What Is the 3(c)(7) Exemption?

The 3(c)(7) exemption refers to a portion of the Investment Company Act of 1940 that allows private investment companies an exemption from some Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulation, providing that they meet certain criteria. 3C7 is shorthand for the 3(c)(7) exemption.

Understanding the 3(c)(7) Exemption

The exemption, found in section three of the act, reads in part: 

Section 3
(3)(c) Notwithstanding subsection (a), none of the following persons is an investment company within the meaning of this title:
(7)(A) Any issuer, the outstanding securities of which are owned exclusively by persons who, at the time of acquisition of such securities, are qualified purchasers, and which is not making and does not at that time propose to make a public offering of such securities.

To qualify for the 3C7 exemption, the private investment company must show that they have no plans of making an initial public offering (IPO) and that their investors are qualified purchasers. A qualified purchaser is a higher standard than an accredited investor; it requires that the investor owns not less than $5 million in investments. The term “qualified purchaser” is defined in Section 2(a)(51) of the Investment Company Act.

3C7 funds are not required to go through Securities and Exchange Commission registration or provide ongoing disclosure. They are also exempt from issuing a prospectus that would outline investment positions publicly. 3C7 funds are also referred to as 3C7 companies or 3(c)(7) funds.  

The Investment Company Act of 1940 defines an “investment company” as an issuer that “holds itself out as being engaged primarily or proposes to engage primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities.” 3C7 is one of two exemptions in the Investment Company Act of 1940 that hedge funds, venture capital funds, and other private equity funds use to avoid SEC restrictions.

This frees up these funds to use tools like leverage and derivatives to an extent that most publicly traded funds cannot. The vast majority of new hedge funds, private equity funds, venture capital funds, and other private investment vehicles are organized so as to fall outside the purview of the Investment Company Act of 1940.

That said, 3C7 funds must maintain their compliance to continue utilizing this exemption from the 1940 Act. If a fund were to fall out of compliance by taking in investments from non-qualified purchasers, for example, it would open itself to SEC enforcement actions as well as litigation from its investors and any other parties it has contracts with. 

3C7 Funds vs. 3C1 Funds

Both 3C7 and 3C1 funds are exempted from the requirements imposed on “investment companies” under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Act”). However, there are important differences between them. 3C7 funds, as noted, take investments from qualified purchasers, whereas 3C1 funds work with accredited investors.

Investors in 3C7 funds are held to a higher wealth measure than those in 3C1 funds, which can limit the investor pool that a fund is hoping to raise money from. That said, 3C1 funds are capped at 100 investors total, limiting the number of investors the fund can take in from the wider pool they are allowed to pull from.

3C7 funds don’t have a set cap. However, 3C7 funds will fall under the regulation that is stipulated in the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 when they reach 2,000 investors. At this point, private funds are subject to increased SEC scrutiny and have more in common with public companies.

What is an Aggressive Investment Strategy?

An aggressive investment strategy typically refers to a style of portfolio management that attempts to maximize returns by taking a relatively higher degree of risk. Strategies for achieving higher than average returns typically emphasize capital appreciation as a primary investment objective, rather than income or safety of principal. Such a strategy would therefore have an asset allocation with a substantial weighting in stocks and possibly little or no allocation to bonds or cash.

Aggressive investment strategies are typically thought to be suitable for young adults with smaller portfolio sizes. Because a lengthy investment horizon enables them to ride out market fluctuations, and losses early in one’s career have less impact than later, investment advisors do not consider this strategy suitable for anyone else but young adults unless such a strategy is applied to only a small portion of one’s nest-egg savings. Regardless of the investor’s age, however, a high tolerance for risk is an absolute prerequisite for an aggressive investment strategy.

Understanding Aggressive Investment Strategy

The aggressiveness of an investment strategy depends on the relative weight of high-reward, high-risk asset classes, such as equities and commodities, within the portfolio.

For example, Portfolio A which has an asset allocation of 75% equities, 15% fixed income, and 10% commodities would be considered quite aggressive, since 85% of the portfolio is weighted to equities and commodities. However, it would still be less aggressive than Portfolio B, which has an asset allocation of 85% equities and 15% commodities.

Even within the equity component of an aggressive portfolio, the composition of stocks can have a significant bearing on its risk profile. For instance, if the equity component only consists of blue-chip stocks, it would be considered less risky than if the portfolio only held small-capitalization stocks. If this is the case in the earlier example, Portfolio B could arguably be considered less aggressive than Portfolio A, even though it has 100% of its weight in aggressive assets.

Yet another aspect of an aggressive investment strategy has to do with allocation. A strategy that simply divided all available money equally into 20 different stocks could be a very aggressive strategy, but dividing all money equally into just 5 different stocks would be more aggressive still.

Aggressive Investment strategies may also include a high turnover strategy, seeking to chase stocks that show high relative performance in a short time period. The high turnover may create higher returns, but could also drive higher transaction costs, thus increasing the risk of poor performance.

Aggressive Investment Strategy and Active Management

An aggressive strategy needs more active management than a conservative “buy-and-hold” strategy, since it is likely to be much more volatile and could require frequent adjustments, depending on market conditions. More rebalancing would also be required to bring portfolio allocations back to their target levels. Volatility of the assets could lead allocations to deviate significantly from their original weights. This extra work also drives higher fees as the portfolio manager may require more staff to manage all such positions.

Recent years have seen significant pushback against active investing strategies. Many investors have pulled their assets out of hedge funds, for example, due to those managers’ underperformance. Instead, some have chosen to place their money with passive managers. These managers adhere to investing styles that often employ managing index funds for strategic rotation. In these cases, portfolios often mirror a market index, such as the S&P 500.

What Is Alpha?

Alpha (α) is a term used in investing to describe an investment strategy’s ability to beat the market, or its “edge.” Alpha is thus also often referred to as “excess return” or “abnormal rate of return,” which refers to the idea that markets are efficient, and so there is no way to systematically earn returns that exceed the broad market as a whole. Alpha is often used in conjunction with beta (the Greek letter β), which measures the broad market’s overall volatility or risk, known as systematic market risk.

Alpha is used in finance as a measure of performance, indicating when a strategy, trader, or portfolio manager has managed to beat the market return over some period. Alpha, often considered the active return on an investment, gauges the performance of an investment against a market index or benchmark that is considered to represent the market’s movement as a whole.

The excess return of an investment relative to the return of a benchmark index is the investment’s alpha. Alpha may be positive or negative and is the result of active investing. Beta, on the other hand, can be earned through passive index investing.

Understanding Alpha

Alpha is one of five popular technical investment risk ratios. The others are beta, standard deviation, R-squared, and the Sharpe ratio. These are all statistical measurements used in modern portfolio theory (MPT). All of these indicators are intended to help investors determine the risk-return profile of an investment.

Active portfolio managers seek to generate alpha in diversified portfolios, with diversification intended to eliminate unsystematic risk. Because alpha represents the performance of a portfolio relative to a benchmark, it is often considered to represent the value that a portfolio manager adds to or subtracts from a fund’s return.

In other words, alpha is the return on an investment that is not a result of a general movement in the greater market. As such, an alpha of zero would indicate that the portfolio or fund is tracking perfectly with the benchmark index and that the manager has not added or lost any additional value compared to the broad market.

The concept of alpha became more popular with the advent of smart beta index funds tied to indexes like the Standard & Poor’s 500 index and the Wilshire 5000 Total Market Index. These funds attempt to enhance the performance of a portfolio that tracks a targeted subset of the market.

Despite the considerable desirability of alpha in a portfolio, many index benchmarks manage to beat asset managers the vast majority of the time. Due in part to a growing lack of faith in traditional financial advising brought about by this trend, more and more investors are switching to low-cost, passive online advisors (often called roboadvisors​) who exclusively or almost exclusively invest clients’ capital into index-tracking funds, the rationale being that if they cannot beat the market they may as well join it.

Moreover, because most “traditional” financial advisors charge a fee, when one manages a portfolio and nets an alpha of zero, it actually represents a slight net loss for the investor. For example, suppose that Jim, a financial advisor, charges 1% of a portfolio’s value for his services and that during a 12-month period Jim managed to produce an alpha of 0.75 for the portfolio of one of his clients, Frank. While Jim has indeed helped the performance of Frank’s portfolio, the fee that Jim charges is in excess of the alpha he has generated, so Frank’s portfolio has experienced a net loss. For investors, the example highlights the importance of considering fees in conjunction with performance returns and alpha.

The Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH) postulates that market prices incorporate all available information at all times, and so securities are always properly priced (the market is efficient.) Therefore, according to the EMH, there is no way to systematically identify and take advantage of mispricings in the market because they do not exist.

If mispricings are identified, they are quickly arbitraged away and so persistent patterns of market anomalies that can be taken advantage of tend to be few and far between.

Empirical evidence comparing historical returns of active mutual funds relative to their passive benchmarks indicates that fewer than 10% of all active funds are able to earn a positive alpha over a 10-plus year time period, and this percentage falls once taxes and fees are taken into consideration. In other words, alpha is hard to come by, especially after taxes and fees.

Because beta risk can be isolated by diversifying and hedging various risks (which comes with various transaction costs), some have proposed that alpha does not really exist, but that it simply represents the compensation for taking some un-hedged risk that hadn’t been identified or was overlooked.

Seeking Investment Alpha

Alpha is commonly used to rank active mutual funds as well as all other types of investments. It is often represented as a single number (like +3.0 or -5.0), and this typically refers to a percentage measuring how the portfolio or fund performed compared to the referenced benchmark index (i.e., 3% better or 5% worse).

Deeper analysis of alpha may also include “Jensen’s alpha.” Jensen’s alpha takes into consideration the capital asset pricing model (CAPM) market theory and includes a risk-adjusted component in its calculation. Beta (or the beta coefficient) is used in the CAPM, which calculates the expected return of an asset based on its own particular beta and the expected market returns. Alpha and beta are used together by investment managers to calculate, compare, and analyze returns.

The entire investing universe offers a broad range of securities, investment products, and advisory options for investors to consider. Different market cycles also have an influence on the alpha of investments across different asset classes. This is why risk-return metrics are important to consider in conjunction with alpha.

Examples

This is illustrated in the following two historical examples for a fixed income ETF and an equity ETF:

The iShares Convertible Bond ETF (ICVT) is a fixed income investment with low risk. It tracks a customized index called the Bloomberg U.S. Convertible Cash Pay Bond > $250MM Index. The 3-year standard deviation was 18.94%, as of Feb. 28, 2022. The year-to-date return, as of Feb. 28, 2022, was -6.67%. The Bloomberg U.S. Convertible Cash Pay Bond > $250MM Index had a return of -13.17% over the same period. Therefore, the alpha for ICVT was -0 12% in comparison to the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Index and a 3-year standard deviation of 18.97%.

However, since the aggregate bond index is not the proper benchmark for ICVT (it should be the Bloomberg Convertible index), this alpha may not be as large as initially thought; and in fact, may be misattributed since convertible bonds have far riskier profiles than plain vanilla bonds.

The WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund (DGRW) is an equity investment with higher market risk that seeks to invest in dividend growth equities. Its holdings track a customized index called the WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index. It had a three-year annualized standard deviation of 10.58%, higher than ICVT.

As of Feb. 28, 2022, DGRW annualized return was 18.1%, which was also higher than the S&P 500 at 16.4%, so it had an alpha of 1.7% in comparison to the S&P 500. But again, the S&P 500 may not be the correct benchmark for this ETF, since dividend-paying growth stocks are a very particular subset of the overall stock market, and may not even be inclusive of the 500 most valuable stocks in America.

Alpha Considerations

While alpha has been called the “holy grail” of investing, and as such, receives a lot of attention from investors and advisors alike, there are a couple of important considerations that one should take into account when using alpha.

1. A basic calculation of alpha subtracts the total return of an investment from a comparable benchmark in its asset category. This alpha calculation is primarily only used against a comparable asset category benchmark, as noted in the examples above. Therefore, it does not measure the outperformance of an equity ETF versus a fixed income benchmark. This alpha is also best used when comparing the performance of similar asset investments. Thus, the alpha of the equity ETF, DGRW, is not relatively comparable to the alpha of the fixed income ETF, ICVT.
2. Some references to alpha may refer to a more advanced technique. Jensen’s alpha takes into consideration CAPM theory and risk-adjusted measures by utilizing the risk-free rate and beta.

When using a generated alpha calculation it is important to understand the calculations involved. Alpha can be calculated using various different index benchmarks within an asset class. In some cases, there might not be a suitable pre-existing index, in which case advisors may use algorithms and other models to simulate an index for comparative alpha calculation purposes.

Alpha can also refer to the abnormal rate of return on a security or portfolio in excess of what would be predicted by an equilibrium model like CAPM. In this instance, a CAPM model might aim to estimate returns for investors at various points along an efficient frontier. The CAPM analysis might estimate that a portfolio should earn 10% based on the portfolio’s risk profile. If the portfolio actually earns 15%, the portfolio’s alpha would be 5.0, or +5% over what was predicted in the CAPM model.