Dutch trio launches PE co-investment

The Netherlands’ Achmea Investment Management, Blue Sky Group and SPF Beheer, with a combined €172 billion ($195 billion) in assets under management, have established a joint platform for co-investment in private equity. All three have about 3-5 per cent of their AUM in private equity, mostly in pooled funds; the trio aims to halve costs and gain access to co-investment deals by working together.

Blue Sky Group runs €22 billion ($24 billion) for three schemes sponsored by Dutch airline KLM. SPF Beheer manages €20 billion ($22 billion) for clients including railways scheme SPF and the public transport pension fund SPOV. Achmea IM, with €130 billion ($147 billion) under management, runs the balance sheet for Holland insurance group Achmea and is also the fiduciary adviser for about 30 independent pension funds.

Jos van Gisbergen, senior portfolio manager for private equity at Achmea, speaks to Top1000funds.com about the rationale behind the collaboration.

What is the background to the private equity platform?

The three of us have always run our own private equity programs with our own activities, going out into the world, hunting the same opportunities. We said OK, it’s time to stop dividing up this landscape and work together. The platform is a program for co-investment and promises a bright future for all three of us and any third parties that want to join. We hope people will see this platform in operation and see how it works. We would like it to expand in the Dutch market.

How does it work?

Sponsored Content

Each of the third parties will decide annually how much they want to invest and will bring that money for co-investment. We will co-invest with GPs, we won’t go direct. We will focus on choosing managers with deep knowledge and specialism.

How popular has it been with GPs?

We have found that GPs like this structure because it is better to have a combined group with more capital to commit. With the platform in place, they know the money is there. Today in the co-investment market, it is increasingly common for money not to be available when the deal comes through the door. This structure is different and allows us to act quickly. However, in some ways, it is also more challenging for GPs having a bigger group the other side of the negotiating table. Divide and conquer has served GPs well; when we invest on our own, we pay higher prices.

Private equity funds usually charge management fees based on assets, including cash yet to be invested or un-called capital. How will this platform operate?

The fund will run a pool of capital on an annual basis. If there are no co-investment opportunities through the course of a year, rather than remain as uncalled capital, the money is freed up and released for the following year in new opportunities. We don’t operate like traditional private equity around committed capital and the fees that this incurs. We are paying fees only on invested capital. This is a new structure that is coming out of the pension community. We are not like other groups out in the market needing to maximise their returns in the short term. This is a product for our community and owned by our community.

What sort of fees do you pay?

As soon as a deal comes through the door and we have screened it and approved it – and the deal closes – we then pay a fee to reflect the extensive work of our GP partners. In the first year, we estimate that we will halve the cost of our private equity investment on a total expense ratio. There are good returns in this industry, and it’s the people providing the risk capital – not just the GPs – who should be rewarded.

Could this model be rolled out into other illiquid markets?

We hope that this platform is a first step in facilitating co-investment in other illiquid markets where pension funds can combine their efforts and resources to avoid the fee burn. A lot of pensions want to invest in the alternative space, but many have only small teams and can’t invest here in an efficient and structured way.

Leave a Comment

More from this fund

Rest Super’s selective approach to PE pays off as program comes of age

Rest Super’s selective approach to PE pays off as program comes of age

A concentrated bet on fewer, better GP relationships is paying off for one of Australia's largest superannuation funds. Built on selective manager and deal selection rather than a broad roster, the A$112 billion ($78 billion) Rest Super delivered private equity returns more than double the peer average last financial year, as the fund proactively courts top-tier PE firms instead of waiting to be approached.

Sort content by

Infrastructure prices don’t show bubble

A decade of price increases in unlisted infrastructure raised fears of an “infrastructure bubble”. On the contrary, this period was one of price discovery for a nascent asset class, research by EDHECinfra finds.

Tough times greet new CalPERS CIO

Ben Meng isn’t easing into his role. The new CIO of CalPERS faces three new board members, a stressed private equity program and executive turnover, all under the pressure of a 70 per cent funded status and a maturing membership at the $340 billion fund.

Value lies where precious data is stored

Organisations across the globe are collecting data, analysing and re-analysing it more and more every day. As this trend continues, data infrastructure – tangible or intangible – becomes increasingly attractive. Canada’s OPTrust cites this reality as the rationale behind the EdgeCore partnership. It thinks data is its own asset class.

Northern LGPS forges own pooling path

The UK’s £45 billion Northern LGPS pool has eschewed creating a separate FCA-regulated entity, seeing it as an unnecessary expense. Moves in infrastructure and private equity have also reflected the asset pool’s laser-like focus on keeping costs down.

LUCRF’s member profile drives strategy

Leigh Gavin, CIO at Australian industry-fund pioneer LUCRF Super, takes care to match portfolios and costs with the needs of the fund’s low-balance membership. In recent years, this has meant taking on additional risk and questioning fee models in private equity.

Why credit ratings need to reflect ESG

ESG relevance scores and ESG-dedicated sections in ratings commentaries are examples of how ratings agencies are addressing demand for analysis of such risk factors in fixed income, the PRI’s Carmen Nuzzo says. Managing data for good comparisons will be a challenge going forward.

Previous