CalPERS urged to pull back commodities risk

CalPERS’ internal commodities team should enforce a tracking error limit for the portfolio it manages, and prepare to boost headcount and resources as investment opportunities evolve and funds under management grow, the fund’s primary asset consultant, Wilshire Associates, found in a review.

Following an on-site review, Wilshire recommended the fund’s investment committee provide a clear mandate to the commodities team with a target tracking error of no more than an annualised 2 per cent. Currently, the fund does not specify how much of the commodities’ portfolio can be invested in alpha strategies – but a tracking error policy would provide this.

In the beginning, the team gained exposure to commodities through an index swap. Its portfolio sits within the inflation-linked asset class (ILAC) program, which accounts for a maximum of 5 per cent of total funds under management, and also invests in infrastructure, timberland and inflation-linked bonds to achieve returns above inflation and provide diversification.

But as the commodities program grew, the team, led by portfolio manager John Kowalik, introduced alpha strategies which increased tracking error, and “while these strategies have added value, continued growth of these alpha-seeking strategies could undermine the intent of the commodities program – broad exposure to the commodities market”.

The team currently has a monthly maximum target to keep its tracking error around 100 basis points, or 3.5 per cent annualised. But this may be too high, given the team’s investment objectives. Wilshire wrote that its proposal of an annualised 2 per cent tracking error implied that about 34 per cent of one-year periods will include performance – either positive or negative – that deviates by more than 2 per cent from the benchmark.

Sponsored Content

Given the volatility of commodities, keeping the tracking error in check would benefit the fund because it would help curb significant deviations from the index, which may not fulfil the investment committee’s inflation-hedging aims.

“Wilshire recommends the alpha-seeking strategies should constitute a minority of the exposure of the commodities program, such that the program continues to provide broad exposure to commodities – hence, the link to inflation – but allows for some alpha to be pursued,” the consultant wrote.

The commodities program accounts for 1.5 per cent of the fund’s capital, and 30 per cent of the ILAC program, meaning that its performance exerted a “meaningful effect” on the success of the portfolio, Wilshire wrote.

Most of the commodity exposures were achieved through inexpensive index swaps, but 25 per cent of the portfolio was devoted to active strategies, including long and short strategies. Wilshire found the team ran appropriate strategies and managed risks well, but should increase headcount – particularly research and risk management resources – as the program grows beyond its current scale.

“AsCalPERS’ various programs continue to grow and the scope of the commodity program expands, additional staff members are likely to be needed.”

The program’s reliance on Kowalik also introduced some key-person risk, and prompted Wilshire to echo its concern that CalPERS, as a governmental operation, could not incentivise talented staff through equity ownership, as private organisations often do.

“The breadth of research required to find innovative approaches to capturing alpha is likely to require additional resources. As such, while the current portfolio manager is an experienced commodity professional, there is key-person risk associated with the lack of depth in staffing.”

Wilshire noted that Kowalik preferred strategies with high Sharpe ratios “which are diversified and have shown consistent performance across different market regimes”.

The consultant also assessed the program’s exposure to counterparty risks, given that its investments often involved swaps. While the team deals with various counterparties, its highest exposure to any one was about 25 per cent – well below the 40 per cent limit stated in the investment policy.

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

Maverick Series video: Gonski part I

In the first of a new series of video interviews featuring thought leaders in global institutional investment, chair of the $80 billion Australian Future Fund, David Gonski, outlines his views on governance. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

ATP reunites alpha and beta after 6 years

Alpha and beta rely to a large extent on exposures to systematic risk factors, so goes the “2013 thinking” of ATP in reversing the decision to separate alpha and beta in its investment portfolio six years ago. ATP has separate hedging and investment portfolios, with the hedging portfolio significantly larger at around DKK 670 billion

State Street’s Probyn into 2013

The current equity rally is not predicated on a shift in economic performance, according to chief economist at State Street, Chris Probyn, who says it would be reasonable to say the market may “pause for thought”. Probyn says the move from fixed income to equities has been fostered by some of the “economic areas for

CalPERS’ sustainability initiative drives investment beliefs

Launched this week, CalPERS’ Sustainable Investment Research Initiative (SIRI) will drive the development the $250-billion fund’s first set of investment beliefs. While difficult to believe a fund of its size, reach and history could invest without a set of investment beliefs, it is encouraging to see that sustainability will be a core part of that

Finnish pension reform a lesson for all

The findings from the first review of the Finnish pension system, commissioned by the Finnish Centre for Pensions, were handed down by Nicholas Barr from the London School of Economics and Keith Ambachtsheer from the Rotman International Centre for Pension Management last month. Although Helsinki in January is far from a party Ambachtsheer and Barr

European investors stay on the offensive

2012 was a year of battles for European pension funds. An ongoing war was waged against a severe regulatory challenge from the European Commission in the shape of Solvency II-style legislation. Aside from the uncertain struggle of that campaign, major European investors gained plenty of credit from standing up to corporate boards in the “shareholder

Previous