How Hedge Funds May Mobilize Illiquid Assets for Collateral
Summary
The discussion interprets a claim that hedge funds can ease collateral pressures by deploying liquid collateral and transforming illiquid assets. It connects that flexibility to differences between hedge funds and traditional asset managers, including limits on illiquid holdings and constraints on derivatives, leverage, and debt. One example suggests that exposure to less liquid foreign equities could be transferred through a total return swap, although the document does not explain the transaction mechanics.
The responses emphasize that the original claim is vague. They offer possible interpretations: hedge funds may have greater freedom to invest in alternative assets, trade them flexibly, or influence the management and sale of private investments. These are illustrative interpretations, not evidence that all hedge funds can readily convert illiquid assets into eligible collateral. The discussion cites regulatory constraints but provides no detailed rules, data, or analysis of specific collateral transformation techniques, so it should be read as a conceptual explanation rather than operational guidance.
Key ideas
- The phrase about transforming illiquid assets is presented as ambiguous and open to interpretation.
- Hedge funds may face fewer restrictions on alternative assets, derivatives, leverage, and debt than some traditional funds.
- A total return swap is offered as an example of transferring risk on less liquid equities.
- Greater investment flexibility does not establish that an illiquid asset can always be converted into usable collateral.
- The discussion offers illustrations but no transaction-level evidence or detailed regulatory analysis.
Tags
Full text
# Ability of hedge funds to transform illiquid assets # Ability of hedge funds to transform illiquid assets In this discussion of a Citi paper, on the impact of collateral management and rising financing costs for hedge funds, there is a quote from Sandy Kaul's statement: > Sandy Kaul, head of business advisory services at Citi, said EMIR and the implementation of bilateral margining for non-cleared derivatives in 2015 would lead to a steady increase in collateral demands but remained hopeful the challenge was not insurmountable. “I do not believe the collateral shortfall will adversely affect the hedge fund industry. The impact will be felt more strongly in the traditional asset management space. Hedge funds, unlike traditional asset managers, have the ability to strategically deploy their liquid collateral and transform illiquid assets and this should alleviate the challenge,” said Kaul. Question: What is meant by "the ability of hedge funds to transform illiquid assets"? ## Answer by madilyn (score 0, accepted) https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/12927 I agree with @emcor that this statement is vague. I believe the key to understanding the intended meaning is this part: > Hedge funds, unlike traditional asset managers, have the ability to strategically deploy their liquid collateral and transform illiquid assets. The SEC requires mutual funds to limit their investments in illiquid securities to a maximum of 15% of each of their total assets, and in particular 10% for money market funds. As such, it is a general assumption that mutual funds cannot do much that involves illiquid assets anyway. Moreover, mutual funds are more limited in their use of derivatives, leverage and debt issuance than hedge funds. Any transaction, especially in derivatives, in which the fund may become liable to a third party in an amount exceeding the cost of investment requires that the fund segregates liquid assets having a value equal to the amount of the potential obligations daily mark-to-market. e.g. It may be more difficult to purchase equities in an African country and then enter a total return swap agreement, for whatever reason, to transfer risk on those equities. ## Answer by emcor (score 0) https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/12923 The passage is indeed quite vague. I would interpret it as to say, Hedge Funds in general are subject to less regulations and restrictions, which gives them more flexibility to invest into alternative asset classes, and trade them more frequently and flexible than a usual restricted asset manager. An example might be private equity, where a hedge fund is usually investor and management board same time, which also means they can sell off their investment easier than an asset manager just holding a private equity share without control.
Shown in full with attribution under the source's licence. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Stack Exchange)
This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.