alternative investment

Pension Asset Growth Outpaced GDP Over Last 10 Years

The value of U.S. pension assets has outpaced GDP growth over the last decade, according to data from Towers Watson.

In that time frame, pension assets have grown at a rate twice that of the country’s GDP.

Pension investments in stocks, bonds, cash and alternative assets such as real estate have surged relative to the country’s gross domestic product over the last decade. The value of U.S. pension assets jumped over 89% while GDP rose roughly 42%, according to data from consulting firm Towers Watson & Co.

Those investments were worth an estimated $22.1 trillion last year, 127% of the country’s $17.4 trillion gross domestic product. That’s the highest percentage on record, and up nearly 32 percentage points from a decade earlier.

[…]

U.S. pension investments accounted for more than 61% of the $36.1 trillion global total. That total is 84% of global GDP. Global pension assets relative to global GDP are up roughly 15 percentage points from the decade earlier.

The dollar is strong relative to foreign currencies, and U.S. companies have more money available, which widens the disparity, Mr. Ruloff said. U.S. pension plans last year made 67% of their equity investments in U.S. stocks, according to Towers Watson.

Towers Watson reported last month that global pension asset values reached all-time highs in 2014.

Thailand’s Biggest Pension Looks to Slash Bond Allocation

Thailand’s largest public pension fund is looking to slash its bond allocation (which currently sits at 77 percent of the fund’s assets) and invest a higher percentage of assets in equities and alternatives.

Yields on Thai government debt are at their lowest levels since 2009.

Chart: Comparing CalPERS to the Endowment Index

The Endowment Index represents the asset allocation and returns of the world’s largest institutional investors.

The this chart [above], you can compare the asset allocation and 10-year returns of CalPERS to other massive institutional investors. This chart represents CalPERS’ allocation before its hedge fund exit, which is an ongoing process.

New Jersey Lawmaker Pushes For Stricter Pay-To-Play Rules For Pension Investments

SEC rules prevent pension funds from investing with firms that have made political contributions to politicians with any control over the pension fund’s investment decisions.

But a New Jersey Senator wants the state to go even further. Reported by NorthJersey.com:

The law that restricts the state pension fund from investing in firms whose investment managers make political contributions to New Jersey candidates should be expanded to include donations to national political groups, a legislator said Wednesday.

Sen. Shirley Turner, D-Mercer, announced her intentions to broaden the state’s pay-to-play law a day after the Division of Investment confirmed the pension system had sold its stake in a venture capital fund with ties to a Massachusetts gubernatorial candidate who donated to the New Jersey GOP.

[…]

When the pension system approves an alternative investment — including venture capital firms and hedge funds — those firms are required to fill out disclosures listing the managers of the particular fund New Jersey is investing with and whether those individuals have made political contributions. But the state’s conflict of interest law does not cover political donations to groups outside New Jersey, like the Republican Governors Association, which Governor Christie heads.

“The method of investment should be selected based on performance and merit, not because of campaign contributions and investments should be made in the best interests of our retirees,” said Turner, whose district includes a significant number of state workers, said Wednesday in a statement. “There shouldn’t be even the appearance of political favorites.”

This is a hot-button issue in New Jersey. One union, the New Jersey AFL-CIO, filed an ethics complaint last week asking whether political donations have influence pension investments.

The issue was also raised at the meeting of the State Investment Council on Tuesday.

Photo by Truthout.org via Flickr CC License

Is Now the Time For Pension Funds To Push Back On Fees?

CalPERS cut ties with hedge funds because, among other reasons, the fees associated with those investments.

Some money managers and pension fund staff are saying that now is the perfect time for other pension funds to speak up about their aversion to fee-heavy investments. The managers told Reuters:

“Pension funds and everyone else would be remiss not to push on fees now,” said Brad Balter, Managing Partner of Balter Capital Management, which invests in hedge funds and is now offering its own liquid alternatives fund that mimic hedge fund performance with a lower fee structure.

[…]

Joelle Mevi, who has long been arguing for lower fees, first as chief investment officer at New Mexico’s pension fund and now as executive director and CIO at the City of Fort Worth’s pension plan, agreed that Calpers’ move could be a wakeup call.

“Top hedge fund managers could see that this is a trend and it could strike fear in their hearts,” she said.

Hedge funds reached by Reuters declined to comment. But the industry has in the past rebuffed criticism over fees and performance by saying returns tend to outperform when markets fall. It has also pointed to strong demand: hedge funds which manage $3 trillion attracted $30.5 billion in new money during the second quarter alone.

Stephen Nesbitt, who runs consulting firm Cliffwater LLC and works with prominent pension funds, said hedge fund performance, like stock performance, can vary greatly – underscoring the need for investors to make careful choices.

“There are many investors who are happy with the results. It works for some and it has to do with implementation,” he said.

It’s not out of the ordinary for pension funds to negotiate with hedge funds on the matter of fees. The Massachusetts Pension Reserves Investment Management Board (PRIM) was doing exactly that even before the CalPERS news came out. From Reuters:

Massachusetts, which invests roughly $5.6 billion with hedge funds, is pushing to move some of that money into separately managed accounts and may even invest, at a lower cost, in liquid alternative strategies.

“Moves by the big leading pensions like Calpers only reaffirms liquid alternatives are the wave of the future,” said Brad Alford, chief investment officer at Alpha Capital Management, which has put money into hedge funds and also now offers liquid alternative funds.

“Smart investors are no longer willing to pay these high fees for single digit returns,” Alford said. “High fees, little transparency, limited liquidity, light regulation plus hard to measure risk from leverage and derivatives are not a good investment solution.”

The Los Angeles Fire & Police Pension System chose to drop hedge funds long before CalPERS made headlines; they made the move early this summer when they removed $550 million from hedge funds.

Photo by www.SeniorLiving.Org

Advisors, Fund Managers React To CalPERS’ Hedge Fund Pullout

We’ve heard what CalPERS officials had to say about the decision to cut ties with hedge funds. But how are advisors and fund managers within the industry reacting to the news?

A few anonymous hedge fund advisors have claimed that CalPERS’ problem wasn’t hedge funds as an asset class—the problem was that the pension fund was bad at picking which hedge funds to invest in. From Business Insider:

“I think CalPERS is not a particularly good hedge fund investor,” one prominent hedge fund manager told Business Insider. He cited the pension fund’s lackluster annualized rate of return of 4.8% over the last ten years. “I would redeem too.”

He continued: “I think it’s not hedge funds as an asset class. It’s the ones they invest in.”

Another prominent hedge fund manager echoed that same sentiment.

“They got what they paid for since they only invested in managers who would cut fees. So the best funds wouldn’t do that, so they had a mediocre portfolio.”

Another investment officer gave a more measured response to the New York Times:

“I think the industry is changing. There is less tolerance for underperformance in an environment when you have a relative huge outperformance with more liquid opportunities like an S.&P.-500 index fund,” said Elizabeth R. Hilpman, chief investment officer at Barlow Partners.

“There is a lot of disappointment that hedge funds have not been able to capture more of the market results,” she added.

Several advisors gave some interesting opinions to Wealth Management, too:

“All taxable investors should take notice of this decision, because if Calpers doesn’t think the asset class is adding value for them, how does any taxable investor believe the asset class can add value in their portfolio—especially those in the top couple tax brackets?” said Scott Freund, president of Family Office Research.

[…]

“We already ignore the [hedge fund] genre because they are the Groucho Marx club of investing: The only ones that will let us in are the ones in which we don’t want to be invested,” said Stephen Barnes, investment manager and chief compliance officer of Barnes Investment Advisory. “Fees are too high. Truly a ‘heads I win, tails I don’t lose’ proposition for the hedge fund manager.”

Some advisors defended hedge funds in light of CalPERS’ decision. From Wealth Management:

Ryan Graves, wealth advisor with FirstPoint Financial, said alternatives play an important role in mitigating the risks associated with traditional asset classes.

“The time for a ‘true’ hedge fund (and not the levered up investment vehicles that many morphed into pre-2008) is when valuations are high, not after the correction has already occurred,” Graves said. “Just wait for a pullback in next 12-24 months and see how they try to explain away dumping an absolute return strategy.”

“To a contrarian this might mean it is time to consider investing in hedge funds,” said Kris Maksimovich, president of Global Wealth Advisors. “The decision could push hedge funds, especially the more expensive variety, to reconsider their pricing.”

There are plenty more quotes in the linked articles.

Photo credit: Lending Memo

Union Files Ethics Complaint Over New Jersey Pension Investments

New Jersey’s largest union, New Jersey AFL-CIO, has filed an ethics complaint with the state regarding the entity that oversees the state’s pension investments – the State Investment Council – and the man that chairs the Council – Robert Grady.

The union alleges that politics have played a large role in the state’s pension investments, which have increasingly included hedge funds and other alternative investments.

From NJ.com:

In an 11-page letter to the ethics commission, New Jersey AFL-CIO President Charles Wowkanech said that the chair of the State Investment Council, Robert Grady, “has violated the Division’s own rules barring politics in the selection and retention of such funds and investments, and has further created an appearance of impropriety.”

At issue is the state’s investment of hundreds of millions of dollars of pension money with Wall Street firms, including hedge funds and other types of “alternative investments” that charge higher fees than more traditional types of investments — a practice that started before Christie was governor but has increased under him.

Some “key executives” of the firms donated to state and national Republican organizations that helped Christie, according to Wowkanech, who said those donations potentially broke state pay-to-play laws, and at the least violated the state officials’ code of ethics. Wowkanech wants an investigation.

The complaint is based on a series of reports on the websites Pando Daily and International Business Times, written by the reporter David Sirota, that explain the pension fund’s increase in alternative investments since Christie took office.

The complaint also takes issue with Grady’s involvement with Chrisite’s re-election campaign as an adviser, in close contact with Christie and top staffers, while he was leading the council.

“It should not be seen as mere coincidence that the reports show Robert Grady was listed as a required attendee on a series of regular weekly phone conference calls held by high-level staff on the Governor’s re-election committee in or around September 2013,” Wowkanech’s letter reads.

The Christie administration and the state treasury department have responded to the complaint, according to the Associated Press:

Christie spokesman Kevin Roberts calls the filing “a cheap political stunt based on shoddy, distorted reporting.”

Christopher Santarelli, a spokeswoman for the state treasury department, said it is state employees who decide who will manage pension fund money, not the investment council.

He also said that the state’s use of alternative investments including hedge funds and bank plans is in line with peers. He said the strategy helped minimize losses in 2008 and 2009, when stock prices fell sharply.

Grady did not immediately return a message from The Associated Press, but he previously said in an email to the International Business Times that he was cleared by the state treasury department’s ethics officer before he participated as a policy adviser to Christie’s re-election campaign. He says that no pension investment decisions were discussed with campaign officials.

The Associated Press wasn’t able to contact Grady. But Grady has previously stated that pension investment decisions had nothing to do with campaign politics.

Photo by Truthout.org via Flickr CC License