EFTA00370773.pdf
PDF Source (No Download)
Extracted Text (OCR)
From: Lesley Groff
To: Jeffrey Epstein <jeevacation@gmail.com>
Subject: Fwd: ATorus Daily Portfolio Report - 4/22 & 4/23
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 12:46:25 +0000
Attachments: PeopleRandomnessHard.pdf; ATorus_BacktestNAV_042214.pdfi
ATorus BacktestNAV_042314.pdf
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Michael Fowler
Date: April 24, 2014, 8:43:31 AM EDT
To: Lesley Groff
Subject: ATorus Daily Portfolio Report - 4/22 & 4/23
Lesley,
Please see attached the Daily Portfolio Reports for 4/22 & 4/23. Have a good day.
- Daily Commentary -
One of our pet peeves is people detecting patterns where there may be none. Reading the following article
about Allergen takeover volume spike (Flurry of Allergan Trading Preceded Offer) is a case in point. And this is
not say the article or the analysis (especially specific to this one circumstance) is inaccurate. There is just not
enough informative statistics disclosed to tell.
The article references "the volume of stock trading during the 10-day period before an announcement was 86%
higher than it's average over the previous year...10 days before bullish activist bought stocks disclosed in
regulatory filings, the stocks nose on average more than 3.2% more than the overall market based on an
analysis of 975 announcements of leading activist investors since .2007."
(1) Are the volumes measured in dollar volume traded instead of number of shares? Dollar volume measured as
a percentage of either EV or market cap provides more relevant and relative context.
(2) Also within the sample size, does that include periods of high and low realized volatility? In periods of high
volatility turnover increases markedly.
(3) Related to the "average 3.2% more" what was the standard deviation? What was the percentile distribution?
What was the on average recent daily movement of these securities. Was the 3.2% unconditional or just noise
given realized volatility at that moment? For instance in 2008, when S&P realized volatility was over 3% was
the excess movement proportional to the overall market volatility if there are occurrences during this period?
We always try to ask ourselves these types questions when we allocate risk, analyze our results, and and then to
manage expectations for investors for when our results are either "noise" or are significant.
"Humans are very good at detecting patterns, but rather poor at detecting randomness." - Joseph Jay
Williams, UC Berkley (I've attached the paper to this email if you have any interest in reading Why are People
Bad at Detecting Randomness? Because it is HaM.)
EFTA00370773
A few points
Best Regards,
Michael J. Fowler
Intl. Mobile
Sent From My Mobile Device
The information contained in this electronic mail message is confidential information intended only for the use
of the individual or entity named above, and may be privileged. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly
prohibited. If you have recieved this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone, and
delete the original message.
EFTA00370774
Document Preview
PDF source document
This document was extracted from a PDF. No image preview is available. The OCR text is shown on the left.
This document was extracted from a PDF. No image preview is available. The OCR text is shown on the left.
Document Details
| Filename | EFTA00370773.pdf |
| File Size | 109.7 KB |
| OCR Confidence | 85.0% |
| Has Readable Text | Yes |
| Text Length | 3,209 characters |
| Indexed | 2026-02-11T16:09:59.438661 |