As the COVID-19 outbreak has escalated in the United States, sponsors of single employer–defined benefit pension plans have experienced a roller coaster ride. Avoiding, or at least cushioning, another wild ride requires a well-designed hedging strategy that accounts for credit spreads. We provide context for this rapidly evolving spread environment and potential responses.
The notion that interest rates are dynamic in nature and notoriously difficult to predict has been demonstrated in spades by the uptick in market volatility during the COVID-19 pandemic. The economic impact from the virus has been swift, creating a dichotomy between “risk-free” Treasury interest rates and corporate spreads. In this paper, we outline how hedging programs may need to re-align their strategies given the current circumstances while continuing to lean on the basics.
It has been a challenging time for hedge funds in recent years. Loose monetary policy has driven equity markets upwards and hurt short books. The growth of quantitatively traded funds has eroded some of the inefficiencies commonly exploited by hedge funds. This fact, coupled with the shift toward low-fee passive and alternative risk premia (ARP) products, has raised questions about the merits of hedge funds in investor portfolios. In this paper, we focus on comparing ARP versus hedge funds and investigate whether hedge funds and ARP funds are complementary or whether ARP funds are actually a viable replacement for hedge funds.
As sponsors of US single-employer defined benefit plans know all too well, interest rates have experienced dramatic swings in recent years. While many plan sponsors have adapted to this environment by strategically hedging their liability interest rate risk, many are still questioning the efficacy of doing so—especially when interest rates appear to be low. Yet, failing to hedge long-duration liabilities with long-duration assets is a risky endeavor that exposes the plan sponsor to significant downside risk.
A universal approach to portfolio construction can help schemes achieve required return targets whilst adding additional upside from alpha generation; reduce risk through true diversification; and generate sufficient income to comfortably meet both planned and unplanned cashflow needs.
A number of UK defined benefit pension schemes have experienced significant funding level gains in recent years, driven by sponsor contributions, liability management exercises, and strong equity market returns. However, due to increased volatility in global equity markets, relatively high valuations in many market segments, and the late stages of the economic and credit cycles, optimising the scheme’s growth engine is more challenging than ever. This paper provides a framework for how to achieve that goal.
Many corporate defined benefit plans experienced significant funded status gains in recent years. Recent capital markets volatility, however, has set many plans a few steps back, re-focusing plan sponsors on both protecting long-term funded status gains and closing the asset-liability deficit. Given increased volatility in global equity markets, relatively high valuations in many market segments, and the late stages of the economic and credit cycles, optimizing the plan’s growth engine is more critical, and challenging, than ever. This publication provides a framework for how to do so in the context of the evolving market environment.
While the focus on making contributions prior to the mid-September tax deadline is important for corporate defined benefit plan sponsors, it should be the first step in establishing a dynamic contribution roadmap. Especially given potentially mounting contribution requirements ahead, plan sponsors should take this opportunity to view their contribution policy as one available lever—along with asset returns, liability hedges, and benefit management—in navigating the pension plan to a strong financial position.
For many pension plans, investment strategy is often structured with a liability-hedging portfolio and a growth portfolio, with the weight and composition of each determined by a strategic asset allocation or a de-risking glidepath. Within this overall structure, the construction and calibration of the liability-hedging portfolio is integral to effective pension asset management. This report focuses exclusively on the liability-hedging portfolio, delineating key considerations and best practices for single-employer defined benefit plans including those sponsored by corporations, health care institutions, non-profit organizations, and certain partnerships.
As pressures on pensions mount, we believe financial executives are best served by re-evaluating major decisions in terms of the true tools at their disposal. In this paper we review four levers that are fundamental drivers of pension costs and outcomes: asset returns, liability hedging, contribution policy, and benefit management. Balancing these levers is critical to enabling greater probability of success in managing pension risk, and we introduce a framework for chief financial officers and other financial executives to use in doing so.