Endowments Should Abandon Alts for Passive Investments, Report Says

Research shows that alternatives have become ‘serious drag’ on institutional fund performance.


Aside from a select few fund managers, endowment CIOs would be wise to abandon alternative investments, as the asset class is likely to underperform for the vast majority of endowments, according to a new paper from investment consultant and co-founder of EnnisKnupp Richard Ennis.

“Alternative asset classes have failed to deliver diversification benefits and have had an adverse effect on endowment performance,” Ennis wrote in his paper. “Given prevailing diversification patterns and costs of 1% to 2% of assets, it is likely that the great majority of endowment funds will continue to underperform in the years ahead.”

Since the financial crisis of 2008-2009, US endowment funds have significantly underperformed passive investing, Ennis said. His analysis shows that over the 11 year-period ending June 30, 2019, none of the 43 largest individual endowments outperformed passive investing with statistical significance.

Ennis examined the diversification and performance of large educational endowment funds and public pension funds in the US over the past decade and found that alternative investments ceased being the “putative diversifiers” they had been before 2008 and have become a “serious drag” on institutional funds’ performance.

Never miss a story — sign up for CIO newsletters to stay up-to-date on the latest institutional investment industry news.

“The decade ended in 2009 coincides with the glory days of the endowment style of investing,” wrote Ennis. “What remains unexplained is what transpired at about the time of the Global Financial Crisis of 2008 to cause endowments to lose their steam.”

In his research, Ennis created a dataset of fiscal-year annual returns and percentage allocations to alternative investments for 43 endowment funds with assets of more than $1 billion and created a benchmark for each individual fund. Ennis found that a composite of large endowment funds underperformed a passive benchmark by an average of 1.6% per year, and a composite of public pension funds underperformed by 1%.

He said investment costs, which were estimated independently of performance measurement, are approximately equal to the margins of underperformance of the institutional composites.

The 43 funds’ alphas ranged from a low of -3.56% for Southern Methodist University (SMU)’s endowment to a high of +2.07% at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). After MIT, the endowments with the highest alphas were Bowdoin College and Michigan State University at 2.03% and 1.39%, respectively.

After SMU, the endowments with the lowest alphas were Harvard University and Cornell University at -3.13% and -2.93%, respectively. None of the positive alphas were statistically significant; however, 11 of the negative alphas were statistically significant.

Ennis’ research also found that the average endowment has earned 8.5% per year over the past 50 years, compared with 9.3% for a 60/40 passive benchmark portfolio, which equates to a shortfall of 0.8% per year. The 60/40 portfolio beat the average in four of the five decades, with the lone exception being the decade ended 2009.

“Notwithstanding the existence of a handful of arguably skillful endowment fund managers in the realm of alternative investments, the vast majority of endowment funds incur costs that overwhelm the limited opportunity to exploit mispricing,” Ennis wrote.

“Those confident of their ability to identify truly profitable alternative investments consistently should concentrate those investments to a greater extent, just as they should do with traditional active portfolios. Absent such confidence, they should shift assets to passive investments.”

Related Stories:

Alternative Investors Target Health Care, Logistics, Shun Real Estate

Endowments Weather Pandemic Better Than in Great Recession

CIO Roundtable (Part 2): Alternative Investment Performance in an Alternative Environment

Tags: , , , , ,

Canada’s PSP Investments Loses 0.6% for Fiscal Year 2020

Despite loss, pension investment manager easily tops benchmark’s 2.2% decline.


Canada’s C$169.8 billion ($125 billion) Public Sector Pension Investment Board (PSP Investments) reported a 0.6% loss for fiscal year 2020 as a result of the market declines due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Despite the loss, PSP easily beat its benchmark, which lost 2.2% for the year, and it reported five- and 10-year net annualized returns of 5.8% and 8.5%, respectively. PSP also said it took in C$32.9 billion of cumulative net investment gains, above the return objective over the past 10 years.

“Despite the decline in equity markets before the year-end, we were able to exceed the reference portfolio for the fiscal year,” Neil Cunningham, CEO and president of PSP Investments, said in a statement. “Strong returns over the past years have helped bring the pension plans into a favorable funding position.”

The asset allocation of the portfolio is 47.8% in public markets, 14.2% in private equity, 14% in real estate, 10.8% in infrastructure, 7.8% in credit investments, and 4.5% in natural resources, with the remainder in cash and cash equivalents.

Want the latest institutional investment industry
news and insights? Sign up for CIO newsletters.

Private equity returned 5.2% for the year and ended fiscal 2020 with net assets under management of C$24 billion, which was C$500 million more than last year. New private equity co-investments totaled C$3.4 billion and were mainly in the health care, financials, and technology sectors

“Fiscal year 2020 was marked by continued strong deployment across the US and Europe, largely offset with another record year of dispositions resulting from active monetization of significant direct investments,” PSP stated.

PSP’s credit investments returned 4.3% for the year, an increase of C$2.8 billion from last year, and ended the fiscal year with net assets under management of C$13.3 billion. The group made C$7.2 billion in acquisitions, which was partially offset by C$3.9 billion in dispositions and net valuation losses of C$1.4 billion.

Real estate investments lost 4.4% for the year and ended fiscal 2020 with C$23.8 billion in net assets under management, up C$300 million from last year. However, the 8.3% five-year annualized return for the asset class exceeded the benchmark’s return of 6.1%.

“The pandemic significantly impacted the value of the global retail portfolio and more specifically the malls in the US,” PSP said.

Real estate acquisitions during the year included a large multi-family portfolio in seven US cities in partnership with Berkshire Group, a large industrial portfolio in Mexico with Advance Real Estate, and a multi-family portfolio with Starlight Investments in Canada.  

Infrastructure investments returned 8.7% and ended the year with C$18.3 billion in net assets under management, a C$1.5 billion increase from last year. The sector easily beat its benchmark, which lost 3.2%.

And natural resources lost 5.2%, compared with its benchmark’s loss of 5.8%, and ended the fiscal year with net assets under management of C$7.6 billion, an increase of C$800 million from the previous fiscal year.

“Performance for the current year was dampened by COVID-19, which significantly impacted the carrying value of the group’s non-core oil and gas assets,” said PSP, which added that “the crisis did not have a significant impact on our core agriculture and timberland investments.”

The pension investment manager said notable agriculture investments included taking private one of Australia’s leading agribusinesses, and a buy-and-lease transaction on mature almond orchards and associated water entitlements located in Victoria, Australia. The group also boosted its exposure to Canadian timberlands.

“Our focus on the long-term horizon has served us well during the global pandemic and has become more important than ever,” said Eduard van Gelderen, PSP’s CIO. “Before the pandemic, we were preparing for an eventual market downturn after many years of sustained growth in order to be able to respond quickly if a crisis occurred. Our strategies have proven their effectiveness in maintaining our portfolio’s stability and liquidity during tumultuous times.”

Related Stories:

Canada Pension Plan Investment Board Posted Lackluster 3.6% Return in Third Quarter

Head of Canada’s Largest Pension Warns Against Illiquid Assets

CDPQ Reports Solid Year of Progress Despite Missing Return Target

Tags: , , , , , ,

«