• Home
  • About
  • Newsletters
  • Conference
  • TMS Links
  • Calendar
  • Log In
  • Register

Room 151

  • 151 BRIEF

    What's New?

  • London CIV launches sustainable equity fund

    April 19, 2018

  • Council funding boost for stadium for Cornwall

    April 18, 2018

  • Herts creates development joint venture

    April 18, 2018

  • Half of councils ‘draw down on reserves’

    April 18, 2018

  • Northants completes HQ sale

    April 18, 2018

  • Ashford adopts commercial property strategy

    April 18, 2018

  • Treasury
  • Technical
  • Funding
  • Resources
  • LGPS
  • Development
  • 151 News
  • Blogs
    • Agent 151
    • James Bevan
    • Steve Bishop
    • Cllr John Clancy
    • David Crum
    • David Green
    • Richard Harbord
    • Graham Liddell
    • Ian O’Donnell
    • Jackie Shute
    • Stephen Sheen
  • Interviews
  • Jobs

Fund management costs – what lies beneath?

0
  • by David Crum
  • in David Crum · LGPSi · Recent Posts
  • — 5 Nov, 2012

Winter, it would seem, has come early(ish) to the south of England. Whilst I’m not exactly freezing as I sit and write this latest blog entry, there is a nip in the air that reminds me of home, north of the border. I need something to warm me up, and it doesn’t need to be made with peaty water and come out of a bottle labelled ‘Laphroaig’. What would be a good topic for this latest instalment in my take on things LGPSi to get the blood going? How about fund management costs? This is something that some of my fellow 151 bloggers seem to have turned to recently, and it’s sure to be a topic to warm the cockles of any self-respecting LGPS-ophile’s heart…oh, the inefficiency of the LGPS as it stands is simply staggering.

Hang on a minute…is this inefficiency real or perceived? As ever, the devil is in the detail.

And are there some relatively simple actions that LGPS funds could take to address some of the concerns? Possibly, and it thankfully doesn’t involve the wholesale restructuring or merging of the LGPS, contrary to what some commentators might suggest.

For the casual, and not so casual, reader of LGPS fund annual reports, one area of interest among many is costs, and more specifically the cost of carrying out the investment management and pensions administration related activities for funds. The £ figure per member is, it would seem, regularly bandied about to show which funds have ultra-low costs (good), and which have sky high costs (bad). Conventional wisdom would then seem to indicate that the expensive funds should be ‘sorted out’ and made to look more like the ‘good value’ funds. Let’s merge ‘em all – that’ll sort the problem out, and let’s forget for the moment about the individual governance and funding arrangements of each fund. Big is beautiful!

All well and good, but what happens when we scratch the surface of this issue? Pensions administration is not my area of expertise, so I’m going to – as usual – focus on the investment management side of things

Why would some funds appear to be more expensive than others? Here are some possible reasons:

1)       Complexity of investment arrangements: many LGPS funds spend a great deal of time and effort on their investment strategies and, as a result, may have a very diverse approach to investing, which leads them into ‘fee heavy’ areas such as private equity, hedge funds (single strategy or fund of funds), active equity mandates, and diversified growth funds. Should funds such as these really be penalised for trying to reduce risk and enhance returns in their overall strategies? Perhaps their view is that an increase in fees of, say, 40 basis points, may well result in enhanced investment returns or, perhaps equally important to them, a marked reduction in estimated investment return volatility, or event contribution rate volatility.

2)       Less passive: some funds out there still believe in active management, and would rather take a view that good managers exist, and should be given the opportunity to demonstrate their skills. Should they be penalised for taking this view? Surely it’s true that the more investors go passive, the greater the opportunity for non-passive investors in such markets, as stock prices are at the end of the day driven less by index positions and re-balancing and more by, well, the fundamental factors that actually determine the value of companies. I have great sympathy with investors who want to buy a stock because it looks like a good investment, rather than because it’s part of an index.

3)       Limited room for manoeuvre: it is true that a £50 million unconstrained global equity mandate will have less immediate fee pricing power in the market than, say, a £300 million one, and as a result the smaller LGPS funds would seem to be at a disadvantage. There’s little that could be done about that – until now. More on this in a moment.

4)       Incomplete information on display: is all true ‘fee’ information easily and readily captured? How many pooled fund investment fees are missed from the total expense calculation because they are not paid by invoice – and therefore would not constitute an explicit expense – but slip off the radar because they are charged internally in the pooled fund itself? What about, as another example, private equity fees contained in limited partnerships? Are these expenses shown? Again, the funds that disclose everything are shown to be more expensive than their peers, and as a result incorrect conclusions can be drawn about the stated cost of running pension fund investment arrangements.

5)       Timeframe: can anyone sensibly believe that absolute management costs should be assessed over a year? Or even three? Investment strategies are set with the longer term in mind, and so the cost versus benefit of having these strategies should also be measured over the long term, but with on-going oversight.

What can be done about these examples that can make some funds seem to cost more to run than others? Well, a bit more understanding, and a bit less criticism would be good for a start.

But also, consider the following:

1)       As recommended in Lord Hutton’s reports, funds need to provide more financial information that allows for a reasonable comparison between them, in terms of their strategic investment goals, the assumptions they use in setting their strategies, and their views on reducing risk (and indeed naming the risks their seeking to reduce);

2)       A common sense acknowledgement that less in the way of passive will mean more in the way of active, with the understanding that such a position is being taken in the hope that an additional investment return that exceeds the extra fee paid is achieved;

3)       Framework Agreements – a perennial favourite topic of mine, and so I won’t say much more other than collective bargaining doesn’t need to come at the expense of local accountability for funds; and

4)       Funds need to sense check the fees that they pay, versus the ‘universe’. This could be done in a number of ways, for example:

– DCLG collating all investment management fee information from each LGPS Fund and providing feedback directly to Funds as to where they sit in the fee ‘spectrum’;

– Funds working together, as I know some already do, by sharing their fee experiences in local CIPFA/NAPF groups;

– Funds asking their investment consultants to compare the fees they currently pay versus the consultant’s wider client base fee experience; or

– an independent third party collecting all fee information from funds, and essentially doing the same as the DCLG in my point above, but with this third party being beyond the scope of any FOI requests that might seek to access the fee information.

5)       Be patient!

Are there problems with my ‘solutions’ above? You bet. Are they valid observations that might add to the debate? I hope so.

We don’t need to merge LGPS funds to make life less expensive. Funds can  – and do – work together to try to solve this problem, but it will require a greater degree of openness for some. Asset managers may not like the direction of travel I’ve suggested on fee comparisons, but it’s in their interests too that the investment arrangements of the LGPS are fair and sustainable in the long term.

David Crum spent 11 years working in the LGPS for the Lothian and Strathclyde Pension Funds, and 5 years as an investment consultant with Aon Hewitt. He is now the founding Director of 330 Consulting Limited
——————————————————————————————————————————————————–

07 February 2013
2nd LAPF Strategic Investment Forum (The Landmark Hotel, London)
Strategic investment thinking for senior LGPS investment officers, their independent advisers and heads of LGPS investment committees. Jointly organised by AIConferences and LAPF Investments Magazine
Free places offered on a first-come-first-served basis to qualifying delegates

 

Share

You may also like...

  • Politicians challenged by power of LGPS pools 17 Mar, 2016
  • Standalone LGPS fund ‘unlikely’ for infrastructure 19 May, 2016
  • Q&A with Hugh Grover on collective investments and the LGPS Q&A with Hugh Grover on collective investments and the LGPS 15 May, 2014
  • US QE3 on the horizon US QE3 on the horizon 3 Jul, 2012

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

  • Register for the Room 151 Weekly Email Digest

  • Latest tweets

    Room 151 3 hours ago

    Herts agrees JV with Morgan Sindall to develop 500 homes: Hertfordshire County Council has signed a deal to create a 50/50 development joint venture with construction firm Morgan Sindall. The council will use its standalone company, Herts Living Ltd… dlvr.it/QQ5ZZg

    Room 151 8 hours ago

    #localgov @JRolfe67 #housing #regeneration twitter.com/SHJFitzgerald/…

    Room 151 8 hours ago

    London CIV launches sustainable equity fund room151.co.uk/brief/#london-… #localgov #lgps

    Room 151 8 hours ago

    #localgov twitter.com/Rebecca_DTZi/s…

    Room 151 9 hours ago

    Newham in danger of missing deadline to publish accounts: The London Borough of Newham is in danger of missing its deadline to publish audited financial statements due to a lack of capacity in its finance team, according to auditors.[...] dlvr.it/QQ3RFn pic.twitter.com/S35NTpUMSJ

    Room 151 12 hours ago

    Enfield funds new housing association with right to buy receipts: The London Borough of Enfield has agreed to fund the creation of a new housing association in which it will take a minority stake, in order to spend £50m of[...] dlvr.it/QQ2hqH pic.twitter.com/Q8Dc5eQuyY

    Room 151 1 day ago

    Council funding boost for stadium for Cornwall room151.co.uk/brief/#council… #infrastructure #development

    Room 151 1 day ago

    Herts creates #development joint venture room151.co.uk/brief/#herts-c… #housing #property

    Room 151 1 day ago

    Half of councils ‘draw down on reserves’ room151.co.uk/brief/#half-of… #localgov #lgps #treasury

    Room 151 1 day ago

    Northants completes HQ sale room151.co.uk/brief/#northam… #localgov

    Room 151 1 day ago

    Ashford adopts commercial #property strategy room151.co.uk/brief/#ashford… #localgov #lgps #housing #treasury

    Room 151 1 day ago

    Government's terms for #businessrates review published room151.co.uk/brief/#terms-f… #localgov #mhclg

    Room 151 1 day ago

    Good chat with LPP's Chris Rule about #LGPS investment in #housing and #regeneration @LPFA1 room151.co.uk/interviews/lgp… #localgov

    Room 151 2 days ago

    #localgov #lgps twitter.com/kshackleton1/s…

    Room 151 2 days ago

    LGPS Pools Roundup: Access appoints Link, CIO for Border to Coast, Central launches funds, new chair for Northern Pool: ACCESS Link wins pooling contract ACCESS  has appointed Link Fund Solutions Ltd to establish and operate its authorised contractual… dlvr.it/QPq8BJ

    Room 151 2 days ago

    Five LGPS funds invest £100m in the private rented sector: Five pension funds agreed last year to commit £100m to a fund aimed at building and managing housing in the private rented sector. Room151 reveals how it came about. The[...] dlvr.it/QPq00D pic.twitter.com/MHjD2vWny2

    Room 151 2 days ago

    Changing the Guard: New Fed leadership and what’s ahead for the world’s most important central bank: Sponsored Article: A change in leadership often sparks intrigue from investors—particularly when the leader is the chair of the world’s most important… dlvr.it/QPpzwx pic.twitter.com/9JWmWJXLzq

    Room 151 2 days ago

    LGPS Q&A: Chris Rule of Local Pensions Partnership on housing and regeneration: Interest in housing and regeneration among institutional investors is growing. In an exclusive interview for Room151, Chris Rule discusses the Local Pensions Partnership’s… dlvr.it/QPpqBS pic.twitter.com/CwuKp8m2ur

    Room 151 2 days ago

    Jeff Houston: LGPS and investment cost transparency: The LGPS Advisory Board has been the first to sign up to a new disclosure template for investment costs. Jeff Houston explains what’s happening and why. It seems a very[...] dlvr.it/QPpq0Y pic.twitter.com/gxW8PinJpX

    Room 151 2 days ago

    Karen Shackleton: The cost conundrum of active managers: LGPS is in a better position to assess the cost of active managers, even if it remains difficult. It is common sense to take costs into account when judging the[...] dlvr.it/QPpfZ1 pic.twitter.com/gfVirgWcy2

  • Categories

    • 151 News
    • Agent 151
    • Blogs
    • Cllr John Clancy
    • David Crum
    • David Green
    • Development
    • Forum
    • Funding
    • Graham Liddell
    • Ian O'Donnell
    • Interviews
    • Jackie Shute
    • James Bevan
    • Jobs
    • LGPSi
    • Mark Finnegan
    • Recent Posts
    • Resources
    • Richard Harbord
    • Stephen Sheen
    • Steve Bishop
    • Technical
    • Treasury
  • Archives

    • 2018
    • 2017
    • 2016
    • 2015
    • 2014
    • 2013
    • 2012
    • 2011
  • Previous story Economic and market briefing: UK Inflation
  • Next story The US presidential election: immediate reflections on Mr Obama’s victory

© Copyright 2018 Room 151. Typegrid Theme by WPBandit.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website.OK