There is little ambiguity about the ultimate target of investigators and prosecutors in their seven-year campaign to halt insider trading by hedge funds on Wall Street. He is “Portfolio Manager A” in Friday’s historic $614m settlement with SAC, the highly successful $15bn fund. 美国调查人员和检方为遏制华尔街对冲基金内幕交易进行了长达七年的努力，现在他们的最终目标已经非常明确。这个目标就是“投资组合经理A”——美国监管当局与SAC资本(SAC Capital)上周五达成的6.14亿美元历史性和解中的被告。SAC是一家非常成功的对冲基金，其管理的资产多达150亿美元。

Portfolio Manager A is not named in the Securities and Exchange Commission suit, but he is identified as “the owner and founder of SAC”. The owner and founder of SAC is Steve Cohen, and his innocence has become the key to whether the industry can retain a reputation for skill, rather than illegality. Mr Cohen denies wrongdoing. SAC neither admitted nor denied the SEC charges. 美国证交会(SEC)在诉讼中并未点明“投资组合经理A”的姓名，而是将他指认为“SAC的所有者和创始人”。而史蒂文•科恩(Steven Cohen)正是SAC的所有者和创始人，此人清白与否有着至关重要的意义，将决定对冲基金行业能否继续以投资技巧而非违规操作著称。科恩否认自己有违规行为。SAC对于美国证交会的指控既未承认也未否认。

The industry’s image has already been tarnished by the SEC and Department of Justice inquiry, which has revealed shocking behaviour on a wide scale. Those jailed include Raj Rajaratnam, founder of the Galleon fund and Rajat Gupta, the former head of McKinsey and Goldman Sachs board member, who leaked him information. 美国证交会和美国司法部(DoJ)所做的调查已使对冲基金行业的形象大受影响；调查显示，大量对冲基金存在令人震惊的违规行为。因此入狱的包括帆船集团(Galleon Group)创始人拉贾•拉贾那纳姆(Raj Rajaratnam)和麦肯锡(McKinsey)前掌门人及高盛(Goldman Sachs)董事顾磊杰(Rajat Gupta)。顾磊杰曾向拉贾那纳姆泄露内幕信息。

As Mary Schapiro, the former chairwoman of the SEC, put it: “there is nothing wrong with doing tremendous due diligence” before hedge funds buy or sell shares. But too many of those working for funds or acting as their informants have strayed beyond this. Instead of analysing the kind of information available to any diligent investor, they have ferreted out private titbits on such topics as drug trials and technology sales. 美国证交会前主席玛丽•夏皮罗(Mary Schapiro)曾表示，对冲基金在买卖股票之前“做大量尽职调查并没有什么不对”。但是，有太多为对冲基金工作的人或为其提供消息的人已经超出了这一界限。他们没有把精力放在分析任何勤勉的投资者都能获得的公开信息上，而是四处搜寻有关药物试验以及技术销售等题材的内幕信息。

Among the problems with these transgressions is that hedge funds form an ever more powerful part of the financial industry. The crackdown on investment banks since 2008 is accelerating the transfer of power towards asset managers. 这种越界行为引发的一个问题是，对冲基金在金融行业内的地位和影响力不断增强。2008年以来投资银行受到的整治，正在推动市场影响力加速向资产管理机构转移。

Even before then, the biggest rewards accrued to fund managers rather than brokers. While bank bosses, and their most valuable employees, might get bonuses of tens of millions a year, members of the hedge fund elite were worth hundreds of millions – or billions. 即便是在2008年以前，最大的利益获得者也不是经纪商而是基金经理。银行高管及其最具价值的雇员或许一年能拿到数千万美元的奖金，而对冲基金行业中的佼佼者身价高达数亿甚至数十亿美元。

The regulatory squeeze on trading and risk-taking within banks through new regulations has pushed them further towards the financial fringe. 监管当局通过新的监管法规限制银行的交易行为、不让它们承担过高的风险，此举进一步降低了银行在金融行业中的影响力。

This has advantages for the system as whole – hedge funds are not too big to fail, and many do. Taxpayers are not forced to underwrite the risks taken by traders at funds that make mistakes. Instead, hedge funds are genuinely entrepreneurial and self-supporting. 对整个金融系统而言，此举有一定益处——对冲基金不会“大到不能倒”，很多银行却存在这一问题。纳税人不必为犯错误的对冲基金的交易员承担的风险埋单。实际上，对冲基金拥有真正的企业家精神，并且在经济上完全靠自己。

But they are also lightly regulated and charge their investors very high fees to participate. They must keep producing exceptional returns in order to remain in existence, which in turn puts portfolio managers under pressure to do whatever it takes to gain their “edge”. 但与此同时，对冲基金受到的监管较松，并向参与投资的个人收取高昂的费用。它们必须持续创造出超常收益才能存续下去，这使得投资组合经理有压力为获得“竞争优势”而不择手段。

In the emerging financial world, hedge funds are not only the most rewarding places to work, but are also Wall Street’s best customers. Equity funds such as SAC pay high commissions to investment banks to be first in line for information. 在这个新兴的金融领域中，对冲基金不仅是回报最高的工作选择，还是华尔街的最优客户。SAC等股票型基金向投资银行支付高额佣金，以成为最先获得信息的机构之一。

They also pay other intermediaries – notably the “expert networks” now drawn into the insider trading investigation. These consultants charge funds to connect them with executives, who are supposed to provide insight into their industries. 对冲基金还向其他中介机构支付佣金——特别是目前卷入内幕交易调查的“专家网络”。这些顾问机构帮助对冲基金与企业高管建立联系并对此收取费用，企业高管则就自身所在行业向对冲基金提供有见地的看法。

In practice, some seem to have provided more – inside information into product development. In the SAC case, Sidney Gilman, a neurologist overseeing a trial of an Alzheimer’s drug, is accused of disclosing results to Mathew Martoma, a fund manager linked to SAC, before these were publicly disclosed. Dr Gilman is now co-operating with the authorities in a non-prosecution deal. 实际操作中，有些高管似乎提供了更多信息——包括有关产品开发的内幕消息。在SAC一案中，负责一种阿兹海默病（Alzheimer's disease，即老年性痴呆）药品试验的神经学家西德尼•吉尔曼(Sidney Gilman)被控在试验结果公开披露前，就向与SAC有关联的基金经理马修•马托玛(Mathew Martoma)先行泄密。吉尔曼目前正与当局合作，以换取免遭起诉的待遇。

Is this kind of activity occurring within other hedge funds? Rather than being exceptionally skilled, are they instead high-octane and high-pressure operations in which some fund managers pay industry insiders for illicit information? 其他对冲基金是否也存在此类行为？对冲基金是否并不以高超的投资技巧见长，而是一项过于高强度高压力的业务，以至于一些基金经理为了获取非法信息要向行业内部人士支付酬劳？

If so, the regulation of the past five years is having one extremely unintended consequence. It is pushing moneymaking from large, supervised institutions into a financial Wild West of dubious legality. Hedge funds need only look at banks – or Fleet Street – to witness the severe effects of an industry being discredited over the sins of some institutions. The same is in danger of happening to them. 如果情况确实如此，那么过去五年的监管举措就产生了一个绝对意想不到的后果。在这种监管的推动下，财富创造活动正从监管完善的大型金融机构转移到合法性存疑的金融“狂野西部”。对冲基金只需参考一下银行系统或弗利特街（Fleet Street，英国伦敦新闻界的大本营），就能看到某几家机构的丑闻导致整个行业声名扫地的严重后果。对冲基金行业目前正面临同样的风险。

Portfolio Manager A maintains his innocence, despite SAC agreeing to pay the biggest insider trading fine levied by the SEC. Not only his reputation, but that of his industry, now rests on it. “投资组合经理A”维护了自己的清白，尽管SAC同意支付美国证交会开出的有史以来金额最高的内幕交易罚单。现在不光是他自己的声誉，整个对冲基金行业的脸面都要仰仗这笔罚款来保全。