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

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