Credit Suisse: S&P 500 Companies Face Larger Pension Deficits Than During Collapse

An analysis by Credit Suisse shows a combined $400 billion pension deficit for S&P 500 companies.

(September 6, 2011) – American corporate pension plans face a larger deficit than they did during the 2008 financial crisis, Credit Suisse is asserting in a report obtained by the Financial Times

The 326 companies within the S&P 500 that have defined benefit pension plans face a total of $388 billion in pension deficits, according to an analysis from the bulge-bracket bank – a number equal to a 77% funding ratio on average. This compares with a $326 billion deficit and 79% funding levels at the end of 2008. This bleak picture is likely the result of low interest rates – which directly influence corporate pension liability calculation under the Pension Protection Act of 2006 – and meager equity markets. “If you think about the typical corporate pension plan, they are continuing to take two big bets: they are betting on interest rates and they are betting on the equity market – and they hope that both go up,” David Zion, head of accounting research for Credit Suisse, told the FT.

Credit Suisse estimates in its report that each 25 basis-point decline in interest rates increases pension liabilities at S&P 500 companies by upwards of $45 billion. With interest rates at all-time lows – having dropped 50 basis points this year – pensions have been caught in a perfect storm of falling assets and rising liabilities.

As a result of these dynamics – as well as an aging populace – many companies have frozen future accruals or prohibited new members from entering into existing defined benefit pension schemes. Many others have abandoned them altogether.

For more stories like this, sign up for the CIO Alert newsletter.

Similar issues exist in the public plan space as well, although the problem is not rising liabilities due to interest rates (public plans do not base liability calculations on interest rates, but on an assumed rate-of-return). Instead, the problem in this sector has been declining assets and, as many argue, oversized benefits and a failure on the part of governments to follow through on promises to contribute into public-sector employee pensions. One solution that has been suggested is similar to that in the corporate world: shift from defined benefit to defined contribution plans.



To contact the <em>aiCIO</em> editor of this story: Kristopher McDaniel at <a href='mailto:kmcdaniel@assetinternational.com'>kmcdaniel@assetinternational.com</a>

Chief Investment Officers: Endowment Model, Risk Parity to Outperform 60/40

The alternatives-heavy endowment model and the bond-heavy risk parity model will outperform the 60/40 approach to investing on a risk-adjusted basis, CIOs believe. 

 

(September 6, 2011) – American institutional investors expect the endowment model and risk parity investment strategies to outperform a traditional 60/40 portfolio going forward, new research shows. 

According to aiCIO’s first annual Risk Parity Survey, 41.9% of the 109 chief investment officers (CIOs) polled expect the endowment model – which relies on heavy use of external alternative managers – to most outperform 60/40 portfolios over the next 10 years, measured via risk-adjusted returns benchmarked to 60/40 portfolio risk. Risk parity strategies – which rely on constructing a risk-balanced portfolio with a heavy use of fixed-income products – are expected to most outperform that same benchmark by 37.8% of respondents. 

Further analysis shows corporate pension plan CIOs to be the most likely to favor risk parity strategies, with 45% suggesting that the strategy will perform the best of the three asset allocation theories over the 10-year timeframe. Public pension funds also predict the most outperformance will come from risk parity strategies (40%), compared to the endowment model (32%) and the 60/40 model (28%). 

Perhaps unsurprisingly, endowments and foundations predict the best results for the endowment model (60%), compared to the risk parity approach (32%) and the 60/40 investment approach (8%). 

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

Breaking down the data by size, America’s largest plans – those with over $5 billion in assets – believe risk parity will outperform the benchmark the most (43.3%), followed by the endowment model (30%). Conversely, smaller plans – those under $1 billion in assets, and those between $1 billion and $5 billion – predict victory for the endowment model, at 47.6% and 52.2% respectively. 

Perhaps surprisingly, considering its dominance over the investment world for so long, the 60/40 model was predicted to come last in risk-adjusted returns over a 10-year horizon by all silos of asset owners polled – corporate funds, public funds, E&Fs, small plans, medium plans, and large plans. 

For a look at the complete survey results, click here



To contact the <em>aiCIO</em> editor of this story: Kristopher McDaniel at <a href='mailto:kmcdaniel@assetinternational.com'>kmcdaniel@assetinternational.com</a>

«