Winner!
The Culross Global Fund has been awarded ‘Best performing diversified fund of hedge funds over 3 years on risk/return basis’ at the Hedge Fund Review’s 7th Annual European Fund of Hedge Funds Awards held on 26th November 2008.
This is the first year that the same Fund has won more that one category, with the Global Fund also winning the ‘1 year’ award.
Nominations
- Winner: Culross Global Fund (Culross Global Management)
- Aurum Aggressive Fund (Aurum Funds)
- The Fitzwilliam Growth Fund (BDO Stoy Hayward Investment Management)
- Claritas G4 Fund – Class Fund of Funds G-7 (Claritas Investments)
- Consulta Alternative Strategy Fund (Consulta)
About the Awards
Hedge Funds Review’s awards are the most sought after accolades in the industry. The hedge fund investment process relies on more than just numbers and our judging process recognises this. Now in it’s 7th year, the European Fund of Hedge Fund Awards remain the only signature event held exclusively for the European fund of hedge fund sector and as such continue to attract the top names from the industry. Chaired by Phil Irvine, Director of PiRho Investment Consulting, the judging panel is impartial and unbiased and seeks to reward genuine performance and success. Previous recipients of these awards have seen as much as a 10 fold increase in their AUM in the 12 months after winning – making the shortlist alone guarantees managers increased awareness in the investor community and an enhanced reputation.
Methodology
The judging process begins by running a screen across all entrants, selecting managers with a significant European presence, typically some investment or due diligence function.
For 1 year awards the period under consideration is July 1st 2005 – June 30th 2008
Each fund of hedge funds is ranked against its peers by its annualised return, its sharpe ratio and its annualised return over its worst month, for the relevant period. These three rankings are added to produce an aggregate ranking and a long-list. Other metrics such as volatility, total return, percentage of positive and negative months and age and size of fund are also generated.
The judges then discuss the various merits of the funds, from both a qualitative and quantitative perspective. Whether groups are of a sound basis and exhibit expert management that could be expected to continue producing, are also taken into account. A shortlist is drawn up, typically of around 5-6 names. From this a winner is chosen.