UK Pensions Report Argues LDI Strategy Is Seriously Misconceived

A new report by Brighton Rock head of research Con Keating asserts that liability-driven investment is “fundamentally misconceived” among UK pensions as a result of hedging low interest rates.

(September 23, 2011) — A new report finds that liability-driven investing has been seriously misconceived among UK pensions.

According to the report by Brighton Rock head of research Con Keating, declining interest rates have been detrimental to pension funds because they increase the present value of liabilities. However, Keating argues that falling interest rates actually increase corporate profitability and strengthen the company’s ability to support the fund. Therefore, LDI increases the sensitivity of companies to declining rates rather than decreasing it, the report says.

“LDI is seriously misconceived but rather more worrying is the fact that though costly it also appears to be ineffective,” Keating tells aiCIO. “LDI hedges interest rate exposures which arise predominantly from the discount rate used for liabilities. The true concern however is with the safety and security of the scheme. The strength of the sponsor company determines this. Companies exhibit higher profitability as interest rates fall but lower discount rates raise the present value of scheme liabilities. There is a natural hedge between scheme and company – which hedging the interest rate sensitivity of scheme liabilities destroys.”

Keating’s report expands on the many possible criticisms of LDI, explaining that the oldest criticism is that the discount rate used to calculate the present value of liabilities is not an accurate reflection of financial exposure. “If you think about it, actual DB pensions…do not explicitly depend on interest rates in any way – they depend such things as length of service, inflation, salary etc.,” Keating tells aiCIO, noting that therefore, what is being hedged in LDI is an accounting metric.

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

The report – “Don’t Stop Believing: The State and Future of UK Occupational Pensions,” officially published September 28 – also analyzes a number of commonly-held beliefs and asserts that they are unsubstantiated by evidence. For example, the paper claims that pensions are both affordable and sustainable in the public and private sector. “Those Jeremiahs who point to an increasing share of our national output as the cost of pensions exaggerate the position. The fact is that true pension costs are rising less rapidly than economic output. They also fail to recognize that as our output and wealth grows so we will want to spend proportionately more on education, healthcare and retirement,” a summary of the report says.

Additionally, Keating notes that pensions costs have risen dramatically because of increasing longevity. “Pensions costs have risen, but at a rate significantly lower than national output and far lower than private sector earnings. True pensions costs have doubled over the past two decades while the funding cost of pensions has more than quadrupled. This is a result of ill-conceived regulation operating on top of accounting standards which are not fit for purpose and badly mis-state the health of schemes,” Keating notes.

Keating’s worried view on the future of UK schemes and, more specifically, on the impacts of LDI in pension portfolios follows an August poll by SEI — completed by 106 pension executives overseeing assets ranging in size from $25 million to over $1 billion — which revealed that an increasing number of schemes are using alternative investment vehicles as funded status volatility continues to be a primary concern.

“Alternative investments continue to be integrated into pension portfolios as another channel for mitigating risk, while providing additional return apparently. However, ongoing volatility of interest rates continues to put liability risk as a primary concern for plan sponsors,” said Jon Waite, Director, Investment Management Advice and Chief Actuary for SEI’s Institutional Group, in a statement. “The poll results show numerous inconsistencies in the use of various investment strategies, including alternatives, over the past year as plan sponsors appear to be uncertain of what’s most appropriate. This might also explain an increased interest in outsourcing as now, more than ever, plan sponsors need to maximize the benefits of external resources and the expertise they provide.”



To contact the <em>aiCIO</em> editor of this story: Paula Vasan at <a href='mailto:pvasan@assetinternational.com'>pvasan@assetinternational.com</a>; 646-308-2742

Despite Position as LDI Frontrunners, Dutch Pensions Suffer Severe Drop in Funding

Dutch schemes have suffered an 11% drop in funding as a result of poor market performance and increased interest rates, according to De Nederlandsche bank (DNB), the Dutch pension regulator.

(September 23, 2011) — Dutch pension funds — one of the first to embrace liability-driven investing (LDI) following strict regulations requiring greater funding levels — have witnessed an 11% drop in funding.

According to De Nederlandsche bank (DNB), the Dutch pension regulator, the decline in funding ratio from March to August has been a result of poor market performance and rising interest rates. The average funding ratio of Dutch pension funds has fallen severely from 112% as of March of this year to 101% at the end of August.

The regulator explained that the deterioration of the funding level – the ratio of available assets to liabilities – was a result of a decline in equity prices as pension funds’ liabilities increased due to a drop in long-term interest rates.

“During the period between end-March and end-August, the Amsterdam Exchange Index (AEX) declined by 19.9% and the MSCI World Index by 10.8%. The decline reduced the value of pension funds’ available assets, directly affected the funding ratios. A positive return on fixed-rate asset portfolios could not compensate the loss,” DNB stated.

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

Consequently, many pension funds currently face funding deficits, defined by the Dutch regulator as a funding ratio below 105%. Pension funds facing a funding deficit are required to submit recovery plans to DNB to be evaluated in early 2012.

At the end of August, 207 Dutch pension funds, totaling 4.7 million active members and 2.1 million retirees, had funding deficits, according to the regulator. Comparatively, at the end of March, 94 pension funds numbering 1.2 million active members and 0.6 million retirees had funding deficits.

DNB’s remarks follow a report released earlier this month by LCP Netherlands that showed Dutch pension deficits increased in 2010 and new IAS19 accounting rules are likely to heighten Dutch companies’ pensions liabilities even more.

LCP warned that the International Accounting Standards Board’s (IASB) new accounting rules, to be introduced in 2013 – which change the way pension scheme assets are valued by using mark-to-market accounting on the assumption that this is more transparent – will have a major impact on companies’ reported profits and would have lowered profits by €1.5 billion if applied for 2011. The firm noted that as well as lower headline profits for companies, current pension disclosures will be insufficient under the new version of IAS19.



To contact the <em>aiCIO</em> editor of this story: Paula Vasan at <a href='mailto:pvasan@assetinternational.com'>pvasan@assetinternational.com</a>; 646-308-2742

«