I’m not aware of Perelman publishing a “a pattern that generates superior risk-adjusted returns".
That type of information is worth millions, and there are many investment firms offering very lucrative positions to those that can identify a pattern that generates superior risk-adjusted returns.
Outside of very rare outliers, it doesn’t seem reasonable to assume that information that will generate outsized returns will be publicly available.
Because if your chosen career is an academic that's what you do. You research, write and publish. You could probably make more money by selling your ideas in private industry but that's an entire career pivot, it's like a junkyard becoming a cheap used car lot. It's a lot of work and comes with risk. If you're tenured or close to it you should probably just publish. Sure you could try and sell your ideas on the side but that's not going to endear you to other people in academia.
Perhaps because they enjoy academia far more than money making?
Some people like Grigori Perelman [0] are just not interested in money or fame, or both.
0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grigori_Perelman