Financier here, Mercer is just at the top of his game. The way that quantitative algorithms have developed--and function--is vastly different from how traditional securities analysis takes place. If he were an equity researcher (my field) employing good ol' DCF analysis to make his calls, I'd say yeah he's bullshitting. But algorithmic trading both exploits lucrative arbitrage opportunities and--depending on the type of algorithm, especially at a prop shop of his own--figures out precise entry and exit points and timeframes for executing trades. He's turned securities analysis into a science with computer algorithms, not by employing trickery.

Consider his hedge fund. He uses no outside capital, so how can it be a con? If Renaissance is funded by employee capital, whom is he defrauding? Employee capital has grown substantially as seen in 401k accounts. There's no model for fraud here.

This is fundamentally unlike traditional securities analysis, so why should the same benchmarks for success be used?