CalSTRS expands active/passive decision making

CalSTRS will double the ranges of its active/passive global equities allocations in a bid to enable investment staff to allocate funds tactically across active and passive rather than be forced to rebalance to strategic asset allocations.


At the February investment committee meeting, CalSTRS concluded its active/passive review of global equities and fixed income — which took nearly nine months — recommending moving the active/passive bands for the US and non-US segments of the global equity portfolio to 10 per cent, while keeping fixed income at the same ranges.

According to a staff report to the investment committee, endorsed by consultant PCA, staff found the 5 per cent range for the non-US portfolio restrictive during times of extreme market conditions..

The report says during the past 18 months the global equities portfolio has periodically “bumped up” against the current ranges which has the potential to force portfolio movements at points that would not be opportune within the market environment.

“This modest level of increased staff discretion will provide the flexibility necessary for staff to shift assets deliberately rather than having the current ranges dictate asset allocation decisions. The expanded ranges will be an important tool used to add alpha in the global equity portfolio by enabling staff to position the portfolio more tactically which, in turn, will broaden the opportunity set.”

The active/passive study has been presented over three investment committee meetings beginning in September 2009 and the latest presentation included a comparison of how other large plans were positioned.

Sponsored Content

Information obtained by Pension Data Exchange and from questionnaires sent to peers showed most US equities were passively managed when viewed in aggregate, while public pension funds favoured active management in non-US equities, with almost 75 per cent of the funds having a higher allocation to active than passive.

The global equities and fixed income portfolios make up about 75 per cent of the fund assets.

 

CalSTRS active/passive mix – global equities

Current range  Proposed range

US passive  65-75%  60-80%

US active  25-35%  20-40%

Non-US passive  45-55% 40-60%

Non-US active  45-55%  40-60%

 

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

Academics and industry unite

The gargantuan impact of systemic risk in global financial markets has been corroborated by a consortium of industry and academics collaborating to provide independent quantitative research, insight and leadership on systemic risk. Driven by director of MIT’s Laboratory for Financial Engineering,  Andrew Lo, senior managing director at State Street Global Markets, Jessica Donohue, and managing

Rethink remuneration

Institutional investors around the world have been lobbying for the right to have a say on pay, a right to have an input into the remuneration of the executives in the companies they invest in. In June the UK’s business secretary, Vince Cable, laid out new plans that will give shareholders three-yearly votes on executive

Endowments fall
from grace

US college and university endowments have gone from pioneers in the adoption of socially responsible investing (SRI) to markedly trailing the rest of the investment industry in integrating environmental social and corporate governance (ESG), new research reveals. The Boston-based Tellus Institute, an independent not-for-profit think-tank, looked at 464 endowments and was damning in its findings,

Kay Review recommendations tackle short-termism

Co-head of responsible investment at the £32 billion Universities Superannuation Scheme, David Russell, says asset manager engagement with companies should move away from its “almost myopic focus on remuneration” to other issues that impact value and strategy. His comments come on the back of the final report of the Kay Review of the UK equity

POLL: Which strategy within emerging markets debt do you find the most compelling?

mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

CalPERS: “opaquely transparent”

A Columbia Business School case study on CalPERS has criticised the fund for being “opaquely transparent”, with a computation of investment expenses revealing the fund pays three-to-four times its peers in fees. Written by Columbia professor of business Andrew Ang and Columbia CaseWorks fellow, Jeremy Abrams, Californian dreamin’: The mess at CalPERS examines the political,

Previous