> Having worked at a successful macro hedge fund for more than 10 years Do you mind sharing which one? (Ok, stupid question) Or whether it's a "quant" or globa

> Having worked at a successful macro hedge fund for more than 10 years Do you mind sharing which one? (Ok, stupid question) Or whether it's a "quant" or global macro fund? > There is no point in trying to predict macro economy further than 3 months I disagree. Sometimes you can identify systematic factors. I remember Bob Litterman once telling me at a conference that a lot of their "quant" success was actually due to factoring in certain central bank policies that the central banks were willing to accept a certain, let's call it, slippage for in order to achieve certain goals. That apparently worked for years. Another example that comes to mind is the Euro convergence trade. Didn't that also go on for years? Unless you mean specifically GDP. Then yeah, I agree. In fact, I remember a class in financial econometrics where the teacher drew fancy equations on the blackboard only to conclude: "But you know, in practice a simple AR-model will perform just as well. It's just so you've seen it" :D > It's important to read and understand macro economists, not as much because they know what is going on, but rather because they are influencers, who participate in risking / de-risking movements Obligatory quote here: """You might suppose that the feud could be settled by testing ri- val claims. Alas, macroeconomics rarely works this way. Macro- economists cannot run experiments as laboratory scientists can. Statistical analysis of the world is muddied by the vast number of variables, many of which are correlated with the thing whose ef- fect the economist is trying to isolate. _Macroeconomic arguments tend not to produce winners and losers: only those with more in- fluence and those with less._ Post-Keynesian ideas were never pro- ven false, unlike the Ptolemaic model of the solar system. Rather, they declined in status as mainstream Keynesianism rose.""" [1] The Economist. Free exchange: Magic or logic? page 69, Mar 16 2019. Which of course leads directly into your > The most important things to understand in macro economics is that it is very much a people's problem. If you could get in the head of every central bank people, you'd get a strong edge over the market. I've been saying this for YEARS, mostly to deaf ears. Thank you for confirming my personal biases/opinions ;) Finally someone else says it. It's why I (used to) like reading biographies, however shitty, of key people in power. Just to get a sense of their thinking or psychological makeup. Very good comment, I'll keep it.