Watch Groups

New legislation would boost the overtime pay premium and benefit 13.4 million workers: The Double Wage for Overtime Act extends worker protections

EPI -

The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA) set workplace norms that are still in use almost ninety years later. The FLSA established the 40-hour standard workweek and overtime protections for workers. It guaranteed pay at a rate of 1.5 times the standard hourly wage for work past the 40-hour mark. Overtime protections were designed as a safeguard for workers—to prevent employers from overworking employees and to require firms to pay workers fairly for their labor when they put in extra time on the job. By making long hours more expensive, the overtime premium incentivizes employers to hire more workers and spread the work around.

But as the country’s workforce has shifted over the nearly 90 years since the FLSA was enacted, the FLSA’s overtime rate has not.

Recently, the Double Wage for Overtime Act was introduced by Rep. Casar (D-Texas) in the House and by Sen. Gallego (D-Ariz.) in the Senate. The Act will strengthen overtime protections for more than 13 million workers by amending the overtime rate for the first time since 1938. It would raise overtime pay from 1.5 times a worker’s regular rate of pay to double the regular rate.

How would this affect pay, hours worked, and employment?

The potential to significantly increase workers’ earnings is notable. A worker making $25 an hour and working 10 hours overtime a week for a full year would gain $6,500 more in annual income, all else equal. But, as with any change to overtime policies, employers could respond to the new standard differently, based on the needs of their workplace. In particular, some workers who often work overtime may work fewer overtime hours, as employers adjust schedules and spread work to minimize having to pay the overtime premium. But, due to the double overtime rate, overall compensation for working people will still rise.

The Double Wage for Overtime Act also serves as a mechanism to narrow race and gender pay gaps by boosting pay in historically undercompensated, overtime-eligible sectors, where women and workers of color are disproportionately represented, due to the broad impacts of racism and sexism on labor market outcomes.

Finally, the bill offers a strong deterrent to employers who might otherwise overwork employees. Stronger overtime protections incentivize fairer and more reasonable scheduling, and act as a protection against unpredictably long hours. And, by incentivizing employers to spread hours out to employees who work less than 40 hours a week, stronger overtime protections are also likely to reduce the number of workers who are working part-time “involuntarily” (because they can’t get enough hours).

Any impact on employment is likely to be small, but positive. Some might argue, as they often do in opposing minimum wage increases, that requiring businesses to pay their employees more would reduce employment. But the overwhelming body of evidence on minimum wage increases shows that they raise wages without causing meaningful job losses.

Moreover, increasing the overtime premium differs from increasing the minimum wage in an important way. A higher minimum wage requires employers to raise the pay of all workers earning below the new minimum. By contrast, employers have considerable flexibility in responding to a higher overtime premium. Rather than paying the higher overtime rate, they could hire additional workers or offer more hours to employees who currently work part-time. In part because employers have these alternatives, any employment effect of increasing the overtime premium is likely to be positive.

How does this compare with “No tax on overtime”?

The legislation is far better for working people than Republicans’ “no tax on overtime” policy. Although a tax deduction may sound like a compelling way to help people who work overtime, it is a deeply flawed policy with very uneven benefits. It largely benefits middle-to-high-income earners, provides only modest tax savings for those workers who do qualify, leaves some workers worse off, and preserves financial gains for employers who overwork employees. Strengthening overtime standards—instead of offering gimmicky tax cuts—is the real way to deliver for working people.

How would this affect local economies and businesses?

As mentioned above, if this legislation were to take effect, businesses would have choices and flexibility as to how to comply. Firms may hire additional employees, which would increase employment in the overall economy. They may also choose to innovate and become more efficient in how they direct their employees’ use of time. Reducing excessive numbers of work hours may also improve worker health, concentration, and lead to fewer fatigue-related accidents, which would increase productivity in the workplace, benefiting workers and employers alike.

Though employers can respond to an increase in overtime protections in many ways, the increase will raise labor costs, as it puts money in workers’ pockets. Importantly, this is unlikely to translate into higher prices for consumers. Research on minimum wage increases, which raise labor costs, finds little-to-no inflationary impact from minimum wage increases. And minimum wage increases are a much greater shock to labor costs than an increase in the overtime premium. Increases in the minimum wage affect all hours worked for impacted workers, while the higher overtime rate will only affect hours worked past 40 in a week, a small fraction of total hours worked.

In fact, the Double Wage for Overtime Act will boost affordability by helping ensure that workers actually earn enough in wages to cover the cost of living with dignity and security. The potential income increase for working-class households would have a positive effect on local businesses as well. When workers have more money in their pockets, they can put that money back into their communities.

In short, increasing the overtime wage premium would strengthen one of the nation’s foundational labor standards, putting more money in workers’ pockets while encouraging employers to create jobs, instead of relying on excessive overtime. The Double Wage for Overtime Act is a straightforward opportunity for lawmakers to tackle continued affordability concerns. It is a long overdue modernization of overtime pay that will benefit millions.

La Caisse and CPP Investments Overhaul FNZ's Board Amid US$4.6B Lawsuit

Pension Pulse -

James Bradshaw of the Globe and Mail reports pension funds overhaul board of fintech FNZ amid $4.6-billion lawsuit: 

Major shareholders in London-based FNZ Group, including Canadian pension funds, overhauled the board of the financial software provider as they look to stabilize the company’s finances and fend off an ongoing shareholder lawsuit seeking US$4.6-billion.

FNZ provides a digital wealth management platform used by some 650 financial institutions, including North American clients such as Bank of Montreal. Two of Canada’s largest pension funds own significant stakes in the company.

The Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, the Montreal-based pension fund that manages $552-billion, is FNZ’s largest shareholder and invested early in the startup in 2018.

The Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB), the country’s largest pension fund with $864-billion of assets, invested US$1.1-billion in FNZ in 2022.

Since then, the company, which was founded in 2003 in Wellington, New Zealand has run into significant challenges that include a lawsuit from minority shareholders and rising financial losses that FNZ incurred as it expanded rapidly into Europe, North America and Asia.

The overhauled board with several new directors has a mandate to revamp the company’s business model to bring it “to a more sustainable, more mature level,” Caisse chief executive officer Charles Emond said in a recent interview.

FNZ has a “great product” but also a high “cash burn rate” that needs to be reined in, he said.

Earlier this month, FNZ swapped its board chair, appointing Stephen Welch and citing his experience working with regulated financial services businesses in Britain. Previous chair Gregor Stewart is staying on the board as chair of its risk committee.

Five of the company’s 14 directors were replaced previously, including two board seats controlled by the Caisse. As of July, new appointees include Justin Shaw, an operating partner in the Caisse’s private equity division, and Denis Turcotte, managing partner of Brookfield Asset Management Ltd.

FNZ’s chief financial officer, Aashish Kamat, left the company in July after a year-and-a-half in his role.

The company reported a pre-tax loss of US$1.36-billion in 2025 – roughly double its loss in the previous year – even as revenue rose 9 per cent to US$1.13-billion, according to the company’s most recent filings.

“We brought in a new chair because we think, you know, there’s a lot of challenges in that situation,” Mr. Emond said. “He’s just not a chair there for governance. He’s really an executive chair that has experience as to how to assist us.”

Spokespeople for the Caisse and CPPIB declined to comment on the lawsuit against FNZ as it is before the court. A spokesperson for FNZ could not immediately be reached for comment.

The minority shareholder group that is suing FNZ in a New Zealand court has criticized the company’s leadership and its largest shareholders, alleging that employee morale is at a low ebb, based on internal engagement metrics.

Instead of sticking to prior cost-cutting measures, FNZ raised billions of dollars and then ramped up its spending, only to now “do another U-turn and heavily reduce costs,” FNZ co-founder Mike Stevens, a former employee who is part of the shareholder group suing the company, said in a news release.

“A number of things here simply don’t add up,” he said.

The group alleged in the lawsuit that their ownership stakes were unfairly diluted when the company raised new capital several times, starting in 2024, on terms that gave its largest investors preferential terms.

The Caisse and CPPIB participated in those fundraising rounds, including a US$650-million equity injection that was undertaken after the lawsuit was filed. 

The minority shareholders are seeking US$4.6-billion in restitution. The company is contesting the lawsuit, which it says it without merit.

FNZ recently issued a press release stating it has appointed Stephen Welch as Group Chair:

  • Stephen brings decades of experience working with the boards and leadership teams of regulated financial services businesses, with a track record of driving growth, operational improvement and strategic transformation.

FNZ, the leading global wealth management platform, today announced the appointment of Stephen Welch as Group Chair.

Stephen will work closely with the FNZ Board and executive team to support the Group's strategy, transformation agenda and long-term growth ambitions.

Stephen brings decades of experience working with the boards and leadership teams of regulated financial services businesses, with a track record of driving growth, operational improvement and strategic transformation.

Gregor Stewart, who has served as Group Chair since 2024, will remain a member of the Group Board and Chair of its Risk Committee. He will also assume an important new role as Senior Independent Director.

Gregor Stewart, Senior Independent Director, said: “I am delighted to have the opportunity to serve FNZ in a new capacity as it continues on its transformation journey, and to welcome Stephen as new Chair. Stephen brings an impressive track record of success and skills that are highly relevant to FNZ. I look forward to working together.”

Stephen Welch, Group Chair, said:FNZ has established itself as a global leader in wealth management technology with an exceptional platform and significant opportunities ahead. I look forward to working with the Board, Blythe and her wider leadership team, to support the delivery of the Group's strategy and pursue its long-term growth ambitions.”

Blythe Masters, Group Chief Executive Officer, said: “I am delighted to welcome Stephen as Chair of the FNZ Group Board. Stephen brings significant experience working with the boards and leadership teams of regulated, global financial services businesses. His track record of driving transformation and operational excellence will be highly valuable as FNZ continues to execute its strategy. I look forward to working closely with him.”

“On behalf of the Company, I would like to thank Gregor for his leadership as Chair, and I'm pleased that FNZ will continue to benefit from his experience, insight and counsel in his new role.”

Now, for those of you who don't know her, FNZ's CEO Blythe Masters (featured at the top of the post) is a legend in financial markets, previously heading up JPMorgan's commodities and credit divisions among other very senior responsibilities:

Blythe Masters is Chief Executive Officer of FNZ Group. She is also a Founding Partner and Industry Partner at the fintech specialized private equity and venture capital firm, Motive Partners, where she is also Chair of Motive Ventures. Additionally, she holds the position of Non-Executive Chair at J.P. Morgan Securities, PLC and sits on the board of SymphonyAI.

Prior to joining Motive, Blythe was the CEO of Digital Asset Holdings, the leading enterprise blockchain fintech company. Previously, Blythe was a member of the Corporate and Investment Bank Operating Committee and firmwide Executive Committee at J.P. Morgan. Her J.P. Morgan career spanned nearly 30 years, fulfilling several roles including Head of Global Commodities, Head of Corporate and Investment Bank Regulatory Affairs, CFO of the Global Investment Bank, Head of Global Credit Portfolio and Credit Policy and Strategy, and Head of Global Structured Credit.

Blythe is a graduate and Senior Scholar of Trinity College, Cambridge where she received a B.A. in Economics.

In short, Blythe Masters was a star at JPMorgan. She rose from intern to head of Global Commodities over the span of nearly three decades. She was widely regarded as one of Wall Street’s most powerful women, and her departure from that bank was high-profile.

The lady has tremendous experience at the most powerful bank in the world and then moved on to be the CEO of Digital Asset Holdings, the leading enterprise blockchain fintech company and was also a founding partner of Motive Partners, where she is also Chair of Motive Ventures. 

She's definitely no lightweight but does it mean she can properly run FNZ? 

I don't know. Leading the Commodities and Credit Derivatives divisions at JPMorgan doesn't necessarily make you a great CEO of a wealth platform startup but she's impressive, no doubt about it.

I also don't know what this ongoing shareholder lawsuit seeking US$4.6-billion is all about but when I read "the minority shareholder group that is suing FNZ in a New Zealand court has criticized the company’s leadership and its largest shareholders, alleging that employee morale is at a low ebb," I tend to think that such a lawsuit is frivolous and will ultimately be dismissed in a court of law.

That's my first impression but again, I don't know the details; it just sounds outrageous to me.

Of course employee morale will be low; the company reported a pre-tax loss of US$1.36-billion in 2025 – roughly double its loss in the previous year – and they need to cut costs and shore up operations.

La Caisse and CPP Investments are continuing to participate in fundraising rounds, including a US$650-million equity injection that was undertaken after the lawsuit was filed. 

These are the two largest pension funds in Canada and La Caisse CEO Charles Emond is publicly stating they believe in FNZ's platform and have undertaken board changes to shore up the company operationally.

That's the difference between investing in a public company and investing in a private startup: you have a lot more clout on what is going on at the operational level.

Below, learn more about FNZ's wealth platform.

Also, recorded live at Global Alts 2024 in Miami, Prosek Partners Founder and Managing Partner Jennifer Prosek sits down with Blythe Masters, Founding Partner of Motive Partners, for a candid fireside on a career that helped shape modern finance and a firm rebuilding what specialist private equity looks like in fintech. 

Blythe walks Jennifer through the entire arc: from writing cold-call letters to London banks as a teenager, to photocopying swaps documentation at JPMorgan in 1987, to becoming one of the youngest managing directors in the firm's history, to being credited with turning credit default swaps from a hypothetical instrument into a global market, to running JPMorgan's global commodities business and its regulatory affairs function through the aftermath of the financial crisis. Then in 2014 she left to build Digital Asset, one of the earliest institutional-grade blockchain infrastructure companies, and in 2019 became a founding partner of Motive Partners.

Third, Blythe Masters a Founding Partner of Motive Partners, a $6 billion specialist private equity platform that builds, backs, and buys technology companies that enable the financial services industry. In this conversation with Ted Seides, they cover Blythe’s career trajectory at JP Morgan across asset classes, cycles, and crises and then turn to the investment model at Motive and themes in asset and wealth management. 

They recorded this conversation on the iConnections Global Alts podcast stage, which explains the occasional wind gusts, airplanes overhead, sirens, and children playing in the background (March, 2024). 

Lastly, and most importantly, Blythe Masters, Group CEO of FNZ, discusses leadership, wealth infrastructure, and how AI is transforming advisor productivity in a conversation with Hiten Patel on The Innovators’ Exchange podcast. Watch this interview here (2026).

Top Funds' Activity in Q2 2026

Pension Pulse -

Davis Giangiulio of CNBC reports Ken Griffin says Citadel unwound more than 80% of risk tied to Situational Awareness portfolio:

Ken Griffin of Citadel in a letter to clients on Friday addressed for the first time the firm’s purchase of assets from Leopold Aschenbrenner’s Situational Awareness hedge fund. 

According to a letter obtained by CNBC’s Sara Eisen, Griffin told clients that Citadel has unwound more than 80% of the aggregate risk from the original portfolio purchased by conducting more than 100 block trades over $4 billion in market value.

Griffin detailed in the letter that Citadel entered discussions with Situational Awareness to acquire some of the fund’s holdings on July 29. One day later, CNBC’s David Faber reported that Situational Awareness was forced to sell all of its public stock positions after facing steep losses. Citadel was later revealed as the buyer of the assets.

“A transaction of this magnitude could not have been completed without the extraordinary cooperation of the trading and prime brokerage teams at the banks serving both firms,” Griffin wrote in the Friday letter to clients. “I am grateful for the focused effort they brought to the rapid transfer of the portfolio.”

Griffin also confirmed the firm’s flagship multistrategy Wellington fund returned 5.94% in July, which CNBC previously reported marked the fund’s best monthly performance since 2022.

Situational Awareness as a hedge fund concentrated positions in the artificial intelligence trade, on a belief by 25-year-old Aschenbrenner that the technology would fundamentally reshape the world and the economy. At the same time, the fund had short positions in some software companies, a sector that investors have worried will be disrupted by AI.

However, the AI trade faltered in June and July — even while broader indexes appeared flat — with stocks that Situational Awareness had large stakes in, like Sandisk and Bloom Energy, tumbling more than 50%. At the same time, software names like Adobe rebounded, meaning the fund was losing money on both its long and short positions.

That set off both margin calls and compulsory sales at the fund.

Since Citadel stepped in to buy the fund’s publicly traded assets, the AI trade has rebounded, with Situational Awareness’ sale representing a bottom for the sell-off that started in June. 

It's that time of the quarter again where we get a sneak peek into the portfolios of the world's most successful money managers, with a customary 45-day lag.

The data was out on Monday, but before I get to it, I led with this article on Citadel profiting off of Situational Awareness's woes, scooping up the portfolio on the cheap and then selling 80% as these stocks rebound.

All this happened in the last few weeks, an amazing story which I chronicled here, and it wasn't just Citadel that profited; other large hedge funds did as well in a coordinated attack where the ruling class of hedge fund kings taught young Leopold Aschenbrenner a lesson he will never forget.\

Citadel made a killing here. Its flagship multistrategy Wellington fund returned 5.94% in July, the fund’s best monthly performance since 2022. And keep in mind, they manage risk extremely tightly and handled the Situational Awareness portfolio perfectly, buying it at the right time and selling it when positions fully recovered. 

How did it do this? Just look at shares of Sandisk, hit a low of $998 on July 29th and recently popped just shy of $1,827 on August 17th when Citadel probably sold a good chunk at a big profit (they bought at a discount so less than $998 a share).

And if you look at the major institutional holders of Sandisk here, you will see the regular large investors but dig a little deeper, and you'll see top hedge funds owned it as well (remember, this data is as of the end of last quarter). 

Importantly, there was huge money to be made just trading this stock, and top hedge funds pounded on the opportunity (next quarterly filing will prove this). 

What else happened this week? Former macro hedge fund manager turned Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent engaged in yield curve control, trying to bring down rates on the long end. So far his efforts have not worked, but he has a huge toolkit to work with

I don't know, I agree with JPMorgan’s James Sullivan, the Treasury buybacks may offer temporary relief but risk merely shifting the debt problem down the road, and it's not bullish for the greenback.

Surging government and corporate debt supply, alongside waning foreign demand, could keep upward pressure on yields.  

Of course, I have a solution for all this: slap on a 2% sales tax in the US and pay off some debt!! 

Back to stocks. The Dow surges 500 points on Friday, but the index posted back-to-back weekly losses:

The S&P 500 rose on Friday as investors tried to find their footing following a steep sell-off driven by rising Treasury yields.

The broad market index climbed 0.43% to end at 7,674.37, while the Nasdaq Composite rose 0.43% to 26,180.45. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was up 517.80 points, or 0.98%, supported by gains in healthcare stocks such as Merck and Johnson & Johnson. The 30-stock index closed at 53,277.01.

The financials sector offered a boost to the broader market, with crypto-related stocks seeing sizable gains as bitcoin posted a weekly advance of 22%. Robinhood shares jumped almost 14%, while Coinbase added 8%. Materials also outperformed, up 2% on the day.

Wall Street is coming off a losing session, as Treasury yields resumed their march higher after the government’s efforts to stymie a sell-off in the Treasury market. Bonds, particularly on the long end of the curve, have been under pressure as investors fear rising inflation due to higher oil prices.

Thursday’s pullback ultimately led the S&P 500 to tumble 1.4% on the week, while the Nasdaq lost 2% in the period. Both indexes snapped three-week winning streaks. The Dow slid 0.9% for back-to-back weekly losses.

The downturn this week also affected stocks beyond the U.S., with the MSCI All Country World Index posting a weekly decline of almost 1%.

In the wake of the latest market drawdown, Leo Kelly, founder and CEO of Verdence Capital Advisors, thinks equities could see even more losses — particularly, a slide toward correction territory in the fall — if Treasury yields continue to rise and tensions in the Middle East persist.

On Friday, longer-dated yields continued their ascent, with the 10-year Treasury note yield gaining more than 3 basis points to 4.734%. The 30-year Treasury bond yield advanced more than 3 basis points as well to 5.273%.

“The market has adjusted to 4% to 5%” on the 10-year yield, Kelly said. “If we had some sort of event and the market broke out and went to the 6% to 7% range on the 10-year, that’s a problem, and the market will react poorly to that.”

With yields higher, investors will be turning to next week’s speech from Federal Reserve Chairman Kevin Warsh at the Jackson Hole Economic Policy Symposium for more clarity on that front, as well as other areas such as central bank independence. 

For the week, here are the top-performing US large-cap and mid-cap stocks (see full list here and here):

 

 

I circled some of the symbols I tracked closely this week. For example: 

  • Moderna shares (MRNA) surged 129% this week on promising results of its cancer vaccine for melanoma. Among its top holders Fidelity, BackRock, Vanguard, Baillie Gifford and  Two Sigma.
  • Shares of Amylyx Pharmaceuticals (AMLX) surged 79% this week after after its treatment candidate for post-bariatric hypoglycemia (PBH) reported strong results in phase 3 clinical studies. Among its top holders, you have Fidelity, BlackRock, Perceptive Advisors and Vanguard.

I'm just showing you two examples here but you really need to do a lot of work to understand who bought which stocks and who did well and why. 

Importantly, things move in real time, not lagged time, but you can still learn a lot by paying attention to where top funds are focusing their attention and add that information to your toolkit.

What else? If you look at the top performing stocks year-to-date (full list here), you'll see a lot of stocks up 300% or more, which shows you trends tend to persist in this market:

I circled a few, including 10x Genomics (TXG), which Stanley Druckenmiller's Duquesne family office owns (and made a killing off of, see his positions here).

Again, I don't expect people to look at all the top funds' holdings below and if you don't understand how to technically analyze daily or weekly charts or if you don't understand biotech stocks, forget about it.

I'm providing you a toolkit, your analysts need to dig hard here to figure out opportunities and then discuss with portfolio managers who need to trade these stocks and figure out the right setup.

Is there alpha here? You bet there is but you need to know how to find it and take the appropriate risks.

Ok, let me wrap this up, time to enjoy my weekend. 

The links below take you straight to the top holdings of top money managers and then click to see where they increased and decreased their holdings.

Top multi-strategy, event-driven hedge funds and large hedge fund managers

As the name implies, these hedge funds invest across a wide variety of hedge fund strategies like L/S Equity, L/S credit, global macro, convertible arbitrage, risk arbitrage, volatility arbitrage, merger arbitrage, distressed debt and statistical pair trading. Below are links to the holdings of some top multi-strategy hedge funds I track closely:

1) Appaloosa LP (David Tepper)

2) Citadel Advisors (Ken Griffin)

3) Balyasny Asset Management

4) Point72 Asset Management (Steve Cohen)

5) Millennium Management (Izzy Englander)

6) Farallon Capital Management

7) Shonfeld Strategic Partners 

8) Walleye Capital 

9) Verition Fund Management 

10) Peak6 Investments

11) Kingdon Capital Management

12) HBK Investments

13) Highbridge Capital Management

14) Highland Capital Management

15) Hudson Bay Capital Management

16) Pentwater Capital Management

17) Sculptor Capital Management (formerly known as Och-Ziff Capital Management)

18) ExodusPoint Capital Management

19) Carlson Capital Management

20) Magnetar Capital

21) Whitebox Advisors

22) QVT Financial 

23) Paloma Partners

24) Weiss Multi-Strategy Advisors

25) York Capital Management

Top Global Macro Hedge Funds and Family Offices

These hedge funds gained notoriety because of George Soros, arguably the best and most famous hedge fund manager. Global macros typically invest across fixed income, currency, commodity and equity markets.

George Soros, Carl Icahn, Stanley Druckenmiller, Julian Robertson  have converted their hedge funds into family offices to manage their own money.

1) Soros Fund Management

2) Icahn Associates

3) Duquesne Family Office (Stanley Druckenmiller)

4) Bridgewater Associates

5) Pointstate Capital Partners 

6) Caxton Associates (Bruce Kovner)

7) Tudor Investment Corporation (Paul Tudor Jones)

8) Discovery Capital Management (Rob Citrone)

9) Moore Capital Management

10) Rokos Capital Management

11) Element Capital

12) Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Trust (Michael Larson, the man behind Gates)

Top Quant and Market Neutral Hedge Funds

These funds use sophisticated mathematical algorithms to make their returns, typically using high-frequency models so they churn their portfolios often. A few of them have outstanding long-term track records and many believe quants are taking over the world. They typically only hire PhDs in mathematics, physics and computer science to develop their algorithms. Market neutral funds will engage in pair trading to remove market beta. Some are large asset managers that specialize in factor investing.

1) Alyeska Investment Group

2) Renaissance Technologies

3) DE Shaw & Co.

4) Two Sigma Investments

5) Cubist Systematic Strategies (a quant division of Point72)

6) Man Group

7) Analytic Investors

8) AQR Capital Management

9) Dimensional Fund Advisors

10) Quantitative Investment Management

11) Oxford Asset Management

12) PDT Partners

13) TPG Angelo Gordon

14) Quantitative Systematic Strategies

15) Quantitative Investment Management

16) Bayesian Capital Management

17) SABA Capital Management

18) Quadrature Capital

19) Simplex Trading

Top Deep Value, Activist, Growth at a Reasonable Price, Event Driven and Distressed Debt Funds

These are among the top long-only funds that everyone tracks. They include funds run by legendary investors like Warren Buffet, Seth Klarman, Ron Baron and Ken Fisher. Activist investors like to make investments in companies where management lacks the proper incentives to maximize shareholder value. They differ from traditional L/S hedge funds by having a more concentrated portfolio. Distressed debt funds typically invest in debt of a company but sometimes take equity positions.

1) Abrams Capital Management (the one-man wealth machine)

2) Berkshire Hathaway

3) TCI Fund Management

4) Baron Partners Fund (click here to view other Baron funds)

5) BHR Capital

6) Fisher Asset Management

7) Baupost Group

8) Fairfax Financial Holdings

9) Fairholme Capital

10) Gotham Asset Management

11) Fir Tree Partners

12) Elliott Investment Management (Paul Singer)

13) Jana Partners

14) Miller Value Partners (Bill Miller)

15) Highfields Capital Management

16) Eminence Capital

17) Pershing Square Capital Management

18) New Mountain Vantage  Advisers

19) Atlantic Investment Management

20) Polaris Capital Management

21) Third Point

22) Marcato Capital Management

23) Glenview Capital Management

24) Apollo Management

25) Avenue Capital

26) Armistice Capital

27) Blue Harbor Group

28) Brigade Capital Management

29) Caspian Capital

30) Kerrisdale Advisers

31) Knighthead Capital Management

32) Relational Investors

33) Roystone Capital Management

34) Scopia Capital Management

35) Schneider Capital Management

36) ValueAct Capital

37) Vulcan Value Partners

38) Okumus Fund Management

39) Eagle Capital Management

40) Sasco Capital

41) Lyrical Asset Management

42) Gabelli Funds

43) Brave Warrior Advisors

44) Matrix Asset Advisors

45) Jet Capital

46) Conatus Capital Management

47) Starboard Value

48) Pzena Investment Management

49) Trian Fund Management

50) Oaktree Capital Management

51) Fayez Sarofim & Co 

52) Southeastern Asset Management 

Top Long/Short Hedge Funds

These hedge funds go long shares they think will rise in value and short those they think will fall. Along with global macro funds, they command the bulk of hedge fund assets. There are many L/S funds but here is a small sample of some well-known funds.

1) Adage Capital Management

2) Viking Global Investors

3) Greenlight Capital

4) Maverick Capital

5) Pointstate Capital Partners 

6) Marathon Asset Management

7) Tiger Global Management (Chase Coleman)

8) Coatue Management

9) D1 Capital Partners

10) Artis Capital Management

11) Fox Point Capital Management

12) Jabre Capital Partners

13) Lone Pine Capital

14) Paulson & Co.

15) Bronson Point Management

16) Hoplite Capital Management

17) LSV Asset Management

18) Hussman Strategic Advisors

19) Cantillon Capital Management

20) Brookside Capital Management

21) Blue Ridge Capital

22) Iridian Asset Management

23) Clough Capital Partners

24) GLG Partners LP

25) Cadence Capital Management

26) Honeycomb Asset Management

27) New Mountain Vantage

28) Penserra Capital Management

29) Eminence Capital

30) Steadfast Capital Management

31) Brookside Capital Management

32) PAR Capital Capital Management

33) Gilder, Gagnon, Howe & Co

34) Brahman Capital

35) Bridger Management 

36) Kensico Capital Management

37) Situational Awareness LP

38) Soroban Capital Partners

39) Passport Capital

40) Pennant Capital Management

41) Mason Capital Management

42) Tide Point Capital Management

43) Sirios Capital Management 

44) Hayman Capital Management

45) Highside Capital Management

46) Tremblant Capital Group

47) Decade Capital Management

48) Suvretta Capital Management

49) Bloom Tree Partners

50) Cadian Capital Management

51) Matrix Capital Management

52) Senvest Partners

53) Falcon Edge Capital Management

54) Park West Asset Management

55) Melvin Capital Partners (Plotkin shut down Melvin after reeling rom Redditor attack)

56) Owl Creek Asset Management

57) Portolan Capital Management

58) Proxima Capital Management

59) Tourbillon Capital Partners

60) Impala Asset Management

61) Valinor Management

62) Marshall Wace

63) Light Street Capital Management

64) Rock Springs Capital Management

65) Rubric Capital Management

66) Whale Rock Capital

67) Skye Global Management

68) York Capital Management

69) Zweig-Dimenna Associates

Top Sector and Specialized Funds

I like tracking activity funds that specialize in real estate, biotech, healthcare, retail and other sectors like mid, small and micro caps. Here are some funds worth tracking closely.

1) Avoro Capital Advisors (formerly Venbio Select Advisors)

2) Baker Brothers Advisors

3) Perceptive Advisors

4) RTW Investments

5) Healthcor Management

6) Orbimed Advisors

7) Deerfield Management

8) BB Biotech AG

9) Birchview Capital

10) Ghost Tree Capital

11) Soleus Capital Management

12) Oracle Investment Management

13) Palo Alto Investors

14) Consonance Capital Management

15) Camber Capital Management

16) Redmile Group

17) Casdin Capital

18) Bridger Capital Management

19) Boxer Capital

20) Omega Fund Management

21) Bridgeway Capital Management

22) Cohen & Steers

23) Cardinal Capital Management

24) Munder Capital Management

25) Diamondhill Capital Management 

26) Cortina Asset Management

27) Geneva Capital Management

28) Criterion Capital Management

29) Daruma Capital Management

30) 12 West Capital Management

31) RA Capital Management

32) Sarissa Capital Management

33) Rock Springs Capital Management

34) Senzar Asset Management

35) Paradigm Biocapital Advisors

36) Sphera Funds

37) Tang Capital Management

38) Thomson Horstmann & Bryant

39) Ecor1 Capital

40) Opaleye Management

41) NEA Management Company

42) Sofinnova Investments 

43) Great Point Partners

44) Tekla Capital Management

45) Van Berkom and Associates

Mutual Funds and Asset Managers

Mutual funds and large asset managers are not hedge funds but their sheer size makes them important players. Some asset managers have excellent track records. Below, are a few funds investors track closely.

1) Fidelity

2) BlackRock Inc

3) Wellington Management

4) AQR Capital Management

5) Sands Capital Management

6) Brookfield Asset Management

7) Dodge & Cox

8) Eaton Vance Management

9) Grantham, Mayo, Van Otterloo & Co.

10) Geode Capital Management

11) Goldman Sachs Group

12) JP Morgan Chase & Co.

13) Morgan Stanley

14) Manulife Asset Management

15) UBS Asset Management

16) Barclays Global Investor

17) Epoch Investment Partners

18) Thornburg Investment Management

19) Kornitzer Capital Management

20) Batterymarch Financial Management

21) Tocqueville Asset Management

22) Neuberger Berman

23) Winslow Capital Management

24) Herndon Capital Management

25) Artisan Partners

26) Great West Life Insurance Management

27) Lazard Asset Management 

28) Janus Capital Management

29) Franklin Resources

30) Capital Research Global Investors

31) T. Rowe Price

32) First Eagle Investment Management

33) Frontier Capital Management

34) Akre Capital Management

35) Brandywine Global

36) Brown Capital Management

37) Victory Capital Management

38) Orbis Allan Gray

39) Ariel Investments 

40) ARK Investment Management

Canadian Asset Managers

Here are a few Canadian funds I track closely:

1) Addenda Capital

2) Letko, Brosseau and Associates

3) Fiera Capital Corporation

4) West Face Capital

5) Hexavest

6) 1832 Asset Management

7) Jarislowsky, Fraser

8) Connor, Clark & Lunn Investment Management

9) TD Asset Management

10) CIBC Asset Management

11) Beutel, Goodman & Co

12) Greystone Managed Investments

13) Mackenzie Financial Corporation

14) Great West Life Assurance Co

15) Guardian Capital

16) Scotia Capital

17) AGF Investments

18) Montrusco Bolton

19) CI Investments

20) Venator Capital Management

21) Van Berkom and Associates

22) Formula Growth

23) Hillsdale Investment Management

Pension Funds, Endowment Funds, Sovereign Wealth Funds and the Fed's Swiss Surrogate

Last but not least, I the track activity of some pension funds, endowment, sovereign wealth funds and the Swiss National Bank (aka the Fed's Swiss surrogate). Below, a sample of the funds I track closely:

1) Alberta Investment Management Corporation (AIMco)

2) Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan

3) Canada Pension Plan Investment Board

4) Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec

5) OMERS Administration Corp.

6) Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan (HOOPP)

7) British Columbia Investment Management Corporation (BCI)

8) Public Sector Pension Investment Board (PSP Investments)

9) PGGM Investments

10) APG All Pensions Group

11) California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS)

12) California State Teachers Retirement System (CalSTRS)

13) New York State Common Fund

14) New York State Teachers Retirement System

15) State Board of Administration of Florida Retirement System

16) State of Wisconsin Investment Board

17) State of New Jersey Common Pension Fund

18) Public Employees Retirement System of Ohio

19) STRS Ohio

20) Teacher Retirement System of Texas

21) Virginia Retirement Systems

22) TIAA CREF investment Management

23) Harvard Management Co.

24) Norges Bank

25) Nordea Investment Management

26) Korea Investment Corp.

27) Singapore Temasek Holdings 

28) Yale Endowment Fund

29) Swiss National Bank (aka, the Fed's Swiss surrogate)

Below, Ken Griffin's Citadel has offloaded more than 80% of the aggregate risk associated with the Situational Awareness stock portfolio it acquired from the embattled AI hedge fund. Citadel struck a deal last month to buy stocks from the fund led by Leopold Aschenbrenner. Bloomberg's Hema Parmar reports.

Also, the CNBC Investment Committee debates whether we are in Wall Street's most exciting era as BlackRock's Rick Rieder says we are (from Thursday's HalfTime report).

Third, Tom Lee, Fundstrat managing partner and head of research, and Bryn Talkington, Requisite Capital Management managing partner, join 'Closing Bell' to recap the day's market moves.

Lastly, Bill Dudley, a Bloomberg Opinion columnist and former New York Fed President, explains why he thinks US the equity market is in bubble territory. Speaking with Romaine Bostick on "Bloomberg The Close," Dudley also comments on the economic impact of AI and the rise in bond yields.

CPP Investments Partnering Up With KKR, Blackstone and BlackRock on Infra Megadeals

Pension Pulse -

Alexandra Heal of the Financial Times reports Canadian pension giant turns to Blackstone and KKR to seal infrastructure megadeals:

One of the world’s biggest infrastructure investors is turning to private capital groups to help it land megadeals, as firms such as KKR & Co. Inc., Blackstone Inc. and BlackRock Inc. expand their influence in a sector long dominated by pension funds.

Canada Pension Plan Investment Board has built almost US$80 billion in exposure to energy and infrastructure by investing directly in companies. But in the past year it has started backing some of the biggest managers’ funds, it told the FT.

“Infrastructure deals are becoming increasingly large,” said James Bryce, head of infrastructure at CPPIB. “As an investor with [a fund], are we able to open up for both of us deal opportunities that we may not have been able to chase on our own?”

CPPIB’s shift demonstrates the extent of the infrastructure market’s transformation from a backwater where deals were cut by pension plans to one of the most important strategies of the largest private capital groups.

It also underlines the growing size of infrastructure deals coming to market, as artificial intelligence and energy security become two of the world’s most popular investment themes.

Infrastructure megadeals this year include two involving BlackRock’s Global Infrastructure Partners, the acquisition of Aligned Data Centres and power group AES for US$40 billion and US$33 billion respectively.

Last year marked a record for infrastructure fundraising by firms who manage cash for institutional clients, with US$200 billion raised, according to McKinsey & Co.

“Twenty years ago, there was no $20 billion infrastructure fund,” said John Graham, chief executive of CPPIB. “If you wanted to deploy a billion dollars into this space you would have been 80 per cent of the fund… It was probably somewhere in the past five years where there was an inflection.”

GIP, which BlackRock bought two years ago, now manages US$170 billion in assets and recently raised a US$25 billion fund. KKR’s latest infrastructure fund just raised US$19 billion, and Blackstone’s open-ended vehicle now manages around US$75 billion.

Bryce said CPPIB’s infrastructure arm would still mostly invest directly in companies, but backing some funds would allow it to work with those managers to source and underwrite large deals together.

Over the past year, CPPIB has committed 500 million euros to EQT’s 22-billion-euro flagship infrastructure fund and US$750 million to KKR’s equivalent, as well as pledging to invest in Blackstone’s open-ended funds. 

This is an interesting article because CPP Investments CEO John Graham is right:

 “Twenty years ago, there was no $20 billion infrastructure fund. If you wanted to deploy a billion dollars into this space you would have been 80 per cent of the fund… It was probably somewhere in the past five years where there was an inflection.”

When I met former CEO Mark Wiseman back in 2011 (or around that time), he told me their strategy in private equity would always be to partner up with the best funds on large co-investments, and go more direct in infrastructure and real estate.

Times have changed a lot since then. What exactly happened five years ago?

Well, the pandemic happened, and it changed everything for large private equity boutiques that were more focused on private equity and real estate.

All of a sudden, their focus shifted increasingly to private credit and infrastructure, where they can massively scale into projects.

That was a game changer. Even BlackRock wanted a piece of the action and acquired GIP two years ago

All of a sudden, the Maple 8 Funds were no longer the only infrastructure players in town, they had massive competition.

And just like in private equity, you're not going to beat the Blackstones and KKRs of this world, much wiser to partner up with them on infrastructure megadeals when it makes perfect sense.

The good thing about infrastructure is it's a relatively stable asset class where you can deploy mega billions and since it's heavily regulated, you can manage risks appropriately and embed inflation protection in your long-dated contracts. 

I don't want to make it sound like there are no risks in infrastructure -- there definitely are; look at what a fiasco Thames Water turned out to be --  but in general it's a boring asset class with extremely long duration and that appeals to pension funds.

Of course, things are changing fast there too. There's more competition; pension funds are buying and selling assets more frequently and there are more risks than meets the eye (I will get into this with an expert in another post).

Will CPP Investments continue to buy companies directly in infrastructure? 

Sure it will. James Bryce, their Head of Infrastructure (featured above), sees all sorts of deals and when it makes sense, they will acquire companies on their own.

But the really big megadeals will continue well into the future, so expect them to partner up with KKR, Blackstone, BlackRock, EQt and others when it makes sense and those deals will figure more prominently in the future.

Interestingly, if you look at BCI's Infrastructure approach, they partner up with two or three large infrastructure investors (like Macquarie and Brookfield) and co-invest with them on large deals.

This is the right approach; this is the right strategy going forward. 

What will happen is the big funds will become larger and the medium to small funds will really need to differentiate themselves if they want to survive.

All this to say, even in boring infrastructure, the landscape is changing fast because competition for megadeals is ferocious.

Below,The AI boom is colliding with the limits of the physical world, creating opportunities well beyond chips and data centers, according to Parnassus Investments CIO Todd Ahlsten. He joins Bloomberg to discuss why the historic surge in AI infrastructure spending is entering a riskier phase, where he sees longer-term opportunities, and why traditional software companies including Salesforce, Workday and ServiceNow could face pressure as AI changes the economics of seat-based software. He joins Ed Ludlow on "Bloomberg Tech."

Also, dive into KKR’s Real Assets business. In this episode of “Dining In at KKR” KKR’s Head of Real Assets, Raj Agrawal, sits down with James Foye, a Principal on the Infrastructure team, to discuss how KKR turned a global financial crisis into opportunity, launching KKR’s Infrastructure business.

KKR created its Infrastructure business in 2008, amid tremendous volatility following the Global Finance Crisis, when existing managers struggled to protect capital. The firm’s decision to enter the space with a distinct risk-return strategy, which allows for capital preservation, reflects its bias for action that is built on a culture of empowering a team of leaders.

Today, KKR manages more than $100 billion in its infrastructure business and has successfully tested its investment thesis that private infrastructure is able to provide downside protection during periods of volatility – such as the COVID supply-chain disruptions in 2020. The team still operates with that entrepreneurship, business-owner mentality it had back in 2008.

Senior Departures at HOOPP and CPP Investments

Pension Pulse -

Layan Odeh of Bloomberg reports Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan's PE boss departs:

Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan’s global private equity head Lori Hall-Kimm is leaving to pursue another opportunity.

Mark Cormier and Roman Gula, both managing directors within the private equity group, will succeed Hall-Kimm as acting co- heads on an interim basis and report to Chief Investment Officer Michael Wissell, according to an internal memo seen by Bloomberg.

A representative for HOOPP confirmed the contents of the memo.

Since Hall-Kimm joined HOOPP in 2022, the private equity arm’s net assets climbed to C$24.2 billion ($17.5 billion) from roughly C$20 billion. She previously spent six years at the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, where she held several roles within its private equity unit, according to her LinkedIn profile.

HOOPP, which had C$132 billion of assets at the end of 2025, serves hospital and community-based healthcare workers in Canada’s most populous province, with more than 504,000 active, deferred and retired members.

Layan Odeh and Paula Sambo of Bloomberg also report CPPIB is said to see several departures across senior ranks: 

Canada Pension Plan Investment Board has seen several departures from its senior ranks over the past few weeks, according to people familiar with the matter.

The affected asset classes included investment risk, credit, real assets and sustainable energies, according to the people, who asked not to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter, as well as Bloomberg News analysis and LinkedIn posts.

The “circumstances are a mix of voluntary and involuntary departures, all in line with business-as-usual retention rates and usual efficiency decisions due to evolving markets and strategies,” Michel Leduc, the pension manager’s head of public affairs, said in a statement.

The Toronto-based firm, which manages C$863.6 billion ($625 billion) in net assets, had 2,084 employees at the end of its last fiscal year, down from 2,125 from a year earlier.

“We continued to focus on operating discipline,” Chief Executive Officer John Graham said in the annual report. He added that the pension plan managed around C$220 billion more in assets with fewer employees than at the of fiscal 2023.

Just another random Wednesday when you learn of senior departures at Canada's large pension funds.

Undoubtedly, the biggest one is Lori Hall Kimm, Head of Global PE at HOOPP

Lori joined HOOPP in 2022 as the Head of Global Private Equity. In her role, Lori leads the Private Equity team and is responsible for the strategic, operational and investment activities for private capital. She also oversees its global portfolio, which ranges across a variety of industries and asset classes. In 2025, Lori was named to the Private Equity International Women of Influence in Private Markets list, which recognizes influential women making their mark in the alternative assets industry.

Prior to joining HOOPP, Lori spent six years with CPP Investments, most recently as Managing Director, Direct Private Equity, where she led the team responsible for the Consumer/Retail sector. Previously, she spent nearly 11 years in the Private Capital team at Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan, helping establish their London office and leading their European fund and co-investments and also worked in investment banking at Goldman Sachs.

Lori holds a BBA (Honours) from the Schulich School of Business at York University and an MBA from the Columbia Business School. 

I never met or spoke to Lori, don't know her well but she had a stellar reputation and all the right credentials.

So why is she leaving HOOPP? To pursue another opportunity?

Maybe but I'm not going to play coy with you; it's been brutal in private equity over the last few years.

I've seen senior departures in Private Equity at CPP Investments, OTPP, OMERS, BCI and now HOOPP.

Typically, what happens behind the scenes is that differing views on strategy and/ or unsatisfactory returns lead to leaders being replaced with new leaders who are either on board with the new strategy or replaced as well.

But make no mistake, private equity has been brutal both from an absolute return standpoint as well as a relative one as public equities continue to soar into the stratosphere, led by a handful of high-flying tech names. 

Importantly, there is a structural change going on where higher rates, higher input costs, a terrible environment for distributions, are all impacting returns over the last few years.

Private equity used to be a hot asset class, professionals were sought after, nowadays, not so much.

I saw the same thing in real estate after the pandemic. La Caisse fired over half its real estate team as it shifted strategy from being an operator to solely being an investor. A lot of amazing real estate professionals were let go. It was just brutal.

All this to say, restructurings happen often at Canada's large pension funds, it's never fun and a lot of good people are let go.

Yesterday, Limin Yang posted a very nice post on LinkedIn saying he's leaving CPP Investments after 19 years. He's an investment risk leader who has worked across public and private markets as well as sustainable investing.

I reached out to him, told him I'd love a guest post on risk, and put him in touch with some consultants.

The guy is smart, experienced and let me tell you, over the next three years, you're going to need experienced risk professionals like him.

I didn't ask him why he's leaving CPP Investments, he said they restructured his group, he didn't have any hard feelings.

That's the way it should be, once you leave an organization, make sure you sign a fair package and say goodbye, adios, till we meet again, if we ever do.

Where it gets tricky is if you're fired without cause, for dubious reasons. Then my advice is to get a great lawyer, and don't stop until you receive more than a fair package because once you're let go from these shops, good luck landing an equally great job (most never do). 

So why is CPP Investments letting go of senior people across divisions?  

Simple: they are in cost-cutting mode because too many critics feel they are way, WAY overbloated as an organization and there's lots of fat to cut.

I personally think the board of directors put pressure on John Graham, and he relayed the message to his senior team.  

Nobody will ever admit this to me publicly or privately but I've seen so many restructurings at these shops, I know exactly how it works behind the scenes.

It's not fun, it's part of the ecosystem of these large organizations, and that's another reason why they pay above average, because this is rarely a job for life and when senior people get let go, it's not easy for them to bounce back and find an equally high-paying job.

Alright, enough on restructurings, brings back bad memories for me.

Below, private equity has long promised investors better returns than public markets, while offering entrepreneurs like Dan Namerow life-changing exits. But the market that made those deals work has changed. Higher interest rates have made debt-financed buyouts harder to justify, while deals struck at peak valuations in 2020 and 2021 have become more difficult to exit. 

University of Chicago Booth professor Steven Kaplan says US buyout funds largely beat public markets for decades, but that pattern has reversed since 2019, while PitchBook reports that the backlog of companies held by private equity firms has risen to more than 33,000. The result is a tougher environment where firms are being judged less on leverage and multiple expansion, and more on whether they can actually improve the businesses they buy.

Pages