Long-horizon premium: up to 1.5%

A premium for long-horizon investing has been quantified for the first time. A study from the Thinking Ahead Institute’s long-horizon investing working group puts a figure on the value add of eight building blocks of long-horizon investing and highlights the importance of governance in harvesting that premium.

The group’s study report, The search for a long-term premium, states that there is a net premium available by accessing return opportunities and limiting the drag on returns. The five strategies that provide opportunities for long-horizon investors are active ownership and investing in long-term oriented companies, liquidity provision, capturing systematic mispricing, illiquidity premium and thematic investing. The three that lead to lower costs are avoiding buying high and selling low, avoiding forced sales, and lowering transaction costs.

The report argues that depending on an investor’s size and governance arrangements, a premium of between 0.5 per cent and 1.5 per cent a year is available via these building blocks.

Tim Hodgson, head of the Thinking Ahead Group 2.0 at Willis Towers Watson and co-author of the report, says the premium exists but is hard to achieve.

“The key reason investors are not harvesting the long-term premium is because their governance is not up to it,” Hodgson says. “It requires a change in mindset and skill set.”

Worth the costs

Sponsored Content

For most investors, there will be some incremental governance costs required to implement these eight strategies. The group identified these costs as 15 basis points for a smaller asset owner and about 8 basis points for larger owners. However, the return gain for these actions is larger – estimated at 65 basis points for smaller asset owners and 161 basis points for larger owners.

“Asset owners will need to spend money, but it’s more than worth it,” Hodgson says. “This paper needs to survive public scrutiny so we have been cautious in our assumptions. If it becomes generally accepted there’s a long-term premium, then any investor with a fiduciary duty will have to consider it.”

The paper outlines the actions and costs of two funds – a small fund and a large one – in harvesting the eight building blocks of long-term value creation.
The smaller fund’s focus was on avoiding costs and mistakes; for example, by reducing manager turnover, avoiding chasing performance and forced sales, and moving some of the passive exposure to smart beta.

The example of the larger fund shows the advantage of having the governance and financial resources to consider all available options for capturing the premiums, including active ownership, investments in thematic exposures and setting aside cash to exploit forced selling.

The paper raises a number of questions regarding how investors would access the building blocks of value creation, and the working group will release a second paper outlining what investors require to implement them. This second paper will also include an examination of the beliefs needed to adopt this strategy.

Hodgson says some of the negatives that have a drag on returns, such as high turnover of managers and excessive costs, are explained in part by behavioural aspects.

The group deliberately does not define what “long horizon” or “long term” is, but it does attempt to say what it is not.

“It’s not having a minimum holding period, it’s not buy and hold; you’re allowed to sell,” Hodgson explains. “My personal definition is a long ‘look-up’ window, so for any decision an investor is making today, they should ask, ‘How will this pan out in 10 years?’ ”

The paper can be accessed here

The-search-for-a-long-term-premium

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

Defining fiduciary duty

What constitutes fiduciary duty is an ongoing discussion in the pension sector. The UK Law Commission has weighed in on the debate with its own interpretation.     Pension funds mulling the definition and obligations of their fiduciary duty can now refer to a consultation paper from the Law Commission, Fiduciary Duties of Investment Intermediaries.

Investors call for conflict of interest code

As an outsourced provider, fund managers make a series of promises to investors. Anything that tempts the promise to be broken is a conflict of interest, according to chief executive of Carne Group, John Donohoe, whose organisation has conducted a survey of institutional investors’ attitudes to conflicts of interest. In a survey of global allocators

Stock exchanges ‘need nudge on sustainability disclosure’

 A study ranking the world’s stock exchanges against disclosure on sustainability themes ranks the BME Spanish Exchange at the top. But the study’s author managing director of CK Capital, Doug Morrow, says stock exchanges need a nudge by regulators to enforce tougher disclosure standards.   The world’s stock exchanges “need a bit of a nudge”

Dry up: how investors assess water risks

The world is running short of water, but what does that mean for investors? Asset owners in the Netherlands and Norway assess and manage the water-related risks in their portfolios, including the measurement of portfolio companies’ water dependence and water security. The drought hitting South Africa’s North West Province sounds another warning shot around the

Serving itself: why the financial services industry needs reform

What would the financial services industry look like if it was structured to service the non-financial services sector, rather than itself? Economist John Kay, author of the Kay Review into short termism in UK equity markets, aims to find out.   In an ideal world there would be one, maybe two, intermediaries between the saver

Lepelmeier: interest rates ruin German strategy

German institutional investors face an urgent need to reconsider their bond-heavy investment strategies, argues Dirk Lepelmeier, a former investment head at one of the country’s largest pension funds. Herr Prof Dr Dirk Lepelmeier, to use his appropriate German titles, would rather be addressed as Dirk. That might be of no surprise to many, but it

Previous