Stumbled across Third Point's org chart recently (below). Is this a normal headcount for a firm of their reputation/AUM? Seems insanely low, or maybe I'm missing something and there are more junior people under each vertical (certainly doesn't seem like it from Linkedin). Can anyone weigh in on Third Point's model/whether other firms of that caliber are similar?
Cheers.
| Best Public Markets Gig? ER, MM HF, SM HF, or LO AM? | 13 | 1d | ||
| +42 | How to start a family office (HF rainmaker) | 17 | 12h | |
| +33 | Law to Quant Pivot? | 10 | 1d | |
| +20 | How to destress at Pod HF? | 7 | 8h | |
| +19 | Hedge Fund WLB | 6 | 10h | |
| +19 | HF Final Round Interview | 4 | 3d | |
| +18 | People who work at hedge funds, what made you interested initially? | 13 | 7s | |
| +17 | Most appealing public credit seats out of RX? | 1 | 4d | |
| +16 | good fundamentals, bad chart | 8 | 1d | |
| +16 | Which Funds focus on timing the broad market rather than L/S individual equities? | 10 | 38m |
Career Resources
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.
that's pretty normal in well oiled single-manager / 1 master-feeder type funds. A normal call it $1-2bn HF should theoretically not need anymore than 10-15 total in the investment team and if you grow to become a truly outstanding single manager at the >$10/$20bn level, your team doubling in headcount as your AUM went up 10x is within reason. Why else do you think reputable single manager HFs pay so much? There's huge operating leverage in this model as long as your founder isn't a greedy little bastard.
It's different for more institutionally oriented companies where they build out very dedicated back-office / non-investment team related staff and begin to hire more and more for adjacent strategies. That's when you run into the large distressed managers with gigantic investment teams while Third Point would just have Ian + Louis running the show.
Not related to OP, is a $1-2bn HF considered to be a small fund?
I would say that is a decent sized fund. for the credit side I think that’s definitely an acceptable critical mass. on the equity side probably as well. it’s really hard to scale hedge funds past $5bn nowadays without time and constant outperformance. just my opinion though but I think $2bn AUM hedge funds (and I mean HF not like other drawdown-type stuff attached) is a solid size. You’ve always got the Tiger Cubs and other large brand name outliers
However 10-15 people on the investment team for this size fund seems pretty high, the funds of this size that I interviewed with were generally less than 10 people on the investment team (founder / CIO, 2-4 more senior analysts, 2-4 junior resources + a trader)
Where'd you come across this org chart out of curiosity, was it in one of their public filings?
https://www.thirdpointoffshore.com/master-fund-strategy
Some pretty interesting stuff.
Appreciate the link.
Pershing Square has 7 people on its investment team for a $10bn+ firm. The massive megafunds like Tiger, Lone Pine, Viking, etc. probably have 10-20 people each. My friend worked for a super low-profile $3bn firm with 4 people, which is apparently quite normal.
Single manager firms tend to be quite small on headcount, although I'd have expected a firm like Third Point (special sits/activist vs. value) to maybe be a bit fatter. I guess I could say the same for Pershing Square though.
May be this is their team for the European Fund?
Vel vero sit et. Necessitatibus rem qui aspernatur qui amet. Exercitationem sed est eius quo voluptatibus et. Ipsum velit quia ad sint molestias. Nesciunt dolores quibusdam unde officia repellat molestiae nam.
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...