I’m talking about SALP and VARA. (These are not cherry-picked due to their high returns; they’re the two hedge funds I talked about 1.5-2 years ago too.) Sorry, I see I didn’t specify the hedge funds in the post.
Recent 5x per year is partly due to gains from big investors becoming AI-pilled. That effect will go to completion well before returns reach 400x. I expect something more like 2x per year is the most that can be sustained without plenty of leverage.
Vara doesn’t seem close to 5x. Both of these seem highly unlikely to produce those kinds of returns going forward because of capacity, let alone a 400x compounded return.
I’d be interested in reading a longer defense of this.
Yeah, my 400x view is pretty unstable and I certainly haven’t justified it. One basic idea is that if AI companies that are currently 4% of global wealth and they will go to 60% (after dilution), that’s 15x growth in your fraction of global wealth just by holding average AI investments, and you can do better by (1) using leverage and (2) making smarter investments.
You do better with leverage at the expense of increasing risk, including total loss in worlds that are only slightly off from what you expect.
You seem to be talking about what people with hundreds of billions collectively can do. Capacity is a real constraint at that point.
It’s also likely some of the best investments won’t want that much capital. Even if you’re right on the 60%, some of that can come from new private companies you can’t invest in or can only invest after they’ve grown a lot.
Can you provide more details? This seems more than an order of magnitude off.
I did a google search and here’s the first article I found; you can find somewhat more info if you try harder: https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/aschenbrenner-ai-focused-hedge-fund-155609137.html.
I’m talking about SALP and VARA. (These are not cherry-picked due to their high returns; they’re the two hedge funds I talked about 1.5-2 years ago too.) Sorry, I see I didn’t specify the hedge funds in the post.
Recent 5x per year is partly due to gains from big investors becoming AI-pilled. That effect will go to completion well before returns reach 400x. I expect something more like 2x per year is the most that can be sustained without plenty of leverage.
Vara doesn’t seem close to 5x. Both of these seem highly unlikely to produce those kinds of returns going forward because of capacity, let alone a 400x compounded return.
I’d be interested in reading a longer defense of this.
Yeah, my 400x view is pretty unstable and I certainly haven’t justified it. One basic idea is that if AI companies that are currently 4% of global wealth and they will go to 60% (after dilution), that’s 15x growth in your fraction of global wealth just by holding average AI investments, and you can do better by (1) using leverage and (2) making smarter investments.
You do better with leverage at the expense of increasing risk, including total loss in worlds that are only slightly off from what you expect.
You seem to be talking about what people with hundreds of billions collectively can do. Capacity is a real constraint at that point.
It’s also likely some of the best investments won’t want that much capital. Even if you’re right on the 60%, some of that can come from new private companies you can’t invest in or can only invest after they’ve grown a lot.