1-6
6-10
11-15
16-20
21-25
26-30
.gif)
31-35
36-40
41-45
46-50
51-55
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Bloomberg's hedge fund listings
There are approximately 55 'Active' US hedge funds listed on bloomberg. This seems like a far from complete list of all hedge funds, but it's an interesting list nonetheless. I apologize that the resolution is exceedingly bad. If you cannot read something, just post a comment, and i'll look it up.
1-6
6-10
11-15
16-20
21-25
26-30
.gif)
31-35
36-40
41-45
46-50
51-55
1-6
6-10
11-15
16-20
21-25
26-30
31-35
36-40
41-45
46-50
51-55
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
http://www.srz.com/publications/publicationsDetail.aspx?publicationId=1627
I wonder if this will be available to the public or only to those involved in the bankruptcy?
It doesn't appear that Tudor made the list (I think they are the 9th largest). From the WSJ a few days ago:
Hedge Funds Coming of Age Politically
Lawmakers' Growing Scrutiny
Coincides With Calls for Cash;
Will New PAC Provide Cover?
By BRODY MULLINS and KARA SCANNELL April 19, 2007
WASHINGTON -- Tudor Investment Corp. has become the first hedge fund to create a political-action committee, or PAC, in the latest sign of the industry's coming of age here. The move comes as the rapidly expanding, lightly regulated sector faces increasing scrutiny from policy makers. At the same time, hedge-fund executives are being besieged by presidential and congressional campaigns seeking a share of a growing wealth pool that is being tapped.
With $16.1 billion in assets under management, Tudor is the ninth-largest hedge fund, according to Institutional Investor, an industry trade publication. Fund officials declined to talk publicly about the new "Tudor Investment Corporation PAC For Responsible Government," which filed papers with the Federal Election Commission last month. But one executive, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the committee was formed in part to help executives deflect the surge in fund-raising requests.
"It's an easy way for them to say 'no' or to politely decline those requests," said the executive of the Greenwich, Conn., company. "This is a way for people to say, 'Sorry, we have a PAC, so I'll pass along your request to the PAC.' "
Most large corporations have PACs, which are pools of political money raised from senior-level company employees. Executives are permitted to contribute up to $10,000 each two-year election cycle to their company PAC. A board of company executives, often working with political advisers or lobbyists, then determines how to contribute the money to political candidates, usually steered to maximize the business's public-policy influence.
But the $1.3 trillion hedge-fund industry -- like Silicon Valley firms in the 1990s and early 2000s -- has been slow to formalize its political activities. Hedge funds have considered Washington as "out of sight, out of mind -- but those days may be ending," says Michael Toner, a former FEC chairman.
Lisa McGreevy, executive vice president and chief operating officer for the industry's trade group, the Managed Funds Association, predicts that several hedge funds will follow Tudor and open PACs in the next two years. "Like every other industry, hedge funds that are thinking about starting a PAC are taking the next step in the political process by building into their business model something that today is part of doing business in this country: dealing with public-policy issues," she said.
Mrs. McGreevy said a large part of her job these days is coaching hedge-fund managers about political giving. "I can't tell you how many firms I talked to who have called and said, 'We just got asked for money and we don't know what to do.' "
Mrs. McGreevy and other industry lobbyists say they tell hedge funds to donate to political candidates who share the industry's views on public policy. Hedge-fund executives tend to contribute to politicians based on their personal political views, rather than considering whether the candidate supports policies that help the hedge-fund industry. Executives in Silicon Valley went through a similar evolution of political savvy.
The recent development of the Managed Fund Association's own PAC illustrates the trend. The group didn't start large-scale fund-raising efforts until the 2004 presidential-election cycle when it made about $100,000 in political donations through the PAC. Donations doubled to $200,000 in the 2006 election and the trade association hopes to double that again to $400,000 this election. The PAC has given a slight majority of its donations to Republicans thus far.
Early in the 2008 presidential race, candidates appear to be relying on hedge funds for a significant share of their financial backing for the first time. According to campaign-finance reports released this week, employees at firms such as SAC Capital Advisors LLC, Elliott Associates LP and Fortress Investment Group LLC ranked among the top sources for presidential candidates.
Though no hedge fund had a PAC before this election cycle, political donations from individual hedge-fund executives have increased rapidly as the industry has expanded. Individuals at the 25 largest hedge funds contributed nearly $2.3 million to political candidates during the 2004 election, up from $576,000 in the 2000 election, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan organization that tracks political donations.
Donations from Tudor executives in particular are relatively small, but increasing quickly. In the 2006 election cycle, managers at the hedge fund contributed $300,000 to political candidates, twice as much as a decade ago. In contrast, Goldman Sachs Group Inc., one of the most politically active Wall Street firms, made $2.5 million in individual donations and another $478,000 from its PAC.
Tudor executives say they don't yet know how much money they hope to raise for their PAC or whom they will support. The giving pattern of individual Tudor executives in the past has tilted Democratic.
[chart]
Tudor employees have made more than $1 million in donations in the last decade, most of which has gone to Democrats. Paul Tudor Jones II, the company's founder and chief executive, has contributed $570,000 since 1992, about 90% of which has gone to Democrats, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.
Mr. Jones donates to some Republicans. In late March, he contributed the maximum $2,300 to the presidential campaign of Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor. Last year, he gave $4,200 to New York Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's re-election campaign. Born in Memphis, Mr. Jones contributed $4,000 to the Tennessee senatorial campaign of former Democratic Rep. Harold Ford -- and $2,000 to Mr. Ford's Republican opponent, Bob Corker, who won that race. Tudor's new political activity emerges as the hedge-fund industry has caught the attention of some in Washington who worry that a potential scandal in the largely unregulated industry could cost billions of dollars for public pension funds.
Lawmakers are discussing ways to limit how much money private pension funds can invest in hedge funds, thereby limiting the risk a fund blowup could indirectly impact its retirees.
The Securities and Exchange Commission has proposed a rule to require that investors in hedge funds have more money -- and thus sophistication -- to handle loss. Two Republican senators, including Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, have criticized the SEC for not aggressively trying to root out potential illegal insider trading by the funds. Mr. Grassley also sought, though failed, to reinstate a registration requirement for fund advisers with the SEC that had been thrown out in court. He has indicated he will continue to pursue the requirement.
Senate aides, meanwhile, are considering legislation that would raise the taxes on the portion of profits that hedge funds earn on their deals.
yeah, SAC isn't even on there. this is definitely missing some stuff
Post a Comment