It was a pleasure to welcome Jessica Stauth, CIO for Systematic Equities at Fidelity Investments, to the Alpha Exchange. Our discussion explores how quant investing has evolved through cycles of market stress, technological change, and today’s extraordinary concentration in the equity landscape. Reflecting on her start in markets in the aftermath of the 2007 Quant Quake and the onset of the global financial crisis, Jessica highlights the foundational lesson that markets contain far more uncertainty than models can fully capture — a theme as relevant today as investors confront narrow leadership and elevated fragility. She explains how early dislocations demonstrated the limits of traditional risk models and the dangers of crowding, especially when many quantitative strategies rely on similar signals or hedging techniques.

Turning to the present, Jessica describes how her team builds equity strategies designed to function across regimes, emphasizing the need for diversified risk models, guardrails that prevent overfitting, and a clear understanding of how macro shocks can overwhelm bottom-up stock selection. She details the evolution of factor research, including the durability of broad categories such as value, momentum, and quality, while outlining how competition and data availability reshape their effectiveness over time. Lastly, she discusses the growing role of non-traditional data — from earnings-call text to machine-learning tools and LLM-driven sentiment extraction — while underscoring the importance of broad, consistent datasets that can be applied across global universes.

Against the backdrop of the S&P 500’s heavy top-weighting, Jessica details how diminished breadth affects opportunity sets, investor demand for alternative approaches, and the search for alpha outside the most crowded areas of the market.

I hope you enjoy this episode of the Alpha Exchange, my conversation with Jessica Stauth.

They say there’s always a bull market somewhere and a chart on doom commentary has surely been up and to the right. Perhaps it’s been the joint decline in the equity and crypto markets. NVDA is down 10% in November and Bitcoin is down almost twice that. Perhaps it’s been that there wasn’t a hard and fast enough of a catalyst to point to…no trade war, Powell presser, CPI surprise or earnings shortfall. These would have at least left us with plausible drivers, satisfying our need for markets to make sense. But when price operates as the only fundamental, sell-offs in asset prices take on much greater meaning.

If there’s one idea that best captures my own curiosity about markets it lies in studying our presence in them. And here’s where the Soros theory of reflexivity is so relevant, especially to modern day risk-taking. Reflexivity is a brilliant concept and price is central to it. Price is surely an outcome that results from changes in economic data, corporate profits and adjustments in the stance of monetary policy. Today, price is more properly thought of as a driver of wealth, which in turn, allows it to drive investment behavior and also narratives. In the process, it can actually shape fundamentals.

Through this lens, I share some of my recent thinking on the risk structure of the equity and crypto markets. I hope you find this interesting and useful. I wish you a wonderful, relaxing and highly caloric Thanksgiving holiday.

Welcome back to the Alpha Exchange. In today’s episode, I am joined by Megan Miller, Senior Portfolio Manager and Head of the Options Solutions team at Allspring Global Investments. Her career spans the extremes of market volatility—from learning options trading during the GFC to now overseeing option-based strategies across a $600 billion platform. The conversation centers on how her team uses a GARCH-like modeling framework as part of a systematic approach to forecast future realized volatility. From this, signals emerge as to which options are over or underpriced.

Megan explains how the democratization of options has reshaped implementation. While call overwriting may appear simple, doing it efficiently at scale requires advanced technology, rule-based construction, and close attention to liquidity across both U.S. and global underlyings. She outlines how index-option overlays can deliver income, preserve stock-specific alpha from the underlying equities, and manage beta more deliberately—an especially relevant point as today’s markets continue to show wide dispersion between single-stock moves and index-level volatility.

As client demand shifts with the market cycle, Megan highlights growing interest in income-oriented solutions, alongside renewed attention on hedging amid concerns around rates, AI-driven valuations, and geopolitical risk. She also underscores the rising importance of customization—whether for tax management, factor tilts, or exposure constraints.

Megan closes with insights on mentorship, learning, and the value of embracing every stage of a career.

I hope you enjoy this episode of the Alpha Exchange, my conversation with Megan Miller.

On this episode of the Alpha Exchange, I’m pleased to welcome back Jordi Visser, CEO of Visser Labs and Head of AI Macro Research at 22V. Our conversation centers on one of the most consequential themes in markets today: the intersection of artificial intelligence, exponential innovation, and market structure. With Nvidia’s historic rise as a backdrop and AI’s increasing integration into every sector, Jordi pushes back on the tendency to label this cycle a “bubble,” arguing that AI is more akin to electricity — an enabling technology whose applications will permeate everyday life. Demand for compute remains effectively infinite, he notes, and the supply shortfalls in GPUs, data centers, and power capacity shape how investors should think about the buildout phase.

Jordi also lays out a framework for navigating volatility in sectors tied to AI buildout — including how to handle 20–30% drawdowns — and why estimate revisions matter more than multiple expansion from here. Beyond markets, we explore the labor dynamics of exponential technology: the K-shaped economy, margin pressure at retailers, and why he believes labor participation will keep drifting lower even without mass layoffs.

Finally, we examine the policy environment. Here Jordi asserts that the Fed’s framework is backward looking and misses how humanoids, robotaxis, and accelerated drug discovery may drive deflationary pressures.

I hope you enjoy this episode of the Alpha Exchange, my conversation with Jordi Visser.

The global economic and geopolitical order has long been balanced by the United States. Today, however, that traditional stabilizing role is in flux. The drivers of market uncertainty, typically resulting from changes in monetary policy and the economy, are increasingly linked to US politics. Fiscal strain, tariffs, and hyper-partisanship are sources of unpredictability reverberating across markets worldwide. In this context, it was a pleasure to welcome Alex Kazan, Partner and Co-head of the Geopolitical Practice at the Brunswick Group, back to the Alpha Exchange.

Our conversation explores just how we got to a point where the US is exporting risk to the rest of the world. Alex argues that this is not solely about Donald Trump but more the result of structural forces that have been building over time. The advent of social media and the technology that maximizes attention by algorithmically parsing individuals into one camp or the other and the twin shocks of the GFC and Pandemic have deepened partisanship and led to an erosion of institutional trust.

On the international front, Alex points to the growing willingness of policymakers to weaponize economic tools like tariffs, sanctions, and export controls. This policy volatility, he argues, has redefined how multinational firms think about resilience, supply chains, and risk. In this new environment, economic strategy and foreign policy are fused, and companies must learn to negotiate not just with markets, but with Washington itself. Finally, we turn to the global stage, where U.S.–China relations remain a critical axis of uncertainty. Alex offers a nuanced view: while risks of escalation remain, the very ambition and unpredictability of U.S. policy may also open space for recalibration—a potential “grand bargain” that could stabilize the system.

I hope you enjoy this episode of the Alpha Exchange, my conversation with Alex Kazan.

Loyal listeners, I hope your recent days have gone well, even if they are becoming shorter. On my mind – and where I hope to engage your interest for 20 odd minutes – is the topic of risk and uncertainty.
The SPX is at an all time high and it is also highly concentrated with volatile and richly valued but uncorrelated tech behemoths. That’s very unique. Whether you are an AI bull or bear, one thing we must acknowledge is the unique degree of index concentration and the risks that accompany it.

The exposure of both US households and foreign investors to the SPX is at an all-time high. There’s a reflexive element here. The massive increase in market cap for corporates is the currency that funds the epic capex. For consumers, facing a tepid labor market and ongoing cost of living challenges, stock market wealth matters a great deal.

I also discuss the surge in volatility in gold and the advent of prediction markets. I hope you enjoy the discussion. Be well.

The distribution of asset price returns is a subject of much study in the literature of empirical finance. We know, of course, that equity returns are left-tailed, subject to the occasional violent plunge. But other asset classes are different, and in this context it was a pleasure to welcome Ben Hoff, Global Head of Commodity Strategy at Société Générale, to the Alpha Exchange. Ben describes commodities as a dual system — one that exists both physically and financially. This duality means real-world frictions such as storage, transport, and substitution shape risk and return in ways financial models often miss.

Unlike equities, where the volatility risk premium (VRP) is structural and macro-driven — investors chronically overpay for protection against crashes — the commodity VRP is episodic and micro-driven, emerging only when the physical system’s natural buffers are overwhelmed.

Ben likens the commodity ecosystem to a CDO structure of risk absorption. The first-loss tranche is “optionality in time,” where storage smooths shocks by shifting supply forward. The mezzanine tranche cures through space and form, rerouting flows across geographies or substituting between products. Only when those defenses are depleted does the equity tranche — financial volatility — take over. This hierarchy explains why volatility in commodities is less persistent but often more explosive when it surfaces.

We also explore how the financialization of commodities — benchmark indices, systematic flows, and vol strategies — has created visible “signatures” in pricing, yet the underlying markets remain driven by physical constraints and optionality. Ben’s takeaway: commodities are inherently antifragile, making their risk premia complex, localized, and highly path dependent.

I hope you enjoy this episode of the Alpha Exchange, my conversation with Ben Hoff.

They say that diversification is the only “free lunch” in markets. Scatter your bets around and you’ll realize a reduction in volatility that helps you manage risk. That’s been happening at an epic scale in US equity markets: the 1m correlation among stocks in the S&P 500 is (to quote Dean Wormer from Animal House) zero point zero. But I’d argue that today’s index and the trillions of dollars that track it are enjoying a run of low correlation among stocks that is unsustainable. It’s not if, but when the next correlated risk-off episode materializes.

Effective risk management requires a healthy imagination and a willingness to carefully evaluate blind spots. In the aftermath of largescale drawdowns and spikes in measures like the VIX, a consistent realization by investors is that the degree of “sameness” in assets was underestimated. It took us until 2008 to recognize that the substantial run up in housing prices was linked to a common underlying driver: the vast supply of mortgage credit. There was a hugely under-appreciated source of correlation that failed to make it into how securities and risk scenarios were modeled. Today, amidst these record low levels of correlation among stocks in the S&P 500, are we similarly missing a hidden yet shared connection that exists in the ecosystem of companies all engaged in the pursuit of AI riches? Is the stunning wealth already generated being recycled today in the same way that mortgage credit was recycled in 2006?

I hope you enjoy this discussion and find it useful. Be well.

It was a pleasure to welcome David Puritz back to the Alpha Exchange. A colleague of mine from 25 years ago and now the CIO of Shaolin Capital Management, Dave has some excellent insights to share on uncorrelated investing broadly and on the current state of convertible bond trading, risk, and liquidity, specifically. When he last joined the podcast in 2021, the Fed was still at zero, five-year yields were 75bps and Dave warned investors to avoid long-duration, low-coupon converts. The epic drawdown in bonds in 2022 made that call quite prescient.

We talk about some of the pricing dynamics within converts, where Dave sees the risk of being wrong as especially high. Here, he points to the pricing of high implied vol underlyings that can suffer from vol compression that is not offset by a tightening of credit spreads. Overall, he sees many areas of the converts market with little margin for error. On the risk management front, Dave states that in order to get a position to a fully desired sizing, the first purchases generally need to be made at the wrong price. In fact, he says, “you want to be wrong” on your earliest purchases and be averaging in at lower levels. In this context, we explore the notion of cheapness and finding value in the convert space. Dave differentiates between fundamental value, value in beta and technical value.

With deficits soaring and the traditional stock-bond hedge broken, we also talk about Dave’s thinking on hedging fiat currency risk. He argues that Bitcoin—once dismissed as too volatile—is increasingly functioning as a digital form of scarcity, a portfolio hedge alongside gold in a world of relentless money creation. He also shares some very interesting insights on
Bitcoin-linked equites like miners and the potential applications to AI.

I hope you enjoy this episode of the Alpha Exchange, my conversation with Dave Puritz.

In this discussion, I share my thoughts on the backdrop for both SPX realized and implied volatility, as I explore the question of whether there is value in optionality. We have 3 things going in terms of realized vol at the index level. It’s low, it’s especially low on SPX down days, and it’s remarkably stable. My take is that the combination here can play tricks on how we think about risk. We are prone to letting our guards down. Next, I share a 5-part framework for addressing the question, “is insurance worth it?”. I find that certain proxy hedges like HYG provide excellent value at current ultra-skinny option premium levels. Next, I review the GOAT (Great Opportunities and Threats) portfolio which overlays gold and bitcoin as diversifying assets and index put spreads as insurance on a base portfolio that is long the SPX. The risk-return characteristics of the GOAT are decidedly better than those of the SPX in 2025. I also explore the pricing of SPX vol skew and how it is a headwind for collar hedging trades. Lastly, the topic of correlation is on my mind, especially as it is an input into structured derivatives trades that often cost too much. I hope you enjoy the discussion and find it useful. Have a great week.