No, we didn’t forget to write a real title for this post. We simply got tired of reading all the Fortress-inspired pun-filled headlines. Then again, can you blame the headline writers?

The story of the day, let alone the week, is the initial public offering of shares in Fortress Investment Group (FIG), a manager of hedge funds and private equity funds. The expansion of hedge fund techniques into vehicles available to individual investors is already underway under the guise of ‘hybrid funds.’ As we noted when the deal was first filed Fortress represents another manner in which individual investors can get in on the alternative investments boom.

Let’s look at the coverage of the deal, and the reaction of commentators to the deal.

The Deal:

A trio of writers at the Wall Street Journal have a summary of the deal.

Bess Levin at pulls together a number of items on the IPO.

Elizabeth Hester and Jenny Strasburg at discuss the valuation and how individual investors can now get a piece of a hedge fund operator.

Alistair Barr at on the stock’s first day rise and the expectations it sets for the future of the company.

Matt Kranz at USA Today with a short summary of the deal including some potential risks.

DealBook recaps the deal and looks forward to what the future might hold for Fortress shareholders.

Jim Mahar at views the Fortress deal as a “must talk about case” for use in all of his classes.

Did you know that Fortress was in the media business via one of the private equity holdings? (via

The Backlash:

Barry Ritholtz at the Big Picture passes along an item by Doug Kass on the “Fortress Top.”

On the other hand, Chad Brand at the Peridot Capitalist does not think that the Fortress IPO represents a top for the hedge fund industry.

Roger Ehrenberg at Information Arbitrage has been on the Fortress story from the beginning is (highly) skeptical of its current valuation.

The Financial Times on the “house of cards” that is Fortress’s premium valuation.

Eddy Elfenbein at Crossing Wall Street wonders “…how anyone can properly analyze this company.”

FT Alphaville on the health of the markets, and how Fortress is yet another example of a company selling a small stake with limited voting rights.

DealBook on moves afoot in the hedge fund-heavy state of Connecticut to increase regulation.

Carter Dougherty at the New York Times on the G-7’s move to enhance oversight of hedge funds.


It is hard to believe that Fortress after a 67% rise on its first day of trading remains a “bargain.” Given the stock market’s reception to the IPO we should not be surprised to see investment banks pushing a flood of copycat deals for alternative investment mangers to market, post haste. This will represent a mixed blessing. On one hand investors (and traders) alike will have a broader pool of investment opportunities. On the other hand these firms are not likely to come at anything resembling “fair” valuations.

One point we have not seen discussed is whether public ownership will change the way Fortress, or any other newly public hedge fund manager, manages money? You could imagine scenarios in which taking on more (or less risk) would be attractive in light of the needs of a public company. In either event, the investors in the underlying fund may very well suffer. This is not a novel risk, but it could be enhanced by public ownership.

Today, hedge fund managers are believed to be the “smart money” that moves the market. That begs the question, if they, and others, are selling, should individual investors be buying? Patience (and prudence) would probably dictate waiting for a good, old-fashioned market shakeout to bring the price of these newly public managers back down to earth. Then again, we could be flat wrong. Nobody said the investment game was easy…

This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment.

The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Ritholtz Wealth Management employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Ritholtz Wealth Management or performance returns of any Ritholtz Wealth Management Investments client.

References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others.

Please see disclosures here.

Please see the Terms & Conditions page for a full disclaimer.