More beta, fewer managers, improves portfolio efficiency

A truly diversified portfolio will have 15 separate asset class allocations with an emphasis on beta opportunities and little to no reliance on active management, according to a Towers Watson’s model.

According to Towers Watson, such a portfolio would have a 20 to 40 per cent improvement in efficiency, measured as return by unit of risk, compared to a simple equity/bond mix.

Or in other words, for a comparable level of risk, the expectation is that returns would be 20 to 40 per cent higher.

Such a model would have fewer managers than employed by most pension funds now, with an estimated eight to 12 managers, compared to 25 to 35 in a full active portfolio.

Global head of investment at Towers Watson, Carl Hess, says this type of portfolio can be made up of beta opportunities and does not necessarily need to rely on active management to any great extent.

Sponsored Content

“What is important with alternative betas is to focus on those that are genuinely different and genuinely diversifying. We would therefore look to exclude, as far as is practical, any beta exposures that we can achieve more cheaply elsewhere in a portfolio. This is of key importance as what we are trying to achieve for our clients is diversification at the right price,” Hess says.

Towers Watson prefers using a bottom-up approach to alternative betas that builds a portfolio on a strategy-by-strategy basis.

It divides the new world of alternative, or unusual, betas into two types:

1. Strategies exploiting asset classes not typically used by most investors, such as reinsurance and volatility strategies and emerging market currency.

2. Strategies that exploit systematic risk premia in conventional asset classes, including value and small cap stocks and macro funds, while merger and convertible arbitrage could be thought of as exploiting an illiquidity premium.

Towers Watson believes, if properly constructed, these new betas should have a strong diversifying effect on a fund’s portfolio.

The firm suggests three new specific diversification opportunities: insurance-type strategies; the emerging market wealth theme; and alternative betas. Within insurance-type strategies it recommends reinsurance, accessed via catastrophe bonds, and other insurance-linked securities.

It also recommends investors increase allocations to emerging markets, via companies more directly exposed to emerging market growth, in areas such as infrastructure or domestic consumption, rather than on large global companies based in these countries.

Emerging market currencies also present an opportunity to exploit productivity growth.

It also views emerging market debt as a more attractive investment than in the past, as more than 70 per cent of the emerging market debt universe is now denominated in local currency bonds, meaning emerging markets are now much less exposed to a currency crisis.

“We believe that emerging market economies will continue to grow strongly, due to a mix of rising productivity, economic and financial reforms, and favourable demographics. However, institutional investors face significant complexity and potentially high fees, if not careful, when trying to build a portfolio that captures this long-term trend and should also recognise the governance implications of following such a strategy,” Hess says.

“Despite recent intermittent, short-lived peaks the equity party really ended as the new millennium began, so a heavy reliance on this asset class would not have been a good strategy since then. While moving to a diversified portfolio is a higher governance approach than a simple bond/equity portfolio, we think the effort is worthwhile for almost all institutional asset owners.”

 

Example of a Towers Watson diversified portfolio

Global credit 22%
Emerging market debt 3%
Credit default swaps 3%
Alternative beta strategies 6%
Long dated domestic bonds 31%
Property 4%
Market cap equities 6%
Secured loans 3%
Enhanced equities 6%
Commodities 3%
Emerging market equities 2%
Reinsurance 4%
Asset backed securities 4%
Total 100%

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