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

LPPI: Keeping AI risk in check

LPPI: Keeping AI risk in check

As the risk of an AI bubble grows, LPPI's Richard Tomlinson reflects on how the LGPS pool manages and measures AI exposure. In an interview with Top1000funds.com, he also explains how he has been moulding the fund's investment structure to be fit for a post-LGPS reform future.

Sort content by

Embracing difference: Why investment teams must be cognitively diverse

Tough investment environments, pressure on costs and competition for jobs are creating pressure on investment teams to perform better. And investment professionals need to jettison some antiquated approaches to decision making to keep pace with social norms. Cognitive diversity in teams has been hailed as a saviour.

NBIM’s RI report showcases benefits of transparency

Risk-based divestments increased returns on Norges Bank Investment Management's equity portfolio by 0.07 per cent in 2023. Measuring the impact of its investment decisions, reported in NBIM's latest RI Report, is part of a concerted drive for greater transparency by the manager of Norway's Government Pension Fund Global.

CalSTRS’ Ailman talks GFC, climate risk and worrying levels of US debt

After 23 years in charge, CalSTRS departing CIO Chris Ailman has more stories from the investment frontline than most. He shares personal recollections of the GFC, his fears of the scale of the climate emergency and why worrying levels of US debt hold new risk and opportunity for investors.

PGGM revamps fixed income; focuses on liquidity

PGGM's Wilfried Bolt explains how the end of quantitative easing (QE) has changed the asset manager's hedging strategy and prompted a keen focus on liquidity. He also explains the rationale behind managing more of the corporate bond allocation in house.

Early adopters to nature related disclosure nut out challenges

NBIM, KLP, AP7 and CIV are integrating new nature-related risks in their portfolios in accordance with TNFD recommendations. In contrast to the focus on emissions in sister framework TCFD, a key challenge is finding a cause to hone in on given nature is frequently complex and intangible.

Investors need to face up to commodity realities in the energy transition

Commodities are at the heart of the energy transition, impacting both the coming structural decline of fossil fuels and the demand for the new economy critical materials. But the reality is that many investors are reluctant to talk openly about commodities because of the negative perceptions of the sector.

Previous