Page 221 - untitled
P. 221

             FINANCIAL CRISIS INQUIRY COMMISSION REPORT

         they could make some money as long as the CDOs performed, but they stood to
         make more money if the entire market crashed. An FCIC survey of more than 
         hedge funds encompassing over . trillion in assets as of early  found this to
         be a common strategy among medium-size hedge funds: of all the CDOs issued in
         the second half of , more than half of the equity tranches were purchased by
                                            
         hedge funds that also shorted other tranches. The same approach was being used in
         the mortgage-backed securities market as well. The FCIC’s survey found that by June
         , the largest hedge funds held  billion in equity and other lower-rated
         tranches of mortgage-backed securities. These were more than offset by  billion
         in short positions. 
           These types of trades changed the structured finance market. Investors in the equity
         and most junior tranches of CDOs and mortgage-backed securities traditionally had
         the greatest incentive to monitor the credit risk of an underlying portfolio. With the ad-
         vent of credit default swaps, it was no longer clear who—if anyone—had that incentive.
           For one example, consider Merrill Lynch’s . billion Norma CDO, issued in
         . The equity investor, Magnetar Capital, a hedge fund, was executing a common
         strategy known as the correlation trade—it bought the equity tranche while shorting
         other tranches in Norma and other CDOs. According to court documents, Magnetar
                                              
         was also involved in selecting assets for Norma. Magnetar received . million re-
         lated to this transaction and NIR Capital Management, the CDO manager, was paid a
                                    
         fee of , plus additional fees. Magnetar’s counsel told the FCIC that the .
         million was a discount in the form of a rebate on the price of the equity tranche and
         other long positions purchased by Magnetar and not a payment received in return for
                      
         good or services. Court documents indicate that Magnetar was involved in select-
         ing collateral, and that NIR abdicated its asset selection duties to Magnetar with Mer-
         rill’s knowledge. In addition, they show that when one Merrill employee learned that
         Magnetar had executed approximately  million in trades for Norma without
         NIR’s apparent involvement or knowledge, she emailed colleagues, “Dumb question.
         Is Magnetar allowed to trade for NIR?” Merrill failed to disclose that Magnetar was
                                       
         paid . million or that Magnetar was selecting collateral when it also had a short
         position that would benefit from losses. 
           The counsel for Merrill’s new owner, Bank of America, explained to the FCIC that
         it was a common industry practice for “the equity investor in a CDO, which had
         the riskiest investment, to have input during the collateral selection process[;] . . .
         however, the collateral manager made the ultimate decisions regarding portfolio
                    
         composition.” The letter did not specifically mention the Norma CDO. Bank of
         America failed to produce documents related to this issue requested by the FCIC.
           Federal regulators have identified abuses that involved short investors influencing
         the choice of the instruments inside synthetic CDOs. In April , the SEC charged
         Goldman Sachs with fraud for telling investors that an independent CDO manager,
         ACA Management, had picked the underlying assets in a CDO when in fact a short
         investor, the Paulson & Co. hedge fund, had played a “significant role” in the selec-
         tion. The SEC alleged that those misrepresentations were in Goldman’s marketing
         materials for Abacus -AC, one of Goldman’s  Abacus deals. 
   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226