[motohagiography]

My impression is Universa is in effect, a product that aggregates intelligent short positions based on their assessment of tail risks, which other mainstream managers use as a hedging instrument. Their %3.5 management fee is a multiple of the 1:10 that other funds have been forced to take, and almost double the 2:20 model of pre-08 hedge funds.

Speculating, but the kind of fund I would imagine buys their product would be in the 5bn+ AUM range, who has broad exposure to a bunch of mark-to-unicorn venture backed startups in their book.

It'd be like %2 Universa, %60 index funds, and %20 buying sand hill dead dogs and F rounds as the price of admission for participation in their next fresh funds, %10 unicorn, %4 on something socially earnest and backed by someone politically connected for social climbing, a management fee, and spoilage. How close is that?

Universa being the tool that offsets the tide rolling out on those other bets.

[justinmares]

This is almost exactly correct. Though what's crazy is they charge fees on the notional - aka the amount they're "insuring".

So if you have a 4b portfolio, they're charging fees on the 4b.

[whatok]

Private equity does it. Why not these guys?

But seriously, not charging SOME sort of fee on capital that is likely to be uninvested on a short-term horizon is giving investors a pretty valuable free option. I'm assuming they have a flexible mandate and are able to invest more given some sort of market conditions. Gauging that capacity and properly modeling trade sizes is extremely important for a strategy like this and is not free.