Future Fund chief departs, alternative weightings increase

Paul Costello

Four years after becoming its first employee, Paul Costello will leave his role as general manager of Australia’s Future Fund, saying “new leadership” was appropriate now that the A$87 billion ($81.2 billion) vehicle was beyond its “startup phase.”

In that time the fund, which began investing in June 2007, has moved to a highly diversified position that includes 15.6 per cent in alternatives – where skilled managers are used to take advantage of capital scarcity and market inefficiency through a diverse range of strategies – 4.5 per cent in infrastructure, and 3 per cent in private equity.

In the year to June 30, 2010 the fund has deployed more than 28 per cent of its cash, with alternatives and global equities the main beneficiaries. The alternatives allocation, for instance, has increased from 5 to 15.6 per cent in the past year.

Costello said he will remain in his role for another couple of months, to “facilitate a smooth transition” to a new leader of the Future Fund Management Agency, Melbourne.

The fund’s board of guardians said it already was searching for a replacement, and would look locally and offshore.

Board chairman David Murray paid tribute to Costello, particularly for his role in “recruiting a skilled team to develop and implement the investment program.”

Sponsored Content

From holding an initial $18 billion in a cash account, the fund under chief investment officer, David Neal, now has more than 60 partnerships with global investment managers.

David Murray, chair of the fund’s board of guardians, said cash was deployed into strategies “consistent with our long-term objective”.

Murray said the design of the portfolio meant the fund was less reliant on equity markets to generate returns, than other investors.

During the year the fund moved its debt program, which remains a significant part of the portfolio at 21.9 per cent, away from holdings built opportunistically during the early stages of the credit crisis, to longer-term and higher yielding securities.

Asset Owner:Future Fund

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

Tennessee finally enters private equity game

The $28 billion Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System is a late entrant into private equity with its debut $25 million allocation to the Draper Fisher Jurvetson Fund X, occurring at the same time the fund has cut its allocation to short term assets by 5 per cent. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

UN fund increases equities exposure

The $37 billion United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund increased its allocation to equities by 4 per cent in the past quarter, at the expense of real estate and bonds, and is now overweight the asset class, as it continues to support active management. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

CalPERS measures liqudity levels

  About half of the $201 billion in assets managed by CalPERS is available to liquidate within 90 days according to a new total fund liquidity assessment to be presented to the investment committee as part of the quarterly risk management update, which also shows the fund to have a total leverage of 19 per

Mapping the risks of bigger government

Bigger appetites for absolute return strategies, new attitudes to risk and governance, and the onset of major regulation – these were the forces for change identified in Watson Wyatt’s 2008 study, Defining Moments. But the social fallout from the financial crisis has sparked another phenomenon that could heavily impact institutional investors, according to Tim Hodgson

LACERS alters allocations to hedge against inflation

The $9.3 billion Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System will tilt its asset allocation to hedge against inflation and will discuss altering its investment policy to explicitly address inflation at each annual asset allocation review. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Massachusetts special commission recommends system changes

A recently completed report by a special commission into the appropriateness of the Massachusetts retirement system contemplated the defined benefit versus defined contribution benefit design, concluding that the existing defined benefit structure was optimal, in part because it put the portfolio management in the hands of professionals. The report entitled, The Special Commission to Study

Previous