CalPERS Investment Office Will Continue Cutting Costs in ‘16

Calpers

At a board meeting Monday, CalPERS officials presented a “roadmap” for a more efficient and cost-effective portfolio, according to meeting materials released to the public.

The fund’s investment office cut over $200 million in costs in 2014-15.

The roadmap contains 36 separate initiatives, ranging from better expense tracking to increased diversity to a more holistic approach to ESG investing.

More from Ai-cio.com:

The roadmap, presented at an investment committee meeting Monday, is part of CalPERS’ 2020 Vision—a five-year effort focused on “simplifying the investment portfolio, simplifying the organizational structure, focusing on risk cost and complexity, and improving the level of collaboration within the investment office,” said Chief Operating Investment Officer Wylie Tollette.

The roadmap also pushes for enhancing the pension’s capital allocation framework, improving its investment platform and controls, and continuing to integrate investment beliefs into the investment process, including environmental, social, and governance (ESG) considerations. CalPERS’ latest ESG effort was signing the Paris Pledge for Action, a commitment to support and implement the climate change agreement reached at COP21.

The ultimate goal, Tollette said, is to manage the investment portfolio in a “cost-effective, transparent, and risk-aware manner in order to generate returns to pay benefits.”

[…]

In addition to improving fee structures, CalPERS said it has also made progress in fostering relationships with diverse portfolio managers. The pension also completed the initial printing of its carbon footprint and finished pricing and valuation procedures for all asset classes.

The roadmap presentation can be viewed here.

 

Photo by  rocor via Flickr CC License

California Savings Plan May Have No Firm Guarantee

7408447448_8de1f6190e_z

Reporter Ed Mendel covered the California Capitol in Sacramento for nearly three decades, most recently for the San Diego Union-Tribune. More stories are at Calpensions.com.

A big question faces a new California board, Secure Choice, as it prepares to recommend an “automatic IRA” to the Legislature for the more than 6 million California private-sector workers not offered a retirement plan on the job.

If a worker is automatically enrolled in a new state-run retirement savings plan, and does not opt out, what happens if the plan’s investments lose money in one or more years?

Last week, the Secure Choice board narrowed its choice to two plans. One is a “dynamic asset allocation” that becomes less risky (and probably lower yielding) near retirement. There is no guarantee against losses, just like private-sector 401(k) plans.

The other plan is a “variable-rate savings bond” that has a “soft guarantee” to reduce but not prevent losses. In years with high yields from a pooled investment fund, some of the returns would be placed in a reserve for use later to offset future losses.

A third plan, said to be out of favor now, is a pension-like “variable annuity” with a guaranteed minimum payment based on peak savings between ages 55 and 65. Costs could be higher and retirement income lower, compared to the other two plans.

In what some call a retirement “crisis,” life spans and health care costs are increasing as Social Security and job retirement plans provide less support, while individual savings are minimal. Two dozen states have considered or enacted state-sponsored retirement plans.

A payroll deduction or “automatic IRA” is said to be a proven way to boost savings. President Obama tried to get Congress to create an “automatic IRA” before launching “MyRA,” a paycheck-deduction for bonds intended to be a “starter” for retirement saving.

The Obama administration gave the “automatic IRA” a big boost last month when U.S. Labor Secretary Tom Perez issued guidelines exempting the plans from a federal pension law (ERISA) that places reporting and other burdens on employers.

An exemption from the federal pension law is required by the legislation that created the Secure Choice program in California. The legislation also requires the state to have no liability for the payment of benefits under the new plan.

But a warning that a wave of new retirement plans, following the ERISA exemption, could create debt for California and other states was issued last month in a Wall Street Journal editorial, mentioned several times at the Secure Choice board meeting last week.

The Journal editorial raised several questions about the legality of the ERISA exemption, calling it “another attempt” by Secretary Perez to rewrite the law without congressional approval.

“To summarize: The Obama Administration is trying to socialize the private retirement investment business by creating subsidized public competition that will be another long-run entitlement burden on taxpayers,” said the Journal editorial.

Choice3

In California, the legislation that created Secure Choice, despite opposition from taxpayer and financial industry groups, requires the plan to be self-sustaining and to result from a legal and market analysis not funded by the state.

A total of $1 million in donations, half from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, was raised to hire Overture Financial for the market analysis and K&L Gates for the legal analysis.

The legislation creating Secure Choice (SB 1234 in 2012) was moved through the Legislature, after several previous failures, by Senate President Pro Tempore Kevin de Leon, D-Los Angeles, before he became the Senate leader.

He envisioned a “cash balance” plan similar to the one at the California State Teachers Retirement System, the Defined Benefit Supplement launched in 2000 with a decade-long diversion of a quarter of the teachers’ contribution to the pension plan.

“This type of retirement savings plan has a guaranteed rate of return, and participants would not be exposed on the individual market and vulnerable to the volatility of the unpredictable stock market,” De Leon said in a Senate bill analysis.

At the Secure Choice meeting last week, board member reaction to the cost and complications of the “variable annuity” plan with the guaranteed minimum payment was said to mean it’s not likely to be recommended to the Legislature.

“We see here three doors (plans),” said Mohammad Bakti of Overture Financial. “But in reality we are talking about the first two doors being feasible initially in the program, and the insurance part being more down the line.”

Bakti said modeling shows the “variable rate savings bond” plan with a reserve has the highest long-term returns. But it also has “political risk” from board decisions about crediting interest rates from the pooled fund and investment management.

In an apparent reference to the “dynamic” plan, a K&L Gates attorney, David Morse, told the board he thinks “the simplest approach is the best approach” to get approval from the legislature and the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Morse said his law firm believes that Secure Choice, as a state agency, is exempt from securities law. But he urged the board to seek an SEC letter clearly stating the exemption as a precaution.

“You are taking a risk that either the SEC or a participant would come in and sue, if their investment goes down, especially,” Morse said.

The startup cost of the Secure Choice plan is estimated by Overture to be $73 million, assuming that workers contribute 5 percent of their pay to the savings plan and 25 percent of the workers opt out.

The startup cost is an estimated $129 million if the worker contribution is 3 percent of pay. The legislation caps Secure Choice administrative expenses at 1 percent of total assets, paid from earnings on investments.

Expenses are expected to drop below the 1 percent cap in the fourth year of the program, slowly falling to 0.30 percent after 15 years. Overture said the gap between the cap and the declining expenses could provide the revenue to pay off a startup loan.

Some of the recordkeeping firms that could be hired to administer the Secure Choice program are willing to make a startup loan. But that would limit the choice of administrators to large firms and probably require a long-term contract.

Overture is recommending that the preset option for the worker contribution be 5 percent of pay, adjustable at individual request by percentage or dollar amount. The contribution might increase automatically, which some experts think is important.

The requirement that employers with five or more employees offer Secure Choice, or have an alternative retirement plan, would be imposed in steps over several years, not to exceed 100,000 employers per year.

The nine-member Secure Choice board chaired by state Treasurer John Chiang was expected to give the Legislature a recommendation for a new retirement savings plan by the end of this year.

“I believe the recommendation has to be submitted to the Legislature probably by the end of February,” Christina Elliott, acting Secure Choice executive director, told the board last week.

Secure Choice savings plan would be phased in over several years

Photo by TaxCredits.net

Moody’s: Corporate Pension Funding Set to Improve Over Next 3 Years

13139691324_b3494430ed_z

A new report from Moody’s projects that non-financial corporate pension funds in the U.S. will undergo significant funding improvements over the next three years.

The report notes that if interest rates rise faster than the projection, plans could become 100% funded in as soon as 18 months.

From Moody’s:

“Since 2008, pension benefit obligations have increased significantly, with discount rates being a major contributing factor,” said Wesley Smyth, a Moody’s Vice President – Senior Accounting Analyst. “Despite asset returns averaging an impressive 10% per annum since 2008, we believe the funding status of US non-financial corporate pension plans will end this year at 78%.”

If interest rates move as Moody’s expects and assuming consistent asset returns, pension plans could achieve fully funded status in as little as 36 months, according to the report, “Pension Underfunding to Shrink in Next Three Years.” The rating agency expects Aa corporate interest rates will begin to increase in December, reaching 6% by 2019. If rates increase more than Moody’s expects, plans could be fully funded in just 18 months.

As Moody’s treats underfunded pensions as a debt-like liability, a funding level of 100% would benefit leverage metrics, a credit positive.

“If discount rates far exceed current expectations and plans become overfunded, plan sponsors could become vulnerable to the risks of surplus cash sitting in pension trust funds,” added Smyth. “However, we believe companies have been managing this risk over the last several years by keeping voluntary contributions low.”

Read the report here (subscribers only).

 

Photo by Sarath Kuchi via Flickr CC License

Greek Pension Disease Spreading?

471px-Flag-map_of_Greece.svg

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

Paul Taylor of Reuters reports, As pension reform crunch nears, Greek coalition looks fragile:

Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras’ governing majority is looking fragile as crunch time approaches for a pension reform that will test his resolve to impose painful measures to satisfy Athens’ international creditors.

The coalition of Tsipras’ leftist Syriza party and the right-wing nationalist Independent Greeks has a majority of just three seats in parliament, and pro-European opposition parties that voted for Greece’s latest bailout are publicly refusing him any help on the toxic pension issue.

The overhaul, which must deliver savings worth 1 percent of gross domestic product or 1.8 billion euros next year, is the most sensitive of a raft of reforms demanded by the euro zone and the International Monetary Fund in return for up to 85 billion euros in aid in the country’s third bailout since 2010.

Trade unions have staged two 24-hour general strikes against further pension cuts and Tsipras has promised there will be no across-the-board reduction in benefits for retirees.

Tsipras says most of the savings will be achieved by ending early retirement under a law enacted last month, leaving about 600 million euros more to be saved.

“Hell, there must be ways to find those 600 million euros. It’s not 6 billion, it’s 600 million,” he said in a television interview this week after critics said he would struggle to avoid a new round of unpopular pension cuts.

Instead the government is proposing to increase social security contributions, mostly by employers – a move the lenders warn would deter job creation and set back economic recovery, setting the stage for tough negotiations next month.

WARS OF WORDS

As the deadline approaches, Tsipras launched an attack on the IMF this week, saying it was making unconstructive demands on both sides and should make up its mind whether it wanted to stay in the Greek program.

That in turn triggered another war of words with Germany, the biggest European creditor, which insists the global lender must stay in the program to enforce tough discipline and to reassure German lawmakers.

Sources in Syriza say some deputies are unhappy at the prospect of a reform that will entail merging the country’s multiple underfunded pension funds and reducing state subsidies to the system and is bound to lead to lower benefits for many.

No one knows how many, if any, of the grumblers may refuse to back the law.

Aides say Tsipras will negotiate hard with the lenders but ultimately will face down any opposition in his own party and push the pension reform through parliament so that Greece can start negotiations with the euro zone on debt relief in March.

Tsipras dismissed talk of a wider coalition in the state TV interview, saying his 153 seats in parliament were more solid than the 225-seat majority which had initially supported a 2011-12 interim government of technocrat Lucas Papademos, which crumbled within six months.

Political sources say the prime minister has put out feelers to a small opposition party, the Union of the Centre, which has hinted its nine lawmakers might let the legislation pass.

Despite their tough public stance, other opposition parties could well abstain or absent themselves in sufficient numbers to ensure passage of the pension bill, the sources said.

“No one has an interest in having another election now,” said a senior political source, noting that the conservative New Democracy is in disarray ahead of a leadership election next week, and the center-left PASOK party is wary of taking any new responsibility for unpopular austerity measures.

The source said that while his “central scenario” was that Tsipras would ram the pension reform through, there was a risk that the prime minister would decide to play for time, delaying any reform until pressure mounted and the threat of another destabilizing Greek crisis began to affect financial markets.

A source on the lenders’ side said creditors could also play things long to increase reform leverage over Greece and push back debt relief talks until after sensitive regional elections in Germany and a general election in Slovakia in March.

While Tsipras remains Greece’s dominant politician, with no challenger in sight, Athens is awash with rumors of an “ecumenical government” combining technocrats with consensual politicians if he loses his majority.

The Greek pension system is effectively bankrupt and getting worse as the country keeps sinking into a debt deflation hellhole. It desperately needs to be reformed but with so many Greeks relying on grandpa and grandma’s pension which has already been cut to the bone, I’m not surprised there’s such massive opposition to reforming pensions.

Unfortunately, Greeks don’t have much of a choice. Either they reform pensions, which means merging them, introducing real governance which shields them from political interference, and risk-sharing so that they’re sustainable over the long-run or else those pensions are going to disappear altogether.

Of course, this is Greece and nothing in Greece ever gets done without drama. I’ve given up hope on Greece and Greeks. It’s quite shocking how they fail to grasp reality and this is reflected in the clowns they keep voting into power. I think Alexis Tsipras is finally taking the right stance but it’s a day late and a dollar short. The titanic is sinking and I expect another “Greek crisis” in the near future which will only exacerbate Europe’s deflation crisis (keep shorting the euro on any strength!).

Worse still, there’s no end of the deflation supercycle and this is bad news for all pensions, not just the ones in Greece. In fact, Greek pension bombs are exploding everywhere including Illinois where the unfunded pension liability has risen to $111 billion:

Illinois added another $6.4 billion to its already large unfunded pension liability in fiscal 2015, pushing the total to $111 billion, according to a state legislative report on Thursday.

The bad news on the pension front comes as a budget stalemate between Republican Governor Bruce Rauner and Democrats who control the legislature continues nearly halfway through the fiscal year that began on July 1.

Analysts at the legislature’s Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability said changes in some actuarial assumptions at two of the five Illinois public employee retirement systems, along with insufficient state contributions, were the main reasons for the higher unfunded liability when fiscal 2015 ended on June 30.

Illinois has the worst-funded pensions among the 50 states and its funded ratio fell to 41.9 percent at the end of fiscal 2015 from 42.9 percent in fiscal 2014, the report said. Those percentages are well below the 80 percent level that is considered healthy.

Moody’s Investors Service and Fitch Ratings in October pushed Illinois’ credit ratings into the low investment grade triple-B level, citing the state’s pension funding problems, the budget impasse, and a growing structural deficit.

A cash crunch resulting from the budget stalemate forced Illinois’ comptroller to delay a $560 million November pension payment. However, stronger revenue this month made a $560 million December payment possible.

The legislative commission’s report projected that the state’s pension contribution will rise to $7.908 billion in fiscal 2017, which begins on July 1, from nearly $7.535 this fiscal year. The report also projected the unfunded liability will grow to $114.8 billion at the end of fiscal 2016 and will keep growing until it tops out at $132.16 billion in fiscal 2029.

Teachers’ Retirement System, the biggest of the five state retirement systems, said on Thursday that Illinois’ $3.986 billion fiscal 2017 contribution falls far short of the $6.07 billion that would be required using actuarial standards.

And it’s not just Illinois. The unfunded liability at Kentucky’s troubled public pension fund for teachers surged by more than $10 billion last fiscal year under new accounting rules intended to provide a more realistic picture of the worst funded public pension plans:

Kentucky Teachers Retirement System’s (KTRS) unfunded liability jumped to $24.43 billion in the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, using new accounting rules known as GASB 67, compared to $14.01 billion in the prior year, a meeting of board members was told on Wednesday.

Under the rules Kentucky had to use a discount rate of 4.88 percent to calculate the net present value of its liabilities, compared to the 7.5 percent it would have used normally, said Beau Barnes, an executive and general counsel for the fund.

The unfunded liability of $14.01 billion in the 2014 fiscal year was calculated using the higher discount rate. Using the lower rate it would have been $21.59 billion.

News of the situation at the fund comes just days after Reuters reported that two of Kentucky’s pension funds for state employees would start exiting illiquid private equity investments as their funding status worsened.

Lawmakers have consistently failed to make required payments into the teachers’ fund, which is supposed to provide retirement security to over 122,000 state teachers.

“We are in a crisis,” Gary Harbin, KTRS executive secretary, was quoted as saying in the Lexington Herald Leader newspaper. “It’s a crisis for the teachers in the classroom today.”

An unfunded liability of more than $24 billion in the teachers’ fund alone is a staggering burden on a state with an annual budget of around $10 billion.

The sharp increase in the unfunded liability led to a decline in the system’s funded ratio to 42.5 percent from 45.6 percent, meaning the fund only has 42.5 cents for every dollar of pension benefits it owes to members.

The appropriate discount rate to use when calculating public pension fund liabilities is hotly contested. Most funds use a rate of 7 percent to 8 percent. Some economists say that is far too high and should be closer to prevailing long-term interest rates.

Using the 7.5 percent discount rate the system’s funded ratio increased to 55.3 percent from 53.6 percent in the prior year, Barnes said, and the unfunded liability actually fell slightly to $13.90 billion.

It’s about time U.S. public pensions start using more realistic assumptions to discount their future liabilities. When people tell me the Greek pension fiasco can never happen elsewhere, I tell them to open their eyes as it’s already happening all around the world, including in the United States where the trillion dollar state funding gap is set to explode higher as rates keep sinking.

Mark my words, a prolonged period of debt deflation will be brutal and unrelenting, especially for underfunded pension plans. Why do you think central banks are busy trying to save the world, introducing all sorts of unconventional monetary policy measures including negative interest rates?

These measures will punish pensions and force them to take increasingly more risk, but this exactly what central banks want to awaken “animal spirits” and stoke inflation expectations higher.

Will they succeed? I have my doubts and fear that the Fed is set to make a huge policy blunder if it raises rates next week. What really worries me is rising inequality and how deflationary this is for the U.S. and global economy.

In fact, Nobel-Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz wrote another great comment for Project Syndicate, When Inequality Kills, which discusses how rising inequality is literally very unhealthy for the U.S. economy and contributing to higher rates of drug abuse, alcoholism, and suicide.

But rising inequality is also adding to deflationary headwinds and this too spells big trouble for the United States of pension poverty. Unfortunately, America’s pension justice is going the way of its justice system, penalizing the most vulnerable and rewarding the most affluent, some of whom have the gall to propose a solution to the retirement crisis which primarily benefits them. And all of this is happening under the watchful eye of Congress which ensures the quiet screwing of America.

George Carlin was right: “it’s called the American dream because you have to be asleep to believe it.” This holiday season, try to read Joe Stiglitz’s latest book on inequality, The Great Divide, and make sure you read the chapter on the “Myth of America’s Golden Age” twice. Then read Thomas Piketty’s The Economics of Inequality, Tony Atkinson’s Inequality: What Can Be Done?, and Bob Reich’s Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few.

After reading these books, if you’re still convinced America, and by extension the world, doesn’t have a massive inequality problem which will threaten future growth and all but ensure a long period of secular stagnation that Larry Summers is warning of, then hats off to you! My bet remains on global deflation and I see the Greek pension disease spreading all over the world in the not too distant future, wreaking more havoc on our already frail pension systems. 

 

Photo credit: “Flag-map of Greece” by en.wiki: Aivazovskycommons: Aivazovskybased on a map by User:Morwen – Own work. Licensed under Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons – https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flag-map_of_Greece.svg#/media/File:Flag-map_of_Greece.svg

CalPERS Board Discusses PE Benchmark

Calpers

The CalPERS board on Monday discussed the fund’s private equity benchmark and whether it should be scrapped.

The pension fund faces an interesting conundrum: its private equity portfolio has fallen short of benchmarks over the last three, five and 10-year periods.

But private equity also has the highest net returns of any asset class in CalPERS’ portfolio (see return data below), according to CIO Ted Eliopoulos.

More from the LA Times:

The California Public Employees’ Retirement System has proposed stripping its policy of [the private equity] return objective – which had been defined as earning 3% more than the broader stock market to compensate for the risk of investing in the private firms.

Instead, CalPERS’ new goal for its private equity investments would not be to meet a specific benchmark, but to “enhance” overall returns, according to a proposed revision. The change is scheduled to be discussed at a Monday meeting.

Critics say the seemingly minor word change would clear the way for CalPERS to invest in the complex Wall Street sector – the buying and selling of whole companies – without requiring it to meet higher return goals to compensate for the extra risk.

“This is outrageous,” said Eileen Appelbaum, a senior economist at the Center for Economic Policy and Research, a Washington, D.C., think tank. “CalPERS can’t get over the goal, now plans to do away with goal post.”

But Joe DeAnda, a CalPERS spokesman, said the critics are wrong. The change to the policy’s “Strategic Objective” section, he said, has nothing to do with the benchmarks, which remain in place.

In an email, DeAnda explained that the fund’s staff was working only “to remove vague, ‘untestable’ language from all our investment policies.”

Here is how CalPERS’ private equity program has performed over various time horizons:

  • 3-year: 14.1%
  • 5-year: 14.4%
  • 10-year: 11.9%
  • 20-year: 12.3%
  • Since Inception: 11.1%

 

 

Photo by  rocor via Flickr CC License

Controversial California Pension Ballot Measure Gets Initial Approval

reed

California Secretary of State Alex Padilla approved two pension-related measures, both of which are striving to be placed on the 2016 ballot, on Thursday.

That means the backers of the initiatives, including former San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed, can start collecting signatures.

More from Reuters:

The measure would take aim at CalPERS, America’s largest public pension fund with $300 billion in assets. It is the administrator of pensions for more than 3,000 state and local agencies, and has long argued that pensions cannot be touched or renegotiated, even in bankruptcy.

One initiative, in part, would bar government employers from contributing more than 11 percent of their base compensation. The other initiative, in part, would bar the enrollment of new employees in defined benefit pension plans.

Both initiatives would bar government employers from paying more than half of the cost of their pension and retiree healthcare benefits without voter approval.

“By putting a cap on the payments it ensures we won’t be generating these huge unfunded liabilities that will then drive the cost (higher),” Reed said.

“Employees would have to pay more if they want a bigger or more expensive pension, or they have to ask the voters to approve it,” he said.

The measures each need 585,407 signatures in the next 180 days to get on the November 2016 ballot.

 

Photo by  San Jose Rotary via Flickr CC License

Shining A Light On Canada’s Top Ten?

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.

Matt Scuffham of Reuters reports, Canada’s top 10 pension funds tripled in size since 2003:

Canada’s biggest 10 public pension funds now manage assets worth more than $1.1-trillion, having tripled in size since 2003, according to a study published by the Boston Consulting Group on Thursday.

The funds have expanded rapidly in recent years, pursuing a strategy of directly investing in assets globally with an emphasis on real estate and infrastructure projects such as bridges, tunnels and roads. Some pension experts say this approach has helped them mitigate the impact of volatility in global equity markets and challenging economic conditions.

About one-third of the top 10 funds’ investments are in alternative asset classes such as infrastructure, private equity and real estate, according to the study, which was commissioned by the top 10 funds.

“The top 10 have shown impressive growth in investment capabilities and scale to manage the realities of a post-financial crisis world,” said Craig Hapelt, partner and managing director at BCG.

“Their investments also have a broader positive impact on Canada’s prosperity,” he added.

By directly investing, the Canadian funds are able to manage assets themselves, a move the funds say results in lower costs. They have also built up sufficient scale over the past two decades to acquire capital-intensive assets such as infrastructure.

At the end of 2014, the top 10 funds now manage assets worth the equivalent of over 45 per cent of Canada’s gross domestic product (GDP), the research showed.

However, the funds face increasing economic headwinds including falling energy prices. Separate research by RBC in November revealed they had suffered a second consecutive quarterly fall in the value of their assets for the first time since the 2007-09 financial crisis.

The 10 largest funds include the Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB), the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (Caisse) and the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Board, the three biggest Canadian funds which are also in the top 20 public pension funds globally. Seven of the funds are among the top 30 infrastructure investors in the world.

Recent investments by Canadian pension funds include the $2.8-billion acquisition of the operator of the Chicago Skyway toll road by CPPIB, Ontario Teachers and the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System and the $7.5-billion purchase of an Australian electricity network by a consortium including the Caisse.

The Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan posted a press release on its website, Among the most successful in the world, the total value of Canada’s ten largest public pension funds has tripled since 2003:

According to  a new study conducted by The Boston Consulting Group (BCG), Canada’s ten largest public pension funds (Top Ten) continue to drive impressive investment returns and remain key players on the global stage during a period of challenging economic conditions both domestically and in major markets globally. The funds now manage over $1.1 trillion in assets, which is the equivalent of over 45 per cent of Canada’s GDP. An infographic highlighting key results and investments is available here.

“The Top Ten have shown impressive growth in investment capabilities and scale to manage the realities of a post-financial crisis world,” said Craig Hapelt, a Toronto-based partner at BCG. “Not only do the funds represent an important aspect of Canada’s retirement income landscape, but their investments also have a broader positive impact on Canada’s prosperity.”

The study indicates that three pension investment funds[1] are listed among the top 20 public pension funds globally. Additionally, the Top Ten remain prominent global players in the alternative asset management industry, with seven funds[2] named among the top 30 global infrastructure investors and five[3] listed as part of the top 30 global real estate investors.

Top Ten funds important to Canada’s prosperity

The Top Ten are a significant component of Canada’s retirement income system, helping to provide financial security in retirement to over 18 million Canadians. Their total assets under management tripled between 2003 and the end of 2014 and 80 per cent of this increase in value was driven by investment returns.

As investors behind several Canadian landmark assets and flagship companies, the Top Ten have invested approximately $600 billion across various asset classes in Canada and directly employ almost 11,000 professionals. In addition to monetary contributions, the Top Ten are responsible for creating talent clusters in multiple Canadian cities – attracting Canadian talent currently working abroad or providing home-based talent with opportunities to gain global experience.

Investment strategy promotes portfolio diversification to maximize long-term returns

While each fund’s strategy is designed to meet its unique mandate, the Top Ten similarly focus on creating well-diversified portfolios that align with the funds’ relatively long-term payout profiles. Enabled by their scale, approximately one third (32 per cent) of the Top Ten’s investments are in alternative asset classes such as infrastructure, private equity, and real estate in Canada and abroad. This figure contrasts to a less than 11 per cent allocation in alternative asset classes by most other Canadian pension plans.

Some of these investments include Canada’s TMX Group, Ontario’s Yorkdale Mall, and BC’s TimberWest Forest Corporation and Brentwood Town Centre. Globally, the Top Ten have invested in such assets as ING Life Korea; Globalvia, a portfolio of infrastructure assets in Europe and Latam; Port of Brisbane, one of Australia’s fastest growing container ports; Open Grid Europe, a gas transmission network operator responsible for approximately 70 per cent of Germany’s total national shipping volume; and, Camelot Group, the UK’s national lottery operator.

About Measuring Impact of Canadian Pension Funds Report

This is the second time that BCG has been commissioned to conduct this survey on behalf of the Top Ten. The study focused on the ten largest public sector pension funds (ranked here by size of net pension assets under management): The Canada Pension Plan Investment Board ($265 billion), The Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec ($192 billion), The Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Board ($154 billion), PSP Investments ($112 billion),The British Columbia Investment Management Corporation ($104 billion), The Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System ($73 billion), The Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan ($61 billion), The Alberta Investment Management Corp. ($50 billion), The Ontario Pension Board ($22 billion) and The OPSEU Pension Trust ($18 billion).

About The Boston Consulting Group

The Boston Consulting Group (BCG) is a global management consulting firm and the world’s leading advisor on business strategy. We partner with clients from the private, public, and not-for-profit sectors in all regions to identify their highest-value opportunities, address their most critical challenges, and transform their enterprises. Our customized approach combines deep insight into the dynamics of companies and markets with close collaboration at all levels of the client organization. This ensures that our clients achieve sustainable competitive advantage, build more capable organizations, and secure lasting results. Founded in 1963, BCG is a private company with 82 offices in 46 countries. For more information, please visit bcg.com.

You can download Boston Consulting Group’s second study on Canada’s top ten pensions here. I covered the first study going over the benefits of the top ten pensions in June 2013.

This study is a continuation of the first one and it demonstrates how impressive Canada’s biggest pensions are not just domestically but internationally, investing across public and private markets all around the world.

To be sure, the BCG study is a bit of public relations piece commissioned by Canada’s Top Ten so let me carefully scrutinize it by going over some important points which are worth bearing in mind:

  • The growth of Canada’s Top Ten since 2003 (after the tech bubble crashed) has been explosive and while a lot of this growth was fueled by strong gains in global stocks and corporate bonds, the bulk of the value added over public benchmarks came from private market investments like real estate, infrastructure and private equity (except for HOOPP which does invest in private markets but has delivered stellar returns primarily by investing like a multi-strategy hedge fund across public markets doing everything internally).
  • The key point in the press release Ontario Teachers’ put out was this: 80 per cent of this increase in value was driven by investment returns. This seems quite high to me (thought it was more like 70 percent) but the point is that it’s investment gains, not contributions which explain the explosive growth of Canada’s Top Ten. This and many other benefits of DB plans are critically important to remember when we look at bolstering our retirement system by building on the success of our large DB plans.
  • What else? Canada’s Top Ten have roughly 30% of their assets in alternative asset classes like infrastructure, real estate and private equity in Canada and abroad. This figure contrasts to a less than 11% allocation in alternative asset classes by most other Canadian pension plans which explains why Canada’s Top Ten are outperforming their domestic and international peers. It’s not only the large allocation to alternative asset classes which explains this outperformance, it’s the approach they use. Canada’s Top Ten invest directly in real estate, infrastructure and private equity, saving a ton on fees.
  • The main reason behind the success of Canada’s Top Ten is their governance model which ensures no government interference and introduces a compensation scheme that pays senior pension fund managers at Canada’s Top Ten extremely well so they can attract talent to bring public and private assets in-house.
  • However, as I recently stated, the media loves overtouting the Canadian pension model and in doing so it often presents biased views of what the Top Ten are doing, especially in terms of direct private equity deals. Still, there’s no denying the success of Canada’s Top Ten which is why many public and private pensions are trying to emulate their approach.
  • The main drawback of this BCG study is that it doesn’t delve deeply into the diverse approaches Canada’s Top Ten use to add value over their benchmarks. For example, I recently covered PSP Investment’s global expansion discussing how the fund is going into leveraged finance. The report also doesn’t discuss the benchmarks Canada’s Top Ten use to gauge their performance in public and private markets, nor does it discuss how a few in the Top Ten are highly levered relative to their peers which could explain part of their long-term outperformance (it’s not the only factor but it’s a big factor).
  • In other words, this BCG is more of a public relations study; it isn’t a rigorous, comprehensive performance audit on Canada’s Top Ten. To be fair, BCG and McKinsey are large consultants which are typically used by Canada’s Top Ten for big studies but they’re there to deliver a product which is shaped by the senior managers at these shops. The consultants’ focus is on repeat business which is why they present findings in a favorable manner. They’re not hired to rock the boat (that’s my job!).
  •  Although I welcome this new BCG study, I wish the Government of Canada would commission a new study on the governance at Canada’s Top Ten which closely examines the various approaches they use to deliver their results, the benchmarks they use to gauge their performance in public and private markets and whether their benchmarks appropriately reflect all the risks they’re taking to deliver these results and whether these risks justify the very generous compensation being doled out to their senior managers.
  • What else? We need to improve the communication at Canada’s Top Ten and perhaps even legislate that board meetings will be made public on a dedicated YouTube channel just like CalPERS, CalSTRS and other large U.S. public pensions do. More transparency is needed on investments, benchmarks and how its tied to compensation.

I know, I’m dreaming but when we want to shine a light on Canada’s Top Ten, we’re better off looking at the good, the bad and the ugly, not just the good.

Having said this, I’m a huge supporter of Canada’s Top Ten and would like to build on their success to improve our retirement system and propel Canada to the top spot in the global ranking of top pensions. There are plenty of pension fund heroes in Canada who quietly do extraordinary work, delivering solid long-term results and even though I’m on their ass constantly to improve their governance and hire a more diversified workforce, if we’re ever going to introduce real change to Canada’s Pension Plan, we have to build on the success of our large DB pensions.

There’s another reason why I’m a big believer in our large DB pensions. The next ten years will be nothing like the last ten years. We need to prepare for lower returns, especially here in Canada where negative interest rates could be right around the corner. In this environment, you’re better off having your pension money invested in Canada’s Top Ten than in some crappy mutual fund which rakes you on fees and is vulnerable to the whims and fancies of public 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: Chris Christie Reacts to Proposed Pension Amendment

Earlier this week, New Jersey Senate President Stephen Sweeney introduced legislation that would lock the state’s annual pension funding requirement into the state constitution.

In this video, above, Chris Christie reacts to the news; it broke as Christie was doing his weekly radio show.

Christie touches on two things: the concept of constitutionally requiring the state to make annual pension payments, and breaking those contributions into quarterly payments.

The proposal was approved by a Senate committee on Thursday.

 

Photo by Bob Jagendorf from Manalapan, NJ, USA (NJ Governor Chris Christie) [CC BY 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

 

h/t Bury Pensions

AUM of Canada’s Largest Pensions Have Tripled Since 2003: Report

496px-Canada_blank_map.svg

The size of the portfolios of Canada’s 10 largest pension funds has tripled since 2003, according to a study conducted by the Boston Consulting Group.

Another interesting takeaway from the study: the assets under management of those 10 funds are equal to 45 percent of Canada’s GDP.

More from Reuters:

Canada’s biggest 10 public pension funds now manage assets worth more than $1.1-trillion, having tripled in size since 2003, according to a study published by the Boston Consulting Group on Thursday.

The funds have expanded rapidly in recent years, pursuing a strategy of directly investing in assets globally with an emphasis on real estate and infrastructure projects such as bridges, tunnels and roads. Some pension experts say this approach has helped them mitigate the impact of volatility in global equity markets and challenging economic conditions.

About one-third of the top 10 funds’ investments are in alternative asset classes such as infrastructure, private equity and real estate, according to the study, which was commissioned by the top 10 funds.

“The top 10 have shown impressive growth in investment capabilities and scale to manage the realities of a post-financial crisis world,” said Craig Hapelt, partner and managing director at BCG.

“Their investments also have a broader positive impact on Canada’s prosperity,” he added.

By directly investing, the Canadian funds are able to manage assets themselves, a move the funds say results in lower costs. They have also built up sufficient scale over the past two decades to acquire capital-intensive assets such as infrastructure.

According to the study, 7 of the funds are in the top 30 infrastructure investors in the world.

 

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

Chart: Most Workers Way Behind Schedule on Retirement Planning, Saving

Screen shot 2015-07-15 at 3.52.51 PM

We’ve been periodically pulling interesting charts out of the Employee Benefit Research Institute’s (EBRI) most recent Retirement Confidence survey, and this particular graphic reveals an important reality: most workers are behind schedule on planning and saving for retirement, and very few workers are ahead of schedule.

Overall, 64 percent of workers said they were “a little” or “a lot” behind schedule.

Meanwhile, a mere 11 percent said they were ahead of schedule. The scary part? That number is actually higher than in years past, when 5 to 8 percent of workers said they were ahead of schedule.

The good news is that 25 percent of workers are “on track”, up 4 percent from 2011.

It’s interesting to compare the current numbers to the numbers from 2005, when the economy was at its height. That year, 37 percent of workers were “on track”. But most workers were still behind schedule; 55 percent of workers said they were “a little” or “a lot” behind schedule in 2005.

The moral of the story? Planning and saving for retirement is hard, even in the good times.

Source: 2015 Retirement Confidence survey

Photo by www.SeniorLiving.Org


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