Scale economies in pension fund investments: A dissection of investment costs across asset classes

Using a unique dataset of 225 Dutch occupational pension funds with a total of 928 billion euro of assets under management, we provide a comprehensive cross-sectional analysis of the relation between investment costs and pension fund size. Our dataset is free from self-reporting biases and decomposes investment costs for 6 asset classes in management costs and performance fees. We find that a pension fund that has 10 times more assets under management on average reports 7.67 basis points lower annual investment costs. Economies of scale differ per asset class. We find significant economies of scale in fixed income, equity and commodity portfolios, but not in real estate investments, private equity and hedge funds. We also find that large pension funds pay significantly higher performance fees for equity, private equity and hedge fund investments.     

An analysis of risk-taking behavior for public defined benefit pension plans

This paper presents the first comprehensive study on the determinants of public pension fund investment risk and reports several new important findings. Unlike private pension plans, public funds undertake more risk if they are underfunded and have lower investment returns in the previous years, consistent with the risk transfer hypothesis. Furthermore, pension funds in states facing fiscal constraints allocate more assets to equity and have higher betas. There also appears to be a herding effect in that CalPERS equity allocation or beta is mimicked by other pension funds. Finally, our results suggest that government accounting standards strongly affect pension fund risk, as higher return assumptions (used to discount pension liabilities) are associated with higher equity allocation and portfolio beta.     

Investor sophistication and risk taking

Using investment policy data of 857 Dutch pension funds during 1999–2006, we develop three indicators of investor sophistication. The indicators show that pension funds’ strategic portfolio choices are often based on coarse and less sophisticated approaches. First, most pension funds round strategic asset allocations to the nearest multiple of 5%, similar to age heaping in demographic and historical studies. Second, many pension funds invest little or nothing in alternative, more complex asset classes, resulting in limited asset diversification. Third, many pension funds favor regional investments and as such do not fully employ the opportunities of international risk diversification. Our indicators are correlated with pension fund size, in line with the expectation that smaller pension funds are generally less sophisticated than large pension funds. Using the indicators for investor sophistication, we show that less sophisticated pension funds tend to opt for investment strategies with less risk.     

Sovereign Wealth Funds: A Growing Global Force in Corporate Finance

Sovereign wealth funds (SWFs) have emerged as among the most important players in global financial markets. With an estimated $3 trillion at present, the collective assets at their disposal are expected to reach or surpass $7.5 trillion by 2012. SWFs have shown a wide range of investment objectives, along with continually evolving time horizons and risk appetites. For example, some SWFs have become increasingly active in corporate acquisitions and other strategic transactions. Though many of these funds prefer to invest in debt or non‐controlling equity positions, a small but growing number are seeking substantial minority and controlling equity stakes. SWFs have also recently become major participants in the financial institutions and alternative investment industries, with several high profile investments in well‐known private equity firms and financial services companies. In certain corporate transactions, their longer time horizons and willingness to employ larger percentages of equity have made them attractive alternatives to established private equity. At the same time, however, the rising prominence and perceived lack of transparency of SWFs have raised concerns among governments and other market participants in countries where companies have been targeted for investment. For this reason, companies intent on obtaining funding from or investing with SWFs are advised to prepare for media and regulatory scrutiny, particularly if a transaction is perceived to involve a country's strategic or security interests. Government policymakers are urged to balance the perceived threats of SWFs against their potential benefits, particularly their ability to provide a stabilizing source of global liquidity in the current economic environment.     

The Return to Direct Investment in Private Firms: New Evidence on the Private Equity Premium Puzzle*

This paper uses a novel dataset to analyze the return to direct investments in private firms by pension funds. We have two key findings. First, direct investments in private firms have underperformed public equity by 392 basis points per annum under conservative risk adjustments. Second, initial mispricing, due to over‐optimism or misperceived risk, and subsequent low capital gains seem to explain the gap in returns to private firms. Overall, these findings complement the finding of Moskowitz and Vissing‐Jørgensen (2002) of low returns on entrepreneurial investments and provide new insight into the existence of what they call the private equity premium puzzle: Even professional investors with well‐diversified portfolios like pension funds seem to get a poor risk‐return tradeoff from investing directly in private firms.     

The Performance of Local versus Foreign Mutual Fund Managers

In this paper we examine the performance of US equity funds (locals) versus UK equity funds (foreigners) also investing in the US equity market. Based on informational disadvantages one would expect the UK funds to under‐perform the US funds, especially in the research‐intensive small company market. After controlling for tax treatment, fund objectives, investment style and time‐variation in betas, we do not find evidence for this. In the small company segment we even find a slight out‐performance for UK funds compared to US funds. Finally we observe a home bias in the UK portfolios, which is partly attributable to UK funds investing in cross‐listed stocks in the USA.     

Price Performance Following Share‐Repurchase Announcements by Closed‐End Funds

We investigate the price performance of closed‐end funds that announce share‐repurchase programs. Closed‐end funds experience positive average stock‐price reactions to the announcements. The long‐run buy‐and‐hold abnormal returns of repurchasing funds over the subsequent three years are significantly higher than a nonrepurchasing control sample matched by size, type, investment style and geographic diversification. Funds with larger discounts, international funds, equity funds, and funds that announce larger repurchases or frequently announce repurchases, experience more positive stock‐price reactions. Except for larger repurchases, the same characteristics are associated with more positive long‐run buy‐and‐hold returns.     

Would emerging market pension funds benefit from international diversification: investigating wealth accumulations for pension participants

In recent years, investment portfolio selection is growing in importance for many emerging market pension funds, as pension reforms replace traditional pay-as-you-go systems with advanced funding systems. Various investment regulations are applied to the funded pensions, particularly in the form of portfolio limits for equities and international assets. With a bootstrap simulation approach, this paper attempts to quantify the impacts on retirement benefits of restricting international assets from the investment portfolios of emerging market pension funds. We find that, on average, over half of the pension portfolios of emerging market countries should be in international assets in order to maximize the expected utility of moderate and conservative pension fund participants. More generally, international assets can play a significant role in the investment portfolios for workers with risk aversion varying from aggressive to conservative. With few exceptions, the entire probability distribution of wealth accumulations at retirement could be shifted higher with the inclusion of international assets.     

What Drives Private Equity Returns?– Fund Inflows,Skilled GPs,and/or Risk?*

This paper analyzes the determinants of returns generated by mature European private equity funds. It starts from the presumption that this asset class is characterized by illiquidity, stickiness, and segmentation. Given this presumption, Gompers and Lerner (2000) have shown that venture deal valuations are driven by overall fund inflows into the industry that yield the putative ‘money chasing deals’ phenomenon. It is the aim of this paper to show that this phenomenon explains a significant part of the variation in private equity funds' returns. This is especially true for venture funds, as they are affected more by illiquidity and segmentation than buy‐out funds. In the context of a WLS‐regression approach the paper reports a highly significant impact of total fund inflows on fund returns. It can also be shown that private equity funds' returns are driven by GP's skills as well as stand‐alone investment risk. In a bootstrapping context we can show that most of these results are quite stable.     

The Role of the Auditor in Modern Society: An Exploratory Essay

This paper examines competing proprietary and political cost arguments for incentives facing managers of different types of Australian and UK pension fund, to voluntarily disclose pension liability information in annual reports sent to their participants. For Australian defined benefit pension funds, the disclosure reveals the fund's actuarial surplus or deficit, which conveys information to participants about the pension fund's ability to generate future cash flows. Tests are conducted on the voluntary reporting practices of a sample of 119 Australian and 100 UK pension funds, using variables which prior research suggests affects their financial valuation and performance. The empirical results support predictions that managerial discretionary disclosure carries proprietary cost implications for Australian defined benefit pension funds, as proxied by their investment risk and funding ratio, and political cost implications for Australian defined contribution and UK defined benefit pension funds, as proxied by their size.     

The effect of pension accounting on corporate pension asset allocation

We examine the impact of new pension disclosures and subsequent full pension recognition under FRS 17 and IAS 19 in the United Kingdom and SFAS 158 in the United States on pension asset allocation. These standards require recognition of net pension surplus/deficit on the balance sheet and actuarial gains/losses in other comprehensive income. Therefore, these standards introduce volatility into comprehensive income and balance sheets. We identify a disclosure period during which UK companies disclosed all the required data under FRS 17 in the notes without recognition. We also identify a full recognition period starting 1 year before until 1 year after the adoption of FRS 17/IAS 19 (UK) and SFAS 158 (US). We predict and find that UK companies, on average, shifted pension assets from equity to debt securities during both the disclosure and the full recognition periods. We also find that while before the adoption of SFAS 158 US companies maintained a stable allocation to equities and bonds, these companies, on average, shifted funds from equities to bonds around the adoption of SFAS 158. Cross-sectional analysis shows that the shift away from equities is related to changes in funding levels, shorter investment horizons, increased financial leverage, and the expected impact of the new standards on shareholders’ equity.     

Do Mutual Funds Profit from the Accruals Anomaly?

Using data on both fund stockholdings and fund returns, we examine whether actively managed equity mutual funds trade on and profit from the accruals anomaly. We find that few, if any, mutual funds trade on the anomaly. The top 10% of mutual funds that have the highest portfolio weights in low‐accruals stocks have a greater, but still relatively small, exposure to low‐accruals stocks. Nonetheless, these funds make significant profit net of actual transaction costs, exhibiting an average Fama‐French three‐factor alpha of 2.83% per year. We also find that these funds are smaller, less diversified, and exhibit higher fund return volatility and higher fund flow volatility.     

Performance of Enhanced Index and Quantitative Equity Funds

We examine the performance of enhanced index and quantitative equity funds. Both types of funds use quantitative models in investment selection. Enhanced index funds set an explicit objective to outperform a benchmark index. Proponents of quantitative funds argue that their management style takes human emotions out of the investment decision‐making process and leads to more objective stock selection. We find evidence of outperformance by quantitatively managed growth funds, especially those investing in small cap stocks.     

Hedge Fund Involvement in Convertible Securities

Convertible arbitrage hedge funds combine long positions in convertible securities with short positions in the underlying stock. In effect, hedge funds use their knowledge of the borrowing and short‐sale market to hedge themselves while distributing equity exposure to a large number of well‐diversified investors through their short positions. The authors argue that many “would‐be” equity issuers that would otherwise pay high costs in a secondary equity issue choose instead to issue convertible debt to hedge funds that in turn distribute equity exposure to institutional investors. This allows companies to receive “equity‐like” financing today at lower cost than a secondary equity offering. The authors' findings also suggest that more convertibles will be privately placed with hedge funds when issuer and market conditions suggest that shorting costs will be lower.     

Managing Pension Risks: A Corporate Finance Perspective

Defined benefit (DB) pension plans of both U.S. and European companies are significantly underfunded because of the low interest rate environment and prior decisions to invest heavily in equities. Additional contributions and the recovery of stock markets since the end of the crisis have helped a bit but pension underfunding remains significant. Pension underfunding has substantial corporate finance implications. The authors show that companies with large pension deficits have historically delivered weaker share price performance than their peers and also trade at lower valuation multiples. Large deficits also reduce financial flexibility, increase financial risk, particularly in downside economic scenarios, and contribute to greater stock price volatility and a higher cost of capital. The authors argue that the optimal approach to managing DB pension risks relates to the risk tolerance of specific companies and their short and long‐term strategic and financial priorities. Financial executives should consider the follow pension strategies:

• Voluntary Pension Contributions: Funding the pension gap by issuing new debt or equity can provide valuation and capital structure benefits—and in many cases is both NPV‐positive and EPS‐accretive. The authors show that investors have reacted favorably to both debt‐ and equity‐financed contributions.
• Plan de‐risking: Shifting the pension plan's assets from equity to fixed income has become an increasingly popular approach. The primary purpose of pension assets is to fund pension liabilities while limiting risk to the operating company. The pension plan should not be viewed or run as a profit center.
• Plan Restructuring: Companies should also consider alternatives such as terminating and freezing plans, paying lump sums, and changing accounting reporting.

     

The Value and Risk of Defined Contribution Pension Schemes: International Evidence

We use historical data on investment returns and labor income from 16 countries to quantify the value and risk of defined contribution pension plans, building frequency distributions of pension fund and pension replacement ratios for each country. We show that pension risk is substantial and find that pension fund ratios are lower and less variable than when the correlation between wage growth and investment returns is ignored, typically halving the median pension fund ratio. We also show that an all‐equity fund is the dominant investment strategy across all countries, although sometimes a life‐cycle strategy insures against downside risk.     

Institutional Investors and Firm Efficiency of Real Estate Investment Trusts

This study investigates the effect of institutional ownership on improving firm efficiency of equity Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs), using a stochastic frontier approach. Firm inefficiency is estimated by comparing a benchmark Tobin??s Q of a hypothetical value-maximizing firm to the firm??s actual Q. We find that the average inefficiency of equity REITs is around 45.5%, and that institutional ownership can improve the firm??s corporate governance, and hence reduce firm inefficiency. Moreover, we highlight the importance of heterogeneity in institutional investors??certain types of institutional investors such as long-term, active, and top-five institutional investors, and investment advisors are more effective institutional investors in reducing firm inefficiency; whereas hedge funds and pension funds seem to aggravate the problem. In sub-sample analysis, we find that these effective institutional investors can reduce inefficiency more effectively for distressed REITs, and for REITs with high information asymmetry, and with longer term lease contracts. Lastly, we find that the negative impact of institutional ownership (except for long-term institutional investors) on firm inefficiency reduces over time, possibly due to strengthened corporate governance and regulatory environment in the REIT industry.     

CEO Overconfidence and Corporate Investment

We argue that managerial overconfidence can account for corporate investment distortions. Overconfident managers overestimate the returns to their investment projects and view external funds as unduly costly. Thus, they overinvest when they have abundant internal funds, but curtail investment when they require external financing. We test the overconfidence hypothesis, using panel data on personal portfolio and corporate investment decisions of Forbes 500 CEOs. We classify CEOs as overconfident if they persistently fail to reduce their personal exposure to company‐specific risk. We find that investment of overconfident CEOs is significantly more responsive to cash flow, particularly in equity‐dependent firms.     

Análisis del riesgo de mercado de los fondos de pensión en México Un enfoque con modelos autorregresivos

The aim of this paper is to analyze the market risk of two types of investment funds, Basic SIEFORE 1 (SB1) and Basic SIEFORE 2 (SB2). To do this, we propose a performance index that will be used in ARIMA-GARCH models and some of its extensions, with the purpose of examining the dynamic behavior of the returns and their volatility on such investment funds. Moreover, the risk premium of both types of funds is analyzed. One of the relevant research results is that yields obtained by these funds in the period studied, are not sufficient to offset the additional risk assumed by the pension funds including equity components. Finally, some remarks are made, on investment policy, about the market risk and how it is being measured and managed in these funds.     

How much does tax erode fund excess returns?

We model the tax drag from active fund management based on reported monthly holdings of active equity funds. Tax drag erodes 65 percent of the 0.74 percent excess return in Broad Market funds, but only 21 percent of the 1.80 percent excess return in Small-Cap funds for Australian superannuation (pension) fund investors. Tax drag varies with investment style; market state, which is most detrimental during bull markets; and fund turnover. For high-income individual investors, tax drag is exacerbated to the extent that active management only generates meaningful after-tax excess return for Small-Cap funds of certain styles.