Risk and Reward with Marek Capital Co-Founder Matt Cherwin | At the Money
1563 segments
[music]
Bloomberg Audio Studios podcasts, radio,
news.
[music]
This is Masters in Business with Barry
Rick Holtz on Bloomberg [music] Radio.
This week on the podcast, another extra
special guest. Matt Sherwin is
co-founder and chief investment officer
at Maric Capital. He previously spent 16
years at JP Morgan Chase and then a
bunch of years at uh Cityroup beforehand
running all sorts of spread markets,
head of securitized product, lots of CIO
and risk management titles. Uh I came to
know through
>> [music]
>> um a live event we did at Bloomberg last
year. I found that his approach to
credit and trading is absolutely
fascinating and what MARA is doing is
really quite interesting. I thought the
conversation was brilliant and I think
you will also with no further ado my
conversation with Mar Capitals Matt
Sherwin.
[music]
[music]
>> Matt Sherwin, welcome to Bloomberg.
>> Thanks for having me. This is exciting.
That was kind of that was that was a
bigger windup than I was uh
>> I likeing
>> I like a big windup cuz it gives us an
opportunity to roll back to the
beginning and say all right bachelor's
in economics from University of
Pennsylvania. What was the original
career plan? I I don't imagine people
going to college and saying I want to be
the head of global spread markets. Uh,
no. But that's super interesting because
um our oldest uh is a sophomore in
college now and he's in the business
school at American and I was just
talking to him yesterday and he said,
"I'm now in I think they call it like
finance for business. I really like this
new class." And I said to him,
>> "That reminds me so well of when I was
in undergrad business school and I did
the first couple semesters of econ and I
hated it." [laughter]
And
>> I had a similar experience.
>> It was like, you know, I I shouldn't
have hated it as much as I did, but at
the time, uh, it was ISLM curves, it was
supply, it was demand, etc. And it just
it felt it didn't feel very practical to
me and I didn't do very well. I didn't
go to class very often. I didn't do very
well. But then we got to kind of the
next semester which I think they called
finance 101 and was like
>> bond math discounted cash flows and I
was like oh this I like okay I am in the
right place.
>> Well it's much more realistic and you're
not dealing with homoe economy cuz that
is this theoretical version of humans.
>> Looking back on I wish I had listened a
bit more at some of those others. Um,
but you know, something I say maybe we
we'll get to is like it just a
recommendation I would give to other
people. It took me a little while to
realize what I was interested in, what I
was interested in being interested in.
>> And when I got into some of those
classes, kind of the more financy kind
of stuff, I was like, this I like this
makes sense. Uh, I want to learn more.
And I think that's kind of where it
starts. So I always wanted to get I just
like when there's, you know, numbers on
the page, it adds up to something.
You're trying to make money. It's
hopefully positive at the end. It might
be negative. It's pretty clear-cut.
>> Um, at least the goal is. And I always
like that. I always gravitate towards.
>> So, so economics way too abstract and
academic, but business and finance
practical, applicable, real life usage.
>> Yeah. Which is interesting too because I
also I'm a little bit like this a little
exaggerated, but I'm a little bit of
like a history buff. So, like it was
interesting that that what didn't appeal
to me because I do like kind of the
history of it. how did we get here? And
I think that's always something that I'm
like in this form as well. Um going back
to learn more about financial systems,
how money works, how they thought it
used to work, different schools of
thoughts, and I think really helps you
understand where you've been, where you
are, where you're going. So when you
look back when you were group treasurer
or chief investment officer at at the JP
Morgan um division you were you were
involved in what sort of lessons did you
take away from that? You're you're in
the real world managing real risk, real
portfolios. H how did that experience
change how you perceive risk?
>> Yeah, it's a great question. Um and
[clears throat] I'll tell you so
obviously I had a career with a
background in um trading running trading
teams both on the buy side and the sell
side and it was really that experience
that this next piece that was
transformative for me and um you know
really brought us to the point where um
my partner Derek Goodman and I decided
let's form Merrick and you know I'm sure
we'll get into that a bit but what
happened was I spent 20 odd years
trading mortgages trades, corporate
credit, high yield products like that,
working with specialty finance
companies, some that I worked with, some
I had a hand in running this kind of
universe and then uh in late 2019 I had
the opportunity to move over and this
was different building, different you
know walled off key card, different team
and be the CIO and the treasurer. So
this is now by side running the capital
of the firm, the investment of the firm,
hedging, managing, structural risk, lots
of things wrapped up in there. But the
real thing was the point in time where
this happened was late 2019, a few days
later was the repo crisis. If we
remember that
>> when all of a sudden if you wanted to
borrow overnight against treasuries, it
cost you 10%.
>> Okay. Six months after that pandemic
breaks out. And why I bring that up is
so much changed in dramatic size at
rapid speed that I saw something I'd
never seen before. And it was how does
the financial system really work and
what does it mean and how does it apply
to everything that I've done? And it was
one of these moments where I felt like I
just went from being the captain of the
ship, you know, my own little thing,
right? We'll be a little expansive with
it. I went from being the captain of the
ship to going to work in the engine room
and seeing the actual gearing and how it
works and how it doesn't and what could
stop it from working. And you spend
years, you know, you pull a lever, you
think the boat goes faster, but you
don't know why. And you don't know what
could stop it from doing that. And you
don't know what could make it work more
efficiently. But now you go work in the
engine room and you see it and you
understand it. It was just this aha
moment like we're two guys with glasses,
right? So, you know, when you go to the
the you get a new prescription, you get
your new glasses, you put them on,
you're like, "Oh my god, I can see."
Right? And by the way, how was I walking
around the streets of Manhattan with
that old prescription, but now I could
see clearly. And honestly, 20 odd years
into my career, that's how I felt at
that that moment
>> in 2019.
>> Yeah. I would say like in early 2020
about 6 months in it was kind of like oh
my goodness it's coming together now. I
wish I wish I had known this for the 20
years that preceded this but I felt like
now I know nothing and I'm starting to
learn. So I have to ask. So uh my
experience with 2019 was that wobble
seemed to go by so quickly compared to
0809 where you know to me you saw a lot
of warning signs first in housing and
then in securitized product and then in
construction and then you know the
market didn't peak till October07 and
the next 18 months were kind of fun if
you were on the right side of it but if
you weren't it must have been a blood
bath. It sounds like you derived more
out of the 2019 experience than you were
on a desk in 089. What sort of scar
tissue did that leave? H how informative
was that
>> moment? It's really interesting the way
you kind of put those together. And um
so to set the table a bit 0708 when I I
got to JP Morgan late ' 06 070809
I was in charge of um had a team we
traded asset back securities say credit
cards auto student loans um subprime
mortgages remember those?
>> Yeah. um CLOS's. So
really kind of like the center of what
ended up happening uh after that. And I
would say it was
so overwhelming at the time. I mean we
were there 2 in the morning handmarking
bonds. Okay. Walking across the street
between the two buildings like is there
more information? This company might buy
that company before the market opens.
What else can we do? Um the numbers were
huge. It was almost like a bit more than
you could process at the time. Um, but I
think each one of these became every
step there was like I understand what
I'm doing better now because but the
first thing I ever did was I started out
as a cash flow structure
>> and actually at that point in time um
the guy who ran the department was uh a
friend of mine named Bruce Richards who
went on to start Marathon and um has had
a fantastic career and we keep in touch
and he said I said I want to be a trader
and he said well I want you to be a
structure because if you learn how the
cash flow works, how the structure
works, then you'll be a better trader
later on. I think each piece helped me
understand the risk better and then the
system it sits in and that helps you
understand the risk better. And then
when you understand the risk better, you
understand the system it sits in better
and it builds and it builds on top of
each other. So I would say in '08 I
learned more in '08. We saw we felt like
we were the tip of the spear in like a
bad way and we could see it was getting
worse and it was accelerating and we
could see that people were maybe even
underestimating. And I remember some
conversations around at the time um that
we were basically saying like think
bigger, think broader, think worse.
That's the context we're talking about.
But all of that helped me understand how
does my product I'm trading fit into an
investment bank? How's an investment
bank impact the system? Um I think when
I went into 2019,
obviously a lot time had passed. I'd had
more experiences, etc. Um I remember
sitting in a meeting. We're in 7:30 a.m.
traders meeting. This is uh with the CIO
group. Um and we go around the table, my
you know, rates lead, my credit lead,
etc. And the repo guys walk in and they
say, "Hey, we can lend against
treasuries at 10%. should we do more?
And I said, "Guys, I this is my third
day with this team." Okay. [laughter]
Um I'm the person in the room who knows
the least about what you're talking
about.
>> But if you need my authorization, you
have it cuz that sounds pretty great.
>> 10% yield against Treasury.
>> Fantastic. My response to you is how
much can we not can we do more like how
much can we do? Meaning more and more.
Um, and that just became the beginning
of like why did that happen? How did we
get here? What's the where did it come
from? Where does it go? And I found that
certain people knew certain pieces but
not the picture. And then you're like it
it it was just starting to pull out
>> and that was your job to know the whole
picture.
>> It be it became it became the only it
became the focus of what I wanted to
know because unpacking that would help
me understand how do we get here? Why
does this happen? And by the way, what
are the pieces that put this all
together? Um and how do we um how do we
take advantage of that? How do we
protect ourselves? But also, how do we
take advantage of that? So, it was this
the whole thing um was this one of those
types of things you say, I opened up a
door, three doors behind it, and I want
to keep going that direction. And then
it felt to me like a purer and purer
version of everything I'd done in my
career getting closer and closer to the
source and pricing.
>> Really, really fascinating. One of the
things I think a lot of people don't
realize about JP Morgan Chase during the
financial crisis and I never uh doing
the research for Bailout Nation I never
got this really sourced the way I would
have liked to but JP Morgan Chase had
their own derivative scare a couple of
years earlier and the word was Jamie
just said clear all this junk off of our
balance sheet we we can't handle this
risk doesn't seem to be worth the
potential upside. So heading into 089,
they weren't dealing with the same sort
of um existential danger that Meil Lynch
and Wells Fargo and go down the list all
had all had to go through. They they
were ended up being an acquirer of
distressed assets, not a uh a seller of
distressed assets. Well, I think I mean
it was a tremendous place to work. I
worked with incredible people. I learned
a lot. Um, and I worked with great great
people that you're just part of a
terrific team. It's fantastic place.
I learned something that became
transformative to everything I'd spent
my career doing. So, that's why we set
out to and I said, I want to do this.
And that's why we set out to build
Merrick when we said, you know, I recall
Derek and I sat down one day and I said,
"Let me just here's how I think about
markets. I think about it in terms of
money, capital, credit, liquidity, and
regulation." That's my five. Money,
capital, credit, liquidity, regulation.
MCCLR.
>> How do you separate money from capital?
>> So, I think money to me is how do you
make it? How do you destroy it? How does
it move through the system? To me,
capital is a little bit more of how much
do you have? How do you measure it? How
much do you have? Are you making more?
Are you destroying it? Credit is really
how is it being formed? How is it moving
through the system? The financial system
is changing now.
>> It's very different than it was a few
years ago. We actually when we were you
know really trying to get our ideas uh
on paper we wrote a paper that we
outlined saying we described what we
thought was the new version of the
financial system. We said the financial
system is changing your de facto
recreating glass steagall. You have
gibbs. If you come from some of this
framework, you know, are the globally
systemat systematically important banks,
systemically important banks. Think JP
Morgan, Wells, Bank of America, etc. Um,
we said there are the new GIBs, people
like Apollo, Blackstone, KKR, BlackRock.
These are Aries. These are the folks
that are actually making credit
extension decisions in this economy.
Okay? You have the traders like Citadel
Securities,
uh, Jump, Jane, some of these other
names everybody's familiar with. This is
disagregating the financial system and
putting it into different buckets. So,
basically, we think about where's it
coming from, where does it go, who wins,
who loses, what are the flywheels here.
Um, this is a process that we apply to
everything we do. Some of the guys on
the team call it MC Clear, um, MCCLR.
It's the lens that we look at because we
believe money, capital, credit,
liquidity, and regulation drives
economies, markets, and prices. And then
you can really start to understand
monetary policy, real estate, housing,
um the types of specialty finance
companies, we've talked about, consumer.
So, this to me actually explains how it
all works and we apply that. It's a huge
addressable universe. Um, we trade
rates, mortgages, securitized products,
corporate credit related equities. It's
an enormous addressable universe with
investors that have very narrow mandates
that transact at different points in
time and sometimes non-economically and
bound by potentially non-economic rules,
which means there are a lot of overlaps
that people don't take the advantage of
and there's a lot of gaps that they
quite simply don't bridge. and the setup
for all of this, I think, um, and I've
seen some stuff. Um, a lot of your, um,
your your listeners have, um, seen quite
a bunch of stuff. We've seen things go
right. We've seen things go wrong. This
is one of the best setups we've seen in
a long time. And so, that's why we went
out to say, um, I saw some interesting
stuff. I learned some interesting stuff.
There's an opportunity set that we want
to prosecute right now. and it is an
incredible time to do so. So, we built
the team. Sorry, go ahead. I was going
to say I was just going to No, I'm
fascinated. I want to roll back to
something you said earlier, which was
GlassSteagall is sort of being backdoor
reapplied.
Is that a function of people being risk
averse or is that a function of people
just specializing in their own silo? So
you don't have, you know, glass deagle
for people who aren't uh economic and
policy wonks, separated the FDIC
safe banks from the riskier investment
banks. And once that was repealed in the
late '9s, didn't cause the financial
crisis, but allowed all these banks to
merge and get bigger. And maybe it made
the crisis a little worse, but it I
don't I don't think of it as the
underlying cause. But um the idea that
the market is working its way back
towards that is kind of fascinating.
Address that.
>> Right. As you laid out like glass
seagull to say to oversimplify basically
said like you can hold deposits, you can
underwrite securities, you can trade
securities, things like that. Um and
there were rules.
Right now, there are like some rules
that say what you can and can't do, but
really there's a lot more that has
morphed into um what people like to call
private credit or we're going to extend
credit through these fashions or some of
the rules don't apply to this group. So,
we can trade the markets differently or
we can make markets in a way that maybe
um the big banks can't. And then the big
banks say, well, we're viewed as super
safe because I would argue we are and
that has its advantages also. So it's
like we created these artificial
boundaries. What is great for us and the
way we look at the world is we saw that
we see that we understand that we also
see and understand and think about all
day long and put it into our portfolio
construction and the the the risk that
we build. It's all up for grabs again.
Right. So, um, we've got Kevin Walsh
nominated to be the Fed chair and Mickey
Bowman is the vice chair for supervision
and they are, um, I don't know what what
the right adjective for it is, but
they're changing the rules and they're
pulling some of them down. And in my
opinion, people just don't understand
which of them matter and which of them
don't. and the market moves to place on
some that simply don't matter like its
lack of understanding of what SLR was
and how that worked and we all need to
dive into that but to simplify they said
we're going to remove this rule and it's
a big deal and we at MARA said you can
take it off it doesn't matter so
everything the market's doing in
reaction to that is a potential
opportunity for us
>> in other words people are overreacting
to a regulatory change that isn't
[music] significant long term
>> in that example yeah
>> coming up we continue our conversation
with Matt Cherwin, co-founder and chief
investment officer at [music] Mara
Capital, discussing why he launched the
firm in 2024. [music] I'm Barry Rit
Haltz. You're listening to Masters in
Business on Bloomberg Radio.
[music]
I'm Barry Raltz. You're listening to
Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.
My extra special guest today is Matt
Sherwin. He is co-founder and chief
investment officer [music] of Mar
Capital specializing in a variety of
alternative credit and related private
[music] products. Uh previously he spent
16 years at JP Morgan Chase where he had
a number of very important titles. Uh
before that Croup. Are we in all that
unique a period of time? Is the
opportunity set that much greater than
what we typically see in the normal? You
know, this is a little more
geopolitically volatile administration
than than even the previous Trump
administration. Is that a driver or is
it the deregulation and misapprehension
of of what these rule changes mean?
>> I think it's a combination of what's
going on. So we have we just kind of use
some little catchphrases among the team
that help us sort of like you know
gravitate around concepts or communicate
quickly. Um we say this is an
administration that's in the business of
being in business
>> and that's just a there's no opinion or
judgment one way or the other. It's just
it's just a statement. Um
what this environment is also we also
came up with something that we thought
was just made us chuckle one like it's
important to have a little bit of sense
of humor. We found our investors
actually do read the materials very
closely and they tend to have a sense of
humor which is good but we created this
thing we called the one big beautiful
chart.
>> Uhhuh.
>> And we just said you know what they
really need they need rates to get down
and they need it to come down a lot more
than what the market and the curve has
already priced in because of how much
debt the country has, what it costs,
what they want to accomp. So here's what
they need to accomplish and they're
going to do everything they can to it.
So, you know, we construct poor
portfolio. We have a nar we have an
investment thesis. We have a narrative.
Everything we put in the book has to fit
that narrative. Has to contribute to
what we're trying to achieve. Has to be
the best version of that or it has to
protect us from what could go wrong. So,
getting back to your question a little
bit, we think it's a very business
forward environment, uh, business
forward administration.
Um, we think that it is one that needs
rates to come down. we are going to have
a new Fed chair in the middle of June
and there he'll say all sorts of things
in the confirmation hearing but really
it will be um a catalyst potentially for
change uh in the middle of the year and
then we have a bias within markets to
strip back some of the layers of of
regulation and away from whether you
support that or not I can tell you
because I've been on the other side of
it the layers of process
and bureaucracy and spending your time
backsolving instead of what could we do
better. When you change what your goal
is and how you're pointed, you're going
to get different results. We think that
combination is spinning flywheels in the
market now that um in our opinion,
people are just they're underestimating
the power of some of these flywheels.
>> Really, really interesting. Last
question before we talk a little bit
about Merrick. Um, in the old days, and
I was never a big believer in this, but
everybody else was, there was some
constraints on deficits and ongoing
government debt, cuz the bond vigilantes
would punish you. The bond vigilantes
seem to have disappeared in part
replaced by the stock vigilantes who any
policy they don't like they just sell
off until they have their hissy fit
until they get their way and then okay
thank you very much and we're off to the
races again. Uh what do you think of the
you know 80s9s era bond vigilantes? Is
that just ancient history? there's no
discipline on deficit spending anymore
or and by the way I think deficits are
not all that relevant. Look at Japan.
Look at the US history. We've been
warned about deficits and they haven't
caused much of a problem most of this
history.
>> Yeah. I mean look, I love the term and I
think we've seen some of those episodes
um last year we saw um around the
whatever we call liberation day in
April. There were a couple days where
treasuries and mortgages said like
enough, okay, that's it. Um, and we're
either going to have one of those days
where they are giving stuff away or you
got to pull back. And I think what we
saw was the administration did pull
back. So I think in some level it's
still there. But part of what we do at
Merrick and what influences our thought
process is um big parts of this have
been really broken down. The markets are
so big now that it's been broken into
specific functions. Like people have a
thing to do and they do that in a narrow
mandate. We have a more flexible mandate
to us. The products, they're widgets.
They're tools in the toolbox for us to
achieve our goals and our investment
thesis and the portfolio risk and
construction and diversification that
we'd like to have. Um, but the markets
are hyper specialized in very very large
markets. So, you get some of those
episodes where it's like, uhoh, crowded
trade, we got to get out. Um, I think
the question of
um, does the administration react to the
markets? Does the markets react to the
administration? It's something that
we've actually focused on uh, quite a
bit. We actually um
you know we wrote another piece in June
of 2025 that we called the wars fed and
it was just about what could happen and
we sort of went through to your point
like the concept of risk-free rate and
credit spread are completely intertwined
and co-mingled now and they don't exist
separately. So I think that's some of
the concepts you're getting at like is
this um a problem for credit? Is it a
problem for rates? Are those the same
thing? Now um one of the most
interesting things and um I would just
say before we get back to your your
question is um what was really
interesting observation to us was during
the last government shutdown whatever
mini version of that we're going through
right now it was almost in the data was
not forthcoming and then VO went down.
So, it was this sort of like a little
bit like if we don't know, maybe
nothing's happening. But what it also
was was a little bit to the to what you
were saying is
when things were a little less
hyperfocused,
they actually were a little less jumpy
around um small moves. And that was a
big takeaway um big takeaway for us.
It's a big thing you're going to hear
from Kevin Walsh if he ends up in the
chair seat. Um, you're going to hear a
long narrative from him for his time in
that seat of we need to step back from
the dayto-day and the minute-by-minute
information and think about the bigger
picture and the trend and where we're
headed and be a be a little more
forward-looking. I think that's the kind
of guidance that you will get from that
chair.
>> Really, really interesting. So, so let's
just start out with why you left the
comfort of a big shop to have the uh
headache of your own firm. What What's
the elevator pitch? What problem does
Maric Capital solve that couldn't be
solved at a large Wall Street bank?
>> Look, I think quite simply there are
some things that banks can do and some
things that banks can't do. There are
some things that they can do and that
they don't want to do. Um in my career
I've always been involved in these types
of markets being rates, mortgages,
curized products, corporate credit, the
equities related to that that around it,
these types of specialty finance
operating companies and always felt that
when you have when you can apply the
various lenses to these products being
the trader lens, the structurer lens,
the operator lens, you understand it
better and you get the gearing and the
pieces. is and when you learn about the
financial system that it sits within
then you actually can understand but
take advantage of the risk and return in
a more elevated and efficient way.
>> I want to address that. Is it that the
big firms, the bigger banks were risk
averse and didn't want to take advantage
of it where they were prohibited on a
regulatory basis or when they're just
doing their macro risk assessment? Hey,
we'll go this far, but no further.
>> I I think it's even simpler than that.
Um, we look at the world through our
lens. We look at the world through the
Maric lens of money, capital, credit,
liquidity, and regulation,
which drives economies, markets, and
prices.
That helps us understand the drivers of
the capital markets that we sit within.
helps us understand monetary policy,
housing finance, commercial real estate
finance. Understand both the gearing of
it. Then you can look at something and
you can say, "Okay, I'm looking at
Croup. I could buy it. I could sell it.
I could understand what they're doing in
the markets. They have a footprint in
what that means for the markets. Do I
want to buy that?" So like where are the
flywheels? What does it spin to next? So
everything we were doing was very much
about
what do we want to do? because we see a
very large addressable opportunity where
we have a unique perspective, a defined
lens and a way of applying that to these
big liquid markets that we think very
strongly we can take advantage of in a
way that people simply haven't had the
opportunity to learn about and to
understand and apply to these products
with the type of flexible mandate that
we have. Which boiled down means we look
at the world a little differently.
These are big addressable markets which
have dislocations, volatility, and
opportunity all the time. And we can use
that combination to achieve what's a
very very simple goal. Improve the
return a little bit while reducing the
risk a little bit.
>> That's all anyone can ask for. Better
returns at lower risk. Um I'm I'm kind
of fascinated by the overall Merrick
investment philosophy we'll get to, but
let's let's start a little bit with
structure. I think of you guys as an alt
credit shop, but you also look a little
bit like a multistrat shop. Like a is it
kind of a hybrid? Like tell us about the
structure.
>> Um we just define what we do. Okay. We
are who we are. We do it the way that we
do.
>> Um
we run we're right now we're running a
hedge fund um which trades these
products as Oh yes. has tools in the
toolbox as as widgets. We do it in one
collaborative portfolio. So, our setup,
our structure, we've got an amazing
team. Um, we have specialists in rates,
in mortgages, in non- agency mortgages
and ABS, in credit, in CLOS's. Um, I am
on the phone every day with traders and
salespeople myself. Um, we trade it as
one book,
>> one portfolio. So, it's really a
multistrat within a single um
expression. It is what we think is the
best expression of the trade
>> or I shouldn't call it multistrat. It's
really multi-asset. It's a variety of
different credit assets all under one
umbrella
>> within our lane. Okay. Sticking to our
knitting what we believe we know very
well. Um what we know we have a
differentiated insight into
>> and extracting from that. Okay. The team
is phenomenal. Um they have a ton of
buyside and sellside experience. They
work very well together. Um it's very
exciting to be I mean and and
additionally
doing this together like Derek and I
doing this together putting our name on
the door like Marrick is Matt and Derek,
>> right?
>> Um because we spent way too much time
trying to think of what's a clever name.
>> They've all been taken. Good luck in New
York. means, you know, alpha extraction
in Sanskrit or some something, you know,
and um Derek's wife one day was like,
"Enough. It's Merrick, Matt and Derek,
now go do some real work." And I think
she said in a little bit more of a spicy
way. Um but we were like, "Yeah, that
could work. All right, let's do that."
I think just a little footnote, if
you've ever incorporated an LLC or any
other entity in New York State, every
Greek and Roman god, every Babylonian
god, every cereabus, name the creature
from mythology, it's either a fund or an
LLC, they're all they're all taken. It's
astonishing.
>> But the real point I I I wanted to make
also um that I don't want to lose is
this is putting our name on the door.
Okay? It's our name. It's our reputation
because and that really cemented it for
us. That was something we really wanted.
I took some time off and which was
fantastic and I met some of the most
amazing and interesting people in the
world. When you're unaffiliated, people
speak to you in a different way because
they have no one to talk to. Okay. I sat
down with the CEO of one of the world's
largest pension fund uh sovereign wealth
funds and we had and I'd never met the
person before. We had an hourlong
conversation
because
he just needed to talk to someone and I
learned a lot in that and I met some of
the most interesting people in venture
cap in um alts in private equity etc.
And it was just more way of learning
parts of the system but it got to the
point where after my you know academic
wander through the wilderness I was like
okay you know what um at the time we had
three teenagers living at home and it
was an amazing time. I used to always
say you should be able to retire in your
40s and go back to work in your 50s.
Like that's the way business should
work. Um obviously that's a luxury that
very few have. But um
I was getting to the point where I was
like, "Okay, I feel great. I want to do
this. I miss markets. I love this. I
want to get back to it and I want to do
it in the way that I want to do it."
>> How long of a gap was that between
>> I took like about a year off. You know,
it's a you know it's a riot. So in our
deck, we put a little timeline of my
experience and Derek's experience and
just to help people understand who
hadn't met us, who we are.
>> Uhhuh.
>> And at the very end, I put, you know,
this my background simple. I was here
for 10 years. I was there for 16 years.
And then we put like a little one-year
nugget on the end of the timeline that
just said chilling with no G. No G. Just
C H I L L I N.
>> Right.
>> I don't remember.
very unw wall street sort of
>> thing. It was like our 900th version of
the deck and we were just getting a
little punchy and we're like it made us
laugh. Okay, you got to have a sense of
humor. It made us laugh. So we're like
this is going in.
>> Every investor brings it up. They bring
it up and they love it. And you know
what to us it's like wow you are reading
every part of the deck and also it's
nice to know you have a sense of humor.
But getting back getting back to it was
like
>> people this is always shocking people
read the foot.
>> Oh yeah that's been a big learning for
us. They read it. Um so when we were
doing all this you know my wife was like
yeah why would you want to do something
for anybody else?
>> And I thought to myself exactly what are
we going to work harder at? What are we
going to make sure succeeds? It's the
thing that we put our name on the door,
our reputation that we believe
other people don't get it that we
believe is the right way to approach
these markets that we believe can
extract from a setup is which is one of
the best that we've ever seen. So if you
tick all those boxes,
why would you do it for anybody else?
>> Huh. Really, really intriguing. So it's
2026. I'm legally obligated to ask how
do you use artificial intelligence in
research portfolio construction or
operations at Meritt Capital?
>> Sure. I would I was make two two points.
I'm an AI optimist. That's not one of my
two points. That doesn't count.
>> Um we use it every day. We build stuff
more quickly. We build our own tools and
we build them more quickly than we ever
could before. You know, the guys on the
team, they're building stuff at their
desk in a week that would have taken a
year to do somewhere else, literally.
And I know because I've been in that.
And then once you built it, it would
have taken like six months to get
approval to release it into your s etc.
This is like light speed versus what we
used to do. Now
changing a little bit of how you frame
that question. Um AI is a really really
interesting um thing in financial
markets as well. Okay. So I don't think
we're there yet, but we're going to get
to a place where people are using it for
risk management. They're using it for
compliance. They're using it for KYC.
Put all that aside. The most interesting
to me right now is we look at the AI
capex boom.
>> Mhm.
>> And we say here's a product that is
commercial real estate with securization
technology around it. You're talking
about where is it? Is it built? If not,
how long is it going to take to build
it? Who are the tenants? How long are
the leases? What are they paying? What's
it worth when it's all done? Is there
residual risk like you have in an auto
lease?
only some of it comes to the securitized
market because it's just not that that
market is not big enough for it. So it
comes to the corporate bond market. So
that to us is like that's the type of
opportunity that piques our interest
where we say um this is something that
looks like ABC
[snorts] and being wrapped up and put
into a different market that is asking
one two three and those are good
questions but it's really like put it
all together look at all the factors
what are the additional are you getting
more structure are you getting less are
you charging for the risk are you paying
away for it? So the AI capex boom to us
is actually like a source of very cheap
risk for us to look at and each one has
a little bit of different flavor and
we're very opinionated about which ones
we like.
>> Huh. It sounds It sounds really
fascinating. It also sounds like um
anytime there's a novel area, the
opportunity for mispricing seems to
really
>> There's that. There's that. Um we look
at some of those firsttime issuers. We
have like we have some things in the
book. We have something called the
northstar playbook
>> which is what are companies and bonds
that have clear missions and objectives
that they can execute on that are
aligned with us with the instrument that
we have or misaligned or that they're
not able to execute. Um but some of it
it's actually not just about the novel
structures. Let's look at agency
mortgage back securities. Those have
been around for a long time. Okay.
couple weeks ago tweet from the press or
whatever we call a post on truth social
4:26 PM I've instructed my
representatives to buy 200 billion of
agency MBS boom bomb in the agency
mortgage back this is a there are it
billion 12 trillion of these things
outstanding in the agency mortgage
market it's 9 trillion hundreds of
billions of it trade every day and that
was a aftermarket
post tweet um when complexity event. So
then
>> are you out buying into that that rise
to take advantage? Are you are you a
price taker or a price maker? What are
you doing when that that's happening?
>> It's both. We look instantly like what
does this mean? What was our
expectation? Now in that instance we
expected the GSC's who will be the ones
who actually buy it. We expected the
GSC's to be buyer.
I think our view was a little bit at the
high side or out of consensus. Even we
thought this is going to be a support
mechanism for this market over the
course of the year. Fanny and Freddy are
going to buy a lot of this stuff
>> assuming they haven't already started.
>> Well, they had been and that's a great
point. They had been, but buying 200
billion with like an aftermarket tweet
and nobody knew like is it going to be
200 and then another 200? Are you going
to start buy are you going to buy 40
tomorrow? How's this all going to work?
>> Um this exceeded even our expectations
and you saw right away. Um I think we
were positioned for that type of event.
Um we were positioned to take advantage
of some of the policy risk as opposed to
get hit by some of the policy risk. You
could see that um there was a massive
short covering rally right after that.
Um and you could see that that wasn't
necessarily people's expectations and
how they were uh how they were set up
for it.
>> I have I have a mortgage related
question to this but I'm going to save
it to the next segment. Uh coming up we
continue our conversation with Matt
Sherwin, co-founder and chief investment
officer of Marrick Capital, discussing
credit and risk in today's markets. I'm
Barry Rhalt. You're listening to [music]
Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.
[music]
I'm Barry Rholz. You're listening to
Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.
[music] My extra special guest this week
is Matt Cherwin, co-founder and chief
investment officer of Maric Capital.
Previously, he spent 25 or so years uh
running credit and various types of risk
at JP Morgan Chase and Croup. So, we
were talking earlier about the Trump
tweet uh directing the GSC's to buy $200
billion worth of agency paper. You would
have thought that should have sent
yields plummeting and mortgage rates
down, which would stimulate the housing
market. I assume part of the motivation
for that tweet and for that purchase.
What What's going on in that market? And
why does it seem so difficult to drive
rates lower? Right. That's a great
question. And as silly as it sounds,
like 200 billion, it's just not enough.
>> Pocket cash, right? Walking around
money.
>> That's one way.
>> I mean, in a 12 trillion market, 12
trillion, it's not even 1%.
>> Yeah. If you're if you are if you've got
35 trillion in treasuries outstanding
and Yeah. Yeah. Um it's a big number and
it moves the needle. But what they they
really want to move it and keep it
there. Like that's a little bit of the
hard part because don't forget that the
Fed owns 2.2 trillion. So they're going
to buy 200 billion.
Didn't give a lot of information and
that sort of helped them in that moment.
The lack of information after probably
led some of it to kind of like bleed out
and unwind a bit. But the Fed owns 2.2
trillion and those are paying off and
that's approximately 180 billion a year.
So then you start to think about like
well if the rate moves and mortgage
prices go up are some of the money
managers just going to sell a hundred
billion over time and do you kind of
neutralize it? So I think it's helpful.
Um it's indicative. Here's the real
takeaway for us. Okay. So at that moment
it's how do we trade this? What's the
price? What's the next step? But then
we're really thinking from there like
what does this mean? What's going to
happen next? um and sort of coming full
circle. What it really does is show you
how hard they're going to try to drive
the mortgage rate down to drive rates
down overall to um sign up for an agenda
and a plan to get rates down. Okay. So,
some of it is what do we do in that
specific market and some of it is how's
it informing our view of the bigger
picture. So, you guys have two
I I I don't want to say conflicting, but
somewhat different
um risk factors you're juggling with.
Obviously, when you buy paper, you're
thinking long term, and we want to watch
this play out to our broader thesis, but
at the same time, you're actively
trading on the short term. uh uh how
much do these complement each other or
do you ever find yourself long in one
duration of the portfolio and short in
another? How do how do you balance this
out?
>> Yeah, I mean we have longs and shorts
across the book within mortgages, within
credit. Um we there we're you know long
what we like and short what we don't to
keep it super simple. um or long what
helps uh contribute to our thesis or
protect and vice versa and you know
protect the convexity profile that we're
looking to achieve. Um we are we trade
every day. We are active in these
markets. It's part of more of a sort of
a medium-term um thought process how
they're going to play out. But every day
is iterating on that. Is this still what
we think? Are we positioned with the
best version of it? Do we have the bonds
that are going to contribute to what we
are trying to achieve? Like right now,
we're very focused on the flywheels that
exist within financing markets. And if
you think about what does that mean?
Okay, so rates come lower. We talk rates
go lower. We talked about that a little
bit. But credit spreads are also really
tightening. And when rates are lower and
credit spreads are tighter, tighter,
your cost of borrowing has gone down
means you can refinance all sorts of
assets. It means some assets are even at
that point in time worth more valued
highly. Now that it's worth more, you've
got a lower LTV loan that you could take
out an even tighter credit spread on.
And how did these spin and what is this?
So this is very much what we're thinking
about now. I think the market completely
underestimates the power of those
flywheels and what it can be achieved.
So we that is one of we look at our
portfolio and say we want to have about
20 trades in it. And a trade is not one
line item. A trade could be 30 line
items. But
>> the flywheel is a trade. It's a little
bit of a maybe even a bigger higher
order one. But
>> we look at what is happening at that
moment. Is there something to take
advantage of? But also
what are the ripple effects of what's
happening in that moment? And what does
the market need to do? what is it going
to do? Does it understand this? And then
we unpack it and say like where's where
where's the opportunity? So coming back
to what we talked about, we believe when
you look at the world through this lens,
>> we look at markets through the Maric
lens
that the lack of connections made
through these markets and the lack of
extracting from some pretty obvious
pockets are an opportunity an like we
talked about to improve your return and
reduce your risk. And it's a process. So
it's just as much a process in a machine
through which you're extracting alpha
from from the market. We have our views.
We hope to be right. It's also it's a
process through which you work through
these markets that you extract all the
time. And the mandate is pretty clear.
Like as I think of it, the mandate is
very clear. You need to make money when
markets go up and you need to make money
when markets go down.
Every day, every month, every quarter,
every year. then you probably won't, but
that's the mandate that you're going
for. And it's it's quite simple when you
frame it out that way.
>> You mentioned in 2019 there was a sea
change in how you perceived what was
happening in the market and how
different that had become. How does that
affect how you look at and define risk?
It it risk definitions have obviously
changed over your career, but 2019 was
such a sea change. What's different
about managing risk today? Yeah, I think
I believe managing risk at scale is a
skill.
Okay,
you have your numbers and you want to
know what those are and those are
indicators and those are starting
places. VAR is a number and a starting
place and an indicator. Stress is a
number. DV1, CSO1, these are we I like
to look at the world in a stressbased
framework and we create a bunch of
different stresses. Some are quite
simple. Um, rates go up, rates go down,
credit crunch, a flight to quality. Some
we had our little like, you know, we're
getting a little punched. We have one we
call QE for Eva and Eva.
>> Um, and looking at these, it's really
about like it's a starting place for a
conversation, okay? Because you do need
to know where it's coming from and
what's the attribution. What's the
return attribution? Where's it where you
hoping it comes from? And what's the
risk attribution? And very importantly,
what could go wrong? um understanding
that what you're trying to achieve, but
knowing where the exits are. Like I
think it's really like a philosophy to
to risk and to managing risk to make
sure you're pointed to achieve your
goals
um while managing your risk properly and
knowing what you would do if things
changed. Right? You have a plan and then
things change.
>> H really really interesting. What when
you're looking out at a variety of
different opportunities, what do you
think today presents the best risk
opportunity? You're looking at
structured credit, corporates, relative
value. What what what is really drawing
your attention?
>> Yeah, we really thought that one of the
places to extract from the flywheel is
in securitized markets.
>> Um actually, as an example, like we've
been very focused on um Trophy Quality
Office and Gateway Cities, and this goes
back a little ways. These are the super
a resident um commercial real office,
>> right? So that all came to be from us
pulling at the thread of how the
financial system works. We talked a
little bit about the new gibs and what
you had was everybody was going back to
work, back to the office, but took
longer than we kind looking back on it.
That took a long time. The part of the
financial system that was changing were
those new GIBs, Apollo, Aries, KKR,
Blackstone, Black Rockck, and they were
coming back to office and they were
growing and they were finding that two
things. one, they needed nice offices to
kind of, you know, get everybody where
they want them to be, but also they were
growing and they outgrew what they had.
And then they went looking for more. And
what they found was there's actually not
that much trophy real estate out there.
And so like our view on the evolving
financial system led us to have very
strong conviction about a supply demand
imbalance in commercial real estate when
applied correctly. And then we just
looked for what's the best place and
it's tightened a lot but actually we
think it continues to and has been
because it's like the it's continued to
be one to two steps behind the
fundamentals. So what that really means
the way we think of to wrap it up in a
nutshell this is a triple B bond that we
think is a double A
>> h really really cuz everybody's painting
with a broad brush of hey forget B's
even A buildings are 60% occupied in
terms of
>> but they're not they're 100% occupied
with
>> I mean in terms of staff returning to
office so it's fully leased but the uh
what is it castle key cards are running
60% of prepandemic levels in a lot of
cities but the A+ the bigger shops, the
JP Morgans, they want everybody back in
the office, as does Goldman Sachs, as
does a lot of these places. And they're
all in trophy properties.
>> And it's not just New York, it's uh
Miami, it's actually San Fran has come a
long way. There are certain buildings
there that we like. We actually, I would
say, a little bit out of consensus. We
like DC, certain part, not the
government buildings, but um nice
offices. Like we said, this is an
administration that's in the business of
being in business, which means you got
to go see them and make your case. You
want to get some business done, which
means you need lawyers with a nice
conference room that need a decent
office and etc., etc. I mean, like, it
sounds a little glib, but it's true.
>> It's the cost of doing business.
>> It's true. And so, you can see there are
certain companies that are buying
buildings, knocking them down in DC, and
building brand new ones. And there are
buildings that are being taken offline
to convert to resi. By the way,
everything we wrapped up in what we
said, the conversion from office resi is
actually spinning faster now. In DC,
some buildings are being con and just
outside DC, some buildings are being
converted to data centers.
>> So, actually like stocks being removed
all the time. Anyways, it's just an
example of how like we're pulling on
threads and we're finding where we can
best take advantage of it and like what
are the next couple steps and ultimately
we're looking for what's something
that's already gotten better except the
price hasn't changed yet.
>> Huh. That that's really that's really
interesting. You you've mentioned stress
scenarios a couple of times. Um we know
that correlations have a tendency to go
to one and liquidity disappears. Well, I
think I've seen that personally, right?
Liquidity disappears. Um,
>> I think I would just wrap that up. We I
make two comments to people. I say like
one, you don't go out of business
because your assets. You go out of
business because your liabilities.
>> Uhhuh.
>> And when you start looking at that side
of the balance sheet first, then you
understand things a little bit better.
And then also, you know, with with my
traders and all the people I work for,
it's really great because some of the
people I hired a long time ago, they're
MDs at places now. It's I actually take
a lot of pride in the people I've worked
with who have gone on and done fantastic
things. I really really hate the phrase
money good. Okay, I don't think anybody
should be allowed to say it.
>> Um it is this like false crutch. I also
in many many conversations have said to
people I think you're right. In fact,
you've convinced me. I believe you are
right. I'm just letting you know you're
going to get fired long before we know
the answer to this question. Okay, let's
take everything we thought, everything
we've known, and let's put it into the
context of how do we apply this in
markets? What's going to happen? What's
everybody else doing? And how do we take
advantage of that?
>> Huh. Really, really fascinating. Last
question before I get to my favorite
questions. What do you think investors
>> I thought those were your favorite
questions.
>> Oh, no. You'll you'll you'll see the
favorite questions. Um, what do you
think investors in the credit and alt
space are not talking about but perhaps
should be? What topics, assets,
geographies, data points are getting
overlooked, but really shouldn't.
>> Yeah. So, it's a great question. Um, we
touched on a little bit. They're
underestimating the power of this
flywheel. Like with with the background
I've had and we've talked about and I've
seen a lot of things blow up. Like we
could come up with a lot of examples of
things that could go wrong. I think
they're underestimating
the things that could go right or what
the power of financing and um the
mechanics around financing and the
provision of liquidity and credit credit
spreads when they're good and when
they're tight and when the machine is
flowing what that financial engineering
can really do to both un recover value
and create value. I think they're
underestimating that really. The other
quick thing is
>> in the middle of the year
if Kevin Worsh ends up sitting in that
seat and if we get a little bit of the
the setup that he's looking for,
he's going to change everything, right?
So he believes we're going to have a big
productivity dividend from AI and we're
going to have a big productivity
dividend from deregulation. And that
that would allow you to have lower rates
and a smaller Fed balance sheet at the
same time.
And if he gets a little bit of what he
needs to craft that argument,
we're gonna have a very different second
half of 26 than the first half.
>> Really, really interesting. All right,
let's jump to our favorite questions,
our speed round. We'll get you guys out
of here at a reasonable time. Uh,
starting with who are your mentors who
helped shape your career?
>> Oh, I've worked for some pretty amazing
people. Um, and I tried to learn from
everyone. I just had the the bosses that
I've had are, you know, legends in this
industry, whether it's Bruce Richards,
TM Plo,
Jimmy Demar, Matt Z, Daniel Pinto. I
mean, these are got these are people who
defined these markets. Um, and they all
had a huge impact on my career.
>> Really interesting. Let's talk about
books. What are you reading now? What
are some of your favorites?
Oh, you know, but like I am in front of
a computer screen and reading so much
and I read so much analytics, research,
etc. When I get home, it's a little bit
more like hang out with my wife and kids
and a little TV.
>> Uhhuh.
>> Um,
>> well, that's my next question. What are
you listening to or streaming?
>> Give us your favorite next Netflix,
Amazon Prime, whatever.
>> I will watch pretty much anything.
Taylor Sheridan, you know, like
>> we just finished season two of Land Man.
It's so good. like Land Man, all the
Yellowstones, everyone. 198, 1823, 1920,
all of those. Lionist, uh, any of those.
>> Lionus was also great. There should be a
new season of that coming out one of
these days.
>> Uh, yeah, there is. I mean, I think I've
watched both seasons like a hundred
times.
>> Final two questions. What sort of advice
would you give to a college grad
interest in a career in investing,
credit, trading, what have you? I just
think it's not, you know, it doesn't
have to be a commitment for life. Just
look at it as what's something I'm
interested in being interested in. I
think you can pick the kind of people
you work with and you want to be around
good people who will teach you, who will
support what you're doing and just say,
I'm going to give this a spin for 3 to 5
years and if I like it, I love it. Um
maybe I'll sign up for another five. Um
but you know, you have an opportunity to
try something out and see if it's for
you. And our final question, what do you
know about the world of trading credit,
investing in alternative sources of of
liquidity and other products that would
have been helpful 25 or so years ago
when you were just getting your legs
onto you?
>> I wish I knew a fraction
of what we are applying at MARIC any
point before we did this. If I knew a
drop of what we're doing when I sat in
other seats. Yeah, I'll put that all in
the I wish I knew bucket.
>> Really, really absolutely fascinating.
Matt, thank you for being so generous
with your time. We have been speaking
with Matt Sherwin. He's co-founder and
chief investment officer of Mara [music]
Capital. If you enjoy this conversation,
well, be sure and check out any of
[music] the previous 600 or so we've
done over the past 12 years. You can
find those at iTunes, Spotify, [music]
um, Bloomberg, YouTube, wherever you get
your favorite podcasts. I would be
remiss if I didn't thank the Crack team
that helps us put these conversations
[music]
together each week. Alexis Noriega is my
video producer. Sean Russo [music] is my
researcher. Anna Luke is my podcast
producer. I'm Barry Rutultz. You've been
listening to Masters in Business on
Bloomberg Radio.
Ask follow-up questions or revisit key timestamps.
Loading summary...
Videos recently processed by our community