Polio, Covered Bridges—and Pension Buy-Ins

From aiCIO Magazine's Fall 2011 Issue: Prudential executes the first American pension buy-in. What’s next?

To see this article in digital magazine format, click here

Hickory, North Carolina is known for being the home of (a) one of the two remaining covered bridges in the Tar Heel state, and (b) perhaps the worst American polio outbreak of the 20th century. It is not known for pension innovation. Should it be?

In May, the Hickory Springs Manufacturing Company, with the help (and, perhaps, prodding) of Prudential, became the first American pension to complete a buy-in, whereby the Hartford-based financial powerhouse took on $75 million worth of risk from the company’s defined benefit pension plan. While buy-ins and buyouts have long been a staple of the European and United Kingdom pension market—where the Prudential name also holds sway—the Hickory Springs’ deal is being heralded as the precedent for American pension risk transfer.

“Europe and the U.K., they’ve been well ahead of America in terms of these types of deals,” Phil Waldeck, Prudential’s SVP for Pension Risk Management Solutions unit, told aiCIO in July. “They had large benefit figures, COLAs, and more teeth in their funding requirements—so it’s not surprising that they’d be earlier to go down the de-risking path.” This is a common story. Liability-driven investing (LDI)—often seen as a precursor to pension buyouts and buy-ins—was prevalent in Europe when only a handful of American plans had adopted it. Fiduciary management—or, as Americans usually call it, investment outsourcing—follows the same storyline. Pension buy-ins and buyouts, then, can be viewed as just another European import. “In 2012, the Pension Protection Act will force companies to write big checks for their pensions,” said Dylan Tyson, SVP at Prudential Retirement. “As they do, companies will ask themselves, for example, ‘am I a pension fund, or am I a car manufacturer?’ It’s not a question of if these types of deals will accelerate, but when—the regulatory pressure is just too great.”

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

The question, then, is this: If buy-ins and buyouts are to become standard American practice as funding levels increase, what will be next? Tyson, for one, sees another European innovation making its way to American shores. “Longevity insurance, for one, will become a tool used here,” he says. “It’s not really available today, but it could fit into an LDI strategy where the sponsor wants further protection against pensioner longevity risk. The Europe market started with LDI, then buyouts and buy-in, and then longevity risk transfer. That’s clearly where the market will go here.”

The innovative center of the American pension market can’t really be said to be Hickory, then. It’s actually Europe. At least they still have that covered bridge.

—Kip McDaniel

Study: “Bigger Is Better When It Comes to Pension Plans”

In a recent Canadian academic paper, researchers assert that larger pension plans outperform their smaller peers due to asset allocation, internal management, and governance.

(September 9, 2011) – Larger pension plans such as Ontario Teachers’ and the New York State Common Retirement Fund are more likely than their smaller peers to provide better investment returns, recent academic work from University of Toronto researchers Alexander Dyck and Lukasz Pomorski shows. 

Unlike mutual funds, the authors argue in the paper, pension funds increase in performance as their size grows. “First and most strikingly, we find increasing returns to scale for pension plans,” the authors conclude. “Bigger is better when it comes to pension plans. Larger plans outperform smaller plans by 43-50 basis points per year in terms of their net abnormal returns. 

This is partially the result of a greater preference for internal management of assets at larger plans, the authors conclude. “While delivering similar gross returns, external active management is at least [three] times more expensive than internal active management, and in alternatives it is [five] times more expensive,” they write. 

Large plans also outperform because of asset allocation decisions unique to them, the authors write. “We find that larger plans shift towards asset classes where scale and negotiating power matter most and obtain superior performance in these asset classes,” they assert. “Larger plans devote significantly more assets to alternatives, where costs are high and where there is substantial variation in costs across plans.” Real estate and private equity add the most value, they insist. 

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

Governance issues also influence returns, the study shows. “Finally, we present suggestive evidence that plan governance affects performance and the ability to fight scale diseconomies,” the authors write. “Long standing concerns about plan governance…are likely greater in the public than in the private sector, particularly where public plans have severe limits on pay for internal managers …We find that stronger governance provides higher returns and a greater ability to take advantage of scale economies.” 

The data on which the study is based comes from CEM Benchmarking, the well-known Canadian pension benchmarking company. 

For a look at the world’s largest asset owners – including the world’s largest defined benefit pension plans – go to aiCIO’s recently launched interactive database, the aiGlobal 500, here. 



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

«