Scott Barbie's value fund experienced a massive drawdown before a 91% rally. This illustrates that systems with high variability show the strongest regression to the mean. If your investment theses are sound, a period of severe underperformance can be a leading indicator of a powerful recovery.

Institutions must manage four primary risks: failing to meet liabilities (shortfall), path-of-return volatility (drawdown), access to capital (liquidity), and the reputational risk of underperforming peers, which Matt Bank calls “embarrassment risk.” This last one is often the most delicate and hard to quantify.

The true financial benefit of ESG or sustainability factors may not be in mitigating drawdowns, but in accelerating recoveries. Factors like employee satisfaction and a smaller environmental footprint contribute to a company's resilience, allowing it to bounce back faster after a crisis. This is the key link between ESG and long-term performance.

Conventional definitions of risk, like volatility, are flawed. True risk is an event you did not anticipate that forces you to abandon your strategy at a bad time. Foreseeable events, like a 50% market crash, are not risks but rather expected parts of the market cycle that a robust strategy should be built to withstand.

To truly understand an investment's resilience, analyze its performance over a 20-year span, paying close attention to how it navigated major downturns like the dot-com bubble and the 2008 financial crisis. This deep historical analysis provides a clearer picture of stability than recent performance alone.

AQR's Cliff Asnes highlights that a prolonged period of underperformance is psychologically and professionally more damaging than a sharper, shorter drop. Enduring a multi-year drawdown erodes client confidence and forces painful business decisions, even if the manager's conviction in their strategy remains high.

Average drawdown is superior to metrics like standard deviation because it measures both the magnitude and duration of a portfolio's decline. This combination better reflects the actual emotional discomfort clients experience during a market downturn, making it a more practical gauge of risk.

A 50% portfolio loss requires a 100% gain just to break even. The wealthy use low-volatility strategies to protect against massive downturns. By experiencing smaller losses (e.g., -10% vs. -40%), their portfolios recover faster and compound more effectively over the long term.

Marks uses the analogy of a six-foot man drowning in a stream that's five feet deep on average. This illustrates that portfolio construction must account for worst-case scenarios, not just average outcomes. Survival through every market phase, especially the low points, is a prerequisite for reaching long-term goals.