Seeking Truly Uncorrelated Returns: Why Litigation Finance Performs Independent of Market Cycles

Institutional investors face an ongoing challenge: finding asset classes that offer true diversification while delivering reliable performance regardless of macroeconomic conditions. As macroeconomic uncertainty and systemic market risks intensify, allocators are increasingly focused on sourcing uncorrelated return streams to strengthen portfolio resilience. Traditional asset classes such as equities, private equity, and real estate often demonstrate significant correlation during times of economic stress, leaving portfolios exposed to synchronized drawdowns. In this environment, litigation finance, particularly the post-settlement segment, has emerged as a compelling solution for sophisticated allocators.

The Search for Uncorrelated Investment Returns

Correlation coefficients quantify how one asset class moves relative to another, with +1 indicating perfect positive correlation and -1 reflecting perfect negative correlation. Over the last two decades, most traditional alternative investments — including hedge funds, private equity, and real estate — have shown increasing correlation to equity markets, particularly during market crises. Litigation finance stands apart with correlation coefficients consistently near zero relative to equities, credit, and real assets across multiple market cycles, typically ranging between 0.00 and 0.05 against major indices such as the S&P 500, MSCI World, or Barclays Aggregate Bond Index (2023 Litigation Finance Market Report, Westfleet Advisors). This independence stems from litigation finance's unique return drivers: court case outcomes influenced by legal merit, factual evidence, enforceability, and judicial decisions rather than macroeconomic events.

Modern portfolio theory emphasizes the importance of cross-asset correlations in constructing resilient portfolios. Yet, many asset classes exhibit rising cross-asset correlations during stressed market environments, a phenomenon widely documented as "correlation breakdown" or "crisis correlation". When liquidity evaporated, investor risk aversion increased, and widespread de-risking cascades caused synchronized losses across global equities, credit, private equity, and real estate, historically separate return streams frequently converged. As a result, even diversified portfolios saw simultaneous drawdowns, undermining their ability to protect capital during macroeconomic disruptions.

Why Litigation Finance Is Macro-Immune

Litigation finance offers institutional investors exposure to pure idiosyncratic returns, as systematic risk is largely absent. Unlike traditional asset classes influenced by GDP growth, interest rates, or consumer sentiment, litigation finance performance hinges on case selection, legal due diligence, jurisdictional expertise, and underwriting skill. Its returns stem from case-specific factors such as legal merits, judicial outcomes, and settlements, remaining anchored to facts, contractual terms, and judicial processes — not macroeconomic events. The legal system operates independently of market cycles, so the trajectory of a legal dispute remains largely unchanged regardless of inflation, monetary policy shifts, or equity volatility.

This macro immunity is structural, not theoretical. Regardless of GDP growth, employment levels, or central bank tightening cycles, legal disputes continue to persist. Even during major world disruptions, litigation finance managers who upheld portfolio discipline continued to produce steady, profitable returns. Monetary tightening may influence company valuations and consumer spending, but it does not affect the enforceability or collectability of established legal judgments or negotiated settlements.

• Idiosyncratic returns: Risks an asset possesses due to its unique characteristics.

• Systematic risk: Risk stemming from broad market and economic forces.

Graph: Asset Class Correlation Map | Guggenheim Investments

Litigation Finance between 0.00 and 0.05 against major indices such as the S&P 500, MSCI World, or Barclays Aggregate Bond Index.

Litigation Finance Performance Through Multiple Market Cycles

Litigation finance’s insulation from market volatility is validated by historical performance. During the 2008 global financial crisis, equities and real estate experienced peak-to-trough declines exceeding 50% (The Global Financial Crisis: Overview, Stanford University), and private credit markets faced severe stress. Yet, litigation finance portfolios that were properly diversified across cases, especially within the pre-settlement stage, continued to generate positive returns. Similarly, during the COVID-19 pandemic, while global markets experienced extreme dislocations, litigation finance again demonstrated resilience. The pandemic had minimal direct impact on legal case development or cash flow realization, as court decisions and settlement values in most commercial cases remained stable. These outcomes underscore the fundamental distinction between litigation finance and market-linked asset classes: returns are secured through legal enforcement and settlements, not earnings growth, rate stability, or macroeconomic trends.

Risk and Returns in Litigation Finance

Pre-Settlement Litigation

Pre-settlement litigation finance offers the potential for enhanced returns but carries elevated risks, including the possibility of total capital loss when cases are unsuccessful. In addition, if cases take significantly longer than anticipated or if a settlement is compromised because the case proves weaker than initially believed, returns often fall short of expectations. Put differently, the “middle ground” in pre-settlement investing can also produce poor outcomes.

Individual investments remain highly unpredictable due to litigation uncertainties such as adverse rulings, procedural delays, or failed settlements. However, firms can mitigate risk by strategically diversifying across a large number of cases, multiple practice areas, and various jurisdictions. This higher-risk profile reflects the inherent uncertainty of ongoing litigation, where outcomes remain undetermined until final resolution.

Post-Settlement Litigation

A properly constructed litigation finance portfolio exhibits minimal volatility even during sharp financial market drawdowns. For those seeking nonspeculative exposure and capital preservation, post-settlement litigation finance is highly compelling. In these transactions, damages have been awarded and liability established. Funders purchase payment streams at a discount, providing liquidity with minimal outcome risk. Here, risk centers on payment timing rather than liability or adjudication. The result is predictable cash flows and steady risk-adjusted returns, with historical annualized performance of 8% to 12% and near zero correlation to major asset classes (2023 Litigation Finance Market Report, Westfleet Advisors).

Institutional Portfolio Construction: The Role of Litigation Finance

Litigation finance offers a stabilizing force in multi-asset portfolios. It is unaffected by growth, inflation, or interest rates. Even modest allocations can enhance a portfolio’s Sharpe ratio and reduce volatility, due to its independence from broader market beta and near zero correlation to equities and credit benchmarks. For institutional allocators focused on risk-adjusted returns, this provides a compelling case for inclusion, especially during periods of market stress.

Institutional Due Diligence and Risk Management Considerations

Although litigation finance avoids market-driven risks, institutional investors must apply due diligence. Effective underwriting requires legal merit evaluation, enforceability, appellate risk, and procedural duration oversight. Manager skill in sourcing, structuring, and diversification is crucial. Partnerships with experienced managers ensure exposure to differentiated returns while mitigating case-specific risks.

Conclusion: A Durable, Non-Speculative Alternative for Institutional Allocators

As synchronized market risks increase, litigation finance offers institutional investors a uniquely valuable source of uncorrelated investment returns and recession-proof alternative exposure that remains independent of conventional market forces. Its distinct return drivers, true legal alpha, and structural separation from financial market volatility make it one of the most differentiated tools available to modern institutional portfolio construction. For investors navigating persistent macro uncertainty, litigation finance represents a powerful opportunity to enhance portfolio stability, preserve capital, and generate attractive, risk-adjusted returns fully decoupled from global market cycles. This opportunity is particularly pronounced in the post-settlement segment of the market, where established legal victories provide predictable cash flows with minimal downside risk, offering institutional allocators a rare combination of capital preservation and steady returns that remain completely insulated from broader market volatility.

---

Roni Dersovitz is the founder of Tower 3 Investments, LLC a firm offering investment opportunities in Post-Settlement/Judgment Litigation Funding. Mr. Dersovitz has 14 years of experience as a practicing personal injury attorney and has managed portfolios of Receivables since 1998. To learn more about access to differentiated returns through litigation finance, visit www.Tower3Investments.com or contact us at info@Tower3Investments.com.