Applying a factor approach to total portfolio management

A recent paper “Innovation Unleashed: The Rise of the Total Portfolio Approach” published by the Chartered Alternative Investment Association proposes a new approach to institutional investment that replaces asset class benchmarks with total portfolio outcomes. Hallmarks of the process include measuring success based on total fund returns rather than relative value in relation to benchmarks, and using factors to achieve diversification rather than asset classes.

Canada’s CPP Investments’ Derek Walker and Geoffrey Rubin, two contributing authors of the paper which includes insights from Australia’s Future Fund, New Zealand Superannuation Fund and GIC, Singapore’s sovereign wealth fund, provide specific detail of their factor approach in one section of the paper.

“We believe the factor-based approach, when implemented thoughtfully, provides greater transparency to underlying portfolio drivers and more effective tools for portfolio management,” write Walker and Rubin.

“A total portfolio approach is critical to how we at CPP Investments contribute to the sustainability of CPP,” they explain, continuing that diversification is the most important lever to control risks and influence returns, and looking at assets through a factor lens helps achieve a well-diversified portfolio.

Broad asset class labels like equities or real estate do not sufficiently capture the underlying drivers that influence the risk and return of investments, but analysing the more fundamental and more independent return-risk factors that underlie each investment strategy can. CPP Investments considers return-risk factors like economic growth, rates and credit spreads, they continue – for example, private equity is considered “high intensity” exposure to economic growth.

CPP Investments total portfolio investment framework (TPIF) reflects the full scope of investment activity at the fund. Underpinning these components is a factor view of the portfolio. At a high level, the TPIF framework consists of the following components:

Sponsored Content

Firstly, it involves setting risk targets drawn from information including the actuarial report and the investor’s own own internal risk and return expectations to estimate and express the level of market risk.

Secondly, the process involves setting exposure targets, determining the mix of factor exposures that maximises risk-adjusted return over a long horizon, robust to different macroeconomic environments.

Next the team set strategy targets. This involves modelling and mapping investment strategies onto the factor set – these representations are then consistently used through TPIF.

For example, modelling will capture different characteristics of the asset class like the fact real assets such as property and infrastructure both have exposure to economic growth and rates, while private and public investments may appear to be fundamentally similar, but their liquidity profile is materially different as are their leverage and debt levels. In this stage of the process, the team also recognise the additional expected risk and returns of active management.

The final step of the process draws together strategic allocation with day-to- day management. Using the factor lens, the team analyse how major new investments or divestments might affect the exposures of the total portfolio. “As markets and security prices change, we use our passive holdings of public market securities to rebalance our portfolios and seek to avoid unintended factor and risk exposures.”

TPIF also separates the management of foreign currency exposures from the management of the underlying assets. This permits the team to target the distinct return risk drivers of currencies.

Complexity challenges

The factor-based approach brings additional challenges above and beyond a traditional asset class-based approach. These include complexity, the risk of model error, and vulnerabilities to shifting macroeconomic relationships. Using factors to model private assets is challenging, and there are also limits on precision and robustness of the strategy, they write.

However, the duo argue that as we move to a less certain world, investors need to continue to evolve factor-based investment frameworks. Increased and more volatile inflation and emerging risks like climate change – like the need for analysis on the sensitivity of return on capital allocation choices to different climate change pathways – and geopolitical instability, are now coming to the fore.

“We believe that consideration of these types of emerging factors at the strategic allocation level and in the service of building a more resilient portfolio is important for institutional investors with diversified global portfolios.

We believe the factor-based approach when implemented thoughtfully provides greater transparency to underlying portfolio drivers and more effective tools for portfolio management.”

Listing key lessons, they write:

  • Establish a prudent and appropriate market risk appetite.
  • Determine the return/risk factors relevant to your program.
  • Map each investment strategy to your risk factor set.
  • Build and rebalance your portfolio based upon optimal factor exposures, not asset classes.
  • Consider adding new factors as the markets evolve.

Leave a Comment

Why NYC pensions CIO hasn’t drunk the ‘TPA Kool-Aid’

Why NYC pensions CIO hasn’t drunk the ‘TPA Kool-Aid’

Three decades of investing have given Monte Tarbox sharp eyes for recognising risk and opportunities, and he’s putting it to use as the new permanent chief investment officer of the $306 billion NYC Bureau of Asset Management. In an interview with Top1000funds.com, Tarbox outlines his vision for the fund, why he’s bullish on infrastructure but “nervous” on PE, and why he hasn’t drunk the TPA “Kool-Aid”.

Sort content by

Investors balance net zero with fiduciary duty and climate scepticism

A panel session at the Fiduciary Investors Symposium at Oxford discusses how the absence of policy is making net zero investment more challenging. Asset owners have to work hard to explain to beneficiaries why net zero targets give a better risk adjusted return.

Geopolitics: US retrenches to focus on one potential war

Leading global affairs scholar Stephen Kotkin explains why the US is retreating from its role as global policeman with profound implications for the world and warned that the rising number of regional conflicts bears comparisons with the 1930s. “It’s only after it happens that it becomes obvious,” he said.

‘Opportunity to lose a lot of money’ in net zero investments

Allocating capital to net zero opportunities doesn’t mean investors are prepared to do charity. In a universe of potential transition solutions, Battcock Professor of Environmental Economics Cameron Hepburn at the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford said investors should look at them with some filters.

Room for fee innovation as traditional models come under pressure

Asset owners and managers may not always agree on fees, but one thing both parties are thinking a lot more about these days is creating innovative structures which – if done right – could provide rewards for the former and value for the latter.

Asset allocation evolves to factor-in client needs and measure success

Institutional investors strive to link their strategic asset allocation to their key objectives and ensure it evolves alongside technological advancements. A discussion at Fiduciary Investors Symposium Oxford explored the complexities and trade-offs inherent in portfolio construction.

Blue bonds: The next wave of sustainable finance?

The blue bond market can provide an innovative means of supporting the critically underfunded blue economy and blue bonds offer a compelling opportunity in fixed income with untapped impact potential. Challenges include illiquidity in the market and where to place the investment in a portfolio.

Previous