Dutch Pension Funding Ratios Drop By 5 Percent in January

Netherlands

The funding ratios of Dutch pension funds have fallen on average by 5 percentage points in January on the back of low interest rates, according to Mercer and Aon Hewitt.

More from Investments & Pensions Europe:

Average funding, according to estimates by Aon Hewitt and Mercer, fell by 5 percentage points over the period, due to persistently low interest rates, the criterion for discounting liabilities.

[…]

The consultancies also attributed the sudden drop in funding to a new accounting method for calculating coverage ratios.

Since 1 January, when the Netherlands introduced its new financial assessment framework (FTK), schemes’ funding has been based on actual interest rates while applying the ultimate forward rate (UFR), rather than the three-month average of interest rates plus UFR.

In addition, the new FTK came with a ‘policy funding ratio’ – meant as a criterion for rights cuts and indexation – consisting of the average coverage of the previous 12 months.

According to Aon Hewitt, policy funding stood at 109% at January-end, while Mercer placed the figure at 109.6%.

[…]

[Aon Hewitt chief commercial officer for retirement and financial management Frank] Driessen said the ECB’s recently announced quantitative-easing programme had led to a further slide of interest rates and predicted that rates would remain low for “a long time”.

The average funding ratio of Dutch pensions stood at 103 percent at the end of January, according to Aon Hewitt.

Institutional Investors Keeping Close Eye on Oil As Prices Continue To Slide

oil barrels

The price of oil dropped below $45 per barrel on Tuesday, and many Americans are undoubtedly enjoying the price drop – at least when they are filling up at the pump.

But the drop is causing “a lot of concern” for institutional investors, according to a Pensions & Investment report.

From Pensions & Investments:

The impact of low oil prices is mixed, but already are being acknowledged and felt by institutional investors.

“There is a lot of concern from clients,” said Tapan Datta, London-based head of asset allocation at Aon Hewitt. He said discussions are taking place among investors, looking at how to “protect themselves if things go seriously wrong. There is no doubt that it should be considered.”

One of the main concerns for pension funds would be the link between falling oil prices and lower inflation.

Pension fund liabilities are where the oil price drop could “bite,” said Mr. Datta, with falling inflation leading to even lower bond yields, and a subsequent rise in liabilities.

“Everybody is worried that the price (of oil) doesn’t seem to have a floor at the moment,” added Alastair Gunn, U.K. equities portfolio manager at Jupiter Fund Management PLC in London. “It is making equity holders quite jittery about dividends, and is making bondholders jittery about the risk of defaults.”

Pension fund executives are certainly paying attention. Ricardo Duran, spokesman for the $189.7 billion California State Teachers’ Retirement System, West Sacramento, said the bulk of the fund’s oil holdings are in the global equity and fixed-income allocations. As of Dec. 31, the $107.8 billion global equity portfolio invested about 5.9% in the oil and gas sector, covering areas such as exploration and production, refining and marketing, and storage and transportation, he said. That equates to about $7 billion.

Just less than 8%, or about $1 billion, of the $13.4 billion fixed-income credit portfolio is in oil, invested mostly in the independent and integrated energy sectors, in midstream holdings, oil field services and refining, he said.

“(The falling oil price) has exerted a downward pressure on the portfolio,” the spokesman added in an e-mailed comment.

CalSTRS executives are “closely monitoring the situation before determining what, if any, moves to make,” said the pension fund spokesman. “CalSTRS is a long-term investor and, while the drop in oil prices has been a cause for some concern, we have to balance that against growth opportunities the situation may create in other sectors of the economy in which we’re also invested.”

Several pension executives told P&I that, although they are watching oil carefully, they still retain the mindset of long-term investors.

 

Photo by ezioman via Flickr CC License

Canada Pension Funding Declined in 2014

Canada map

The collective funding ratio of Canada’s defined-benefit pension plans declined by 2.7 percentage points in 2014, according to Aon Hewitt.

From Benefits Canada:

The median solvency ratio of 449 Aon Hewitt administered pension plans from the public, semi-public and private sectors stood at 90.6% at Dec. 31, 2014.

That represents a decline of 0.5 percentage points over the previous quarter ended Sept. 30, 2014, and a 2.7 percentage-point drop from plan solvency at Dec. 31, 2013.

Since peaking at 96.6% in April 2014, overall plan solvency has declined by 5.9 percentage points, continuing the trend towards worsening plan solvency that began in the third quarter of 2014 (when the solvency ratio dropped to 91.1% from 96.2% in the previous quarter).

About 18.5% of plans were more than fully funded at the end of the year, compared with 23% in the previous quarter and 26% at the end of 2013. Plan sponsors that must file valuations as at Dec. 31, 2014 could see the amount of their deficiency contributions double in 2015 as a result of the lower solvency ratio, says Aon Hewitt.

“Plans that stayed exposed to interest rates really took a beating in 2014,” says William da Silva, senior partner, retirement practice with Aon Hewitt. “Those plan sponsors who have implemented or fine-tuned their risk management strategies performed much better than traditional plans amid interest rate declines.”

Aon Hewitt also said that new mortality tables from the Canadian Institute of Actuaries could lead to a further funding decline in the future.

Study: Pension Trustees Spend Less Than 5 Hours Per Quarter Evaluating Investment Decisions

stack of papers

Survey results recently released by Aon Hewitt reveal that most pension trustees in the UK only spend about five hours each quarter evaluating investment decisions. The survey did find, however, that trustees were spending more time on investment evaluation in 2014 than they did in 2013.

From Investment and Pensions Europe:

Pension boards and trustees are opting for fiduciary management because they can often only spend five hours each quarter scrutinising investment decisions, according to Aon Hewitt.

The consultancy said the increasing complexity of investment decisions was driving those in charge of pension assets into the arms of fiduciary managers, but that only one-quarter of those using such providers were employing indices to measure successful performance.

Drawing on the results of a UK survey of nearly 360 investors worth £269bn (€344bn), the Aon Hewitt Germany’s head of investment consulting Thorsten Köpke said the questions facing UK investors were also relevant concerns for their German counterparts.

The survey also found that 73% of pension boards and trustees were only spending five hours a quarter on investment decisions, a 10-percentage-point increase over the 2013 survey results – meaning they placed significant trust in managers to monitor investments, according to the consultancy.

However, interest in fiduciary management was largely dependant on the size of a fund’s portfolio, the survey found.

It also found that those managing more than £1bn in assets were more inclined to delegate responsibility for only part of their portfolio, while those with less than £500m in assets delegated the entire portfolio.

Köpke added: “The last few years have seen occupational schemes in Germany as in England – both small and medium-sized ones – work with fiduciary managers.”

The data came from Aon Hewitt’s Fiduciary Management Survey 2014.

Survey: 88% of Pension Funds Prefer Hiring Firms They’ve Already Worked With

balance. retirement decision

A recent survey from consulting firm Aon Hewitt suggests that pension funds looking to hire consultants or outsource investment management duties will overwhelmingly consider firms they’ve already worked with over those they haven’t.

This survey comes from Britain—but it’s a safe bet that funds in the U.S. behave similarly.

Reported by Financial News:

Pension funds that are contemplating bringing in a fiduciary manager – a single firm to take on most, if not all, active investment responsibilities – are overwhelmingly more likely to employ a firm they already know rather than a newcomer, a survey for consultancy Aon Hewitt suggests.

Only 12% of 125 funds said they would bring in a firm they did not already employ.

In choosing among firms that already worked for them, 59% would go for their consultant and 30% for a fund manager.

[…]

Sion Cole, head of client solutions at Aon Hewitt, who is responsible for its £6.2 billion fiduciary business, said: “Fiduciary management has to be built on a level of trust. What we’re seeing is that pension trustees are going out to market, assessing their options and then appointing someone they know and trust to do that job.”