Author Topic: Broyhill Asset Mgmt - BMC Fund Struggling  (Read 1307 times)

Broeb22

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 451
Broyhill Asset Mgmt - BMC Fund Struggling
« on: October 06, 2020, 07:37:16 AM »
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/351786/000110465919072872/tm1925242-1_ncsr.htm

Page 22 shows this family office's long-term results. This is also the same family office where Chris Pavese from Broyhill Asset Management works.

I wonder how he squares this long-term performance with his letters which paint a picture of success protecting investor capital.

4-5% long-term...not so hot



Broeb22

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 451
Re: Broyhill Asset Mgmt - BMC Fund Struggling
« Reply #1 on: October 06, 2020, 08:32:40 AM »
Increasing cash significantly too...seems like a great recipe for continued underperformance.

influx

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 149
  • Mindful Patience & Long-Term MINDSET
Re: Broyhill Asset Mgmt - BMC Fund Struggling
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2020, 04:07:06 PM »
Increasing cash significantly too...seems like a great recipe for continued underperformance.

Much like Berkshire, Baupost. I would think the dry powder is part of the convexity in an old fashion way

Broeb22

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 451
Re: Broyhill Asset Mgmt - BMC Fund Struggling
« Reply #3 on: November 18, 2020, 09:58:52 AM »
Increasing cash significantly too...seems like a great recipe for continued underperformance.

Much like Berkshire, Baupost. I would think the dry powder is part of the convexity in an old fashion way

Can you explain the convexity of holding dry powder like you're talking to someone who got C's in his Econ classes?

COBFInfinity

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Broyhill Asset Mgmt - BMC Fund Struggling
« Reply #4 on: November 20, 2020, 09:37:03 AM »
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/351786/000110465919072872/tm1925242-1_ncsr.htm

Page 22 shows this family office's long-term results. This is also the same family office where Chris Pavese from Broyhill Asset Management works.

I wonder how he squares this long-term performance with his letters which paint a picture of success protecting investor capital.

4-5% long-term...not so hot

Protecting capital and growing capital are two different things. Not sure what the performance has looked like during actual market drawdowns, but since the worst annual return was -2%, it seems reasonable to argue that the capital has been protected so far. Now, whether the growth has been sufficient for the strategy, I don't know enough about it.