CalPERS’ effect persists: Wilshire analyses focus list performance

CalPERS will review all elements to the methodology of its successful focus list in the coming months, as the latest study by Wilshire shows companies on CalPERS’ radar over the past 23 years have had a total return turnaround of 32.5 per cent on average.In Wilshire’s annual review it looked at the companies’ performance for the five-year returns before and after CalPER’s attention, and found they retuned 12.7 per cent above their benchmark for the five years after their “initiative date”, or 2.4 per cent on an annualised basis, compared with 83.3 per cent below benchmark for the five years before CalPERS focus, or -30.1 per cent annualised.

Since inception of the focus list 23 years ago, the fund has targeted 142 companies, with the number of companies on the list in any one year ranging from four to 11.

The review of methodology and consideration of new engagement opportunities for shareowner intervention, is triggered by a belief that now is an opportune time to complete a comprehensive review due to recent market developments and regulatory reform.

As part of the review input will be sought from academics, external managers, governance data providers and staff.

According to a paper to be presented to the investment committee next week, the annual Wilshire study on CalPERS corporate governance program has shown the “CalPERS effect” on targeted company share prices persists and that the fund’s “involvement has generally stopped the rapid erosion of performance results”.

Wilshire conducts an annual analysis of CalPERS corporate governance effectiveness by measuring the stock returns of companies placed on the focus list.

Sponsored Content

At the moment the focus list process involves an initial screen which includes 40 per cent stock performance, 30 per cent return on invested capital, and 30 per cent corporate governance criteria; from the lowest-ranked 50 companies, 15 preliminary focus list companies are selected; these are approved by the investment committee; then staff meets with the focus list company representatives and requests specified governance reform; staff then develops focus list and monitoring list company recommendations based upon each company’s response to CalPERS requested governance reform; the investment committee gives the final recommendation; CalPERS publicises the focus list companies; and monitoring continues for up to three years representing extended engagement of prior focus list and monitoring list companies.

The companies on the focus list for 2009 were Eli Lilly, Hill-Rom Holdings, Hospitality Properties Trust, and IMS Health;

For 2008 they were: Cheescake Factory Inc, Hilb Rogal and Hobbs Company, Invacare Corporation, La-Z-Boy, Standard Pacific Corporation.

For 2007 they were: Corinthian Colleges Inc, Dollar Tree Stores, Eli Lilly & Co, EMC Corp, International paper Corp, Kellwood Corp, Marsh & McLennan Co, Sanmina0SCI Corp, Sara Lee Corp, Tenet Healthcare Corp, Tribune Co.

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

Is the financial services sector serving the public interest?

Fiduciary law, which creates the boundaries and rules for asset owners managing other people’s money, is evolving. The short-termism, misaligned incentives and complex and over-supply of services that characterises financial services, is under fire. Regulators around the world are increasingly looking at how to change the behaviour and supply chain dynamics in the industry, and

The impact of the mega manager

The impact of size is a delicate point for asset managers. For specialist asset classes, and boutique managers, being small and nimble can be a source of alpha. On the other hand, being large can reduce fees and increase innovation and product offering. But now there is evidence to show that the emergence of the

The contested role of asset consultants

Asset consultants are a key part of the investment chain, providing small funds with services that include decision making processes and strategic asset allocation, and for larger funds traditionally playing a key role in manager and strategy selection. But a study by Gordon Clark and Ashby Monk, which is part of a broader look by

Demystifying private equity

US public pension funds, on average, have around 9.4 per cent allocated to private equity but for many public funds monitoring the firms that manage these investments – including the transparency of underlying investments, fees, performance and benchmarking – as well justifying these investments to boards and stakeholders, takes up more than 10 per cent

Why investors employ smart beta strategies

The common view is smart beta is used to side step expensive active equity managers or hedge fund managers whose processes are on the surface opaque, but on close investigation turn out to be largely beta like in approach. As investors have gained experience and familiarity they have also learnt about how it offers greater

Managing culture with risk management techniques

The interaction between governance, culture and performance is increasingly a topic around asset owner board tables. But little has been written about the relationship between culture and the financial crisis, and how to change culture in financial services organisations. Andrew Lo, professor of finance at MIT, has come up with a proposal to change culture

Previous