Wall Street & Technology is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Careers

12:26 PM
Andrew Waxman
Andrew Waxman
Commentary
Connect Directly
LinkedIn
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Insider Trading Escalates At Hedge Funds, Reflecting Weak Controls

The ongoing proliferation of insider trading cases at hedge funds points to the need for more transparency into investment decisions and trading processes. One way to stop the pattern is for hedge funds to form internal control groups that scrutinize the links between investment themes and material non-public information.

Insider trading was once again center stage in 2012 with the by now usual raft of arrests, guilty pleas and high profile trials. The trend has only continued in 2013 with the charging of Matthew Martoma, a former SAC portfolio manager and the continuing swirl of speculation and rumor surrounding SAC itself. The aggressive prosecution of the crime, however, seems insufficient, leading to suggestions that more could be done by the industry to manage the issue. But what? To paraphrase Freud, understanding the problem, will go a long way towards solving it.

The infrastructure of insider trading industry is of course, by design, opaque, since it deals in an illegal substance called inside information. One can't be overly simplistic about this. Unlike drugs, for example, there is some level of ambiguity that makes going after its traffickers somewhat tricky: first, what exactly constitutes "material non-public information" (mnpi); second, how to determine who is in possession of such information and, third;how to identify those who are trading on it with the requisite intent to do so. However, prosecutors have had considerable success in overcoming these obstacles in recent years as they have adopted more aggressive methods. Much of this success has been focused on two types of financial service firms: expert networks, firms who provide consulting advice to trading firms, and hedge funds.

The middlemen in the insider trading industry are the expert networks who can (sometimes unknowingly) link the users (traders) to the suppliers (industry executives, researchers - people with access to inside information). The operation is financed by the users who are willing to pay good rates for the information. The industry is global in its scope. Many of the cases that have been brought have turned on evidence that expert networks provided mnpi to their clients.

Second, as with the drug industry, the inside information industry would not exist without the demand of the users. So who are these users? It would appear, given the number of hedge fund managers charged in recent years, that some hedge fund managers are very significant dealers and users of inside information. Cases in the last three or so years have brought down several major and well-established multi-billion dollar funds, including: Front Point Partners, Galleon Group, Diamondback Capital Management, and New Castle Funds. So what is it about hedge funds that have given rise to this trend?

Hedge funds have grown ever more ubiquitous as more and more traders from large banks, frustrated with red tape and declining pay have left to set up their own shops. These are typically aggressive types, quite different from the portfolio managers of the more traditional and conservative asset management industry. They tend to build very sleek and streamlined organizations with very little infrastructure. It is not so unusual for a young fund to have a billion dollars or more under management with relatively few staff members in operations and a fairly junior "chief financial officer" (cfo) or controller. In some cases hedge funds may take on an experienced CFO to help set up the infrastructure and systems, only to replace him or her with a more junior, and lower paid person once that goal has been achieved. In addition, compliance may be outsourced and there is likely no independent risk management function or investment committee to speak of.

Andrew Waxman writes on operational risk in capital markets and financial services. Andrew is a consultant in IBM's US financial risk services and compliance group. The views expressed her are those of his own. As an operational risk manager, Andrew has worked at some of the ... View Full Bio
Previous
1 of 2
Next
More Commentary
A Wild Ride Comes to an End
Covering the financial services technology space for the past 15 years has been a thrilling ride with many ups as downs.
The End of an Era: Farewell to an Icon
After more than two decades of writing for Wall Street & Technology, I am leaving the media brand. It's time to reflect on our mutual history and the road ahead.
Beyond Bitcoin: Why Counterparty Has Won Support From Overstock's Chairman
The combined excitement over the currency and the Blockchain has kept the market capitalization above $4 billion for more than a year. This has attracted both imitators and innovators.
Asset Managers Set Sights on Defragmenting Back-Office Data
Defragmenting back-office data and technology will be a top focus for asset managers in 2015.
4 Mobile Security Predictions for 2015
As we look ahead, mobility is the perfect breeding ground for attacks in 2015.
Register for Wall Street & Technology Newsletters
Video
Exclusive: Inside the GETCO Execution Services Trading Floor
Exclusive: Inside the GETCO Execution Services Trading Floor
Advanced Trading takes you on an exclusive tour of the New York trading floor of GETCO Execution Services, the solutions arm of GETCO.