Managers refine glidepaths for a smoother ride

Managers are continuing to refine their strategies for target date funds, with more than a third of managers incorporating a tactical overlay into their asset allocation, a recent survey has revealed.

Global asset consultant Callan Associates’ 2011 survey of 26 target date funds managers with more than $375 billion under management found that while 8o per cent said their fund’s asset allocation was strategic in nature, 37 per cent now used a strategic with tactical overlay approach.

This was up from 24 per cent who said they used a similar strategic/tactical overlay approach last year. The majority of managers (51.9 per cent) said they still considered their approach as purely strategic, down from 64 per cent the previous year.

Callan defined contribution practice leader, Lori Lucas, said target date managers were increasingly looking for flexibility in their approach so they could respond to volatile market conditions.

The survey also looked at glidepath design, finding substantial changes to the structure of funds’ glidepaths were uncommon. But managers were evaluating the glidepaths more frequently and as result making more incremental changes.

While half of managers conducted annual glidepath evaluations, monthly evaluations were rising.

Sponsored Content

Nearly 14 per cent of managers now conducted monthly evaluations, up from just 3.3 per cent the year before. While this year, 13.6 per cent of managers will conduct quarterly evaluations down from 23.3 per cent in 2009.

The greater focus on glidepaths had resulted in the majority (58.3 per cent) of managers changing their allocation after their most recent evaluation, up from 34 per cent the previous year.

While typically small changes, the most noteworthy adjustments involved incorporating inflation-sensitive assets, with the majority maintaining exposure to a combination of TIPS, US REITs, international and global REITs, commodities and diversified real estate.

“Allocations to inflation sensitive securities and other diversifiers remain generally modest,” Lucas said.

“Often the target date managers are just dipping their toes in the water when it comes to commodities and alternatives and even REITs and TIPs allocations tend to be small.”

Lucas said that despite the pre-financial crisis view of target-date-funds as being generally fairly similar and commoditised there were, in fact, substantial differences in glidepath design and overall performance.

The survey found the rate of decline in total equity exposure as the member ages differed greatly across target dated funds, while asset management strategies and asset allocations also varied markedly.

More than 62 per cent of target date strategies represented in the survey were actively managed, 20 per cent were passively managed and 17 per cent were hybrid.

Of those funds surveyed 65.7 per cent managed their glidepaths through a 65-year retirement age, while the remainder managed to retirement.

Nor was it the case that funds that were managed to retirement were necessarily more conservative than those that continued to scale back equity exposure as the retiree aged.

The survey found there was a on average a “through” fund had 13 per cent more exposure to equities than a “to” fund by age 65. But by the time the retiree was 75 the continuing roll down in equity exposure led to an on average more conservative approach for a “through” fund as the retiree entered their twilight years.

“So it’s more than ‘to’ versus ‘through’ – it’s about conservative versus aggressive glidepaths,” Lucas said.

Despite increasing discussion around annuity products none of the TDF managers surveyed had included these into their glidepath funds, and only 16 per cent were looking at annuity-type solutions for the future.

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