Rich Nuzum discusses recent developments in the UK and potential lessons to be applied elsewhere.
Author: Rich Nuzum, Executive Director, Investments and Global Chief Investment Strategist
What Has Happened?
First, if you’re reading this and you actually are involved in the oversight of a defined benefit (DB) plan in the UK, please see our recent video for UK clients which was filmed before the Bank of England stepped in on Wednesday 28 September. Your investment committee, staff, actuaries, investment consultants and investment managers will hopefully have already been helping you take appropriate actions to navigate the situation in line with your objectives. There has been a lot to deal with quickly.
For everyone else, here is a brief summary of what has happened in the UK.
First, the economic picture:
What has all of this meant specifically for liability-driven-investment (LDI) strategies in the UK:
And now let’s come back to the economic picture:
The popular press and some market commentators have had some good fun comparing the UK to an emerging or frontier market, and applying terms such as “doom loop” to several different dynamics in play in this situation. For example, inflationary pressures led the government to announce a stimulus, which caused the currency to lose value, which added to inflationary pressures. In this sense, the announcement achieved the opposite of what was intended. This has been identified as a “doom loop”, separate from the use of that term in connection with functioning of the local LDI segment.
The popular press and some market commentators have also effectively blamed UK DB sponsors and their LDI strategies for the spike in rates.
Ironically, notwithstanding their widespread adoption of LDI, most UK DB sponsors had interest rate hedging ratios below 100%. Their funded status is now stronger because of the spike in yields, because the economic present value of their liabilities has dropped by more than the value of their assets. Also, for their international stock and bond holdings, most UK DB sponsors hedged less than 100% of the currency risk, and have benefitted in terms of funded status from the decline in value of the pound sterling. Many of these sponsors will have a dynamic de-risking glidepath in place, which will call for them to sell equities and other growth assets, and buy bonds and other LDI assets, in order to “lock in” these gains in funded status. So, the same DB plans that have been blamed for “selling” bonds will soon be net buyers of bonds, as they react to their improved funded status.
What does all this mean for investors in other countries?
Get physical: First, and more broadly than for DB or LDI, and not for the first time, if an investment objective can be achieved by holding physical stocks, bonds and other investments, that may be the best way to pursue that objective. If one can effectively “put the assets in a drawer”, and no matter what happens in the short term with market volatility and liquidity, “leave the drawer shut”, that can be a good position to be in during unprecedented market crises. Those of us who were in the industry during the Global Financial Crisis learned this. Recent events in the UK are a good reminder that when an investment objective can be achieved with physicals, that can have some benefit during a crisis. For LDI investors, common practice in the US relies relatively more on use of physicals than is generally true in the UK. US liability durations are typically much shorter (e.g., 12 years versus 20), and US liabilities tend to have less inflation sensitivity that UK liabilities, simplifying the construction of the hedging portfolio. Canadian practice varies widely across sponsors, with some more closely resembling common US practice but others pushing the envelope harder in line with UK practice. Ireland and other European DB markets more closely resemble the UK, but with their underlying exposures in Euro or other non-sterling currencies.
Provide for liquidity structurally: Although we are fans of using physicals where possible, derivatives are an important tool for hedging, and for achieving and adjusting exposures quickly and cost effectively. If you are using derivatives, we suggest you revisit your collateral waterfall. In other words, how will you fund any collateral calls, within the time permitted, if the mark-to-market value of your derivative positions move against you more sharply than you may have deemed possible? That is likely to be most necessary during a crisis, when liquidity and the functioning of physical markets may be disrupted. If you’ve tested for one standard deviation events, test for three, then for five. Grouping physical and derivative mandates with the same manager in the same portfolio is one way to help mitigate the risk that collateral is not available to maintain positions when needed. I.e., the manager can sell physical assets to post collateral as needed, or potentially post physical assets other than cash, with some level of “haircut” in their attributed valuation for collateral purposes. Maintaining a passively managed sleeve in your portfolio that can be liquidated quickly is another common measure with only limited opportunity cost in terms of foregone alpha net of fees. At the cutting edge, some sophisticated investors have used cash plus futures or cash plus swaps to replicate a passive index fund exposure, so that they have the cash readily available in the event collateral is needed elsewhere in their portfolio.
Keep delegations current: Most asset owners using derivatives will have already delegated the necessary authority to staff to take actions needed to raise and deploy collateral. Revisiting those delegations and keeping them up-to-date should be part of the annual fiduciary calendar, and also on the checklist of activities when a staff member leaves service, especially during the ongoing war for talent that most investors are participating. Where an outsourced chief investment officer is used, they can typically be charged with raising and deploying collateral as needed across the assets over which they have been delegated authority.
Notwithstanding media and commentator hyperbolic references to “doom loops”, and UK DB sponsors being blamed for market volatility when that volatility has ultimately been driven by some unconventional fiscal policy, in our view LDI remains a structurally sound and appropriate approach for many DB sponsors. The recent UK experience points up several areas in which any LDI investor, or any user of derivatives more broadly, might usefully review their practices.
Simplify your search. Get strategic research tailored to your interests from thought leaders across the investment industry, including Mercer and hundreds of third party publishers. Membership is complimentary, and it takes seconds to sign up.
References to Mercer shall be construed to include Mercer LLC and/or its associated companies.
© 2022 Mercer LLC. 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.
For Mercer’s conflict of interest disclosures, contact your Mercer representative or see http://www.mercer.com/conflictsofinterest.
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.
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.
Investment management and advisory services for U.S. clients are provided by Mercer Investments LLC (Mercer Investments). Mercer Investments LLC is registered to do business as “Mercer Investment Advisers LLC” in the following states: Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas, and West Virginia; as “Mercer Investments LLC (Delaware)” in Georgia; as “Mercer Investments LLC of Delaware” in Louisiana; and “Mercer Investments LLC, a limited liability company of Delaware” in Oregon. Mercer Investments LLC is a federally registered investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended. Registration as an investment adviser does not imply a certain level of skill or training. The oral and written communications of an adviser provide you with information about which you determine to hire or retain an adviser. Mercer Investments’ Form ADV Part 2A & 2B can be obtained by written request directed to: Compliance Department, Mercer Investments 99 High Street, Boston, MA 02110.
Investment advisory services for Brazil clients are provided by Mercer Human do Brasil (Mercer Brazil), a company regulated by the Brazilian Securities and Exchange Commission to provide Financial Advisory services.“
Investment management services for Canadian investors are provided by Mercer Global Investments Canada Limited. Investment consulting services for Canadian investors are provided by Mercer (Canada) Limited.