Former Hedge Fund CFO Pleads Guilty to Securities Fraud in $3 Million Scheme
Theodore Woo admitted to defrauding his former employer through fake consulting invoices, unauthorized transfers, and personal credit card charges.
Theodore Woo, 49, of Miami, Florida, pled guilty on August 11, 2026, to one count of securities fraud stemming from a yearslong scheme to embezzle more than $3 million from his former hedge fund employer, according to an official record from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York.
Woo, the fund's former chief financial officer, entered his plea before U.S. Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. He is scheduled to be sentenced by U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on November 18, 2026. The charge carries a statutory maximum potential sentence of 20 years in prison.
According to the official Information, Woo began stealing from the fund shortly after being hired and continued until his termination in March 2026. Leveraging his authority to manage back-office operations and approve reimbursements, Woo directed payments to two entities he secretly controlled—TWDRR LLC and MGTW LLC—under the guise of research consulting services that were never performed. Woo also concealed the scheme by falsely telling an external auditor that MGTW LLC was an independent research consultancy.
Official records further detail that Woo orchestrated more than 100 fraudulent transfers from the fund to his personal accounts and affiliated corporate entities. He also charged thousands of dollars in unauthorized personal expenses to fund-issued credit cards, including expenses for international vacations and adult entertainment establishments.
"For years, Theodore Woo flagrantly abused his position of trust and brazenly stole from his employer to line his own pockets," said U.S. Attorney Jamie McDonald. "To do so, Woo took advantage of his position as CFO, misled his employer, and falsified documents."
Ketty Larco-Ward, Inspector in Charge of the New York Division of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, also commented on the plea, stating: "Woo's arrest shows that greed and deceptive tactics do not pay. For years Woo allegedly cheated this company out of millions and used this money as his own personal piggy bank."
The prosecution is being led by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Sarah Mortazavi and Christy Slavik of the Office's Securities and Commodities Task Force, with assistance from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 120 Aug 2026, 13:23current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.