Investing December 7, 2021

Real Estate Investments Increasing in DC Plans

A new report suggests defined contribution plan investors have grown more sophisticated in their knowledge of the real estate asset class and many are looking closer at asset-level and manager performance.

Reported by

U.S. defined contribution (DC) retirement plan investors’ appetite for real estate investments is increasing, with the median assets under management (AUM) of an investment manager overseeing DC real estate capital increasing more than 50% over the past five years, according to a new analysis. The report is a collaboration from the Defined Contribution Real Estate Council (DCREC), NAREIM [the National Association of Real Estate Investment Managers] and Ferguson Partners to publish the first edition of the “DCREC-NAREIM-Ferguson Partners Defined Contribution Survey.”

The findings build on six years of reporting by DCREC on daily-valued private real estate strategies in the DC market.

Get more!  Sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters.

The collaboration aims to help expand the metrics being tracked to provide a benchmark of DC capital flows and structuring considerations, as well as organizational and staffing best practices among DC real estate investment managers.

At a high level, the survey finds DC investors are increasingly sophisticated, having expanded their knowledge of the real estate asset class. According to the survey, many DC plan investors are looking closer at asset-level and manager performance, in addition to product structure, than they have in the past. As the survey report explains, the set of product choices continues to expand, as a growing number of real estate managers have launched daily-valued DC investment products over the past several years. Several say they expect to bring additional offerings to the market in the near to medium term.

Findings in the new survey echo those reached in a recent report published by J.P. Morgan Asset Management. That analysis posits that real estate is a cyclical asset class—specifically one that has been in a relative trough for several years and which can be expected to rebound and continue to grow over the next 10 to 15 years, including in the DC plan space.

J.P. Morgan’s analysts argue that, in the search for retirement income, especially with yields being so low and government bond returns even being negative, many investors are turning to real estate to deliver that income. They conclude that real estate can play a role in both the early stages of a target-date fund (TDF)’s glide path and the late stages of its glide path as a fixed-income substitute.

The “DCREC-NAREIM-Ferguson Partners Defined Contribution Survey” says DC plan investors cited diversification, risk-adjusted returns and inflation as the primary reasons for investing in real estate. The survey also shows that investors are increasingly willing to manage their own liquidity and, as they become more comfortable with the real estate asset class, they are evaluating new types of products and managers. The survey finds that a third of DC investors are investing with multiple managers rather than just one.

Despite the positive future momentum identified in the survey, today, very few DC plans invest directly in real estate, according to GuidedChioce, a digital advisory firm. Generally speaking, the only type of real estate investment typically available within a DC investment menu is a REIT. REITs, or “real estate investment trusts,” are companies that own or finance income-producing real estate in a range of property sectors. These companies have to meet a number of requirements to qualify as REITs. Most REITs trade on major stock exchanges.

According to GuidedChoice, REITs perform a lot like small/mid-cap value stocks rather than like private real estate. Analysts say this is not surprising, considering that most public REITs are in the major broad stock indexes.

When it comes to direct real estate investing within DC plans, a previous DCREC paper offered a checklist of principles and best practices to consider, including the following:

  • As a general matter, DC direct real estate product structures should accommodate the unique considerations that are important to DC plan fiduciaries, such as investor eligibility, regulatory oversight and tax reporting;
  • A DC direct real estate product should be structured as a tax-exempt entity or a vehicle that issues an IRS Form 1099 for tax reporting to minimize the administrative burden to plan fiduciaries and recordkeepers; and
  • A DC direct real estate product should use a structure that reduces unnecessary regulatory, operational and administrative expenses, while still providing an appropriate level of regulatory oversight and investment disclosure.
Data and Research December 7, 2021

Do Public Pensions Need a Shift in Investment Strategies?

A report, which says their investments have underperformed since the 2008 financial crisis and are costly, suggests officials should switch to purely passive investing.

Reported by

Public employee pension funds, endowment funds and other nonprofit institutional investors in the U.S. have underperformed properly constructed, passively investable benchmarks by a wide margin since the global financial crisis of 2008, contends Richard Ennis, an early pioneer of quant investing and co-founder of U.S. investment consultancy EnnisKnupp, in a research paper.

A composite of 46 large public funds underperformed a passively investable benchmark by 155 basis points (bps) per year for the 12 years ended June 30, 2020. The composite underperformed the benchmark in 11 years out of 12, according to his findings.

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan benefits news.

With public defined benefit (DB) pension plans’ holdings of $4.5 trillion (according to public plans data from the Center for Retirement Research [CRR] at Boston College), Ennis figures that underperformance of 155 bps per year costs stakeholders nearly $70 billion a year.

Ennis notes that a number of public pension fund officials might disagree with his findings and point out that their funds have outperformed their benchmarks or at least matched them. However, Ennis refers to public pensions’ benchmarks as “reporting benchmarks”—i.e., performance benchmarks of the funds’ own devising that they employ in their annual reports. He argues that his comparisons of returns of the reporting benchmarks of 24 of the largest U.S. public funds over the decade ended June 30, 2020, with the returns of “properly constructed,” passively investable benchmarks tailored for each of those funds found evidence of a sizable downward bias in the returns of custom benchmarks.

Ennis says the “extreme diversification” of public pension funds makes them more costly, “with poor prospects for keeping up with a passively investable benchmark over time.” Citing data from the CRR and Greenwich Associates, Ennis says large public funds use an average of 182 investment managers, commingled funds and partnerships; they index about 22% of their assets; and their typical allocation to alternative investments is approximately 28% of assets.

In the paper, Ennis makes some similar points about endowments’ investing. He notes that both public pensions and small endowments underperform by the amount of their cost. The solution, he says, is for fund trustees to invest purely passively at next-to-no-cost.

The paper, “How to Improve Institutional Fund Performance,” is available for download here.

Not Everyone Agrees

In a statement to PLANSPONSOR, Hank H. Kim, executive director and counsel of the National Conference on Public Employee Retirement Systems (NCPERS) in Washington, D.C. said: “Blessed with 20-20 hindsight, another analyst has come up with the idea that passive investing is better than active investing for public pension plans.

“Anyone can look back and detect patterns. Looking ahead is the perennial challenge for investors. Foresight is inevitably imperfect, and this is why professional investors arm themselves with as much information as possible, and then diversify and take steps to guard against downside risk.

“Index investing has a place in portfolios; Ennis himself has noted this, calculating that 22% of assets in large public plans are indexed. But in managing public pension assets for the long-term, professional investing and the flexibility to choose investments within carefully established guidelines have been a proven formula for decades. Matching the markets this year or next isn’t the goal of public pension funds; the goal is to keep the funds of contributors and employers growing prudently over the long haul.

“The ability to seize opportunities is lost in passive investing; so is the ability to exit an investment nimbly when markets are in turmoil. There is also growing body of academic literature to show that index investing contributes to the overvaluation of assets. A National Bureau of Economic Research study has shown that passive flows into the S&P 500 over the last two decades disproportionately increased the prices of its largest members.

“The late Vanguard CEO Jack Bogle, known as the father of the index fund, warned shortly before his death in 2019 that index funds, while a triumph for retail investors, could also yield broader and detrimental consequences. ‘If historical trends continue, a handful of giant institutional investors will one day hold voting control of virtually every large U.S. corporation. Public policy cannot ignore this growing dominance, and consider its impact on the financial markets, corporate governance, and regulation. These will be major issues in the coming era,’ Bogle wrote in the Wall Street Journal.

“It is naïve, simplistic, and potentially dangerous to suggest that a wholesale shift to index investing is in the best interests of public pension funds or indeed the U.S. economy as a whole.”

Any opinions stated in the study or in the statement to PLANSPONSOR do not necessarily reflect the stance of Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS) or its affiliates.

«