Pension Pulse: Diving Into CAAT’s 2014 Returns

496px-Canada_blank_map.svg

Leo Kolivakis is a blogger, trader and independent senior pension and investment analyst. This post was originally published at Pension Pulse.

The Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology (CAAT) Pension Plan announced an 11.5% net return  for the year ended December 31, 2014, which increased the Plan’s net assets to $8 billion from $7.1 billion in the previous year with a going-concern funding reserve of $773 million:

The CAAT Pension Plan today announced a 11.5% rate of return net of investment management fees of 77 basis points for the year ended December 31, 2014.The Plan’s net assets increased to $8 billion from $7.1 billion the previous year.

In its valuation filed as at January 1, 2015, the CAAT Pension Plan is 107.2 % funded on a going-concern basis with a funding reserve of $773 million.

During the past five years, the Plan has earned an annualized rate of return of 10.5% net of investment management fees.

Contributions to the CAAT Plan were $417 million in 2014, while net income from investments was $808 million. The Plan paid $369 million in pension benefits for the year.

The CAAT Pension Plan has 40,000 members – 24,700 are employed in the Ontario college system, which comprises 24 colleges and 12 associated employers, and 15,300 members who are retired or have a deferred pension.

The average annual lifetime pension for retired members and survivors is $25,800. In 2014, members on average retired at age 62.4 after 23.3 years of pensionable service.

“We continue to work diligently to earn and keep the trust of members and employers,” says Derek Dobson, CEO of the CAAT Pension Plan. “The security of existing benefits and the sustainability of the pension plan at stable and appropriate contribution rates is our primary focus.”

The 11.5% rate of return net of investment management fees outperformed the policy benchmark by 1.4%, adding value of $96 million.

The CAAT Plan seeks to be the pension plan of choice for single-employer Ontario university pension plans interested in joining a multi-employer, jointly sponsored plan in the sector. The postsecondary education alignment and similar demographic profile of university and college employees makes the university plans an ideal fit with the CAAT Plan’s existing asset and liability funding structures. The CAAT Plan has been in discussions with individual universities, employer and faculty associations, and government officials, about building a postsecondary sector pension plan that leverages the Plan’s infrastructure and experience, reducing costs and risks for all stakeholders.

Created at the same time as the Ontario college system in 1967, the CAAT Plan assumed its current jointly sponsored governance structure in 1995. The CAAT Plan is a defined benefit pension plan with equal cost sharing. Decisions about benefits, contribution rates, and investment risk are also shared equally by members and employers. The Plan is sponsored by Colleges Ontario on behalf of the college boards of governors, Ontario College Administrative Staff Association (OCASA), and Ontario Public Service Employees Union (OPSEU).

The 2014 CAAT Pension Plan Annual Report will be available on the Plan website by May 11.

Read more about the 2015 Valuation
2014 Investment performance
Shared governance is the key to stability

From the three links above, I’d say the key to CAAT’s success is without a doubt their shared risk/ governance model:

The CAAT Pension Plan is a jointly-governed pension plan. This means that employers and employees together share responsibility for the stability and security of the Plan (including the cost). This governance model fosters cooperation and flexibility, and encourages prudent and responsible decision-making.

The Sponsors of the Plan (OCASA and OPSEU representing employees and Colleges Ontario representing employers) appoint representatives to the Board of Trustees and Sponsors’ Committee.

As far as investment performance, net of fees, the Plan managed to deliver a solid return of 11.5% last year, beating its benchmark (policy) portfolio by 1.4%. I want to take a minute here to go over their policy portfolio using information from CAAT’s 2013 Annual Report.

As you can see below, the benchmarks they use for their policy portfolio are very clear and in my opinion, these are the benchmarks all Canadian pensions, including our revered top ten, should be using to gauge value added (click on image below from page 18 of the 2013 Annual Report):

And here was the value added for each asset class in 2013 (click on image below from page 18):

As I was reading CAAT’s 2013 Annual Report last night in bed (I know, I’m weird but I sleep like a baby!), a few things struck me. First, CAAT severely underperformed its Private Equity benchmark in 2013 because the benchmark (MSCI All Cap World Index + 3%) isn’t easy to beat, especially when global stocks are surging. Also, the J-curve effect in Private Equity makes it harder to beat this benchmark because these investments are valued at acquisition-cost and it takes several years to realize gains on these investments.

The second thing I noticed was the strong, if not unbelievable, outperformance of their Canadian equity portfolio in 2013, with a value added of 7.8%. Now, I don’t know which external managers they used to deliver such incredible gains over the S&P/ TSX Composite but one Canadian pension fund manager did tell me that according to Mercer, the median Canadian equity manager outperformed the TSX by 6% in 2013:

Canadian equities returned 7.3 per cent in the fourth quarter which brought the 2013 return to 13.0 per cent. The median returns were 8.3 per cent for the quarter and 19.0 per cent for the year.

For the year:

  • The best performing S&P/TSX sectors were Health Care (+72.1 per cent), Consumer Discretionary (+43.0per cent) and Industrials (+37.5 per cent). The worst performing sectors were Materials (-29.1 per cent), utilities (-4.1 per cent) and Telecom Services (+13.1 per cent).
  • Large cap stocks (S&P/TSX 60 Index) returned 13.3 per cent, outperforming small cap stocks (S&P/TSX SmallCap Index) which returned 7.6 per cent during 2013.
  • Value stocks outperformed growth stocks as measured by the S&P Canada BMI Value and Growth indices, which returned 17.2 per cent and 9.1 per cent respectively in 2013.

What else did Mercer state in its Q4 2013 report? It was a pretty good year for pensions and balanced funds:

A typical balanced pension portfolio returned 12.8 per cent in 2013. The median return offered by managers of the Canadian Pooled Balanced Universe was 6.5 per cent for the quarter and 16.2 per cent for the year.

Of course, if you look closely at CAAT’s asset mix, you will notice they are a lot more diversified than the typical balanced fund. Julie Cays, Kevin Fahey and Asif Haque, my former colleague at PSP, are doing a great job managing investments at CAAT.

Unfortunately, CAAT’s 2014 Annual Report will only be made available by May 11th, which makes it impossible for me to delve deeply into their latest results. I highly recommend CAAT adopts a new approach of making available its annual report at the same time as it releases its results, just like Ontario Teachers’ does (everyone should do this so we can properly examine their results).

Having said this, as you can see below, CAAT has been posting solid returns over the last six years years, beating its policy portfolio (click on image below from page 17 of the 2013 Annual Report, figures are as of end of December, 2013):

And since CAAT is growing but still a relatively small plan, its approach is to farm out most of its investments to external managers. Not surprisingly, one of their biggest investments is an allocation to Bridgewater’s Pure Alpha II Fund which is up 14% so far this year mostly owing to a big bet on the surging greenback (all of which I predicted back in October 2014; Ray is on my distribution list).

CAAT has the advantage of being fairly small relative to its bigger Canadian peers, and unlike HOOPP, its managers have opted to farm out most of their investments (read more about the CAAT and Optrust edge). This strategy works when you are able to choose the right managers but it also poses risks, the least of which is manager selection risk, and they have to make sure they negotiate the fees carefully because as they grow, so do those fees, increasing the costs of the plan.

Even now, CAAT is forking over fees to external managers but if they gt to be ten times their size, those fees can pay some nice salaries to bring some of those assets internally. As the plan grows in size, so will those fees, and so will the pressure to bring more assets internally.

Again, CAAT’s investment team has been posting solid returns, adding value over its policy portfolio over the last five years. Moreover, its governance model has allowed it to beef up its fully funded status, which is what ultimately counts. Also, as Julie Cays, CAAT’s CIO, once told me, there is a lot of knowledge leverage that goes along to allocating money to top global funds.

Late today, Julie shared this with me:

Our fees were 77 basis points – which incidentally includes over 20 basis points paid as fees for outperformance to managers with performance based fee arrangements. Once our annual report is available I’d be happy to chat about 2014.

I look forward to reading CAAT’s 2014 Annual Report when it becomes available by May 11th. Those of you who want to learn more about CAAT should take the time to carefully read its 2013 Annual Report and listen to its senior managers discuss the plan’s results and characteristics here.

Also, CAAT is an excellent multi employer defined-benefit plan which adheres to the highest standards of pension governance. I highly recommend all Canadian universities seriously consider having their defined-benefit plans managed by CAAT. Don’t just look at their returns, which are excellent, think of the advantages of pooling your assets with those of other university pension plans and having those assets managed by professional pension fund managers who will properly diversify across public and private markets.

 

Photo credit: “Canada blank map” by Lokal_Profil image cut to remove USA by Paul Robinson – Vector map BlankMap-USA-states-Canada-provinces.svg.Modified by Lokal_Profil. Licensed under CC BY-SA 2.5 via Wikimedia Commons – http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Canada_blank_map.svg#mediaviewer/File:Canada_blank_map.svg

Video: CalPERS Plays Waiting Game With Vacant Land in Downtown Sacramento

Pension360 has previously covered the undeveloped lot, owned by CalPERS, that sits at Third and Capitol in downtown Sacramento.

It’s the site of a former failure — a condo development that went underwater — but could it also be the site of a future success?

In the video above, CBS further examines the unoccupied land: What are CalPERS’ plans? How long will the fund wait to develop the piece of land that has become a fairly hot property in recent years?

Watch the video for more.

Video credit: CBS

Photo credit: sea turtle via Flickr CC License

NYC Comptroller: “We’re Worried About Coal” In Pension Portfolio

640px-Manhattan_amk

New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer – who serves as custodian and investment advisor to the boards of the city’s pension funds – said on Thursday that he is “worried about coal” in the pension funds’ investment portfolios.

But Stringer maintained that engagement was the best way to enact change while maintaining his fiduciary duty to retirees.

From Yahoo Finance:

“My job first and foremost is to be a fiduciary. So I look at these issues in terms of creating long term value to the 700,000 retirees I protect, managing this pension fund,” [Stringer] says. “Our public pension fund is concerned about our investment in many of these companies because obviously we believe the future is in clean energy. We’re worried about coal… one it’s killing people but also it could be a dying industry so we want to have discussion about this as well.”

One of the ways Stringer is dealing with such issues is a program he calls “boardroom accountability.” He is working with the aforementioned CalPERS and other big pension funds to demand “the right to run directors at major companies.”

Given the size of their investments these funds and the people that run them want to ensure the companies aren’t overpaying CEOs, lacking diversity in the C-Suite, or ruining the environment.

And while Stringer and others are trying to be responsible when it comes to investing and divesting he’s careful to point out “we do have a fiduciary responsibility to grow our pension fund and the long term value of the fund, so not everything is dealt with through the lens of the pension fund… I’m a citywide elected official representing 8.4 million people and part of my job as comptroller, in addition to the pension fund is doing audits and investigations – thinking about the longterm future of the New York City economy.”

New York City’s pension funds manage approximately $150 billion in assets.

 

Photo by Tim (Timothy) Pearce via Flickr CC License

Moody’s Slaps New Jersey With 9th Consecutive Credit Downgrade

640px-New_Jersey_State_House

Moody’s on Thursday downgraded New Jersey’s credit rating by one notch, which marks the ninth time since 2010 a major rating agency has taken such an action.

Pension costs were cited as a factor behind the decision; but in the report, Moody’s makes it clear that New Jersey only hurt itself by slashing its pension contribution in 2014 and 2015 — the action helped Christie balance the budget in the short-term, but will exacerbate the state’s structural imbalance going forward.

From the Asbury Park Press:

Moody’s said it downgraded New Jersey’s bond rating because the state’s weak financial position isn’t improving, though it said the state’s budget performance, economy and liquidity have seen some stabilization. It said the state budget’s large structural imbalance is primarily related to continued shortfalls in the state’s pension contribution.

[…]

“The negative outlook reflects our expectation that the state’s financial and pension position will weaken further before pension reform, if successful, is implemented,” Moody’s said in a report issued Thursday night. “Without meaningful structural changes to the state’s budget, such as pension reform that dramatically improves pension affordability, the state’s structural imbalance will continue to grow, and the state’s rating will continue to fall.”

[…]

Each of Wall Street’s three major rating agencies have now lowered their assessment of New Jersey’s fiscal health three times since Gov. Chris Christie took office, more than any other New Jersey governor. The downgrades don’t have an immediate impact on state finances but can mean it will cost more for the state to borrow money by selling bonds.

The outlook on New Jersey’s credit rating remains “negative”, which means further downgrades are possible if the state stays its course.

The state has the second-worst credit rating of any state in the country, second only to Illinois.

 

Photo credit: “New Jersey State House” by Marion Touvel. Licensed under Public domain via Wikimedia Commons – http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:New_Jersey_State_House.jpg#mediaviewer/File:New_Jersey_State_House.jpg

Some Experts Question Long-Term Implications of Rauner’s Pension Proposal

rauner

Democratic lawmakers and pension experts in Illinois this week are raising concerns about the long-term implications of Gov. Rauner’s pension reform proposal.

Some experts say that the proposal would eventually reduce benefits so steeply that the consequences could push unwanted expenses on the state and pensioners alike.

From the Chicago Tribune:

Under Rauner’s proposal, veteran employees would be allowed to keep all retirement benefits they have earned up to the end of June. After that, everyone would be moved into the Tier 2 plan, with the exception of workers who opt to transfer their retirement benefits into a 401k-style retirement account similar to those now common in private industry.

Jean-Pierre Aubry, an expert on public pension plans at Boston College, termed the benefit cuts of Tier 2 “pretty draconian,” opening the door to future problems he said would be without precedent in the U.S. “There’s a lot of things in Illinois that are different from the rest of the country,” said Aubry, assistant director of state and local research at the college’s Center for Retirement Research.

Central to questions about Tier 2 is a federal tax provision sometimes referred to as the Safe Harbor rule. In short, it requires public pension plans to offer retirement benefits at least as good as the minimum workers would get if they were covered by Social Security.

Failing that, federal law requires public workers to join Social Security and pay a 6.2 percent tax to the national retirement system. Their employers would also have to kick in another 6.2 percent, costing taxpayers more money. Most public employees and employers in Illinois currently do not pay Social Security taxes.

Teacher retirement system experts say Tier 2 benefits currently meet the Safe Harbor test but will begin to fall out of compliance by 2027. The reason, they say, is that Tier 2 includes both a limit on benefits and inflation adjustments much tighter than those adopted by Social Security — leaving retirement benefits for some workers at risk of falling below what they could qualify for under the federal system.

In essence, experts are worried that by 2027 benefits will have been cut so steeply that payouts fall below federal requirements.

If that happens, public workers will be required to join Social Security, which carries a new set of costs for the state and for workers.

Read more on the issue here.

 

Photo by Tricia Scully via Flickr CC License

NJ Pension Votes to Launch Forensic Audit of Investment Expenses

5857462455_b0929c5cbe_z

The Board of the New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System voted on Wednesday to launch a forensic audit of the investment expenses it pays to outside money managers.

The vote comes in the wake of an identical decision by the state’s Police and Firemen’s Retirement System.

The trustees of both funds are worried the fund is over-paying; but members of the State Investment Council defended the use of outside managers.

From NJ.com:

The heads of New Jersey’s largest pension funds, skeptical of the hundreds of millions of dollars in investment fees and bonuses paid to private companies, say they plan to launch a probe into how the state awards those fees.

[…]

Fees and bonuses for the pension fund’s investments hit a high last year. The state spent roughly $265 million on management fees and expenses and $335 million on performance bonuses, which are referred to as “performance allocation” in a State Investment Council annual report.

“Why are we paying that kind of money?” said Wayne Hall, chairman of the PFRS Board of Trustees. “When I see the exorbitant fees the state has been paying for the last couple of years, I have to question that.”

[…]

State investment officials have said the shift out of fixed-income securities and into alternatives has paid off.

In the fiscal year that began July 1, 2013, and ended halfway through last year, the pension investments earned 16.9 percent.

Members of the State Investment Council that oversees the fund and state officials have defended the fees, which they say beat industry norms, and bonuses.

“I know there’s some distrust of the fees we pay these people,” Tom Byrne, chairman of the State Investment Council, has said. “But just by putting smart managers in some places you can add a lot of value… We have been producing returns well ahead of what was established, and the investment results have made the pension fund billions healthier.”

New Jersey’s pension systems have significantly increased its allocation to alternative asset classes since 2010: allocations to hedge funds, private equity and real estate have all doubled in that time-frame, according to annual reports.

New Jersey handles much of its money management in-house, but alternative investments are usually handled by outside managers.

 

Photo by TaxRebate.org.uk

Pennsylvania Teachers’ Pension Sets Sights on Lawmaker For New Executive Director

640px-Flag-map_of_Pennsylvania.svg

The Public School Employees’ Retirement System has offered its top job to Glenn Grell, a former long-time board member and current state representative.

More details on the hire from the Sentinel:

The Public School Employees’ Retirement System said Wednesday it has offered the job to Rep. Glenn Grell, assuming he passes background and reference checks.

Grell is a lawyer and former deputy counsel under Gov. Tom Ridge. His 87th House District is the northeast corner of Cumberland County, east of Carlisle and north of Mechanicsburg and Camp Hill.

Grell served on the 15-member PSERS board, to which he will now report, from 2009 until January. Grell has been in the Legislature since 2004 and for half of his more than 10 years has focused on pensions.

State Senate leaders say making changes to the state’s large public-sector pension plans is among their priorities for the coming months.

Grell will oversee a $50 billion retirement fund and 315 employees. It will be his job to ensure that pension checks get to more than 200,000 retirees.

[…]

Grell is likely to leave his seat in the next month or so, and a special election to fill the seat will be called by the Speaker of the House Mike Turzai, R-Allegheny. It’s expected in August.

The job will pay approximately $200,000 a year, according to the Sentinel.

 

Photo credit: “Flag-map of Pennsylvania” by Niagara – Own work from File:Flag of Pennsylvania.svg and File:USA Pennsylvania location map.svgThis vector image was created with Inkscape. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons – http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flag-map_of_Pennsylvania.svg#mediaviewer/File:Flag-map_of_Pennsylvania.svg

Nevada Lawmakers Review Bill Aiming to Transition Pension System to 401(k) Plan

savings-jar

A panel of Nevada lawmakers on Wednesday examined a bill – officially titled AB190 – that would give the state’s pension system more features of a 401(k) plan.

The goal of the measure it to ebb the state’s $12 billion unfunded liability. From the Associated Press, via the State:

The measure would add a defined contribution option for employees hired after mid-2016 that would limit pension payouts based on how much money public employees contribute. The existing “defined benefit” plan promises employees a specific payout upon retirement, but Kirner said investment returns that fall below predictions have fueled the growth of the unfunded liability.

The defined contribution plan will help control the debt, and the portability of the plan will be attractive to a generation of younger workers that tends to switch jobs more often, Kirner said.

The bill also caps payouts to retirees in the traditional plan at no more than 133 percent of the income the employee earned during their three highest-paid years. Participants would have to work until the Social Security retirement age of 67 to receive full benefits under the bill, or 57 if they are a police officer or firefighter.

The top official at Nevada PERS raised several objections to the bill. From AP:

Public Employees’ Retirement System chief Tina Leiss raised a laundry list of concerns about the bill, arguing that it doesn’t provide a way to pay down the existing unfunded liability. The state is on track to pay down the $12.5 billion in 22 years but would be thrown off if new hires enroll in the defined contribution plan and stop paying toward the debt.

“If we don’t continue to get the same amount of money to pay that,” Leiss said, “it will grow.”

She said current employers and employees would have to increase their contributions by 15 percent to keep paying down the unfunded liability — about $700 million to $800 million a year.

Leiss also argued that the plan might pay out so little to employees that they would need to draw Social Security benefits, and that would require additional contributions from the state.

Read AB190 here.

 

Photo by TaxCredits.net

With Clock Ticking, Christie Still Reviewing Fee Transparency Bill

407425544_d3497fe68d_z

A bill that would increase transparency around the New Jersey pension system’s investment expenses, passed in late February, still sits on Gov. Christie’s desk – and the 45-day window for Christie to sign the bill is quickly closing.

From NJ Spotlight:

The bill would require the State Investment Council, the panel that oversees the roughly $80 billion pension system, to issue detailed reports four times a year on funds handled by outside managers. The reports would have to disclose the rate and the amount of fees charged by the outside managers by asset class, including commodities, hedge funds, private equity, real estate, bonds, equities, or any other class.

The reports would be submitted to the governor, the state treasurer and the Legislature. They would also have to be posted on the state’s website.

The legislation would also extend current restrictions on state-level political contributions by investment management professionals hired by the pension system to national groups, like the Republican Governors Association and the Democratic Governors Association, and other non-state political committees.

Read the bill, officially titled S-2430, here.

The measure passed the state Senate and General Assembly by a combined vote of 76-23.

Photo by  Paul Becker via Flickr CC License

CalPERS Looks for 12 Percent Boost In Annual State Contribution, Starting Next Year

640px-Flag_of_California.svg

CalPERS on Tuesday announced it would be requiring a larger annual contribution from the state to deal with the cost of retirees living longer and workers earning higher salaries.

The higher payment will kick in as soon as the next fiscal year.

From Bloomberg:

The California Public Employees’ Retirement System said the state’s annual pension contribution needs to jump by 12 percent because of payroll growth, salary increases and the longer lives of retirees.

The payment to the pension fund would increase by $487 million to $4.7 billion during the fiscal year beginning in July, according to recommendations approved by the fund’s finance and administration committee Tuesday. School districts would have to pay $1.3 billion, an increase of $111 million.

[…]

The schools’ contribution is also increasing because of the new accounting policies and an 8 percent increase in payrolls.

The full Calpers board will vote on the proposed payment increase Wednesday.

CalPERS is about 77 percent funded and manages over $300 billion in pension assets.


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /home/mhuddelson/public_html/pension360.org/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 3712