Discipline · Risk Management
Risk Is a Continuous Judgment, Not a Finished System
ABCD Fund treats risk assessment as part of the investment process itself — considered before capital is committed, while a position is held, and whenever the evidence or market conditions change.
Risk management is integrated into opportunity selection, research, valuation, sizing, portfolio construction, monitoring, and exit decisions. It reduces risk but cannot guarantee against loss — every strategy described on this site involves capital at risk.
- Assessed Before Entry, During Holding, and on Change
- Applied Across Screening, Research, Valuation, and Monitoring
- Not a Guarantee Against Loss
Risk Philosophy
Judgment Applied at Every Stage — Not a One-Time Gate
Risk is not a checkpoint applied after an investment decision has already been made. It runs through the same sequence that governs every position: Opportunity Screening → Deep Discovery Research → Valuation Realisation → Portfolio Monitoring. Risk is considered before capital is committed, again when a position is sized and held, and again whenever new evidence or changed market conditions call the original case into question.
This is a discipline, not a guarantee. Distinguishing temporary dislocation from permanent impairment, or a well-evidenced thesis from a weakening one, reduces the chance of avoidable loss — it does not remove the possibility of loss. Every strategy described on this site involves capital at risk.
Opportunity Screening
The first risk question is whether a candidate's downside is even bounded and quantifiable, and whether it is liquid enough to justify deeper research.Deep Discovery Research
The downside case is built independently of the upside case and tested against a ranked evidence hierarchy before conviction is formed.Valuation Realisation
Entry price, position size, and exit approach are set against the quantified downside — and re-tested on a schedule and whenever a material assumption is challenged.Portfolio Monitoring
Positions are watched for as long as they are held: catalyst progress, thesis integrity, and changing conditions are reviewed on an ongoing basis, not only at entry.Across the Investment Process
How Risk Judgment Applies at Each Pillar
ABCD Fund's investment pillars each carry a distinct risk question, applied with judgment rather than through a fixed, numeric gate.
Pillar I
Opportunity Screening
Key Risk Question
Is the dislocation temporary rather than structural, and is there a bounded, quantifiable downside with a credible catalyst?
Actively Assessed Today
- Catalyst identification — a specific, named path back to fair value
- Downside bounded and quantified, not open-ended
- Liquidity sufficient to size and exit the position within fund discipline
Also Applied
Candidates whose qualifying factors remain under review stay on a watchlist rather than advancing or being rejected outright. Liquidity and concentration are weighed case by case within each fund's overall risk framework.
Feeds Into
Qualified candidates proceed to Deep Discovery Research
Pillar II
Deep Discovery Research
Key Risk Question
Does the evidence validate the thesis, and is the downside case built independently of the upside case?
Actively Assessed Today
- Downside scenarios tested independently of the upside case
- Bull, base, and bear outcomes built from the same evidence base
- Evidence ranked by reliability, not treated as uniform
- Contradiction review — evidence against a required qualifying factor ends the thesis outright
Also Applied
Research conviction directly informs position sizing, weighed alongside each fund's per-position limit and portfolio-level concentration and liquidity considerations.
Feeds Into
A validated or rejected thesis proceeds to Valuation Realisation
Pillar III
Valuation Realisation
Key Risk Question
Does the price paid leave room against the quantified downside, and is the position monitored and re-tested for as long as it is held?
Actively Assessed Today
- Entry price checked against the independently quantified downside
- Position size bounded by each fund's hard per-position limit
- Catalyst progress, thesis integrity, and risk/reward compression monitored while held
- Re-underwriting on a defined schedule and whenever a material assumption is challenged
Also Applied
Eclipse uses no mechanical price stop-loss by design — positions are reduced or exited on fair value, thesis break, or governance and balance-sheet risk, not on price decline alone. Nova is managed around a 15% maximum-drawdown objective that triggers immediate portfolio review (see the strategy comparison below).
Feeds Into
Held, scaled, reduced, or exited — capital recycles back into Opportunity Screening
Risk Register
Eight Risk Dimensions
The register below states, dimension by dimension, how ABCD Fund applies risk judgment across both funds.
| Risk Dimension | How It Is Managed |
|---|---|
| Thesis Risk | Tested through Deep Discovery Research's ranked evidence hierarchy and contradiction review, then re-tested at Valuation Realisation through scheduled and event-driven re-underwriting for every position. |
| Valuation Risk | Entry price is checked against an independently quantified downside, with bull, base, and bear scenarios weighted by probability at Valuation Realisation. The required margin of safety is set thesis by thesis rather than by a single fixed percentage. |
| Concentration Risk | Both Eclipse and Nova apply a 20% maximum single-position limit, complemented by portfolio-level diversification management across sector, country, and correlated exposures. |
| Liquidity Risk | Both funds invest primarily in listed instruments; liquidity and spread conditions are assessed when sizing and exiting positions, particularly in stressed or crisis-affected names. |
| Market Risk | Positions are evaluated against the broader market and regime backdrop at entry and through ongoing monitoring; Nova's four-engine structure and Eclipse's thesis-based exit discipline are both designed with market-cycle risk in mind. |
| Currency Risk | Both funds hold cross-border, non-domestic exposure — Eclipse across global listed equities, Nova primarily across the U.S., Hong Kong/China, and Europe — tracked as part of position and portfolio review; exposure may not be fully hedged. |
| Derivative & Leverage Risk | Eclipse does not use borrowing leverage as a primary investment tool; an active options overlay creates controlled economic exposure for income generation and downside management. Nova may use derivatives and controlled portfolio-margin exposure within its risk framework. |
| Operational & Counterparty Risk | Both funds rely on brokers, custodians, and counterparties for execution, custody, and clearing — a dependency recognised as a risk to performance independent of investment decisions, supported by the platform's data, dashboard, and monitoring infrastructure. |
Strategy-Specific Risk Frameworks
Eclipse and Nova, Risk Compared
Eclipse and Nova share the same research and risk discipline but carry different risk profiles by design, reflecting their contrasting mandates.
| Dimension | Eclipse Fund | Nova Fund |
|---|---|---|
| Thesis & Impairment Risk | Primary focus is distinguishing temporary dislocation from permanent impairment; the thesis is re-tested through scheduled and event-driven re-underwriting. | Multi-strategy and market-regime risk assessed per sleeve, combining fundamental, macro, sentiment, and quantitative evidence; a regime shift triggers re-underwriting. |
| Valuation & Margin of Safety | Entry price checked against an independently quantified downside. No fixed margin-of-safety percentage applies uniformly across positions. | Payoff and scenario analysis applied per sleeve. No fixed margin-of-safety percentage applies uniformly. |
| Max Position Size | 20% of Eclipse Fund NAV, maintained even as a position appreciates. | 20% of Nova Fund NAV, within a portfolio of approximately 15–30 securities. |
| Liquidity & Refinancing | Invests in listed global equities; liquidity and spread conditions are weighed at sizing and exit, particularly for stressed or crisis-affected names. | Invests across listed equities, options, gold futures, and multi-asset instruments; some instruments may see reduced liquidity or wider spreads under stress. |
| International Market & Currency Exposure | Cross-market global equity exposure; currency movements are weighed as part of position review. | Cross-border exposure across the U.S., Hong Kong/China, and Europe; exposure may not be fully hedged. |
| Leverage | Does not use borrowing leverage as a primary investment tool; options and other permitted instruments may create controlled economic exposure. | May use derivatives and controlled portfolio-margin exposure within its risk framework; exact gross-exposure, net-exposure, and margin limits are not publicly disclosed. |
| Derivatives | An active options overlay — covered calls, puts, index options, warrants, and convertible bonds — generates recurring cash flow and manages downside exposure. Option income and protection are not guaranteed. | Options and other derivatives can create losses beyond the initial premium in certain structures; the fund also holds gold exposure within its risk framework. |
| Portfolio Drawdown Discipline | No numerical portfolio-level drawdown limit is published; risk is managed through position limits, thesis-based exits, concentration management, liquidity assessment, permanent-impairment analysis, active options protection, cash flexibility, and continuous re-underwriting. | Managed around a 15% maximum-drawdown objective. Reaching this threshold triggers immediate portfolio review and risk reduction, though losses may exceed the objective during adverse conditions. |
| Position Discipline | No mechanical price stop-loss; positions are reduced or exited when fair value is reached, the thesis breaks, or the crisis becomes permanent. Averaging down is considered only when the thesis remains valid on re-underwriting — a lower price alone is never sufficient. | Positions and sleeve exposure are reviewed daily against regime signals and portfolio-level risk, and reduced or closed when a target is reached, a thesis is invalidated, or risk conditions require it. |
Defensive Fund is a future strategy under development and is not part of the October 2026 launch.
Any risk objective described for Defensive Fund is indicative only, not an operating policy or a guarantee. Its full risk framework will be published only after formal review. Development status →
Governance and Responsibility
Who Owns Risk
ABCD Fund has assigned primary risk responsibility across its two launch strategies, each led by its specialist investment lead and supported by shared investment, research, and risk oversight across the platform.
-
Suthon Singhasitthangkul
Primary risk owner for Eclipse Fund.
-
Vithan Minaphinant
Primary risk owner for Nova Fund.
-
Kanol Mongkolpathumrat & Thanayut Kiatpattanachai
Support research, data, dashboards, monitoring, and reporting behind the risk process.
Material exposure changes, thesis breaks, and drawdown thresholds trigger escalation to the relevant investment lead for immediate review, with the platform's shared research and risk oversight providing a second perspective before capital is added, reduced, or exited.
Monitoring
Positions, strategy exposures, and material risk limits are monitored daily — including position-level exposure, drawdown, liquidity, concentration, margin, derivatives exposure, and thesis or signal deterioration.
Portfolio Response
Depending on what monitoring reveals, the response may include reducing exposure, closing positions, hedging, increasing cash, rebalancing across strategies, reassessing the thesis, suspending new risk, or conducting an immediate portfolio review.
Stress Scenarios
What ABCD Fund Intends to Test
ABCD Fund reviews portfolio positioning under a defined set of adverse scenarios, to understand how each fund's approach would respond before such conditions arise in live markets. These scenarios describe the intended testing scope; reviewing them does not guarantee a specific outcome in any future stress event.
Broad Market Sell-Off
A rapid, broad decline across equity markets. Tests whether thesis-based exit discipline and position sizing hold up under sustained, indiscriminate selling pressure.
Liquidity Freeze
A sudden contraction in market liquidity. Tests how easily positions — particularly stressed or crisis-affected names — can be sized down or exited without material price impact.
Currency Shock
A significant, rapid move in exchange rates affecting cross-border holdings. Tests the portfolio impact of unhedged or partially hedged currency exposure.
Rapid Interest-Rate Change
A sharp, unexpected shift in interest rates. Tests valuation sensitivity, margin conditions for leveraged sleeves, and refinancing considerations.
Country, Regulatory, or Policy Shock
An adverse policy change, geopolitical event, or country-level crisis affecting concentrated exposure. Tests concentration risk and thesis validity under a changed regulatory backdrop.
Thesis Failure
The investment case for one or more significant positions fails. Tests whether re-underwriting, position sizing, and concentration discipline limit the resulting impact on the portfolio.
Risk Disclosure
- Risk management does not eliminate investment risk. All strategies involve the possibility of capital loss.
- Targets and risk objectives described on this page are not guarantees of future performance or outcomes.
- Final fund documents, eligibility criteria, and terms will be confirmed in the formal offering documents ahead of launch.
Investor Relations
Request the Full Risk Framework Briefing
Qualified investors may request an investor briefing to review the risk framework described here in more depth, including current risk parameters and portfolio construction.