Rate Hike ‘Could Wipe $450B from Pension Underfunding’

The Federal Reserve's rate increase marks the beginning of a tightening cycle that will decrease the value of pension liabilities.

The Federal Reserve gave pension plans reason to rejoice Wednesday as it announced it would finally raise the interest rate after seven years of near-zero rates.

The Federal Open Markets Committee (FOMC) raised its target for the federal funds rate from 0.25% to 0.5%. The increase is the first in nine years: The Federal Reserve’s last hike was June 29, 2006.

“For bonds to underperform a cash investment, rates do not simply need to rise—they need to rise faster than the market expects.”“This action marks the end of an extraordinary seven-year period during which the federal funds rate was held near zero to support the economy from the worst financial crisis and recession since the Great Depression,” said Federal Reserve chair Janet Yellen in a press conference following the announcement.

Credit rating agency Moody’s estimated the move would “help eliminate” roughly $450 billion from US non-financial corporate pensions’ total unfunded liabilities.

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

“One indirect policy effect [of ultra-low rates] was increasing pension benefit obligations because of lower discount rates,” Moody’s Senior Accounting Analyst Wesley Smyth wrote in a research note. “Since 2008, our rated issuers’ obligations have risen by $703 billion to around $2.1 trillion. We estimate that $342 billion of this increase was driven by lower discount rates.”

Brad Smith, a partner in NEPC’s corporate pension practice, said the decision to raise rates is a welcome one for pension plans for this reason. As for the asset side, Smith said pensions were unlikely to make drastic allocation changes in the wake of the announcement, having already prepared for interest rates to go up.

“Our clients, for a long time, for the past six to nine months, have been waiting for the Fed to take action,” he said. “A lot of the managers have positioned their portfolios for a rate increase.”

Consensus among asset managers prior to the FOMC announcement was that markets had already priced in the interest rate hike.

“The prospect of modestly higher rates and government bond yields should come as a surprise to no-one.”According to a research note from PIMCO, “since most investors believe that rates will go up at some point, prevailing yields on longer maturity bonds are significantly higher” than the federal funds rate. “For bonds to underperform a cash investment, rates do not simply need to rise—they need to rise faster than the market expects.”

And Wednesday’s rate hike was exactly in line with market expectations, the FOMC having been “very transparent in what they do and very aware in where inflation is and what markets have done,” NEPC’s Smith said.

“The markets really did absorb it,” he added.

In a statement Wednesday, the FOMC said further rate increases would be “gradual,” with the federal funds rate “likely to remain, for some time, below levels that are expected to prevail in the longer run.”

A Hermes Investment Management report predicted US interest rates will peak “some years down the line” at 3.75%, below historic averages of 5%.

David Lloyd, head of institutional public debt portfolio management at M&G Investments, said the FOMC’s move “does not yet represent a watershed”—despite the announcement being billed as “historic” by many commentators.

“The prospect of modestly higher rates and government bond yields should come as a surprise to no-one,” Lloyd said. “For investment grade credit markets rate rises are, to an extent, a vote of confidence in the health of economies and, by extension, in the health of borrowers. Value is becoming increasingly apparent as credit spreads have widened recently. Clearly, high yield is experiencing volatility but this is, of course, primarily caused by weak commodity prices.”

Related: How to Deal with Interest Rate Rises (Without Using Derivatives) & Rate Rises Won’t Help Active Managers, S&P Warns

How Would Steve Jobs Design Income?

Research Affiliates channels the late Apple co-founder’s simplicity mantra in search of sustainable yield.

Investors seeking income-generating equity strategies should not have to choose between yield and quality, Research Affiliates has argued.

In a research article on income strategies, the company’s CIO Chris Brightman, head of equity research Vitali Kalesnik, and vice president of equity research Engin Rose cited Apple Co-Founder Steve Jobs’ principles when designing the iPhone.

“We believe the quality-yield trade-off is largely unnecessary.”“The iconoclastic iPhone design showed that the consumer can enjoy a product with rich functionality and ease of use,” the authors wrote. “We call this the AND principle… Instead of accepting unnecessary trade-offs, we seek to combine the qualities investors desire in a single vehicle.”

For equity income, Research Affiliates said investors usually had to choose between strategies that chased high dividend payers regardless of the quality of the underlying companies, or dividend growth strategies that focus on quality companies but with lower payouts.

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

“The consequence is that dividend-oriented strategies often must make a trade-off between quality and yield,” Brightman, Kalesnik, and Rose said. “We believe the quality-yield trade-off is largely unnecessary.”

The trio’s paper builds on previous research that showed how income portfolios could be improved by screening for financial distress, profit sustainability, and poor accounting processes.

After applying this filter to identify high quality, high-dividend payers, Brightman, Kalesnik, and Rose then applied a weighting strategy to optimise both yield and liquidity.

While traditional weighting methods—by market capitalization, yield, or equal weight—usually compromise liquidity or yield in some way, the authors argued that a “fundamental weighting” approach would minimize this effect.

“We believe investors can have both preferences [yield and capacity] by applying a fundamental weighting approach that intrinsically provides an excellent proxy of liquidity,” the authors said. Research Affiliates’ method “assigns larger weights to larger companies based on accounting measures”.

This approach involves weighting companies according to “fundamental measures of size” such as adjusted sales and retained cash flow.

As the late Apple CEO Jobs said—cited in Research Affiliates’paper: “Some people think design means how it looks. But of course, if you dig deeper, it’s really how it works.”

Related: Dividend Disaster Avoidance

«