Women Hedge Fund Managers Outperform Men

Testosterone or not, I think it is a matter of men generally having to demonstrate their "men-ness" with typical acts of bravado, activity, action etc. Which results in unnecessary trading, taking risks bigger and more dangerous than their neighbours etc. After a while men tend forget the purpose of the hunt and the hunt becomes the end in itself. With women it is different, which is possibly why they are better money managers - when their objectives are achieved they perhaps stop "hunting" for more.
I say more power to women in all human endeavours. But watch out for women living up to the male ideal - that will be disastrous. Then we will only get the same behaviour and results that we see from men.

What a sexist title. Imagine "men outperforms ...". now that will NEVER make BW headlines. Up yours on the PC crap! BW just lost brownie points with me.

no question that some women can outperform many men.

it may be that in this male dominated field the women must be better than the men (on average) just to be allowed to participate.

but to succeed you must not only need it and want it but you must do it too

most women I know simply don't feel like making the effort to succeed

Peter,
Your comment about this being "a sexist title" is ill-placed. Statements such as, "Men Are Better at Science and Math", have been deemed appropriate for years now; it is time to shutter the double standard which is precisely what this article IS DOING.

When Peter learns to communicate using proper English grammar then someone may consider whether he is worth earning brownie points with.

If you are going to correct someone on their grammar you probably should not do something as arguable as ending a sentence with a preposition.

Besides the way people express themselves should not be confined because of restrictions of something as pointless as grammar.

If the numbers in the article are true women do outperform men, so its not sexist, its fact.

So, what else is new? MY 28 years in investment management practice have clearly taught me that women are better money managers than men; furthermore, they are smarter and have much better judgement in almost any situation than we men. Although they can be vexing at times, we men should listen to them.

Burton A. Johnson, MD.,JD
President
Burton A. Johnson Portfolio Management, Inc.
www.BAJvalueinvesting.com

Grammar is pointless....

Another lost soul....

No humor either

We really see the thin skin of men coming out here...fragile beings...

Do you like this format better? Good luck brownie point sniffer - adios

My daughter just finished a very successful tour of duty in Afghanistan as a maintenance support platoon leader. She replaced a male lieutenant who was ineffective and failed to get the job done. Her secret of success: she convinced the platoon that she had their backs by intercepting problems from landing on the platoon members and by having my wife send our daughter a stream of small treats that could be used as rewards for good behavior or just feel-good treats for people in extreme conditions.

Maybe the secret of the success of women fund and money managers is that they see the money and their job as a responsibility and an obligation to the account holders more than the men do. The fund managers I have spoken with for my (admitedly poor) investments generally seem to see the money as theirs and prone to be more risky trying to run up the score.

Just one guy's opinion, worth what you paid for it.

Umm...not to rain your hyperbolic delusions, but anyone who thinks 9% is nearly double 5.82% is actually not that good at math...

Lets see the statistics for 2000-2007, prior to the market's crash and the corresponding punishment of risk takers...would women still out perform men during that time frame?

There are fewer female hedge fund professionals than there are male investment professionals. It may be the case that those few female professionals are more capable than the average male professional. That may be the source of the difference in returns instead of some gender explanation. I would be interested in comparing the returns of the top 1000 female investment professionals to the top 1000 male investment professionals. That may be a better indicator of a gender discrepancy, if there even is one.

tend to have higher EPS and stock prices? I'm not sure how anyone can compare companies across those metrics

There is that BS conviction that women are risk-averse. It is usually used as an excuse to keep women out of the teams and it has to end.

I have recently written a post on the subject: "Time to end the frat house culture! We need more women in our midst." It is on my blog http://LeanStartups.com (it is a featured article).

In the post I link to some research that shows mixing in good number of women into teams not only breaks up the groupthink, but also increases efficiency.

I think in a male dominated field like fund management, the few women who make it to the top have to be very, very good. If the playing field were completely level (men and women were equally likely to be handed the reins to a fund, or be able to scrounge up enough capital to start one), I bet returns would be similar.

"Statements such as, "Men Are Better at Science and Math", have been deemed appropriate for years now."

Appropriate where? I have never seen an article in a major publication make the supposition that men are better than women at anything, and I would expect a fierce outcry if that type of article ever ran.

The double standard is that it is perfectly acceptable in our society to point out individual instances where women outperform men, and attribute it to gender; but it is taboo to do the same when it is men who outperform women.

Check out this recent lawsuit from one female employee's viewpoint -

Lawsuit says Merrill Lynch favors male employees

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chicago-bar-tender/2009/12/lawsuit-merrill-lynch-favors-male-employees.html

For more evidence of women's positive influence on profit and shareholder value, check out www.catalyst.org and the numbers on Boards of Directors with women participants.

The bottom quartile of large companies (almost no women) returned 9.1% return on equity (ROE), the top quartile (more than two women on the Board) delivered 13.9% ROE, a margin of 480 basis points, or 4.8% in return. If you add a third women to the board, the average ROE jumps to 16.7%. The return on sales (profit) and return on invested capital (ROIC) show similar results.

Correlation or causation? Does it matter? The leading firms tend to be more inclusive, reduce risk by integrating all talent, and reaping financial rewards and lower risks.

With the general population at 50%-50% and now the workforce also at that equal ratio (the "man-cession" lost more male jobs), it's time for the Boards, Exec's and Mgr's to mimic the customers they serve, the employees they manage and the shareholder ownership of those organizations.

R. Paul Herman, HIP Investor Inc., www.HIPinvestor.com

I agree you need more women in inv management, just not people like Feingold, who plays it close to edge. Look at history - associated with Triumph Capital that was convicted of bribing State of Connecticut in re: to pay to play pension investments and Mass. AG filing against UBS for bribing hedge funds in Boston, including Feingold, who in turn didn't bother disclosing some of the "bribes" such as below mkt rents to its client base. Greed knows no ethics.

There is no mention of the statistically significance of this result. There could be 5 hedge funds run by women and 500 by men. To say that this skewed situation can be the basis of a fair comparison is moronic to say the least.

I really agree with this .In this globalised world i dont think there is any difference btn man or woman .On contrary, male for their overconfidence or might be for male ego part giving a path to woman for outperforming them .The woman who still feels underestimated should learn from this and should come up .