Hedge Funds’ Latest Defector: Family Offices

Family offices join other institutional investors in retreating from the much-maligned investment vehicle.

Add family offices to the list of investors backing away from hedge funds.

Much like endowments and foundations, family offices are scaling back their hedge fund allocations, with 34% planning decrease their commitments, according to a survey by Campden Wealth Research and UBS.

The survey, which included 242 family offices with an average of $759 million in assets, revealed concerns about poor performance and high fees similar to those shared by endowments and foundations in an NEPC poll last month.

“This year’s report shows a re-appraisal of hedge funds amongst the family office community,” said Stuart Rutherford, director of research at Campden Wealth. “There are also some doubts about the ability of hedge funds to generate alpha going forward, even with the benefit of volatility.”

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

But while endowments returned 2.4% in 2015, family offices earned just 0.3%—down from annual returns of 6.1% and 8.5% in 2014 and 2013.

“The endowment funds of top universities tend to be prepared to take greater risks than the average family office, and often have much lower allocations to cash and fixed income,” said Rutherford. “There is also more stability in their investment approach and management because they don’ t have to navigate changes to family control and investment objectives.”

Perhaps due to these lower returns, the survey found that family offices are shifting their investments to riskier growth assets. Globally, investors pursuing growth strategies grew from 29% to 36% this year, with nearly two-thirds of US-based investors adopting these approaches.

“In the search for yield, family offices are playing to their strengths by allocating longer term and accepting more illiquidity,” said Philip Higson, vice chairman of UBS’ global family office group. “This approach is successful when experienced in-house teams have sufficient bandwdith for conducting due diligence and managing existing private market investments.”

Private equity in particular has become a favorite of family office investors, who grew their allocations from 19.8% to 22.1% this year. Hedge fund commitments, by comparison, dropped from 9% of the average portfolio to 8.1% in the last 12 months.

“Most family offices can trace their roots back to the growth and success of a single business,” Higson said. “Strong performance from private equity over the last five years has only served to strengthen this natural affiliation.”

Related:Are E&F Investors Abandoning Hedge Funds?

Consistent Risk, Inconsistent Returns

Maintaining volatility appears to be easier than maintaining a consistent outcome, according to research.

Past performance may be no guide to future returns, but past volatility can be a guide to future volatility, research has shown.

“Market participants may not want to assume that higher aggressiveness must prove rewarding.”Investors can “sensibly manage” the volatility of their portfolios through reference to a fund’s historic volatility, reported Tim Edwards and Craig Lazzara of S&P Dow Jones’ index investment strategy group, and Luca Ramotti of the ESCP Europe business school.

The researchers analyzed active unleveraged funds in the US and Europe between 2005 and 2015, and found that the percentage of active funds with higher volatility than their benchmarks had increased since 2010 after declining over the previous two years.

Analysis of volatility over rolling two-year periods showed a high level of consistency among active funds, the researchers said.

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

“For example, 70% of US-domiciled funds in the least volatile quintile in a given two-year period are in the two lowest volatility quintiles in the subsequent two-year period,” Edwards, Lazzara, and Ramotti wrote. Two thirds—66%—of the most volatile funds stay in the first or second most volatile quintiles, they added.

“Past performance may not predict future returns, but past volatility was a meaningful guide to the future volatility of active funds,” they stated.

On top of the volatility research, the authors also assessed returns in order to determine correlations between risk and return. At the outset of this exercise, the researchers said they expected lower-volatility funds “with persistently higher cash allocations” to underperform US equities, which gained roughly 8% annually.

“In fact, the data would appear to support a conjecture that, within any given fund category, fund volatility is effectively independent of fund return,” Edwards, Lazzara, and Ramotti reported. “The performance of different funds in the same category did not noticeably rise commensurately with their relative risk profile in the sample.”

In other words, while volatility usually remains consistent for active strategies, increasing overall risk levels will not automatically raise returns—nor will lowering risk necessarily decrease returns.

“Market participants may not want to assume that higher aggressiveness must prove rewarding,” the researchers concluded.

Fund volatility research

Read the full report, “The Volatility of Active Management.”

Related: Time for a New Volatility Model, Says Hermes & Dunatov: Volatility Measure ‘Dangerous’ for Long-Term Investors

«

 

You’ve reached your free article limit.

  You’re out of free articles!! 

Subscribe to a free PW newsletter - get free online access!

 Don’t leave before subscribing! 

If you’re a subscriber, please login.