Performance fees hardly worth it

There is no appreciable difference in the returns of asset owners that do pay performance fees and those that don’t, so what’s the point of these fees?

That’s the question to ask, based on a research paper from Maastricht University and De Nederlasche Bank, in the Netherlands. The researchers looked at 218 Dutch pension funds between 2012 and 2015. They found no difference between the investment performance of those that paid performance fees and those that didn’t.

The paper, Does it pay to pay performance fees? Empirical evidence from Dutch pension funds, claims to be the first that examines the relationship between performance fees and the net investment performance of a pension fund and, in doing so, shows whether it pays for pension funds to pay performance fees at all.

The research looks at total returns, excess return and performance fees for the total portfolio and six major asset classes, and finds that those investors that paid performance fees do not produce higher, or lower, returns than those that don’t.

(There is one minor exception. Pension funds that pay performance fees for hedge funds report a net excess return 3 basis points higher, on average, but that disappears when the authors correct for risk.)

In 2015, the funds, whose combined assets are €985 billion ($1.1 billion), paid €1.5 billion ($1.7 billion) in performance fees, across a variety of asset classes but most commonly in private equity and hedge funds. These fees represented a 36 per cent increase from 2012, when the funds paid €1.1 billion ($1.25 billion) in performance fees.

Sponsored Content

Paying performance fees could be “economically rational”, the paper states, if they enable pension funds to enhance their overall net performance by recovering these costs with superior returns or higher diversification benefits. The findings show this isn’t necessarily what happens.

The authors observed that “performance fees primarily relate to gross excess returns for equities and hedge funds where investors pay 2.1 basis points and 30.5 basis points, respectively, for every 100 basis points of gross excess return”.

The 218 Dutch funds’ total return over the period studied was 9.72 per cent, with a 0.11 per cent excess return over the benchmark, after costs. For private equity, the total return was 11.54 per cent, with an excess return of 1.4 per cent, and for hedge funds it was 2.64 per cent, with an excess return of 0.12 per cent.

The paper further calls into question the relevance of performance fees by showing that pension fund size and specialisation are “economically more important for net returns than paying performance fees”.

Specialisation is positively correlated with net returns for private equity and hedge funds, the paper demonstrates; pension funds with an allocation to these asset classes 1 percentage point higher than their peers’ reported a 1.31 and 1.37 basis point, respectively, higher net total return.

As for size, the research also supports the notion that bigger is better. It finds empirical evidence that larger and more specialised pension funds pay less in performance fees for a given level of excess return in alternative asset classes, possibly as a result of their better negotiating power. Larger funds also apply performance fees more often, and pay significantly less for the same performance by asset managers.

The authors did recognise that, in theory, performance fees could be a valuable tool to minimise the principal-agent conflict between pension funds and asset managers.

The research paper cites academic studies outlining the benefits of performance fees, including aligning the managers’ incentives with the pension fund’s interests, and linking the manager’s reward to performance. Ideally, this should increase the effort from the manager and translate into higher investment returns.

The drawbacks are that the manager receives the same performance fee whether the performance comes from skill or luck, and the payments create a skewed incentive structure, as the manager benefits from excess returns but does not suffer from losses.

“We find no statistical evidence that paying fees for most asset classes adds or subtracts value,” the authors conclude.

The paper is by Dirk Broeders, Arco van Oord, and David Rijsbergen.

Leave a Comment

Future Fund looks to slash external tech spend in cost-cutting drive

Future Fund looks to slash external tech spend in cost-cutting drive

Australia's Future Fund is hoping to find tens of millions in cost savings by consolidating arrangements with external data and tech providers and putting a number of roles under review as it reconsiders resourcing in a volatile investment environment that it “expects to endure”.

Sort content by

Cost-templates pilot begins in UK

The Cost Transparency Initiative has entered its pilot phase, in which five of its templates will be tested in coming weeks. Data from the testing will be used to rationalise templates across the industry. The idea is to provide consistency of clarity of fees and costs, so trustees can compare funds easily.

Seeing pension costs should be easy

How much does it cost? It should be the most basic of questions from pension fund trustees when decisions are made about how to invest members’ assets, yet it appears this is often not the case. A lawsuit originating in the US state of Kentucky has the potential to change matters for the better.

Price war hitting active fees, too

Fee compression is here to stay. Only the few active managers that have met their benchmarks over the past few years have been immune. But make no mistake, asset owners will be reviewing all strategies for their value and fee models will continue to evolve.

IMCO plots private, inhouse future

The C$60 billion ($48 billion) Investment Management Corporation of Ontario, the latest kid on the block in Canada’s pension scene, is planning its asset allocation 2.0, which will involve more private and direct investments, more internalisation and lower costs. Amanda White spoke to chief executive Bert Clark and chief investment officer Jean Michel.

PennPSERS reports carried interest

PennPSERS has announced it pays its private equity GPs about 20 per cent of investment profits. The reveal from the $56.7 billion public pension fund, which came after a laborious process involving 500 staff hours, expands on its commitment to transparency.

GPIF’s Mizuno heaps change on managers

As CIO of the world’s largest pension fund, Hiro Mizuno has restructured fees and forced a focus on ESG and stewardship. Now the fund is using AI to make sure managers practice what they pitch.

Previous