It still feels very fishy to me that a closed capped fund has insane returns while the public fund that investors can invest in, has lukewarm results (not even beating the market from what I recall).<p>Seems like too many people, especially those that have no experience in the industry bought into the myth that genius mathematicians beat the market etc. The truth is that the market is mostly a zero sum competition between its participants. If RenTech is so good, they should have people that are a class above everyone else. Does someone claim that RenTech has more smart traders than Jane Street, Citadel etc? All of these people hire IMO Gold Medallists etc, and after a point there are diminishing returns on intelligence, someone who won IMO gold is not that much better than someone who got silver in intelligence. Even assuming RenTech got the cream of the cream, only golds while Jane street got the Silvers, I doubt there is enough alpha there for RenTech to have the insane spectacular market performance that they show. But that is likely not the case, they have people of similar caliber to Jane Street, Citadel etc which makes their outsized performance even more intriguing.<p>The only possibilities I can think of, is 1 they are cooking the books, this would be insanely risky but not something unheard of in this industry. 2 they have discovered a few trading strats that they have maintained as a closely guarded secret all these years that allows them to get their edge on the market. Or similarly, some of their founding team are just godlike traders who always beat the market and once they’re gone RenTech will also fall. This feels even more unlikely, considering employee attrition and such but might be possible.<p>For what it’s worth, I’ve had friends that interviewed with RenTech mention to me that it was an okay interview, heavily focused on C++ technical details (especially latest C++11 features and above) but not harder than an equivalent Citadel interview etc.