Defined-benefit (DB) pension de-risking: Balancing funding, costs and risk

Reducing defined benefit pension plan risk is a key challenge for all trustees and plan sponsors
Assessing and managing risk has always been a challenge for providers of defined benefit (DB) pension plans, whether it relates to investment returns, member longevity or the strength of the employer covenant. While securing the benefits of all plan members is the ultimate end-game for DB pensions, a range of factors, including volatility in global investment markets, growing life expectancy among scheme members and cyclical changes in employers’ funding positions, can have a profound impact on the scale of risk facing DB plan trustees.
Recent years have seen a significant growth in the number of innovative solutions enabling DB pensions not only to identify and assess the scale of such risks, but also to implement measures to manage and eliminate them – thereby strengthening the long term security of their members’ benefits.
Industry innovation has been complemented by increasingly risk-orientated regulatory developments, where under the IORP Directive for example, European pension plans are now required to have a dedicated risk management function acting as a ‘second line of defence’ to complement the activities of the plan’s day-to-day management and governance.
Identifying defined benefit pension plan risks
The core objective of any DB pension plan is to secure the payment of all members’ benefits in full and on time. As a DB pension provider, the key risk is therefore that of failing to achieve this objective, and the nature of plan risk management has been to balance the risk of failure against affordability constraints and broader financial management.
Historically, failure risk was not seen as a significant issue for most DB plans. Funding levels were generally healthy, employer covenants were strong, accounting and funding standards provided flexibility, and liabilities based on actuarial assumptions were relatively “affordable”.
Since the 1990s, several factors have ensured a higher profile for pension-related risk. Increases in life expectancy significantly extended the length of pension liabilities, while funding volatility, evolving accounting standards, employer insolvencies and regulatory developments all combined to bring de-risking options into sharper focus.
The replacement of DB plans with defined contribution alternatives helped reduce short term costs for many employers, but did little to address the long term liability risk for DB plans as they matured, with fewer contributing members and growing proportions of their membership in retirement. Persistently low interest rates inflated liability valuations, prolonging the time period over which deficit contribution requirements and funding volatility have challenged plan stakeholders.
Increasingly, the combined risks facing DB pension plans are being assessed more holistically, taking account of risks related to funding, investment and sponsor covenant. Given the unpredictable political and economic climate in which today’s DB plans operate, holistic risk management is more important than ever in enabling plans to act promptly to identify, manage and eliminate risk, and to secure members’ benefits.
Strategies to minimise defined benefit pension risks
In view of the multiple risks facing them, the aim for DB pension plan providers has increasingly become to identify, and work towards, a clear outcome or endgame, to narrow the range of potential outcomes around progress towards that endgame, drawing on the range of available de-risking options. The extent to which this range can be narrowed can sometimes be limited however, whether through practicalities, affordability or member expectations, and achieving balance is key.
In seeking to reduce funding volatility, for example, growing numbers of DB plans employ Liability Driven Investment (LDI) strategies, whereby assets are allocated to bonds or other liability hedging investments that address inflation or interest rate risks, rather than investing purely for growth. In some cases, plans have adopted cash flow matching strategies which enable them to match benefit payments to high-quality and sometimes less-liquid investments that distribute predictable income, thus avoiding forced selling of assets at times of market volatility.
Arguably the most significant risk facing DB plans in recent years has been longevity risk - with pension benefits in payment for longer periods than anticipated. A relatively recent innovation in this area is longevity hedging – an option that mitigates longevity risk whilst allowing the DB plan to retain the investment flexibility needed to continue closing any funding gap.
A longer-established option is a bulk annuity, also known as a buy-in or buy-out. This is a transaction between the trustee and an insurer through which, in return for a single premium payment, the insurer undertakes to meet the liabilities of an agreed proportion of the plan’s membership, ensuring that those members’ benefits continue to be paid on time and in full. This approach has seen a huge growth in activity over the past decade, often enabled by supporting short-term funding from sponsors who benefit from lower balance sheet risk. Increasingly, more affordable alternatives to buy-out have become available, but without the underpinning of insurance regulation, require particular care in assessing suitability to purpose.
De-risking can also involve the sharing of risk with individual DB plan members, particularly those at or approaching retirement and in return for an incentive. These can include:
-
Enabling members to transfer cash sums out of their DB plan, for example to a personal retirement savings vehicle or DC plan;
-
A pension increase exchange, under which a member receives a higher initial pension in return for foregoing subsequent pension increases.
Defining your de-risking approach
Questions to ask yourself
-
What is your endgame?
-
What is the timeframe for your long-term goal, and your appetite for risk over this timeframe?
-
Within what regulatory and accounting constraints are you operating?
-
How strong is your sponsor covenant and what levels of contribution can you expect for each year?
-
What is the required return on your investments if you are to meet your liabilities?
-
Which de-risking solution - or combination of solutions, will best help you to reach your endgame?
Whichever de-risking approach a DB plan takes, the first important step is to understand its risks in a holistic way. With a clear idea of the nature and scale of the risks faced, backed by an agreed endgame or objective, DB plans can choose from a wide and constantly evolving range of de-risking solutions to ensure the effective management of risk and ultimately, to ensure members’ benefits are paid in full and on time. For most, implementing an effective de-risking strategy is not a matter of if, but when.
Our pension risk consultants can help you identify your risks and put a strategy in place. This could include endgame planning, integrating risk management with funding improvement such that affordable de-risking glide paths are implemented, LDI, portfolio construction, risk transfer and strategies for stakeholder engagement.
Global Defined Benefit Segment Leader
Related solutions
Related insights
-
Portfolio strategiesWe examine both the similarities and differences between our views on endowment asset allocation and the framework utilized by many of the largest endowments.
-
Portfolio strategies
Why are institutional investors allocating to semi-liquid funds?
As the market for semi-liquid private debt funds expands, it’s not just private wealth exploring allocations, but institutional investors as well. -
Portfolio strategies
Why wealth managers should consider hedge fund liquidity waterfalls
Self-imposed constraints on allocations can diminish the returns of hedge fund allocations. We recommend a flexible liquidity profile for semi-liquid allocations
References to Mercer shall be construed to include MMC Financial Company (Mercer) and/or its associated companies.
© 2023 MMC Financial Company. All rights reserved.
This content may not be modified, sold or otherwise provided, in whole or in part, to any other person or entity without Mercer's prior written permission.
Mercer does not provide tax or legal advice. You should contact your tax advisor, accountant and/or attorney before making any decisions with tax or legal implications.
This does not constitute an offer to purchase or sell any securities.
The findings, ratings and/or opinions expressed herein are the intellectual property of Mercer and are subject to change without notice. They are not intended to convey any guarantees as to the future performance of the investment products, asset classes or capital markets discussed.
This does not contain investment advice relating to your particular circumstances. No investment decision should be made based on this information without first obtaining appropriate professional advice and considering your circumstances. Mercer provides recommendations based on the particular client's circumstances, investment objectives and needs. As such, investment results will vary and actual results may differ materially.
Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The value of investments can go down as well as up, and you may not get back the amount you have invested. Investments denominated in a foreign currency will fluctuate with the value of the currency. Certain investments, such as securities issued by small capitalization, foreign and emerging market issuers, real property, and illiquid, leveraged or high-yield funds, carry additional risks that should be considered before choosing an investment manager or making an investment decision.
Information contained herein may have been obtained from a range of third party sources. While the information is believed to be reliable, Mercer has not sought to verify it independently. As such, Mercer makes no representations or warranties as to the accuracy of the information presented and takes no responsibility or liability (including for indirect, consequential, or incidental damages) for any error, omission or inaccuracy in the data supplied by any third party.
For the most recent approved ratings of an investment strategy, and a fuller explanation of their meanings, contact your Mercer representative.
Mercer universes: Mercer’s universes are intended to provide collective samples of strategies that best allow for robust peer group comparisons over a chosen timeframe. Mercer does not assert that the peer groups are wholly representative of and applicable to all strategies available to investors.
Please see the following link for information on investment management index definitions.
Not all services mentioned are available in all jurisdictions. Please contact your Mercer representative for more information.
In the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Mercer’s Investment Services are delivered by MMC Financial Company (“MMCFC”). MMCFC is regulated by the Capital Market Authority (CMA), License No. 20-22238. MMCFC is incorporated in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Commercial License No. 431210240571.
For the conflict of interest statement of Mercer Investments, of which MMCFC is a part, contact your Mercer representative or see https://www.mercer.com/conflictsofinterest.