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

Maverick Series video: Gonski part I

In the first of a new series of video interviews featuring thought leaders in global institutional investment, chair of the $80 billion Australian Future Fund, David Gonski, outlines his views on governance. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

ATP reunites alpha and beta after 6 years

Alpha and beta rely to a large extent on exposures to systematic risk factors, so goes the “2013 thinking” of ATP in reversing the decision to separate alpha and beta in its investment portfolio six years ago. ATP has separate hedging and investment portfolios, with the hedging portfolio significantly larger at around DKK 670 billion

State Street’s Probyn into 2013

The current equity rally is not predicated on a shift in economic performance, according to chief economist at State Street, Chris Probyn, who says it would be reasonable to say the market may “pause for thought”. Probyn says the move from fixed income to equities has been fostered by some of the “economic areas for

CalPERS’ sustainability initiative drives investment beliefs

Launched this week, CalPERS’ Sustainable Investment Research Initiative (SIRI) will drive the development the $250-billion fund’s first set of investment beliefs. While difficult to believe a fund of its size, reach and history could invest without a set of investment beliefs, it is encouraging to see that sustainability will be a core part of that

Finnish pension reform a lesson for all

The findings from the first review of the Finnish pension system, commissioned by the Finnish Centre for Pensions, were handed down by Nicholas Barr from the London School of Economics and Keith Ambachtsheer from the Rotman International Centre for Pension Management last month. Although Helsinki in January is far from a party Ambachtsheer and Barr

European investors stay on the offensive

2012 was a year of battles for European pension funds. An ongoing war was waged against a severe regulatory challenge from the European Commission in the shape of Solvency II-style legislation. Aside from the uncertain struggle of that campaign, major European investors gained plenty of credit from standing up to corporate boards in the “shareholder

Previous