Denmark’s ATP defends risk parity despite worst loss ever

Denmark’s largest pension fund, the DKK 732.6 billion ($98 billion) ATP, has just posted its worst loss ever, shedding nearly DKK 58 billion ($8.2 billion) mostly in its investment portfolio. Rising interest rates and falling equity markets hit the allocation, impacting investments in government and mortgage bonds and listed equities particularly.

The return-seeking fund, run on a risk-parity basis since 2005, introduced four risk factors in 2016 based on equity, interest rates, inflation and other risk factors – namely illiquid risk factors and an allocation to long/short hedge funds or alternative risk premiums. The strategy has always sold itself on an ability to function well in almost any market environment due to its perfect balance between different asset classes.

Despite the latest results and other investors losing faith  with risk parity, ATP’s CIO Mikkel Svenstrup tells Top1000Funds he is sticking with the approach.

“ATP’s long-term strategy for the investment portfolio is to follow a balanced risk strategy in our four factors,” he says. “That hasn’t changed just because this year the rates factor has underperformed equity. A more traditional 60/40 portfolio would only have done slightly better.”

Svenstrup continues that in today’s stagflationary world, where central banks are fighting inflation by rising rates, none of the three main factors will perform. The largest positive contributions in the recent results came from the holdings of inflation-related instruments.

It means the most important decision lies around whether to increase or reduce the risk level, and during the first six months of 2022,  Svenstrup says ATP reduced the level of risk in the investment portfolio. Levels published at the end of 2021 marked market equity factor at 47 per cent, interest rate factor at 32 per cent, inflation factor at 14 per cent and other factors at 7 per cent.

Sponsored Content

Risk parity experts say that when interest rates are rising, risk parity can open the door to hidden interest rate risk seeping into other factors and upsetting the balance. For example, high interest rates can convert into lower equities. Rising inflation is another source of disruption because of its impact on interest rate risk. In short, the different factors may end up throwing off the same cashflows and stack up the same exposures. It can leave risk parity investors struggling to diversify and reduce risk – or running more risk than they thought they had.

Positives

Svenstrup  stresses that despite the losses, the basic security of ATP’s guaranteed pension is unchanged because of its large hedging programme.  “ATP protects its pension guarantees by hedging the interest rate risk allowing us to ensure that all our members – more than 5 million in Denmark – receive the pensions promised regardless of interest rates rising or falling. ATP will maintain its disciplined approach to risk management as a long-term investor.”

The funded ratio is secure, he continues. “ATP started 2022 with a funding ratio of 120 per cent after paying 4 per cent general bonus to all our members and now the funding ratio has dropped to 117.4 per cent which is in line with the historical levels.”

“No doubt we have had a large loss in the investment portfolio. However, given that the returns the last three years were 44.2 per cent, 23.3 per cent and 35 per cent – a half year return of -36.4 per cent is a poor outcome but not at all inconsistent with our high risk strategies,” he concludes.

Asset Owner:ATP

Leave a Comment

The twin forces rewriting the rules of investing

The twin forces rewriting the rules of investing

Portfolios built for the old world will be severely tested as emerging forces rewrite the rules of investing. The Fiduciary Investors Symposium heard that geopolitical and macroeconomic upheaval, together with the disruption wrought by AI, should force asset owners to rethink the structure and composition of portfolios.

Sort content by

What past market crashes teach us

Looking back at the portfolios of large institutional investors during and after the dot.com crash and the GFC, CEM Benchmarking, reveals commonality in the portfolios that thrived. For both events the top quartile returns were more than 2 per cent higher than the bottom quartile. Analysing the asset allocation and behaviour of investors showed two clear themes: top quartile performers had more defensive allocations pre-crash; and rebalancing is a tailwind for performance.

Harvard endowment goes net zero by 2050

The Harvard endowment is about half way through its transition to external investment management and will work with its service providers to implement the university’s new directive, to position the portfolio in line with net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

Markets remain fragile

A risk management strategy that measures resilience and fragility of markets, protected portfolios from the wild February downswing in equity markets, and predicts more fragility to come.

Investing in infra: living dangerously?

COVID-19 lockdowns have highlighted the risks in infrastructure, that have been there all along. The realisation that infrastructure assets represent significant risk exposures, that should be understood and managed, will determine the coming of age of the infrastructure asset class.

The importance of governance in a crisis

From December to mid-March of this year New Zealand Super lost 20 per cent of its assets. It’s the second time in less than 18 months the fund has experienced a significant drop in assets but in an example of how good governance and process can allow for counter cyclical behaviour the fund is now buying equities.

Investors focus on human capital

Investors are putting pressure on companies to accelerate the shift to purpose-driven leadership and focus on human capital policies during the crisis. But while there are some examples of corporations making policy changes that positively impact their workers, supply chain issues pose a significant problem.

Previous