Certain or Liquid: A New Way to Class Assets

A UK consultant asks whether it is time to reassess how we label investments.

How investors classify their investments might be holding them back from achieving the outcomes they want, according to analysis by consulting firm Redington.

Categorisation of assets has become meaningless for pension investors, according to Redington Associate Alice Cheung, as the sector has spread beyond simple boundaries of existing terms such as “equities” and “bonds”.

Even the trend for calling assets “growth” or “matching” has become futile, she argued.

“Even without the last few crises, it is clear that risk, return, and relative value are subjective and will fluctuate.”—Alice Cheung, Redington“What is the level of return that earns an asset class the title ‘growth’?” said Cheung. “Is it ‘matching’ if it has duration? Even now with corporate bonds, you would be unable to get a consensus for ‘growth’ or ‘matching’ with a group of 10 pension people. How are we to make good investment decisions using a system that is inconsistent within its own industry?”

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

Cheung maintained that catch-all terms, such as “alternatives” were not helpful either, as they covered too much and left investors often lost and not getting what they expected.

Instead, she encouraged investors to think about what they wanted from their portfolios.

“Before we dive into conjuring every shade of classes between matching and growth, perhaps it’s time to rethink what pension funds need from their assets,” she said. “Even without the last few crises, it is clear that risk, return, and relative value are subjective and will fluctuate.”

The attributes that pension investors value are two-fold, according to Cheung: Cash flow certainty and liquidity.

The certainty of cash flow from an asset can be plotted on an axis alongside another showing its liquidity. This would allow investors to choose from a spectrum of assets depending on their own particular needs rather than use arbitrary valuations and measurements, she said.

However, she warned that to implement such changes within a pension or other institutional investor a strong governance model would be essential.

Cheung’s analysis can be found on the Redington website.

Related Content:Investors Are Driven to Short Termism, Says Hermes & Bad Habits in Asset Allocation

Indices: Asset Management’s Golden Goose?

Following on the heels of LSE’s acquisition of Russell Investments, LGIMA has launched a US index fund business of its own.

Legal & General Investment Management America (LGIMA) has announced the launch of its US index fund management business. 

According to the US arm of UK-based Legal & General Investment Management, the new venture would help further expand the firm’s footprint in America.

“Indexing is an important component in our sophisticated approach to implementing a cost effective and customized de-risking strategy for our pension and institutional clients,” Mike Craston, CEO of LGIMA, said in a statement.

The addition of the index business aligns with broad shifts in assets from active to passive management, said Chad Rakvin, LGIMA’s head of US index funds.

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

To prepare for the launch, the Chicago-based division took over $60 billion in pension assets from its parent company, doubling its total assets. In October, LGIMA also brought over two members from the UK team—Drew Miyawaki, head of global equity trading, and Aodhagán Byrne, index portfolio manager—to help lead the enterprise.

“LGIMA is in a growth mode and a key component is bringing talent to Chicago, and mobilizing our equities capabilities under one global desk,” Rakvin said. “The move to a global trading model will put our traders closer to the market and, more generally, supports our move to create a truly global index business.”

The firm’s CEO added the US index fund business would help provide a “level of service that is centered on transparency—free from those conflicts of interest.”

The asset manager’s move resembles the London Stock Exchange’s (LSE) recent purchase of Russell Investments’ index and investment management businesses.

LSE’s Chief Executive Xavier Rolet said in June the acquisition “sits squarely with [its] strategy… and provides another key driver of growth by growing [its] presence in the US, the largest global financial services market.”

By bringing together more than $5 trillion of benchmarked assets from Russell and $4 trillion of equities from LSE-owned index operator FTSE, the two firms said they hope to create a “[number] two player in US-listed exchange-traded funds.”

However, the future of Russell’s asset management business is unclear, with many industry experts speculating LSE would eventually sell the unit separately to a strategic buyer or a private equity firm.

Read more about the breakdown of the anatomy of Russell and what LSE might have in store for its asset management and consulting business.

Related Content: What Is Russell Investments?, LSE Buys Russell Investments for $2.7 Billion

«

 

You’re viewing the first of three free articles.

 Subscribe to a free PW Newsletter! 

…subscribing gets you free access to PW’s online content!

If you’re a subscriber, please login.

Close