CalSTRS’ leap of faith brings assets in-house

In an act of faith for the investment staff at CalSTRS, the board has approved that a further $15 billion in assets be managed in- house, including some strategies outside those first recommended by the investment staff.

Chris Ailman
Chris Ailman

The approval follows a comprehensive board analysis of external and internal management over a period of three board meetings, and is expected to save the $154 billion fund millions of dollars in investment management fees.

Investment staff, led by chief investment officer Chris Ailman, and the fund’s consultant Pension Consulting Alliance, recommended a list of strategies that could be potentially managed in-house, that were grouped into three categories using the criteria matrix, prioritised according to the extra staff and resources that would be required.

“To our surprise the board approved all of category one and two and said ‘be quick’. It means an additional $10 billion to $15 billion will be brought in-house in the next four months,” Ailman said.

The board approved that staff move forward with the potential strategies from category one and two at their discretion, mindful of implementation and timing needs. There is also a potential to move even more assets in-house, with strategies from category three potentially managed in-house following more analysis.

In addition to the cost savings of internal management – bringing the category one portfolios in-house will save the fund between $1.5 million and $3 million alone – the board discussion also considered other advantages of managing internally including greater control over the assets, coordination among asset classes and the ability to customise mandates.

Sponsored Content

“In considering what we could manage internally, we created a decision matrix which included the complexity of the market, operational efficiency, and skill. Cost was a factor but not overriding,” Ailman said.

The category one strategies are:

  • Russell 3000 passive portfolio (internal staff already managed 59 per cent of this $40 billion portfolio)
  • US equity tactical passive portfolios
  • FTSE RAFI US 1000 portfolio (a fundamental index)
  • S&P 500 equal weight portfolio
  • High yield portfolio
  • Contributions and distributions (currency management)
  • US REIT passive portfolio

Category two:

  • MSCI EAFE and Canada IMI passive portfolio (market capitalisation weighted index that is designed to track the performance of the 23 largest non-US developed equity markets)
  • Global environmental passive portfolio
  • Non-US tactical passive portfolio
  • Securities lending cash collateral
  • Currency repatriation

CalSTRS’ internal staff has had a reasonably long track record, managing about one-third of the fund’s assets over a 12- to 15-year period, and has had a round of internal audits in the past year. (CalSTRS broke away from CalPERS in 1983, and at that time all the assets were managed externally.)

“We have demonstrated our capabilities in managing the entire fund and of discrete portfolios,” Ailman said. “We are pleased the board said yes to us managing those strategies, and pushed it beyond our recommendation. It is a nice vote of confidence for our staff. We have existing internal capability, and this is a positive move for us.”

Some of the category two strategies that will be managed in-house, may require some new internal systems, for example, the equal weighted S&P500, REIT portfolio, and foreign currency management, Ailman said.

A lot of the foreign currency exposure will be brought in-house (last year the Californian Attorney General filed a suit on behalf of CalSTRS and CalPERS against its currency manager, State Street, which is still outstanding); and CalSTRS will also start to look at whether it can manage international indexing in-house.

Ailman said bringing these additional assets in-house would bring it in line with its global peers which manage around 55 to 60 per cent of assets in-house, until this review CalSTRS had about one-third of its assets managed internally.

“This will take us to that level,” Ailman said.

Among those managers to lose mandates were State Street Global Advisors, and BlackRock.

The board asked the investment staff to consider the internal versus external decision making about a year ago. The criteria matrix was developed following the identification of a set of key decision factors that would help standardise the process of whether an investment strategy should be implemented internally or externally. Subsequently the three categories were identified.

Category three strategies, which staff said could be implemented internally with an increase in staff and other resources, but which the board said needed more analysis are:

  • Global equities:

Non-US fundamental index portfolio

Low volatility portfolio

High dividend yield portfolio

Enhanced index portfolio

Option collar portfolio

Covered call portfolio

Best of analysts portfolio

Market neutral portfolio

Fundamental active portfolio

  • Fixed income:

Emerging market debt

Internal securities lending

  • Private equity:

Purchase a general partner

Sponsorless deal/CalSTRS direct investment

  • Real estate:

Non-US REIT passive index

Core real estate portfolio

  • Infrastructure:

Master Limited Partnership passive index

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

Studying the active management environment

In this timely analysis, Wurts & Associates examines the active management environment, warning investors of the pitfalls of studying and choosing active managers including a reminder that reaching for high levels of benchmark relative excess returns can be potentially rewarded, but only in a marginal way relative to lower tracking error managers. It also concludes

Recovery “square root” says Russell

It will be just as important for investors to be patient in 2010 as it was in 2009 according to Russell Investments, as the year will be dominated by a series of macro themes causing spikes in asset return volatility. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Financial services firms banish short-term bonuses: survey

Financial services firms are responding to the perceived negative impact of their remuneration practices by changing the mix of pay, moving emphasis away from short-term incentive schemes in favour of salary, according to a global survey of more than 60 organisations by Mercer. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Pensions for all in UK market’s big DC shift

Now that automatic enrolment has become the centrepiece of UK pension reform, decent retirement incomes should no longer be exclusive to company veterans and the well-off. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

CalPERS’ new sec lending risk controls

CalPERS has made some significant changes to its securities lending policy document in order to reduce risk and improve counterparty diversification in the portfolio, including a reduction in the maximum exposure to any counterparty, from 30 to 25 per cent of the total program.mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Lawmakers gun for OTC deals

While regulatory reforms can introduce improvements to complex investment products such as standardisation, Dr Arjuna Sittampalam, Research Associate with EDHEC-Risk Institute and Editor, Investment Management Review, argues an increased suppression of complexity could be unfortunate, particularly as pension funds begin to take to derivatives in a big way. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Previous