Modern portfolio theory drives Volkswagen Stiftung

The €2.3-billion ($3-billion) assets at the Volkswagen charitable foundation in Germany are powered by portfolio theory and diversification.

The foundation is so keen on modern portfolio theory that its founder Harry Markowitz gets a mention in its annual report.

Chief investment officer Dieter Lehmann says he is sure “that his correlation analysis isn’t correct at each point in time, but as an average it is correct.”

The foundation, which despite its name has no affiliation with the modern-day Volkswagen company, being formed from the proceeds of a privatisation of the firm in the 19050s, has tried to implement a wide diversification of its assets to adhere to these principals.

It is most evident in the geographic spread of the foundation’s assets.

A mere 15.3 per cent of its $740-million equity holdings are invested in Germany – a proportion outstripped by its investment in both South East Asian and US equities.

Sponsored Content

A similar story is true in bonds, with a modest 29.4 per cent of its approximately $1.9-billion debt portfolio tied up in domestic government issues.

Some 57 per cent of its $556-million real estate portfolio is held in German properties – another modest proportion in an asset class where investing at home is usually much less complex.

 

Emerging market interest

The foundation made $211 million from its asset management in 2011 – by all accounts a good return in a turbulent year for investors.

Its penchant for diversification is starting to take it into emerging market bonds, with a recent $91-million allocation to the asset category.

Lehmann says that the foundation’s response to the eurozone crisis has naturally been to gain more foreign currency assets. These have been hiked from a long-term average of between 12 and 19 per cent to above 30 per cent.

Four per cent of total assets are now held in Australian dollar-denominated bonds, with additional Norwegian krone debt also recently acquired.

 

Navigating foundation law

Acquiring foreign-currency holdings is currently a necessary inconvenience for the foundation.

This inconvenience arises from Lehmann’s admission that the foundation prefers to manage assets in house, but all foreign currency holdings are mandated to external managers.

Germany’s foundation regulations, which Lehmann terms “special”, provide strict restrictions on any ‘commercial income’ derived from asset management.

The net result of this is that it is easier, and cheaper in Lehmann’s opinion, to run passive in-house portfolios.

Passive management also suits portfolio theory better, he adds, “so you aren’t investing in assets that will later change and ruin your correlation analysis”.

The Volkswagen Stiftung’s bond holdings are run passively to match certain sub-sets of figures from indices, rather than match any one index – an approach it labels ‘semi-active’.

That allows a tie to indices but creates added flexibility.

The bond holdings are invariably held to maturity due to another important condition in foundation law.

Only ‘ordinary income’ – bond interest, dividends or tenant income – can be used for grant making.

Profits from asset sales, on the other hand, have to go onto the capital sheet. That is not to say these returns are neglected, as maintaining the real value of the foundation’s capital is an important objective.

 

Finding the components

The search for ordinary income has an impact on which asset classes that the Volkswagen Stiftung can use.

Investing in private equity, for instance, carries a risk that regulators might scrap its charitable tax status as this would draw commercial income.

Hedge funds is another thorny asset class for the same reasons.

The foundation asked its local fiscal office in 2005 for permission to invest in hedge funds and private equity, with the foundation having identified their use as boosting diversification.

The fiscal office was sympathetic and it was granted permission to invest a maximum of 10 per cent in alternatives.

Three different fund-of-fund managers could not provide the returns that the foundation was looking for in a hedge fund portfolio, however, and the holdings were scrapped in 2010.

Private equity holdings have been less disappointing but Lehmann says the foundation has no desire to increase the 3.5 per cent stake in this category.

Matching the kind of private equity investments commonplace for US foundations would in anyway be “impossible” for a German foundation in any case, Lehmann says.

 

Property

A definite goal of the foundation is to reallocate the real estate portfolio towards a greater exposure to European office properties.

Given that over 15 per cent of the real estate portfolio is invested in Holland, over 10 per cent in France, and 5 per cent in Belgium, the customary geographic diversification is evident here.

The current real estate portfolio ties in neatly with the foundation’s charitable interests.

Scientific institutions let two of its key office holdings, in both London and Washington.

Likewise, an eye-grabbing investment in a historic palace in the foundation’s home city of Hannover is set to tie the grant making side of the business to the investment income.

Conferences, workshops and summer schools that the foundation sponsors might be held in the conference center of the reconstructed Schloss Herrenhausen.

The palace was destroyed in a 1943 air raid. Lehmann says the Volkswagen Stiftung can bank four per cent annual returns by financing the rebuilding project.

Publicity for the foundation from conference delegates and the public visits to the palace museum is also a way to profit from this unique investment.

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

Good for Harvard, good for the world: Why HMC embraced ESG with a passion

Harvard Management Corporation (HMC) signed up to the UN-supported Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) less than a year ago, but the company that manages the $36 billion Harvard University endowment is already moving rapidly to build environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors into every investment decision it makes. Jane Mendillo, president and chief executive of

Behind the long-horizon equities mandate at The Pensions Trust

How to implement long-term ideology is one of the enduring questions for investors. Unilever UK Pension Fund, The Pensions Trust and the Environment Agency Pension Fund have collectively allocated $750 million to the start-up, Ownership Capital, for its long-horizon engagement-focused strategy. For The Pensions Trust chief investment officer, the decision to allocate to a specialist

The challenges of a low-carbon mandate

AP4 already has US and emerging markets low-carbon mandates and plans to invest up to $1 billion across various regions. Mikael Johansson, senior portfolio manager global equities, AP4 explains how the concept of responsible investment can be integrated into the investment process of a large pension fund and the challenges in implementing low carbon mandates.

NEST’s defined contribution lessons

At the end of last year, 47 per cent of global pension assets were in defined contribution structures. As the trend towards defined contribution continues, one of the newest DC funds, the UK’s NEST, has some clear messages on what makes a defined contribution fund work. Chief executive, Tim Jones speaks with Amanda White.  

UniSuper’s domestic equities bias

John Pearce recently notched up five years in the role of chief investment officer at the $37 billion Australian fund, Unisuper. Here he explains his fund’s bias to domestic equities and explains the parameters of the fund’s in house management program. David Rowley reports. John Pearce has a side bet with a member of his

Why Sunsuper likes hedge funds

One of Australia’s largest superannuation funds, the $27 billion Sunsuper, is adamant that it gets value out of its large hedge fund program. This is against the grain in Australia, where many large funds (with the exception of the Future Fund) choosing not to invest in hedge funds. So why does Sunsuper favour hedge funds?

Previous