CalPERS Weighs Foray Into Riskier Loan Securities

 The CalPers Building in West Sacramento California.
The CalPERS building in West Sacramento, California.

CalPERS is considering investing in collateralized loan obligations (CLOs), or securities backed by a pool of (sometimes low-grade) corporate loans.

From the Wall Street Journal:

Fixed-income executives for the nation’s largest public pension fund told their investment board committee Monday they want to buy riskier versions of “collateralized loan obligations,” which are securities backed by corporate loans. The plan already invests in triple-A rated slices of these securities.

“We think we have expertise in this area,” said fixed-income head Curtis Ishii. He added: “You get more spread if you take more risk.”

Mr. Ishii did not disclose how much the system, which is known by its abbreviation Calpers, would like to invest in the riskier loan-based securities. The move still needs to be approved by an investment strategy group comprised of the fund’s top investment officers.

Any shift it makes will likely influence others because of its size and history as an early adopter of alternatives to traditional stocks and bonds.

CalPERS announced last week that it is increasing its real estate holdings by 27 percent.

 

Photo by Stephen Curtin

Christie’s 2017 Challengers Already Forming Pension Policies

Chris Christie

New Jersey’s next gubernatorial election is still three years away – but Christie’s potential Democratic challengers are already meeting with stakeholders and gearing up their pension policies.

Those potential challengers include Senate President Stephen Sweeney, Assemblyman John Wisniewski, former U.S. ambassador Philip Murphy and Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop.

They all have one thing in common: they believe pensions will be a big issue in the 2017 election, and Christie will be on the wrong side of it.

From NorthJersey:

Although the contest is still three years away, several Democrats are already conducting a fierce, behind-the-scenes pre-primary.

And, for the time being, the best way of wooing unions representing police, firefighters and thousands of government workers appears to be to trumpet one of labor’s bottom-line demands: Unless Governor Christie reverses course and makes his promised payments to the pension system, any further discussion of more changes, including a call to scale back workers’ benefits, is dead in the water.

“The employees are paying their share, [Christie] should do the same,’’ said state Senate President Stephen Sweeney.

Christie’s reform push — a public tour over the summer and creation of the 10-member panel of experts who issued last month’s report — looks like it may run smack into the Democratic Party’s solidarity with public employee unions.

That unity will most likely be seen in the Senate, where Sweeney, a Gloucester County Democrat, has the power to derail Christie’s agenda when it suits him. Sweeney has cooperated with Christie on a whole range of deals — including the hotly contested 2011 reforms that forced public workers to pay more for pension and health care benefits, raised the retirement age and cut cost-of-living adjustments. Sweeney is not cooperating this time.

Other potential Democratic candidates in the 2017 race are also lining up behind the union position.

“We have no credibility as a government unless we stand up and meet our obligation to the pensioners,” said Philip Murphy, who served as a U.S. ambassador to Germany and led the Democratic National Committee’s fundraising from 2006 to 2009. “I think it’s very hard to go back to the well until the state can prove that it’s a reliable partner in this.”

Assemblyman John Wisniewski, D-Middlesex, who opposed the first round of benefit changes in 2011, also toed the union line. “Why would anybody believe assurances about any new set of promises about the pension fund when the promises that were made under heavy skepticism to begin with have not been lived up to?”

Unions were angry when Christie cut the state’s pension payments and used the money to plug budget shortfalls elsewhere. Union leaders said that workers were doing their part by contributing money, but the state was shirking its responsibility. From NorthJersey.com:

“We can’t take anyone seriously who talks about fixing the pension system without putting in additional resources,’’ said Ginger Gold Schnitzer, director of governmental relations for the New Jersey Education Association, the powerful teachers union. “It’s ridiculous to think a pension system can survive without regular [state] contributions. Our members have made those contributions.”

According to a recent report from the New Jersey Pension and Benefit Study Commission, the state if shouldering $37 billion of pension liabilities. That number has tripled since 2005.

Corbett: “Entrenched Interests” Preventing Pension Reform in Pennsylvania

Tom Corbett

Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett (R) is trailing by double-digits in many polls to opponent Tom Wolf (D) – but his campaign strategy of pushing the need for pension reform appears to be unchanged.

Corbett has been the most vocal critic of his state’s pension system, but most of his fellow lawmakers – and voters, for that matter – have not reciprocated that enthusiasm for major reform.

On Monday Corbett said that “entrenched interests” are preventing pension reform. And those interests, according to the governor, have seeds in both parties.

Reported by the Intelligencer:

“There are entrenched interests out there,” the governor said. “The public sector unions are all against change … There are Republicans that don’t like me. I’m pushing change. It’s very hard to get change in Pennsylvania.”

[…]

Corbett traces the current pension problem to 2001.

That’s when the state Legislature boosted the retirement package for state lawmakers and judges by 50 percent and increased pensions by 25 percent for 300,000 active state workers and school employees. Corbett wants to roll back those increases to pre-2001 levels for current employees — an annual multiplier of 2.0 rather than 2.5 for employees and from 3.0 to 2.0 for lawmakers and judges — and place new employees in a 401(k) style retirement plan.

But the Legislature, backed by the might of public section unions, has stood in his way.

“We said to present-day employees, going forward, that we need to ratchet it back to two,” Corbett said of the annual multiplier. “Did you earn that (2.5)? I don’t think so. You did nothing new.”

Corbett said he favors the state rolling back the benefits and letting the courts decide when the unions sue. The real problem for taxpayers, he said, would occur once the issue landed in court because the judges who benefited from the enhanced pensions would be asked to rule on the matter.

“What judge in this state can hear that case?” he asked. “It’s an economic conflict of interest. … People should be upset with that. I say, let’s try it.”

Corbett re-iterated that, if re-elected, he would call a special legislative session to push through pension reform measures.

Study: Has a 400 Percent Increase in Alternatives Paid Off For Pensions?

CEM ChartA newly-released study by CEM Benchmarking analyzes investment expenses and return data from 300 U.S. defined-benefit plans and attempts to answer the question: did the funds’ reallocation to alternatives pay off?

The simple answer: the study found that some alternative classes performed better than others, but underscored the point that “costs matter and allocations matter” over the long run.

In the chart at the top of this post, you can see the annualized return rates and fees (measured in basis points) of select asset classes from 1998-2011.

Some other highlights from the study:

Listed equity REITs were the top-performing asset class overall in terms of net total returns over this period. Private equity had a higher gross return on average than listed REITs (13.31 percent vs 11.82 percent) but charged fees nearly five times higher on average than REITs (238.3 basis points or 2.38 percent of gross returns for private equity versus 51.6 basis points or 0.52 percent for REITs). As a result, listed equity REITs realized a net return of 11.31 percent vs. 11.10 percent for private equity. Net returns for other real assets, including commodities and infrastructure, were 9.85 percent on average. Net returns for private real estate were 7.61 percent, and hedge funds returned 4.77 percent. On a net basis, REITs also outperformed large cap stocks (6.06 percent) on average and U.S. long duration bonds (8.97 percent).

Many plans could have improved performance by choosing different portfolio allocations. CEM used the information on realized net returns to estimate the marginal benefit that would have resulted from a one percentage point increase in allocation to the various asset classes. Increasing the allocations to long-duration fixed income, listed equity REITs and other real assets would have had the largest positive impacts on plan performance. For example, for a typical plan with $15 billion in assets under management, each one percentage point increase in allocations to listed equity REITs would have boosted total net returns by $180 million over the time period studied.

Allocations changed considerably on average from 1998 through 2011. Of the DB plans analyzed by CEM, public pension plans reduced allocations to stocks by 8.5 percentage points and to bonds by 6.6 percentage points while increasing the allocation to alternative assets, including real estate, by 15.1 percentage points. Corporate plans reduced stock allocations by 19.1 percentage points while increasing allocations to fixed income by 10.5 percentage points (consistent with a shift to liability driven investment strategies), and to alternative assets by 8.6 percentage points. For the DB market as a whole, allocations to stocks decreased 15.1 percentage points; fixed income allocations increased by 4.3 percentage points; and allocations to alternatives increased by 10.8 percentage points. In dollar terms, total investment in alternatives for the 300 funds in the study increased from approximately $125 billion to nearly $600 billion over the study period.

The study’s author commented on his findings in a press release:

“Concern about the adequacy of pension funding has focused attention on investment performance and fees,” said Alexander D. Beath, PhD, author of the CEM study. “The data underscore that when it comes to long-term net returns, costs matter and allocations matter.”

[…]

“Many pension plans could have improved performance by choosing different allocation strategies and optimizing their management fees,” Beath continued. “Listed equity REITs delivered higher net total returns than any other alternative asset class for the fourteen-year period we analyzed, driven by high and stable dividend payouts, long-term capital appreciation and a significantly lower fee structure compared to private equity and private real estate funds.”

Read the study here.

Canada Pension To Invest Up To $500 Million In Mexico Real Estate Projects

Canada blank mapCaisse de depot et placement du Quebec, the entity that manages Quebec’s public pension assets, has unveiled plans to invest up to $500 million in residential and urban housing projects in Mexico.

First up: a $100 million investment in two yet-unbuilt condo complexes.

From the Yucatan Times:

Ivanhoe Cambridge, the real estate unit of the Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec, a public pension funds manager, is teaming up with United States-based Black Creek Group with an investment of up to US $500 million.

Its first project, reported to be its first foray into Mexico, will be a residential development in the borough of Cuajimalpa in Mexico City consisting of two residential condominium buildings with 479 units in total.

It will invest $100 million in the 46,500-square-meter project.

Black Creek is a private-equity firm and real estate company with 17 years’ experience in Mexico in building infrastructure, retail and residential developments, targeting low and middle-income Mexican families. Another market is second homes for American and Canadian baby-boomers.

“With this investment, Ivanhoe Cambridge is setting a major foothold in Mexico, which will provide excellent access to opportunities, including long-term investments in a portfolio of high-quality assets,” said Rita-Rose Gagne, an executive vice-president with Ivanhoe Cambridge.

“The investment is part of Ivanhoe Cambridge’s strategy of developing a long-term, active presence in growth markets. The economic growth and demographic trends in Mexico are producing a large and sustained local demand for commercial and residential real estate.”

Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec manages around $180 billion (USD) of assets.

Pennsylvania Public Schools Fund Commits $200 Million To Real Estate

businessman holding small model house in his hands

The Pennsylvania Public School Employees’ Retirement System (PSERS) has announced its decision to allocate an additional $200 million to its real estate portfolio; $100 million will go to the AG Core Plus Realty Fund IV, which targets a return of 14-15 percent before fees.

From IP Real Estate:

The plan made two new $100m commitments to the AG Core Plus Realty Fund IV and the pension fund’s in-house co-investment and secondary real estate programme.

Pennsylvania is the second US public pension fund to approve a new commitment to Realty Fund IV, following the Illinois State Board of Investment, which made a $30m allocation.

Courtland Partners, the real estate consultant for Pennsylvania, said Angelo Gordon & Co would continue its core-plus strategy of acquiring equity interests in high-quality assets likely to appreciate over time.

The fund will target underperforming office, retail, apartment and industrial assets, with an emphasis on the Top 15 US markets, shunning development projects.

Most assets will be in the US, although the fund can invest as much as 25% outside North America.

[…]

Targeted gross returns for the fund are 14-15%, with the current income component of the return projected to be 7-8%.

The fund will have a leverage component of 55-65%.

Pennsylvania has now committed a total of $200m to in-house co-investments and its secondary investment strategy.

The capital can be invested via co-investments on specific transactions with other funds, as well as by buying out other limited partners from existing positions in funds.

PSERS is also exiting the Prologis North American Industrial Fund, a fund of logistics and distribution facilities in the U.S.

PSERS committed $200 million to that fund in 2006, but the investment is now thought to be worth $167 million.

Colombia To Spearhead Pension Reform Study; Country Calls Itself “Pension Time-Bomb”

Colombia

Colombia announced over the weekend that it’s seeking to study possible pension reforms to head off what the country’s President called a “pension time-bomb”. Colombia is asking international economic organizations to help with the study.

From Reuters:

Finance Minister Mauricio Cardenas will request that the Inter-American Development Bank and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development conduct the study, [Colombia President] Santos said at a business conference in Cartagena.

“I have given him instructions to start an in-depth study about the possibility of pension reform,” Santos said, referring to Cardenas.

The announcement comes amid calls from pension funds and insurance industry groups for the government to reform the pension system, which they say is unsustainable.

Colombia is confronting a “pension time-bomb” according to Santiago Montenegro, the president of the Asofondos pension group, as only 7.5 million of 21 million workers currently make pension contributions, a figure which points to labor market informality of close to 65 percent.

Colombia has budgeted 34 trillion pesos ($16.6 billion) for pensions in 2015, some 4.1 percent of gross domestic product.

The education and defense sectors contribute the most to pension funds, with 28.9 trillion and 28.2 trillion respectively.

The country pays monthly pensions to 1.9 million people.

 

Photo by Pedro Szekely via Flickr CC License

How Does Implementation Cost Affect Private Equity Performance?

graphs and numbers

A recent paper in the Rotman International Journal of Pension Management analyzes the costs and performance of private equity investments of large public pension funds.

There were a few interesting findings, but the authors admitted that the “most interesting” was how drastically implementation style affects performance.

The paper finds that “higher-cost implementation styles resulted in dramatically reduced net performance”.

But a larger problem is that this cost isn’t often adequately reported in financial statements.  Further analysis from the paper, titled “How Implementation Style and Costs Affect Private Equity Performance”:

Our findings confirm those of other CEM research indicating that the highest-cost implementation styles have the worst net returns. We believe that since costs have such a significant impact on performance, fund managers should understand the true costs of investing in private equity. However, CEM experience indicates that costs are underreported in the financial statements of many funds. This is unfortunate, because what gets measured gets managed, and what gets poorly measured gets poorly managed. This underreporting is not intentional. In fact, the accounting teams of many funds believe they are reporting all costs.

The four most common reasons that private equity costs are underreported are the following:

• Accounting teams often rely on capital call statements to collect management fees. Yet these statements often show management fees on a net basis, whereby the management fee owing is offset by the LP’s share of transaction and other revenues (commonly called rebates) generated and kept by the general partner (GP). Therefore, accounting teams have no record of their share of the gross management fee paid to the GP.

• The repayment of management fees before the carry has been paid is treated as a reduction in cost. This is an accounting shift; no money is coming back. For every dollar of repayment, there is a dollar of carry.

• Carry (e.g., performance fees) is excluded.

• For FOF LPs, the costs of the underlying funds are excluded. The underreporting in financial statements is material. For example, the cost of private equity LPs is frequently reported to be less than 0.70% by funds’ financial statements, whereas Dutch funds that are beginning to collect and report all private asset costs are reporting a median of 3.03% (0.12% internal monitoring costs + 1.66% management fees + 1.10% carry or performance fees + 0.15% transaction fees. For a fund with US $5.0 billion in private equity assets, the difference between 0.70% reported and 3.03% actual represents US$116 million in costs.

There’s much more analysis available in the full paper, which can be read here.

Arkansas Teacher’s Fund Fires PIMCO, Withdraws $475 Million From Firm

PIMCO's Newport Beach Office
PIMCO’s Newport Beach Office

The Arkansas Teacher Retirement System is pulling its money out of PIMCO, the fund announced today. Its investments with PIMCO had totaled $475 million.

More from Pensions & Investments:

Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, Little Rock, terminated Pacific Investment Management Co., which managed about $475 million its Total Return strategy for the pension fund, said George Hopkins, executive director.

Mr. Hopkins said the decision to terminate PIMCO was twofold. Officials at the pension had been looking to derisk the fund’s fixed-income portfolio, and the September departure of William H. Gross, PIMCO’s co-founder and chief investment officer, contributed to the decision to move out of the strategy completely.

“[Mr. Gross’] departure came at an inopportune time,” Mr. Hopkins said.

The assets will be transferred to a fixed-income index fund managed by State Street Global Advisors. State Street currently manages about $250 million in the index fund, Mr. Hopkins said.

The Arkansas Teacher Retirement System manages over $14 billion of pension assets.

Some Pension Funds Want Longer Private Equity Deals; Funds Bypassing PE Firms To Avoid Fees

flying one hundred dollar billsPrivate equity investments typically operate on a five-year timeline. But some pension funds are talking with private equity firms about longer-term deals. And at least one pension fund is cutting out the middleman and buying companies outright to avoid fees.

Reported by the Wall Street Journal:

Canada Pension Plan Investment Board is “open to conversations” with private-equity firms about partnerships to buy and hold companies for longer than the traditional five-year investment period, said Neal Costello, a London-based manager at the C$227 billion ($203 billion) pension fund.

Blackstone Group LP and Carlyle Group LP are among private-equity firms exploring how they can do longer-term deals with investors such as CPP and sovereign-wealth funds, people familiar with the firms have said.

Such deals could represent a major shift in the private-equity industry. The firms may use their own balance sheets rather than their funds to buy large companies with investors, people have said.

[…]

Large institutional investors are balking at paying expensive private-equity fund fees, and they are seeking to hold investments for longer. CPP is already buying companies outright, in addition to investing in private-equity funds and taking direct stakes alongside those funds. Earlier this year, it bought insurance company Wilton Re for $1.8 billion.

“That’s a very long-term asset,” Mr. Costello said Thursday at a conference in London organized by the British Private Equity and Venture Capital Association. “We can look at a 20-year investment period.”

Universities Superannuation Scheme, a London-based pension manager of £42 billion ($67.6 billion), would also consider longer-term deals in partnership with private-equity firms, according to Mike Powell, head of the private markets group at USS Investment Management.

“If we find good assets, we want to hold on to them as long as we can,” Mr. Powell said in an interview at the conference.

USS has already bypassed private equity and other fund managers entirely: It owns direct stakes in London’s Heathrow Airport and NATS, the U.K.’s air traffic service. Investing directly in infrastructure projects and companies is a way of avoiding paying high fees to fund managers, Mr. Powell said.

One problem that arises with a longer timeline is the issue of fees; most pension funds would balk at the additional expenses that accompany PE partnerships longer than five years. From the WSJ:

An obstacle to doing longer term deals with private-equity firms is figuring out how to pay the deal makers for such transactions, Mr. Powell said. Private-equity firms typically charge an annual fee of between 1% and 2% and keep 20% of profits when they sell a company, a model that won’t work if assets are held for many years.

“How do we remunerate them over the long term?” Mr. Powell said. “That’s up to Carlyle and Blackstone to come up with the answer.”

Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System, a Canadian pension manager, has stopped investing in private-equity funds to avoid paying their fees, Mark Redman, the European head of its private-equity group said at the conference. The pension fund is buying companies directly instead.

The switch will benefit the pensions of the Canadian workers such as firefighters and policemen by saving them money, Mr. Redman said.

“The amount of fees that we were paying out for a fund, 2 and 20 [percentage points] and everything that goes with that, was a huge amount of value that we were losing to the fund,” Mr. Redman said. “If we could deliver top quartile returns and we weren’t hemorrhaging quite so much in terms of fees and carry that would mean that we would be able to meet the pension promise.”

Pension funds might have some leverage here — Pension360 has previously covered how PE firms want more opacity in their dealings with pension funds. The firms have been upset about the amount of private equity information disclosed by pension funds as part of public records requests.

 

Photo by 401kcalculator.org


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