Towers Watson: complexity coming straight at you

To be a long-term investor requires thematic investing because markets and economies are complex adaptive systems, according to Tim Hodgson, global head of the thinking-ahead group at Towers Watson.

Hodgson told delegates at the Towers Watson Ideas Exchange in Sydney that economies and markets are complex and adaptive, their path is not random and the future is not predictive.

“We don’t live in a linear world. We must hold truths in our head while we navigate the future. A single market price cannot reflect this,” he says.

Towers Watson believes that there are a number of interconnected issues that will converge in the next decades, and which it outlines in its 2013 secular outlook on thematic investing, which will require transformational change.

“It is coming straight at you: the asset owner and you have to deal with it whether you like it or not,” he says.

Recognition of the interconnectedness of these issues is essential.

Sponsored Content

Hodgson says traditional investment thinking is drawn heavily from economics, which has separate disciplines. The micro side of economics is well developed and the industry is disciplined in how to optimise a portfolio, value a company or price a derivative, all in isolation. But the macro side, including the emergence of bubbles, is almost completely unknown.

Complex system, complex thinking

Hodgson advocates for complexity thinking when it comes to finance, which comes from the study of complex adaptive systems.

Those systems have these common elements:

  • They have simple individual components, but rich complex behaviours.
  • They are adaptive, not in equilibrium and the system behaviour changes in response to external environment.
  • There is signalling and information processing between the components.
  • There is no central control, rather systems are not controlled by any coordinating body, but there is complex collective behaviour.

“Complex systems are where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. You can’t break it down to understand it and put it back together again,” he says. “Markets and economies are complex systems.”

By way of example, he says academic textbooks in finance teach that everyone is making individual decisions in isolation, but that is not true.

“Markets are coupled and interacting; my trades change your prices,” he says.

He also says markets have multiple scales in time and space, and that fat tails are created by market participants.

In this regard, markets do not have a normal distribution, rather a “power law” distribution where the tail is much fatter.

“We shouldn’t be surprised by the large price moves. If you are, you’re using the wrong distribution.”

He also says that market returns are not random and “rejects” the random-walk philosophy.

“Economics and markets are complex and adaptive; the future is not predictive. As a long-term investor, you have to anticipate this otherwise you are at the whim of market prices.”

“Equilibrium is dead. It is the interconnectedness of finance that categorically matters. Tail events are normal,” Hodgson says.

Not alone

Further, his argument is that finance is not the only industry that is complex.

Health, crime, pollution, climate, economies, urbanisation are all complex and all coupled.

In its 2013 secular outlook on thematic investing, the Towers Watson investment committee outlines six key elements: economic imbalance, adverse demography, degradation and natural capital, innovation and technology, business nexus and government.

While acknowledging the thinking is the easy part and a lot of implementation of these ideas is still to come, he believes it will see a shift from dull market-cap portfolios to bright thematic portfolios.

Hodgson says this cannot be achieved by putting in place one or two themes and hoping it all works out. Rather, the themes need to encompass a complex and wide range of outcomes, with an option-like payoff.

 

 

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

Tail risk parity, V 1.0

Just when you thought you were safe, the next reiteration of risk parity has arrived. AllianceBernstein’s tail risk parity takes the concept of risk parity, reallocating assets uniformly according to risk, but it uses tail risk, not volatility, as the core measure. The concept of risk parity is a portfolio diversified according to risk, rather

Retirement: a cause worth working on

There are two things that drive the newly appointed global chief operating officer of State Street Global Advisors, Greg Ehret, in his bid to improve the client experience: the retirement business is a cause worth working on and the clients are the reason the business exists. Ehret was appointed to the new position at SSgA,

Pension funds, where banks no longer go?

There continues to be potential for pension capital appearing where bank lending no longer wants to go. Commentators in the UK and continental Europe have heightened expectations that pension funds will step in to help fill the continent’s bank financing gap. Societe Generale, for instance, recently predicted further “disintermediation” by investors sidestepping banks and looking

Building consensus for investment beliefs at CalPERS

An investment-beliefs workshop for the CalPERS board, held in April, revealed five areas, including active management, where the views of the board and staff lacked consensus. The contentious, or unsettled, topics for discussion were active management, private asset classes, sustainability (environmental, social and governance), investment performance targets and stakeholder considerations. At the board workshop, Janine

Behind PGGM’s ESG index

In 2010 PGGM conducted a study to see if it was possible to reduce the number of companies it invested in from 4000 to 400, based on its environmental, social and governance leanings, and still maintain it’s beta risk/return profile. The idea was that the €133-billion ($174-billion) fund would better know and understand what it

Holland’s hybrid: defined ambition

Jan Tamerus, actuary director at PGGM, was instrumental in developing the new Dutch pension defined-ambition structure. Back in 2006, he was involved in looking at the sustainability of the defined benefit system and in concluding it was not in fact sustainable, the idea of defined ambition evolved. One of the key reasons for not going

Previous