Redefining the Defined Benefit Lexicon

Willis Towers Watson paper says outdated definitions can lead to excess risk, and a skewed investment strategy.

In the defined benefit universe, words matter, according to a new paper released by Willis Towers Watson (WTW), and the wrong definitions can lead to unnecessary and excessive risk, as well as wasted time on short-term issues that have little or no bearing on the success of pension plans.

In its paper, WTW aims to update and evolve the business language lexicon for defined benefit pension plan sponsors. It says the new definitions can help improve how sponsors, consultants, and managers address pension plan challenges going into 2018. The paper outlines 10 defined benefit investment terms, and provides for each a traditional, and now outdated, definition, as well as a new definition WTW believes is more relevant today.

1. Fiduciary duty

Old Definition:Actions taken are documented and reasonable.

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

New Definition:Actions taken are subject to a higher level of scrutiny as more parties are considered fiduciaries, and are being held to higher standards that require expertise.

2. Full Funding

Old Definition:Having assets that are equal to, or exceed accounting liabilities.

New Definition:Having assets that are equal to, or exceed the organization’s desired funding target, which could reflect market cost required to settle obligations, signify the ability to run them off over the very long term, or support future benefits for employees.

3. Time Horizon

Old Definition:The very long period of time until the plan makes its last benefit payment. 

New Definition:A series of time frames that vary in length depending on sponsor objectives, plan liability profile, and the desired approach to delivering retirement benefits over the long term. In some cases, the time horizon can be very short.

4. Investment Strategy

Old Definition:The plan’s static asset allocation and investment manager lineup.

New Definition:The dynamic process of achieving a series of risk allocations that vary with market conditions, and reflect the plan’s progress toward its funding and settlement objectives.

5. Interest Rate Risk

Old Definition:A financial risk that can result in significant gains or losses relative to the liability if rate changes occur within the time horizon. Plans with interest rate risk often maintain a large and risky “short position” relative to the liability, potentially larger than other risks in their portfolio.

New Definition:A liability valuation factor where increases are already priced into the forward curve, which means potential gains the risk are lower than expected. WTW says it is often the most significant risk for pension plans, extremely difficult to time, and vital for portfolio construction.


6. Liability-Driven Investing (LDI)

Old Definition:Extending interest rate exposure of plan assets, primarily through long duration, fixed-income investments.

New Definition:Making any investment decision that takes the profile of the liability into account. This can extend beyond long-duration, fixed-income assets, as long as the decision was made to manage risk in an asset and liability context.


7. Diversify

Old Definition:Allocate across various regions, such as US, non-US, emerging markets, and investment styles, such as value or growth within a portfolio.

New Definition:Use a greater variety of return drivers to help enhance return and/or potentially reduce total portfolio risk. Look beyond traditional beta, alpha and interest rate exposures into the potential risk premia from illiquidity, complexity or difficult implementation. Avoid constraining new investment ideas with traditional asset-class buckets.

8. Implementation

Old Definition:Execution of investment ideas by a part-time fiduciary committee that meets infrequently.

New Definition:Proactive, timely, and transparent portfolio management and execution within cost and risk budgets. This is supported by a deep internal or outsourced resource structure that empowers committees to focus on their strategic goals for the pension.

9. Delegation

Old Definition:Outsourcing just your manager selection activity to a third party or outsourcing more, including strategy setting.

New Definition:Enhancing your ability to make strategic decisions and achieve strategic goals by outsourcing their execution to third parties. Delegation aims to improve efficiency of implementation, reduce costs, manage risks within the context of a defined investment strategy, and reallocate resources toward the core business.  

10. Success

Old Definition:Achieving the desired return, whether this is in the form of manager outperformance of its benchmark, meeting a forward-looking target or hurdle rate, or beating peers.

New Definition:The ability to execute the firm’s objectives, including those related to funded status and risk management, and to ultimately secure benefits for all plan participants. Oversight and monitoring of the strategy focuses on progress relative to objectives, with less emphasis on short-term investment return goals.

Tags: , , ,

Norges Bank Calls for Gas, Oil Stock Removal from GPFG Benchmark

Switch will decrease government’s exposure to shock vulnerability, bank says.

In a move that Norges Bank ($1 trillion) feels will decrease the vulnerability of the Norwegian government’s wealth to permanent gas and oil price declines, the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund recommended the removal of oil and gas stocks from the Government Pension Fund Global’s (GPFG) benchmark index in a Thursday letter to the Ministry of Finance.

“The Bank’s advice has largely been based on how changes in the investment strategy can be expected to affect return and risk for the fund in isolation. The fund now accounts for a much larger share of the government’s wealth than before, and is an integral part of fiscal policy via the fiscal rule,” the letter said. “For that reason, in the strategy plan for Norges Bank Investment Management 2017-2019, the Executive Board states that in the period ahead, it will adopt a broader wealth perspective when advising the ministry.”

According to the bank’s analysis, GPFG investments and its stake in Statoil result in a total exposure to gas and oil equities twice as large as it would be for a broad global equity index. The letter reveals that, based on estimates from a whitepaper titled “Long-term Perspectives on the Norwegian Economy 2017,” the current value of future government oil and gas revenue is roughly “4,000 billion kroner” ($4.8 trillion) The ministry’s calculations state that “a permanent drop in oil prices of 100 kroner per barrel would more than halve the present value of future oil and gas revenue,” a huge blow to the Norwegian economy.

While oil and gas prices generally rise and fall with the broad equity market—usually during periods of stability— the bank indicated there have been periods where oil and gas prices move contrary to the broad market as well. In addition, oil prices also impact returns in other equity sectors.

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

To decrease the government’s vulnerability to oil and gas shocks, the bank proposed the fund remove oil and gas companies that are classified as such by the FTSE equity benchmark index from the GPFG’s benchmark index.

“It is the bank’s assessment that the government’s wealth can be made less vulnerable to a permanent drop in oil prices if the GPFG is not invested in oil and gas stocks,” the letter said. “If the relationship between long-term returns in the broad equity market and oil and gas stocks persists, neither the expected return nor the market risk in the fund will be affected appreciably by whether or not the fund is invested in oil and gas stocks.”

Oil and gas equities currently account for roughly 6% of the GPFG’s benchmark index at just over NOK 300 billion ($36 billion).

Tags: , , ,

«