Cross the street. Everything on tracking an index assumed the deviation from the index is a defect. An active manager's deviation is the product, and the first analytical task is to say what kind of product it is.
How are active equity strategies classified?
The process axis separates fundamental from quantitative. A fundamental manager forms a view on a small number of companies with deep information about each. A quantitative manager applies a shallow, testable view to hundreds or thousands of names at once. The fundamental law of active management, which the branch develops properly elsewhere, says the two can reach the same information ratio by different routes: high skill on few bets, or modest skill on many independent ones. A 30-name fundamental book needs genuinely better forecasts than a 500-name systematic one, and both need to explain where their edge survives after costs.
The direction axis separates bottom-up from top-down. Bottom-up builds the portfolio from security selection and takes whatever sector weights fall out, which is why an honest bottom-up manager should expect large, unintended sector bets and should say so before a risk committee discovers them. Top-down sets country, sector or factor weights first and fills them with whatever is available.
Style is the third axis, and the style box is its blunt instrument: value against growth on one side, size on the other. It is useful for one purpose only, which is checking whether a manager is where she says she is. It is not a risk model and does not survive contact with a manager who holds a cheap technology company.
Advertisement
What are factor and smart-beta mandates selling?
Factor and smart-beta mandates sit between passive and active and are best understood by what they charge for. The product is a rules-based tilt toward a characteristic with a documented historical premium, delivered at a fee between a tracker's and an active manager's. What the investor is buying is exposure, not judgement: the rules are published, the rebalancing is mechanical, and the manager is not deciding anything. Two questions decide whether it is worth the fee. Is the premium real out of sample and after the trading the tilt forces, given that a factor with high turnover can have most of its historical premium eaten by implementation? And is the exposure available more cheaply, given that a value tilt bought at 30 basis points and a value tilt bought at 5 basis points inside an existing active manager's book are the same exposure.
Where do activist and event-driven sleeves fit?
Activist and event-driven sleeves are a different animal again. Their return comes from changing the company or from a corporate event completing, so their risk is legal, temporal and idiosyncratic rather than factor-driven, and the tracking-error apparatus describes them badly. They belong in an alternatives budget rather than an equity one, which is where the alternatives branch takes them.