The Quant Quake, 10 years on

Share This Post

August 7, 2017.  10 years ago today there was a wakeup call in systematic investing when many quants across the Street suffered their worst losses – before or since – over a three day period that has been called the “Quant Quake.” The event wasn’t widely reported outside of the quant world, but it was a worldview-changing week for those of us who traded through it. Most quant investors today, it seems, either didn’t hear the wakeup call, or have forgotten. This article addresses what’s changed in the last ten years, what hasn’t, what we learned and what we didn’t, and eight ideas on how to change your research process to insulate yourself from the next Quake.

In summary:

  • The Quake, which caused massive losses in quant funds in 2007 as well as some fund closures, was driven by crowded trades and similar alphas across many funds
  • There are more quants trading more capital today than ten years ago, but most of them haven’t significantly changed their alphas or data sources and have not widely adopted alternative data, perhaps due to complacency or herding behavior
  • So there’s more risk of another Quake than there was 10 years ago. In 2017 we’re seeing evidence of crowdedness and poor performance in standard strategies, with alternative data sets exhibiting far stronger performance
  • Quants need to build systematic processes for evaluating new data sources, and should view alternative data as a prime directive


The Quake

After poor but not hugely unusual performance in July ’07, many quantitative strategies experienced dramatic losses – 12 standard deviation events or more by some accounts – over the three consecutive days of August 7, 8, and 9. In the normally highly risk controlled world of market neutral quant investing, such a string of returns was unheard of. Typically-secretive quants even reached out to their competitors to get a handle on what was going on, though no clear answers were immediately forthcoming.

Many quants believed that the dislocations must be temporary since they were deviations from what the models considered fair value. During the chaos, however, each manager had to decide whether to cut capital to stem the bleeding – thereby locking in losses – or to hang on and risk having to close shop if the expected snap back didn’t arrive on time. And the decision was sometimes not in their hands, in cases where they didn’t have access to steady sources of capital. Hedge funds with monthly liquidity couldn’t be compelled by their investors to liquidate, but managers of SMAs and proprietary trading desks didn’t necessarily have that luxury.

On August 10th, the strategies rebounded strongly, per the chart above from Khandani and Lo’s postmortem Quant Quake paper. By the end of the week, those quants who had held on to their positions were nearly back where they started; their monthly return streams wouldn’t even register a blip! Unfortunately, many hadn’t, or couldn’t, hold on; they cut capital or reduced leverage – in some cases, like GSAM, to this day. Some large funds shut down soon afterwards.


What happened???

Gradually a sort of consensus emerged about what had happened. Most likely, a multi-strategy fund which traded both classic quant signals and some less liquid strategies suffered some large losses in those less liquid books; and they liquidated their quant books quickly to cover the margin calls. The positions they liquidated turned out to be very similar to the positions held by many other quant-driven portfolios across the world; and the liquidation put downward pressure on those particular stocks, thereby negatively affecting other managers, some of whom in turn liquidated, causing a domino effect. Meanwhile, the broader investment world didn’t notice; these strategies were mostly market neutral and there were no large directional moves in the market at the time.

With hindsight, we can look back at some factors which we knew to have been crowded and some others which were not, and see the difference in performance during the Quake quite clearly. In the chart below, we look at three crowded factors: earnings yield; 12-month price momentum; and 5-day price reversal. Most of the data sets we now use to reduce the crowdedness of our portfolios weren’t around in 2007, but for a few of these less-crowded alphas we can go back that far in a backtest. Here, we use components of some ExtractAlpha models, namely: the Tactical Model (TM1)’s Seasonality component, which measures the historical tendency of a stock to perform well at that time of year; the Cross-Asset Model (CAM1)’s Volume component, which compares Put to Call volume and option to stock volume; and CAM1’s Skew component, which measures the implied volatility of out of the money puts. The academic research documenting these anomalies was mostly published between 2008 and 2012, and the ideas weren’t very widely known at the time; arguably, these anomalies are still relatively uncrowded compared to their “Smart Beta” counterparts.

The table above shows the average annualized return of dollar neutral, equally weighted portfolios of liquid U.S. equities built from these single factors and rebalanced daily. For the seven-year period up to and through the Quant Quake, the less crowded factors didn’t perform spectacularly, on average, whereas the crowded factors did quite well; their average annualized return for the period was around 10% before costs, about half that of the crowded factors. But their drawdowns during the Quake were minimal, compared to those of the crowded factors. Therefore, we can view some of these factors as diversifiers or hedges against crowding. And to the extent that one does want to unwind positions, there should be more liquidity in a less-crowded portfolio.

It turned out, we were all trading the same stuff!

The inferior performance of the factors which we now know to have been crowded was a shocking revelation to some managers at the time who viewed their methodology as unique or at least uncommon. It turned out, we were all trading the same stuff! Most equity market neutral quants traded pretty much the same universe, controlling risk using pretty much the same risk models… and pretty much betting on the same alphas built on the same data sources! In many ways, the seed of the idea which became ExtractAlpha – that investors need to diversify their factor bets beyond these well-known ones – were planted in 2007. At the time one would have assumed that other quants would have had the same thought, and that the Quant Quake was a call to arms – but as we’ve learned more recently, the arms don’t seem to have been taken up.

But it won’t happen again… will it?

Quant returns were generally good in the ensuing years, but many groups took years to rehabilitate their reputations and AUMs. By early 2016, the Quant Quake seemed distant enough, and returns had been good enough for long enough that complacency had set in. Times were good – until they weren’t, as many quant strategies have fared poorly in the last 18 months. At least one sizable quant fund has closed, and several well known multi-manager firms have shut their quant books. Meanwhile, many alternative alphas have done well. In our view, this was somewhat inevitable; since 2013 we’ve been saying that times eventually wouldn’t be good due to recent crowding in common quant factors, in part due to the proliferation of quant funds, their decent performance relative to discretionary managers, and the rise of smart beta products; and there’s a clear way to protect yourself: diversify your alphas!

With so much data available today, there’s no excuse for letting your portfolio be dominated by crowded factors.

With so much data available today – most of which was unavailable in 2007 – there’s no longer any excuse for letting your portfolio be dominated by classic, crowded factors. Well, maybe some excuses. Figuring out which data sets are useful is hard. Turning them into alphas is hard. But we’ve had ten years to think about it now. These are the problems ExtractAlpha helps its clients solve, by parsing through dozens of unique data sets and turning them into actionable alphas.

You’d think quants would actively embrace new alpha sources, and would have started doing so in earnest around August 15th, 2007. Strangely, they barely seem to have done so at all. Most quant managers still rely on the same factors they always have, though they may trade them with more attention to risk, crowding, and liquidity. Alternative data hasn’t crossed the chasm.

Perhaps the many holdouts are simply hoping that value, momentum, and mean reversion aren’t really crowded, or that their take on these factors really is sufficiently differentiated – which it may be, but it seems a strange thing to rely on in the absence of better information. It’s also true that there are a lot more quants and quant funds around now than there were then, across more geographies and styles – and so the institutional memory has faded a lot. Those of us who were trading in those days are veterans (and we don’t call ourselves “data scientists” either!)

It’s also possible that a behavioral explanation is at work: herding. Just like allocators who pile money into the largest funds despite those funds’ underperformance relative to emerging funds – because nobody can fault them for a decision everyone else has also already made – or like research analysts who only move their forecasts with the crowd to avoid a bold, but potentially wrong, call – perhaps quants prefer to be wrong at the same time as everyone else. Hey, everyone else lost money too, so am I so bad? This may seem to some managers to be a better outcome than adopting a strategy which is more innovative than using classic quant factors but which has a shorter track record and is potentially harder to explain to an allocator.

Another quant quake is actually more likely now than it was ten years ago.

Whatever the rationale, it seems clear that another quant quake is actually more likely now than it was ten years ago. The particular mechanism might be different, but a crowdedness-driven liquidation event seems very possible in these crowded markets.

So, what should be done?

We do see that many funds have gotten better at reaching out to data providers and working through the evaluation process in terms of vendor management. But most have not become particularly efficient at evaluating the data sets in the sense of finding alpha in them.

In our view, any quant manager’s incremental research resources should be applied directly towards acquiring orthogonal signals (and, relatedly, to controlling crowdedness risk) rather than towards refining already highly correlated ones in order to make them possibly slightly less correlated. Here are eight ideas on how to do so effectively:

  1. The focus should be on allocating research resources specifically to new data sets, setting a clear time horizon for evaluating each (say, 4-6 weeks), and making a definitive call about the presence or absence of added value from a data set. This requires maintaining a pipeline of new data sets and sticking to a schedule and a process.
  2. Quants should build a turnkey backtesting environment which can efficiently evaluate new alphas and determine their potential added value to the existing process. There will always be creativity involved in testing data sets, but the more mundane data processing, evaluation, and reporting aspects should be automated to expedite the process in (1)
  3. An experienced quant should be responsible for evaluating new data sets – someone who has seen a lot of alpha factors before and can think about how the current one might be similar or different. New data sets shouldn’t be a side project, but rather a core competency of any systematic fund.
  4. Quants should pay attention to innovative data suppliers rather than what’s available from the big players (admittedly, we’re biased on this one!)
  5. Priority should be given to data sets which are relatively easy to test, in order to expedite one’s exposure to alternative alpha. More complex, raw, or unstructured data sets can indeed get you to more diversification and more unique implementations, but at the cost of sitting on your existing factors for longer – so it’s best to start with some low hanging fruit if you’re new to alternative data
  6. Quants need to gain comfort with limited history that we often see with alternative data sets. We recognize that with many new data sets one is “making a call” subject to limited historical data. We can’t judge these data sets by the same criteria of 20-year backtests as we can with more traditional factors, both because the older data simply isn’t there and because the world 20 years ago has little bearing on the crowded quant space of today. But the alternative sounds far more risky.
  7. In sample and out of sample methodologies might have to change to account for the shorter history and evolving quant landscape.
  8. Many of the new alphas we find are relatively short horizon compared to their crowded peers; the alpha horizons are often in the 1 day to 2 month range. For large-AUM asset managers who can’t be too nimble, using these faster new alphas in unconventional ways such as trade timing or separate faster-trading books can allow them to move the needle with these data sets. We’ve seen a convergence to the mid-horizon as quants who run lower-Sharpe books look to juice their returns and higher-frequency quants look for capacity, making the need for differentiated mid-horizon alphas even greater.

I haven’t addressed risk and liquidity here, which are two other key considerations when implementing a strategy on new or old data. But for any forward-thinking quant, sourcing unique alpha should be the primary goal, and implementing these steps should help to get them there. Let’s not wait for another Quake before we learn from the lessons of ten years ago!

Originally posted on LinkedIn at

More To Explore

Dealroom Competitors

Introduction In the fast-paced world of business and finance, competition is inevitable. Dealroom, a prominent player in the industry, faces competition from various companies aiming

Financial Best Practices

Introduction In a world of economic uncertainties and ever-changing financial landscapes, adopting financial best practices becomes imperative for individuals and businesses alike. This article explores

Chloe Miao

Chloe joined ExtractAlpha in 2023. Prior to joining, she was an associate director at Value Search Asia Limited. She earned her Masters of Arts in Global Communications from the Chinese University of Hong Kong.

Matija Ratkovic

Matija is a specialist in software sales and customer success, bringing experience from various industries. His career, before sales, includes tech support, software development, and managerial roles. He earned his BSc and Specialist Degree in Electrical Engineering at the University of Montenegro.

Jack Kim

Jack joined ExtractAlpha in 2022. Previously, he spent 20+ years supporting pre- and after-sales activities to drive sales in the Asia Pacific market. He has worked in many different industries including, technology, financial services, and manufacturing, where he developed excellent customer relationship management skills. He received his Bachelor of Business in Operations Management from the University of Technology Sydney.

Perry Stupp

Perry brings more than 20 years of Enterprise Software development, sales and customer engagement experience focused on Fortune 1000 customers. Prior to joining ExtractAlpha as a Technical Consultant, Perry was the founder, President and Chief Customer Officer at Solution Labs Inc. a data analytics company that specialized in the analysis of very large-scale computing infrastructures in place at some of the largest corporate data centers in the world.

Perry Stupp

Perry brings more than 20 years of Enterprise Software development, sales and customer engagement experience focused on Fortune 1000 customers. Prior to joining ExtractAlpha as a Technical Consultant, Perry was the founder, President and Chief Customer Officer at Solution Labs Inc. a data analytics company that specialized in the analysis of very large-scale computing infrastructures in place at some of the largest corporate data centers in the world.

Janette Ho

Janette has 22+ years of leadership and management experience in FinTech and analytics sales and business development in the Asia Pacific region. In addition to expertise in quantitative models, she has worked on risk management, portfolio attribution, fund accounting, and custodian services. Janette is currently head of relationship management at Moody’s Analytics in the Asia-Pacific region, and was formerly Managing Director at State Street, head of sales for APAC Asset Management at Thomson Reuters, and head of Asia for StarMine. She is also a board member at Human Financial, a FinTech firm focused on the Australian superannuation industry.

Leigh Drogen

Leigh founded Estimize in 2011. Prior to Estimize, Leigh ran Surfview Capital, a New York based quantitative investment management firm trading medium frequency momentum strategies. He was also an early member of the team at StockTwits where he worked on product and business development.  Leigh is now the CEO of StarKiller Capital, an institutional investment management firm in the digital asset space.

Andrew Barry

Andrew is the CEO of Human Financial, a technology innovator that is pioneering consumer-led solutions for the superannuation industry. Andrew was previously CEO of Alpha Beta, a global quant hedge fund business. Prior to Alpha Beta he held senior roles in a number of hedge funds globally.

Natallia Brui

Natallia has 7+ years experience as an IT professional. She currently manages our Estimize platform. Natallia earned a BS in Computer & Information Science in Baruch College and BS in Economics from BSEU in Belarus. She has a background in finance, cybersecurity and data analytics.

June Cook

June has a background in B2B sales, market research, and analytics. She has 10 years of sales experience in healthcare, private equity M&A, and the tech industry. She holds a B.B.A. from Temple University and an M.S. in Management and Leadership from Western Governors University.

Steven Barrett

Steve worked as a trader at hedge funds and prop desks in Hong Kong and London for 15+ years. He also held roles in management consultancy, internal audit and business management. He holds a BA in Business Studies from Oxford Brookes University and an MBA from Hong Kong University of Science & Technology.

Jenny Zhou, PhD

Jenny joined ExtractAlpha in 2023. Prior to that, she worked as a quantitative researcher for Chorus, a hedge fund under AXA Investment Managers. Jenny received her PhD in finance from the University of Hong Kong in 2023. Her research covers ESG, natural language processing, and market microstructure. Jenny received her Bachelor degree in Finance from The Chinese University of Hong Kong in 2019. Her research has been published in the Journal of Financial Markets.

Kristen Gavazzi

Kristen joined ExtractAlpha in 2021 as a Sales Director. As a past employee of StarMine, Kristen has extensive experience in analyst performance analytics and helped to build out the sell-side solution, StarMine Monitor. She received her BS in Business Management from Cornell University.

Triloke Rajbhandary

Triloke has 10+ years experience in designing and developing software systems in the financial services industry. He joined ExtractAlpha in 2016. Prior to that, he worked as a senior software engineer at HSBC Global Technologies. He holds a Master of Applied Science degree from Ryerson University specializing in signal processing.

Jackie Cheng, PhD

Jackie joined ExtractAlpha in 2018 as a quantitative researcher. He received his PhD in the field of optoelectronic physics from The University of Hong Kong in 2017. He published 17 journal papers and holds a US patent, and has 500 citations with an h-index of 13. Prior to joining ExtractAlpha, he worked with a Shenzhen-based CTA researching trading strategies on Chinese futures. Jackie received his Bachelor’s degree in engineering from Zhejiang University in 2013.

Yunan Liu, PhD

Yunan joined ExtractAlpha in 2019 as a quantitative researcher. Prior to that, he worked as a research analyst at ICBC, covering the macro economy and the Asian bond market. Yunan received his PhD in Economics & Finance from The University of Hong Kong in 2018. His research fields cover Empirical Asset Pricing, Mergers & Acquisitions, and Intellectual Property. His research outputs have been presented at major conferences such as AFA, FMA and FMA (Asia). Yunan received his Masters degree in Operations Research from London School of Economics in 2013 and his Bachelor degree in International Business from Nottingham University in 2012.

Willett Bird, CFA

Prior to joining ExtractAlpha in 2022, Willett was a sales director for Vidrio Financial. Willett was based in Hong Kong for nearly two decades where he oversaw FIS Global’s Asset Management and Commercial Banking efforts. Willett worked at FactSet, where he built the Asian Portfolio and Quantitative Analytics team and oversaw FactSet’s Southeast Asian operations. Willett completed his undergraduate studies at Georgetown University and finished a joint degree MBA from the Northwestern Kellogg School and the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology in 2010. Willett also holds the Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) designation.

Julie Craig

Julie Craig is a senior marketing executive with decades of experience marketing high tech, fintech, and financial services offerings. She joined ExtractAlpha in 2022. She was formerly with AlphaSense, where she led marketing at a startup now valued at $1.7B. Prior to that, she was with Interactive Data where she led marketing initiatives and a multi-million dollar budget for an award-winning product line for individual and institutional investors.

Jeff Geisenheimer

Jeff is the CFO and COO of ExtractAlpha and directs our financial, strategic, and general management operations. He previously held the role of CFO at Estimize and two publicly traded firms, Multex and Market Guide. Jeff also served as CFO at private-equity backed companies, including Coleman Research, Ford Models, Instant Information, and Moneyline Telerate. He’s also held roles as advisor, partner, and board member at Total Reliance, CreditRiskMonitor, Mochidoki, and Resurge.

Vinesh Jha

Vinesh founded ExtractAlpha in 2013 with the mission of bringing analytical rigor to the analysis and marketing of new datasets for the capital markets. Since ExtractAlpha’s merger with Estimize in early 2021, he has served as the CEO of both entities. From 1999 to 2005, Vinesh was the Director of Quantitative Research at StarMine in San Francisco, where he developed industry leading metrics of sell side analyst performance as well as successful commercial alpha signals and products based on analyst, fundamental, and other data sources. Subsequently, he developed systematic trading strategies for proprietary trading desks at Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley in New York. Most recently he was Executive Director at PDT Partners, a spinoff of Morgan Stanley’s premiere quant prop trading group, where in addition to research, he also applied his experience in the communication of complex quantitative concepts to investor relations. Vinesh holds an undergraduate degree from the University of Chicago and a graduate degree from the University of Cambridge, both in mathematics.

Subscribe to the ExtractAlpha monthly newsletter