a degree of timeframe diversification so you avoid too much ST or LT momentum and/or reversal risk in your portfolio construction.

I want a certain mix of shorter-term catalyst trades, medium-term fundamental positions, and longer-term secular theme exposure (dynamic weighting of these depending on current opportunity set). I want to maximize my ability to monetize whatever comes my way (within my coverage and risk limits) that offers asymmetry, with a diversified timeframe. Perhaps more then anything just to calibrate my risk metrics to desired levels at any given point in time.

If I'm honest, my view of secular vs. near-term catalyst takes a backseat to price action. If I have a LT view, and the bet expression narrows to my return target sooner than expected then I take profit. I could hold it for longer, but then it's a new bet. And I'd need to re-underwrite the position for a new return hurdle with a new risk/reward skew that I'd be forced to compare to other alpha opportunities.

Equally, if a ST bet is not working within a specific time frame I'll cover my losses. They can also move from ST views to secular bet depending on emerging views/new information. 

These can be expressed differently (not exhaustive):

  • Relative pairs (Long A / Short B) within subsectors → isolating company-specific factors (management execution, product cycles, market share shifts)

  • Single Stock vs Basket → Long or short a high-conviction name vs basket of peers. Helps isolate idiosyncratic opportunity while hedging sector risk

  • Factor-Based Positions → No real single security bet, but helps risk manage the book and dispose of unwanted exposures

  • Catalyst-Driven Trades → Corp action, short report, reg headlines... and I guess Trump tweets going forward? (fml...). Can be expressed through single name or any of the above if I have enough risk budget to allocate within the risk framework. I tend to leave a little bit of risk budget & GMV for these type of situational opportunities for when they arise.

 

Very helpful. Of the below, am i correct in thinking that the average pod at Big 4 only has (i) at their disposal (generally speaking)? And within (i), they can only express it via pair trades?

(i) shorter-term catalyst trades, (ii) medium-term fundamental positions, and (iii) longer-term secular theme exposure.

Rarely restricted to just pair trades. The risk framework is about managing exposures rather than forcing specific trade constructions. 'Classic' Pair Trade may be the bread and butter for many, but there's also distinctions between "paired" positions vs true pair trades. You can be long NVDA / short SMH (Semi's ETF) to express company-specific view while maintaining sector exposure. Or long ASML / short AMAT for pure relative value. Both could be considered as a pair. 
 

Can you elaborate a bit more on factor based positions?

 What do you want to know?

As far as first principles go: Stock return = idiosyncratic + market/factor. Idiosyncratic returns = selection + sizing + timing. Because markets move factor loadings change so we need to rebalance often to bring in unintended risk to acceptable levels. We measure this through volatility/VaR towards a specific factor loading. Idio VaR / Total VaR.

Impossible to 100% hedge any factor (if you could it would imply you could perfectly predict the future and in that case you wouldn’t even need to hedge). While some factors have persistent alpha (few), many are highly cyclical and mean-reverting.

Say you run a portfolio with annualized vol of $XM with a 80/20 idio/factor target, so 20% x $XM = $YM of vol can be driven by the market. Y moves up and down (esp around big market moves). Great variety among PM’s how they manage this.

Can be through simple marginal risk-reducing trades (just single names offsetting some unwanted risk), portfolio optimization baskets (tailored for you from banks, usually free, they earn commission when you trade it), systematic factor hedging through your traders, PM actively trading off-the-shelf factor portfolios (again from banks) or sector / niche indices, or some type of fully automated factor portfolio management. There's great tech embedded in the systems to help you optimize your portfolio at any half decent manager in this day and age.

 

It depends on the strategy and your ability to run net long or short. It’s harder to be long secular trends because they’ll accumulate momentum and that’ll put you offsides in a factor model.

You definitely can run it on the edges but it’s harder to put on a trade like long NFLX short Media because the model will tell you that it’s too momentum driven

I tend to think that being long secular winners and short secular losers is an incredible trade if you can stomach drawdowns but I’m not at a pod shop

 

Similique quas repellendus omnis dolores maiores sint rerum. Non et voluptas aut quia vel rerum voluptas. Dolorem eum eos quisquam eos. Quia laudantium quod quasi et sunt.

Deserunt minima suscipit blanditiis est esse vel. Qui maxime laborum blanditiis. Quaerat blanditiis iusto praesentium non. Voluptas eligendi voluptatem possimus veritatis. Tenetur velit eos sed rerum.

Amet facere aperiam voluptas rem autem voluptatum. Commodi enim deserunt qui est. Ducimus iste ex ipsum sunt repudiandae asperiores. Sed deleniti assumenda pariatur modi sed. Repellat quam assumenda minima et reiciendis soluta id. Alias molestiae quia exercitationem recusandae.

Distinctio et ut blanditiis. Necessitatibus porro quasi consequatur similique ullam rerum. Velit ab quaerat sunt fugit doloremque. Praesentium rem voluptatem rerum doloremque rerum. Consequuntur veritatis ea nulla qui nostrum qui.

Career Advancement Opportunities

June 2026 Hedge Fund

  • Point72 99.0%
  • D.E. Shaw 98.1%
  • Citadel Investment Group 97.1%
  • AQR Capital Management 96.1%
  • Magnetar Capital 95.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

June 2026 Hedge Fund

  • Magnetar Capital 99.0%
  • D.E. Shaw 98.0%
  • Blackstone Group 97.0%
  • Citadel Investment Group 96.0%
  • Millennium Partners 95.0%

Professional Growth Opportunities

June 2026 Hedge Fund

  • AQR Capital Management 99.0%
  • Point72 98.1%
  • D.E. Shaw 97.1%
  • Citadel Investment Group 96.2%
  • Magnetar Capital 95.2%

Total Avg Compensation

June 2026 Hedge Fund

  • Portfolio Manager (9) $1,648
  • Vice President (27) $464
  • Director/MD (12) $423
  • NA (9) $320
  • Engineer/Quant (86) $288
  • 3rd+ Year Associate (26) $284
  • Manager (4) $282
  • 2nd Year Associate (32) $253
  • 1st Year Associate (76) $192
  • Analysts (242) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (28) $146
  • Junior Trader (5) $102
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (282) $96
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
6
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”