Otimização de alavancagem e gestão de risco em estratégias long-short

Alavancagem em hedge funds tem preocupado investidores e estudiosos nos últimos anos. Exemplos recentes de estratégias desse tipo se mostraram vantajosos em períodos de pouca incerteza na economia, porém desastrosos em épocas de crise. No campo das finanças quantitativas, tem-se procurado encontrar o nível de alavancagem que otimize o retorno de um investimento dado o risco que se corre. Na literatura, os estudos têm se mostrado mais qualitativos do que quantitativos e pouco se tem usado de métodos computacionais para encontrar uma solução. Uma forma de avaliar se alguma estratégia de alavancagem aufere ganhos superiores do que outra é definir uma função objetivo que relacione risco e retorno para cada estratégia, encontrar as restrições do problema e resolvê-lo numericamente por meio de simulações de Monte Carlo. A presente dissertação adotou esta abordagem para tratar o investimento em uma estratégia long-short em um fundo de investimento de ações em diferentes cenários: diferentes formas de alavancagem, dinâmicas de preço das ações e níveis de correlação entre esses preços. Foram feitas simulações da dinâmica do capital investido em função das mudanças dos preços das ações ao longo do tempo. Considerou-se alguns critérios de garantia de crédito, assim como a possibilidade de compra e venda de ações durante o período de investimento e o perfil de risco do investidor. Finalmente, estudou-se a distribuição do retorno do investimento para diferentes níveis de alavancagem e foi possível quantificar qual desses níveis é mais vantajoso para a estratégia de investimento dadas as restrições de risco.

A Higher order and stable method for the numerical integration of Random Differential Equations

Trabalho apresentado no Congresso Nacional de Matemática Aplicada à Indústria, 18 a 21 de novembro de 2014, Caldas Novas - Goiás

The art of being together: a social constructionist perspective on dialogic methods in the organizational context

The purpose of this project is to understand, under a social constructionist approach, what are the meanings that external facilitators and organizational members (sponsors) working with dialogic methods place on themselves and their work. Dialogic methods, with the objective of engaging groups in flows of conversations to envisage and co-create their own future, are growing fast within organizations as a means to achieve collective change. Sharing constructionist ideas about the possibility of multiple realities and language as constitutive of such realities, dialogue has turned into a promising way for transformation, especially in a macro context of constant change and increasing complexity, where traditional structures, relationships and forms of work are questioned. Research on the topic has mostly focused on specific methods or applications, with few attempts to study it in a broader sense. Also, despite the fact that dialogic methods work on the assumption that realities are socially constructed, few studies approach the topic from a social constructionist perspective, as a research methodology per se. Thus, while most existing research aims at explaining whether or how particular methods meet particular results, my intention is to explore the meanings sustaining these new forms of organizational practice. Data was collected through semi-structured interviews with 25 people working with dialogic methods: 11 facilitators and 14 sponsors, from 8 different organizations in Brazil. Firstly, the research findings indicate several contextual elements that seem to sustain the choices for dialogic methods. Within this context, there does not seem to be a clear or specific demand for dialogic methods, but a set of different motivations, objectives and focuses, bringing about several contrasts in the way participants name, describe and explain their experiences with such methods, including tensions on power relations, knowledge creation, identity and communication. Secondly, some central ideas or images were identified within such contrasts, pointing at both directions: dialogic methods as opportunities for the creation of new organizational realities (with images of a ‘door’ or a ‘flow’, for instance, which suggest that dialogic methods may open up the access to other perspectives and the creation of new realities); and dialogic methods as new instrumental mechanisms that seem to reproduce the traditional and non-dialogical forms of work and relationship. The individualistic tradition and its tendency for rational schematism - pointed out by social constructionist scholars as strong traditions in our Western Culture - could be observed in some participants’ accounts with the image of dialogic methods as a ‘gym’, for instance, in which dialogical – and idealized –‘abilities’ could be taught and trained, turning dialogue into a tool, rather than a means for transformation. As a conclusion, I discuss what the implications of such taken-for-granted assumptions may be, and offer some insights into dialogue (and dialogic methods) as ‘the art of being together’.