Skip to main content
Welcome to
super saver spring
offer ends april 20
save over $140
save over 85%
$0.99
per week for 24 weeks
Welcome to
super saver spring
$0.99
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

Until recently, Bill Hwang sat atop one of the biggest — and perhaps least-known — fortunes on Wall Street. Then his luck ran out.

Mr. Hwang, a 57-year-old veteran investor, managed US$10-billion through his private investment firm, Archegos Capital Management. He borrowed billions of dollars from Wall Street banks to build enormous positions in a few American and Chinese stocks. By mid-March, Mr. Hwang was the financial force behind US$20-billion in shares of ViacomCBS, effectively making him the media company’s single largest institutional shareholder. But few knew about his total exposure, since the shares were mostly held through complex financial instruments, called derivatives, created by the banks.

That changed in late March, after shares of ViacomCBS fell precipitously and the lenders demanded their money. When Archegos could not pay, they seized its assets and sold them off, leading to one of the biggest implosions of an investment firm since the 2008 financial crisis.

Story continues below advertisement

Almost overnight, Mr. Hwang’s personal wealth shriveled. It is a tale as old as Wall Street itself, where the right combination of ambition, savvy and timing can generate fantastic profits — only to crumble in an instant when conditions change.

Mr. Hwang declined to comment for this article.

His is a proverbial American rags-to-riches story. Born in South Korea, Mr. Hwang moved to Las Vegas in 1982 as a high-school student. He spoke little English, and his first job was as a cook at a McDonald’s on the Strip. Within a year, his father, a pastor, had died. He and his mother moved to Los Angeles, where he studied economics at UCLA, but he found himself distracted by the excitement of nearby Santa Monica, Hollywood and Beverly Hills.

“I always blame people who set up UCLA in such a nice neighborhood,” he told congregants at Promise International Fellowship, a church in Flushing, a neighborhood in the New York borough of Queens, in a 2019 speech. “I couldn’t go to school that much, to be honest.”

He graduated — barely, he said — and pursued a master’s degree in business administration at Carnegie Mellon University, in Pittsburgh. He then worked for about six years at a South Korean financial services firm in New York, eventually landing a plum job as an investment adviser for Julian Robertson, a respected stock investor whose Tiger Management, founded in 1980, was considered a hedge fund pioneer.

Story continues below advertisement

After Mr. Robertson closed the New York fund to outside investors in 2000, he helped seed Mr. Hwang’s own hedge fund, Tiger Asia, which focused on Asian stocks and quickly grew, at one point managing US$3-billion for outside investors.

Shortly after shuttering Tiger Asia, Mr. Hwang in 2013 opened Archegos, which is Greek for leader or prince. The new firm, which also invested in both U.S. and Asian stocks, was similar to a hedge fund, but its assets were made up entirely of Mr. Hwang’s personal wealth and that of certain family members. The arrangement shielded Archegos from regulatory scrutiny because of its lack of public investors.

Goldman Sachs, which had lent to him at Tiger Asia, initially refused to deal with Archegos. JPMorgan Chase, another “prime broker,” or large lender to trading firms, also stayed away. But as the firm grew, eventually reaching more than US$10-billion in assets, according to someone familiar with the size of its holdings, its lure became irresistible. Archegos was trading stocks on two continents, and banks could charge sizable fees on the trades they helped arrange.

Goldman later changed course and in 2020 became a prime broker to the firm alongside Credit Suisse and Morgan Stanley. Nomura also worked with him. JPMorgan refused.

By the beginning of this year, Mr. Hwang had grown fond of a handful of stocks: ViacomCBS, which had pinned high hopes on its nascent streaming service; Discovery, another media company; and Chinese stocks, including e-cigarette company RLX Technologies and education company GSX Techedu.

Trading at roughly US$12 just over a year ago, ViacomCBS’s stock rose to about US$50 by January. Mr. Hwang kept amassing his stake, people familiar with his trading said, through complex positions he arranged with banks called “swaps,” which gave him the economic exposure and returns — but not the actual ownership — of the stock.

By mid-March, as the stock moved toward US$100, Mr. Hwang had become the single largest institutional investor in ViacomCBS, according to those people and a New York Times analysis of public filings. The people valued the position at US$20-billion. But because Archegos’s stake was bolstered by borrowed money, if ViacomCBS shares unexpectedly reversed, he would have to pay the banks to cover the losses or be quickly wiped out.

Story continues below advertisement

On March 22, ViacomCBS announced plans to sell new shares to the public, a deal it hoped would generate US$3-billion in new cash to fund its strategic plans. Morgan Stanley was running the deal. As bankers canvassed the investor community, they were counting on Mr. Hwang to be the anchor investor who would buy at least US$300-million of the shares, four people involved with the offering said.

But sometime between the deal’s announcement and its completion the morning of March 24, Mr. Hwang changed plans. The reasons are not entirely clear, but RLX and GSX had both spiraled in Asian markets around the same time. His decision caused the ViacomCBS fundraising effort to end with US$2.65-billion in new capital, significantly short of the original target.

ViacomCBS executives had not known of Mr. Hwang’s enormous influence on the company’s share price, nor that he had cancelled plans to invest in the share offering, until after it was completed, two people close to ViacomCBS said. They were frustrated to hear of it, the people said. At the same time, investors who had received larger-than-expected stakes in the new share offering and had seen it fall short were selling the stock, driving its price down even further. (Morgan Stanley declined to comment.)

By March 25, Archegos was in critical condition. ViacomCBS’s plummeting stock price was setting off “margin calls,” or demands for additional cash or assets, from its prime brokers that the firm could not fully meet. Hoping to buy time, Archegos called a meeting with its lenders, asking for patience as it unloaded assets quietly, a person close to the firm said.

Those hopes were dashed. Sensing imminent failure, Goldman began selling Archegos’ assets the next morning, followed by Morgan Stanley, to recoup their money. Other banks soon followed.

As ViacomCBS shares flooded onto the market March 26 because of the banks’ enormous sales, Mr. Hwang’s wealth plummeted. Credit Suisse, which had acted too slowly to stanch the damage, announced the possibility of significant losses; Nomura announced as much as US$2-billion in losses. Goldman finished unwinding its position but did not record a loss, a person familiar with the matter said. ViacomCBS shares are down more than 50 per cent since hitting their peak March 22.

Story continues below advertisement

Mr. Hwang has lain low, issuing only a short statement calling this a “challenging time” for Archegos.

Be smart with your money. Get the latest investing insights delivered right to your inbox three times a week, with the Globe Investor newsletter. Sign up today.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies