Administration March 27, 2014

The New Diversification: Adding Alternatives

March 27, 2014 (PLANSPONSOR.com) – In prior decades, international and emerging market stocks were good investments to get diversification for a retirement plan portfolio, but things have changed.
Reported by

According to Mark Peterson, director of investment education at BlackRock, speaking for a webinar hosted by Envestnet, traditional diversification vehicles underperformed when the return environment changed. Traditional stocks and bonds worked well until the 2000s. While bonds have done well since, equities have been volatile. And, now bonds will become a challenge with rising interest rates.

Peterson adds that for equity investments, correlations (the tendency for investment vehicles to move similarly in the market) have been increasing over time. Equities, including international and emerging markets, tend to cluster in the same return neighborhood with increased correlation; all equities fell during the financial crisis.

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

How to Diversify Better

Risk is more than just about volatility, and alternative investments can help mitigate the different risk factors, Peterson contends.

“In a higher inflation world, floating rate or bank loan funds are a tremendous inflation hedge,” Peterson said. “Commodities are second best, and inflation-protected bonds, high-yield municipal bonds, natural resources investments, and energy investments all correlate well in higher inflation environments.”

For interest rate risk, Peterson suggests, investors consider floating rate loans or high-yield bonds. For currency risk, use global or currency investments or commodities.

“Adding alternatives widens out clustering; you get all types of returns in a bear market,” he adds.

Adding Alternatives

Peterson explains there is no standard definition of an alternative investment. “They are simply ‘alternatives’ to traditional debt and equity.” BlackRock thinks of alternative investing on two levels: via asset classes, such as commodities, currency, direct real estate, direct infrastructure, real assets and renewable energy; and via strategies—for equities, long, short or private, and for bonds, arbitrage or distressed.

Instead of just having alternative investments included in an “other” piece in a portfolio, plan sponsors should have an “alternatives” piece for different alternative asset classes, and they should split the strategies for traditional asset classes between traditional strategies and alternative strategies, Peterson suggests. He says the alternatives portion of the portfolio should be in the 15% to 20% range to make a difference, noting that adding alternatives in the last 12 to 15 years would have lowered risk and improved returns.

Manager skill is vital when selecting alternative investments and strategies—in 2012, the return difference between top and bottom managers was 13.50% versus -3.34%, Peterson says. Plan sponsors need alternatives managers with a lot of experience that can execute strategies well. Plan sponsors may spend more on due diligence when looking for the right manager, but it will pay off, he adds.

According to Peterson, the most common mistake investors make when adding alternatives to a portfolio is with the source of assets to invest. “After the financial crisis, folks were sourcing their entire alternatives allocation from equities, since equities did poorly, but equities were a buy at the bottom of market, buying alternatives at that time only reduced risk, it didn’t boost returns,” he notes. Plan sponsors should make sure their investment sourcing matches what they’re trying to do—to just reduce risk or both reduce risk and increase returns. “They may be trying to reduce risk in fixed income and boost returns for equities.”

Products March 27, 2014

Achieving Alpha Through Sustainability

March 27, 2014 (PLANSPONSOR.com) – Global markets are well past the point where investors can ignore the sustainability profile of the stocks and bonds they’re holding, says Gerrit Heyns of Osmosis Investment Management.
Reported by

Heyns is a founding partner at the UK-based Osmosis Investment Management LLC. His firm partnered recently with Calvert Investments to develop the “Calvert–Osmosis Model of Resource Efficiency World Strategy,” which leverages a unique quantitative methodology within institutional client portfolios and separately managed accounts to identify and select sustainably run companies for purchase.

Heyns says the strategy is unique in that it leverages underappreciated and underutilized data related to the use of resources and the production of waste. In basic terms, Osmosis rates security-issuing companies on the types of resources and energy required to produce one unit of value—for instance, how many gallons of water or watt-hours of electricity does it take a manufacturer to create a single unit of product? And how much waste is coming out the back end that must be processed in one way or another?

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANSPONSOR NEWSDash daily newsletter.

The calculation allows Osmosis asset managers to identify which companies are run most efficiently, whether within a single industry or across different sectors of the economy. And when these considerations are merged with more traditional performance and profitability evaluations, a powerful portfolio building model emerges, Heyns says.  

“This methodology gives us an opportunity to do a new type of information arbitrage,” Heyns explains. “We are still investors that are driven by returns, but we’re using sustainability to do that and identify where the best returns are.”

The idea is that, when a stock picker is considering, say, a field of construction firms that all look like relatively attractive investments, the best option is going to be the construction firm that produces the least amount of waste and requires the least amount of energy to produce value. This is true both in the short term, when the company will pay less in energy costs and to process waste, as well as in the long term, as issues like water and resource scarcity become ever-more-material to the daily operation of companies and economies.

Heyns says that, by making stock selections based on these factors, Osmosis can reliably deliver between 400 and 500 basis points of uncorrelated alpha in client portfolios. That’s probably the most important detail to consider within the retirement planning space, as the Department of Labor (DOL) has affirmed in a number of advisory publications that sustainability factors must be considered secondarily to the economics of any investment being contemplated by a plan regulated by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).

In other words, according to the DOL, noneconomic factors such as resource efficiency can serve at most as a tiebreaker when retirement plan fiduciaries are considering investment choices. That holds true even for plans at issue-dedicated nonprofits and other social organizations, where participants may be more willing to consider ethics during the investment process.

Despite the fiduciary hurdle, experts anticipate certain sustainability factors—namely climate risk, energy pricing and resource scarcity—to become significantly more material in long-term investment analysis and therefore to become more important to retirement plan investors in the years ahead. Heyns agrees wholeheartedly with the assessment that energy pricing and resource scarcity are quickly becoming hugely important to portfolio strategies.

“I am confident that within 10 years, and perhaps even five, everyone will be doing the sort of energy-waste analysis that we are doing within our strategy,” he says. “Water especially is quickly becoming one of the most restrained resources in global markets, and of course there is the carbon issue. You cannot get around these facts when considering company performance.”

Heyns feels that as resource-use efficiency gets factored more and more into various types of active management strategies, it will not be such a significant challenge for plan sponsors and advisers to justify their use of “ESG” investing–short for Environmental, Social and Governance—in the eyes of the DOL or other regulators.

“It’s a pragmatic approach that we are taking to stock selection and it’s motivated by performance,” he explains. “We are not managing portfolios on the intent of corporate management at the companies we buy, but on their current operational efficiency. That is certainly material.”

«