|
|
Fiduciary
management: a breath of fresh air
Christine
Senior explains why new fiduciary management offerings are providing a
welcome relief to pension fund boards across Europe
Fiduciary management is certainly gaining ground among pension funds,
with the Netherlands the leader in embracing the concept. Bureau Bosch
has just published research showing that 77% of total Dutch pension scheme
assets of E580bn are managed this way. It’s hardly surprising that
Dutch pension funds are so far ahead, since fiduciary management emerged
in the Netherlands. Anton van Nunen, who is generally acknowledged as
its architect, defines the process as having five elements: advising the
pension funds on the asset liability study (or validating the ALM if it
is carried out by a consultant); portfolio construction to provide the
highest return for the given risk budget; manager selection; monitoring
of the managers; and reporting back to the fund.
But the field has been complicated by the advent of other similar services
which go under various names – implemented consulting, delegated
consulting and solvency management, for example. Patrick Disney, managing
director SEI’s Institutional Business for EMEA, says some differences
come down to benchmarks and objectives. The objective of solvency management
is to achieve a particular funding level by a particular time, or there
could be a performance objec-tive which should eventually lead to the
desired funding status. The second differentiator depends on who is providing
the service, whether asset manager or consultant.
Fiduciary management has been evolving since its original model around
seven years ago, Paul Boerboom, founder of Avida International in the
Netherlands, explains: “We have just gone through a crisis and the
way fiduciary management was designed a few years ago was not successful
compared to what clients were expecting,” he says. “If you
look at the coverage ratio of those pension funds who were clients of
the first generation fiduciary management, they are not happy. Fiduciary
management has not delivered on its promises.”
Boerboom has more faith in new style fiduciary management: “Looking
forward, what I call fiduciary management – the next generation,
with a lot of attention on strategic liability led risk management, that
model is working in Holland and will work in other countries,” he
says. “It will also work for DC plans. When you have liabilities
you need professional expertise to manage assets against liabilities.
It could work in the UK, Scandinavia and Germany.”
Demand for fiduciary manage-ment in the Netherlands has been boosted by
several factors, including more onerous regulatory requirements and the
changing investment landscape which brings ever more complex investment
strategies and products to the table. A third element is the decline in
importance of defined benefit (DB) schemes to employers as a means of
attracting and retaining talent. A closed DB scheme means fewer staff
are active members, and it loses its importance as an employee benefit,
while more often than not proving a drain on the company’s finances.
“Effectively there is an end game in sight” says Lloyd Raynor,
senior consultant at Russell Investments. “The reason pension funds
are more interested in fiduciary management is to avoid crystallisation
of deficits or surpluses as the end of the life of the scheme approaches,
to help institute real time decision-making in the face of ever rarer
opportunities to derisk and to ensure greater precision in asset liability
management which is of greater importance as active employee contributions
dry up.”
Outside of the Netherlands, fiduciary management is on the rise. Two high
profile UK adopters, for example, include the Merchant Navy Officers Pension
Fund and the Metal Box Company pension fund. Germany is also proving fruitful
territory for fiduciary managers: BlackRock has won a mandate from Henkel,
for example, which gives BlackRock the responsibility for the multinational’s
pension schemes in five countries – Germany, the Netherlands, the
UK, Ireland and the US. “We manage all global Henkel DB assets on
a fiduciary basis,” says Leen Meijaard, head of institutional business
in EMEA for BlackRock. “We have to deal with local trustees in each
country, and with Henkel the corporate on a global level. For multinationals
the advantage of fiduciary management across the DB plans in different
countries is it gives consistency across different pension plans in manager
selection and risk management at corporate level, which is a big advantage.”
Van Nunen also confirms that pension funds in the Nordics, Austria and
Switzerland have signed up to the concept, and even Japanese pension funds
are interested.
Despite this growth, fiduciary management is not without its detractors.
One of the often voiced reservations is the question of how you measure
whether your provider is doing a good job. Van Nunen suggests peer group
comparison is the best solution. But Gaynor says a peer group benchmark
isn’t ideal because even for similar schemes which are set to wind
up in the same year, each set of trustees would have a different risk
tolerance, so comparisons would not be legitimate. “The obvious
thing is to have a clear time horizon in sight. Also have a balanced scorecard
of metrics where you evaluate the strategy in relation to a composite
benchmark and where you consider how the strategy is doing versus the
liabilities and perhaps versus other metrics such as an RPI plus target.”
Fees are another source of concern. The open architecture model gives
managers with a huge pool of assets the clout to win fee reductions from
managers.
But Meijaard says the BlackRock model which uses mainly its in-house funds
is a more effective way to keep fees low. "We tend to manage most
of the assets internally, which offers the client an advantage because
they do not have to pay a double layer of fees," he says. "As
a fiduciary manager if you have lots of assets under management you are
probably able to negotiate with external managers to get a better fee
but they will never come down to the level of internally managed funds."
Written by Christine Senior, a freelance journalist
|
|