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

NZ Super cuts benchmark return expectation on US valuation concerns

NZ Super cuts benchmark return expectation on US valuation concerns

A view that the US stock market is overvalued and equity risk premia will be lower over the long term has driven New Zealand Super to lower the return expectations for its reference portfolio following its recent five-yearly review of the benchmark. Co-chief investment officer Brad Dunstan also flags underweight commodity exposure as an area to address and explains why the fund remains sceptical of illiquidity premia despite seeing a growing case for private markets.

Sort content by

A granular view of emerging markets will serve investors better

A market-weighted index isn’t necessarily the best indicator of where growth in Asia will come from in future. The Monetary Authority of Singapore's Bernard Wee told the Fiduciary Investors Symposium that investors must take a much closer look at the region and understand the nuances of trade and investment.

Investors urged to allocate more and get boots on the ground in Asia

The economic fundamentals of Asia dictate that asset owners should lift their allocations to the region, and a panel at the Fiduciary Investors Symposium - including chief of APG in the region - heard the best way to exploit the emerging opportunities is to have investment professionals on the ground.

China experts split on the nation’s financial policymaking capability 

The strength of China’s national leadership remains a central topic for avid China watchers around the world. As the nation heads into a structural reshuffle of its economy, investors, researchers and political scientists have different views on Chinese policymakers’ ability to work with the financial market from this point on.

Asian investors reveal home bias challenges

For investors based in Asia, a home bias can throw up some challenges that affect investors homed in other regions much less. Three Asia-based investors - Temasek, Brunei Investment Agency and Khazanah - outlined to the Fiduciary Investors Symposium in Singapore last week how they face into those challenges.

Looking backwards is a poor way to assess Asia’s future

The specific drivers of growth of Asian economies means a traditional view of asset allocation is not necessarily the best way to approach investing in the region, the 2024 Top100funds.com Fiduciary Investors Symposium in Singapore has heard.

Recasting emissions abatement as expensive rather than hard 

When it comes to figuring out how a company will get to net zero and how their transition will be financed, more investors are making a distinction between emissions that are hard to abate, and emissions that are expensive to abate.

Previous