Compare
| Feature | Mutual Fund | Hedge Fund |
|---|---|---|
| Mandate | Track or beat a benchmark (relative) | Positive return in any market (absolute) |
| Instruments | Mostly long-only public securities | Short selling, leverage, derivatives |
| Fees | Flat expense ratio (often <1%) | ~2% management + ~20% of profits |
| Liquidity | Daily NAV redemption | Lock-ups + quarterly or longer windows |
| Investors | Open to the public | Accredited / qualified only |
Key point
Long/short equity is the archetype: go long the name expected to outperform and simultaneously short the name expected to underperform. If the whole sector falls, the gain on the short cushions the loss on the long -- the fund is betting on the SPREAD between the two, not the market's direction.
Key insight
Check-in
Step through
This is why the mandate matters. The 2-and-20 model is only defensible if the fund delivers returns the investor could not get cheaply elsewhere -- uncorrelated, skill-driven alpha. In a strong bull market a long-biased fund can look good in absolute terms while destroying value relative to a low-cost index. Judge a hedge fund against its mandate (absolute, market-agnostic, net of fees), not against zero.
So far
Hedge funds chase absolute, market-agnostic returns using tools mutual funds cannot touch, behind lock-ups and a 2-and-20 fee. Long/short trades the spread between names; quant funds trade modeled mispricings. The bar is alpha net of fees -- beta in disguise does not clear it. For the techniques underneath, see Derivatives Beyond Options (delta hedging, volatility as an asset class) and Special Situations (capital-structure arbitrage, short-selling mechanics).
Sit with the ideas.
A long/short equity fund is long $10M of a strong chipmaker and short $10M of a weak competitor. The whole semiconductor sector falls 15%. The strong name drops 8%; the weak name drops 22%. Roughly what is the fund's P&L on this paired trade (ignore fees)?