New decision making parameters for Alaska’s investments

The $38.5 billion Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation (APFC) has made further enhancements to its unique approach to investment decision making, clarifying procedures relating to risk guidelines in its investment policy.

The investment policy outlines via colour codes, different operating zones which allow for various decisions to be made with, or without board approval, and correlate to the riskiness of investments.

There are three zones – green, yellow and red – with the policy outlining that the portfolio must be within the green zone at least 80 per cent of the time. The green zone is the board approved, chief investment officer operating zone.

In December the board expanded the communications and procedures for the riskier zones of yellow and red.

The amended policy clarified each required step to enter into the yellow and red zones, including the steps required to extend operating in the zones. The policy had previously been less clear about extending approval for operating in these zones and the procedures required for notifying those needed to approve it.  The updated policy has also made provisions for the board to be provided with a historical report showing periods of operating within the yellow and red zones at board meetings.

Changes to the APFC investment policy also clarified that any weighting above 20 per cent to a single portfolio manager or investment vehicle within a distressed, mezzanine or credit opportunity mandate must be approved in writing by the executive director upon recommendation of the CIO.

Sponsored Content

Previously the policy did not specify who was required to provide the written approval. The amended policy also removed the restriction on the investment life of general partnerships, increasing the partners’ ability to invest in distressed debt funds. The policy previously limited investment life to December 31, 2022.

These changes follow on from the introduction of a new way of classifying its investments in 2009 and demonstrate APFC’s continual strive to make changes to ensure the fund is well positioned to provide benefits for Alaskans now and in the future.

One response to “New decision making parameters for Alaska’s investments”

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

AP2 appoints another new CIO

The SEK 204 billion ($28 billion) Second Swedish National Pension Fund/AP2 has appointed its fourth chief investment officer in four years, as the fund reports its best annual return since inception. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

France’s SWF names manager selection committee

France’s €33 billion Sovereign Wealth Fund, the Fonds de Reserve Pour Les Retraites, has made four appointments to its independent manager selection committee tasked with reviewing all mandate bids by funds managers. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Climate change expert upbeat on post-Copenhagen opportunities

Global head of climate change investment research at DB Climate Change Advisors, Mark Fulton, has a contrary view to most observers, post-Copenhagen. He spoke to Amanda White about the climate change market and the asset allocation implications for investors. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

ATP’s split portfolio

The performance of the hedging portfolio and a 43 per cent allocation to interest-rate sensitive bonds in the investment beta portfolio of the DKK352 billion ($65 billion) ATP were the main contributors to the group increasing pension reserves by one third last year. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Ibbotson reveals the ABCs – alphas, betas and costs – of hedge funds

Hedge funds, in aggregate, have generated positive alpha in the past 11 years. This finding, made by Roger Ibbotson, founder of Ibbotson Associates and Professor of Finance at Yale University, proves the strategies can resist powerful market declines but often fall short of providing absolute returns to investors. He spoke with Simon Mumme about the

CalPERS rates reputational risk above investments

Risk to reputation is more important than risk to investments according to a survey of internal staff at CalPERS completed as part of its governance/risk management initiative. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Previous