Author Archives: russkamp

04.18.24
by

What’s the Motivation?

By: Russ Kamp, Managing Director, Ryan ALM, Inc.

There appears in the WSJ today an article stating that pension plans were pulling “hundreds of billions from stocks”. According to a Goldman analyst, “pensions will unload $325 billion in stocks this year, up from $191 billion in 2023″. We are told that proceeds from these sales will flow to both bonds and alternatives. First question: What is this estimate based on? Are average allocations now above policy normal levels necessitating a rebalancing? Are bonds more attractive given recent movements in yields?

Yes, equities have continued to rally through 2024’s first quarter, and the S&P 500 established new highs before recently pulling back. Valuations seem stretched, but the same argument could have been made at the end of 2023. Furthermore, US interest rates were higher heading into 2023’s fourth quarter. If bond yields were an attractive alternative to owning equities, that would have seemed the time to rotate out of equities.

The combination of higher interest rates and equity valuations have helped Corporate America’s pensions achieve a higher funded status, and according to Milliman, the largest plans are now more than 105% funded. It makes sense that the sponsors of these plans would be rotating from equities into bonds to secure that funded status and the benefit promises. Hopefully, they have chosen to use a cash flow matching (CFM) strategy to accomplish the objective. Not surprisingly, public pension plans are taking a different approach. Instead of securing the benefits and stabilizing the plan’s funded status and contribution expenses by rotating into bonds, they are migrating both equities and bonds into more alternatives, which have been the recipients of a major asset rotation during the last 1-2 decades, as the focus there remains one of return. Is this wise?

I don’t know how much of that estimated $325 billion is being pulled from corporate versus public plans, but I would suggest that much of the alternative environment has already been overwhelmed by asset flows. I’ve witnessed this phenomenon many times in my more than 40 years in the business. We, as an industry, have the tendency to arbitrage away our own insights by capturing more assets than an asset class can naturally absorb. Furthermore, the migration of assets to alternatives impacts the liquidity available for plans to meet ongoing benefits and expenses. Should a market correction occur, and they often do, liquidity becomes hard to find. Forced sales in order to meet cash flow needs only serve to exacerbate price declines.

Pension plans should remember that they only exist to meet a promise that has been made to the participant. The objective should be to SECURE those promises at a reasonable cost and with prudent risk. It is not a return game. Asset allocation decisions should absolutely be driven by the plan’s funded status and ability to contribute. They shouldn’t be driven by the ROA. Remember that alternative investments are being made in the same investing environment as public equities and bonds. If market conditions aren’t supportive of the latter investments, why does it make sense to invest in alternatives? Is it the lack of transparency? Or the fact that the evaluation period is now 10 or more years? It surely isn’t because of the fees being paid to the managers of “alternative” products are so attractive.

Don’t continue to ride the asset allocation rollercoaster that only ensures volatility, not success! The 1990’s were a great decade that was followed by the ’00s, in which the S&P 500 produced a roughly 2% annualized return. The ’10s were terrific, but mainly because stocks were rebounding from the horrors of the previous decade. I don’t know what the 2020s will provide, but rarely do we have back-to-back above average performing decades. Yes, the ’90s followed a strong ’80s, but that was primarily fueled by rapidly declining interest rates. We don’t have that scenario at this time. Why assume the risk?

04.15.24
by

ARPA Update as of April 12, 2024

By: Russ Kamp, Managing Director, Ryan ALM, Inc.

In the last 10 days or so, I’ve felt an earthquake in NJ, witnessed the eclipse in Dallas, and then saw the magnificence of a double rainbow on Saturday evening. What does Mother Nature have in store for me this week?

Fortunately, the PBGC didn’t have many surprises for us during the last week, as activity was mainly kept behind closed doors. They did provide an update on Friday, as they customarily do, but there wasn’t much to show. In fact, there were no new applications filed, approved, denied, or withdrawn. There was one new fund added to the waitlist. Pension Plan of International Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftworkers Local #15 PA added its name to the list on April 10th. They became the 114th fund to be on the list. As previously reported, 27 of those have filed an application with 8 having been approved for an SFA grant.

There has been a new tab added to the PBGC’s weekly update, as a result of excess SFA grant money being repaid. The first fund to return excess grant money is the Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Plan, which returned $126.7 million or 0.35% of the initial grant payment. They are the first, but they likely won’t be the last to have to do so.

Economic and labor market conditions remain positive, likely keeping US interest rates elevated in 2024. These higher rates provide SFA recipients with the wonderful opportunity to defease the promised benefits at lower present value cost. Let us help you!

04.12.24
by

The Truth Will Set You Free!

By: Russ Kamp, Managing Director, Ryan ALM, Inc.

Managing a pension plan should be all about securing the promised benefits at a reasonable cost and with prudent risk. I believe that most plan sponsors would agree, yet that is not how plans are managed, especially public and multiemployer plans that continue to pursue the return on asset assumption (ROA) as if it were the Holy Grail. I’ve written quite a bit on this subject, including discussing asset consulting reports that should have the relationship of plan assets to plan liabilities on page one of the quarterly performance reports.

We know that pension liabilities are like snowflakes, as there are no two pension liability streams that are the same given the unique characteristics of each labor force. Furthermore, most pension actuaries only produce an annual update making more frequent (monthly/quarterly) updates more challenging. Would plan sponsors want a more frequent view of the liabilities if they were available? I think that they would. Again, if securing the promised benefits are the primary objective when it comes to managing a pension plan, then plan sponsors need a more frequent view of the relationship between assets and liabilities.

Why is this important? First and foremost, the capital markets are constantly moving, and the changes impact the value of the plan’s assets all the time. But it isn’t just the asset-side that is being impacted, as liabilities are bond-like in nature and they change as interest rates change. We’ve highlighted this activity in both the Ryan ALM Pension Monitor and the Ryan ALM Quarterly Newsletter. However, accounting rules for both multiemployer and public plans allow a static discount rate equivalent to the plan’s ROA to be used that hides the impact of those changing interest rates on the value of a plan’s liabilities and funded status.

What if a more frequent analysis was available at a modest cost. Would plan sponsors want to see how the funded status was behaving? Would they want that comparison available to help with asset allocation changes, especially if it meant reducing risk as funding improved? I suspect that they would. Well, there is good news. Ryan ALM, Inc. created a Custom Liability Index (CLI) in 1991. The CLI is designed to be the proper benchmark for liability driven objectives. The CLI calculates the present value of liabilities based on numerous discount rates (ASC 715 (FAS 158), PPA – MAP 21, PPA – Spot Rates, GASB 67, Treasury STRIPS and the ROA). The CLI calculates the growth rate, summary statistics, and interest rate sensitivity as a series of monthly or quarterly reports depending on the client’s desired frequency.

The above information is for an actual client, who we’ve been providing a CLI for 15+ years. This client has elected to receive quarterly reviews. They’ve also chosen to see the impact on liabilities for multiple discount rates, including a constant 4.5% ROA, which could easily be a pension plan’s ROA of say 7%. As you will note, the present value (PV) of those future value (FV) liabilities are different, and they could be dramatic, depending on the interest rate used. In this case, the AA Corporate rate (5.48% YTW) produces a funded ratio of 56.7%, while the flat 4.5% rate increases the PV liabilities thus reducing the funded status by more than 20%.

Using Treasury STRIPS as the discount rate produces the lowest funded ratio of 33.7% or 23% lower than using the AA Corporate discount rate.

With this information, plan sponsors and their advisors (consultants and actuaries) can make informed decisions related to contributions and asset allocation. Most plan sponsors are currently blind to these facts. As a result, decisions may be taken without having all of the necessary facts. Pension plans need to be protected and preserved (Ryan ALM’s mission). Having a complete understanding of what those future promises look like is essential.

You’ve made a promise: measure it – monitor it – manage it – and SECURE it…   

Get off the pension funding rollercoaster – sleep well!

04.09.24
by

Ryan ALM, Inc. Q1’24 Newsletter

By: Russ Kamp, Managing Director, Ryan ALM, Inc.

We are pleased to provide you with the Ryan ALM, Inc. Q1’24 Newsletter. You’ll find lots of interesting information related to defined benefit pensions, with a particular focus on pension liabilities. The firs quarter of 2024 was a good quarter for pension America, as rising rates and strong asset gains combined to improve funded status for all plan types.

That said, there have been several recent articles that included comments from leading actuaries imploring plan sponsors to take risk out of their current asset allocations. We’ve encouraged pension plan sponsors to do that for decades, as riding the asset allocation rollercoaster has only lead to increased contribution expenses and volatility of the funded status. It is time to adopt a new approach. One that will secure the promised benefits and allow participants and plan sponsors to sleep better at night.

Please don’t hesitate to reach out to us if you’d like more information on how to de-risk a plan. We’ve written chapter and verse on the subject.

04.08.24
by

ARPA Update as of April 5, 2024

By: Russ Kamp, Managing Director, Ryan ALM, Inc.

Welcome to ECLIPSE DAY. Good luck found me in Dallas today for the TexPERS conference, as it is in the path of totality (complete darkness). Bad luck has it heavily overcast today following a Sunday that had beautiful blue skies. Oh, well. Perhaps we’ll get lucky.

APRA’s implementation by the PBGC has slowed, and we don’t have earthquakes (NJ residents are still shaking their heads), eclipses, or any other natural event to blame. That is not to say that nothing has been done, as there was one new application received during the week. Printing Local 72 Industry Pension Plan, a Priority Group 5 member, submitted its revised application seeking $37 million in SFA for the 787 plan participants. Beyond that, I suspect that they are busy reviewing the 19 applications that have been submitted that are currently waiting on approval. Only 5 of those applications are the initial version.

As we’ve discussed in previous updates, census data used to determine SFA grant payments has had to be checked and rechecked following the announcement that Central States received more SFA grant $ than they were eligible to receive since some of the participants were no longer alive. That revelation and the corrective measures taken to ensure that SFA monies are only being allocated for eligible participants has really slowed an already cumbersome review. Despite some of these impediments, it is great that 72 plans have gotten the SFA awards totaling nearly $54 billion.

We might not have great visibility as it pertains to the eclipse, but with US interest rates tending higher, inflation remaining more “sticky” than hoped, and a Fed that may just not cut in 2024, visibility is clearer that cash flow matching the SFA is the way to secure the benefits and expenses well into the future. As a reminder, as rates rise, the cost to defease those promised benefits falls. Higher rates aren’t only good for savers. They are particularly good for SFA recipients and all plan sponsors of DB plans.

As an example of how that math works, when I entered this industry on October 13, 1981, the 10-year Treasury was yielding 14.9%. It would have only cost you $17.82 to defease a $1,000 30-year liability. On August 4, 2020, when the 10-year Treasury yield dipped to 0.52%, it would have cost you an extraordinary $860.40 to defease the same $1,000 30-year liability. As of April 5, 2024, the 10-year Treasury is yielding 4.41% and the cost to defease that 30-year liability is much more manageable at $301.00. You should be cheering for a higher for longer scenario.

04.05.24
by

It is Time to Bag the Agg!

By: Russ Kamp, Managing Director, Ryan ALM, Inc.

We are happy to share with you a research piece titled “Bond Index Recommendation: Bag the Agg!“, written by Ronald J. Ryan, CEO, Ryan ALM, Inc. It includes a wonderful history lesson regarding the first bond indexes produced by Kuhn Loeb in the mid ’70s, and how Ron got involved to eventually create the “Lehman” indexes that are still so prominent today. There is also a nearly 50-year look back at a Kuhn Loeb index document. There aren’t many in our industry today who will remember the Kuhn Loeb letterhead.

Of equal importance is Ron’s opinion that the Aggregate Index has served its useful purpose and it is time for a rethink. Replacing the Agg won’t be easy, but with a renewed focus on the primary pension objective which is to secure the promised benefits at a reasonable cost and with prudent risk, it becomes easier to understand. The Ryan organization is focused on securing the pension promise through cash flow matching. In order to successfully implement such a strategy, a “Custom Liability Index” (CLI) must be created given each pension plan’s unique liabilities. The CLI is now the benchmark of choice for investment professionals to manage against.

I’m sure that you will appreciate Ron’s history lesson and his rationale for wanting to “retire” the Aggregate Index as the primary fixed income benchmark. Enjoy!

04.05.24
by

Corporate Funding Improves in March – Milliman

By: Russ Kamp, Managing Director, Ryan ALM, Inc.

Milliman released the results of its latest Milliman 100 Pension Funding Index (PFI), which analyzes the 100 largest U.S. corporate pension plans. Pension funding improved for the third consecutive month to start the year, which now stands at 105.6% from 105.3% at the end of February. March was a bit different, however, as the discount rate declined 11 basis points increasing the collective liabilities by $14 billion to $1.299 trillion at the end of the quarter. Despite the increase in liabilities, investment performance was once again strong leading to a gain of $19 billion. Total assets now stand at $1.373 trillion.

Zorast Wadia, author of the PFI, stated, “the funded status gains may dissipate unless plan sponsors adhere to liability-matching investment strategies. Zorast’s observation is outstanding. Should rates fall from these levels, the cost to defease pension liabilities will grow. Now is the time to take risk off the table. Create certainty by getting off the asset allocation rollercoaster. Engaging in Cash Flow Matching (CFM) does not necessitate being an all or nothing strategy. Start your cash flow matching mandate and extend it as the funded status improves.

Return-seeking bond strategies will lose in an environment of rising rates. However, once a plan engages in CFM, the relationship between plan assets and liabilities is locked. Done correctly, assets and liabilities will move in tandem. It doesn’t matter what interest rates do, as benefit payments are future values that are not interest rate sensitive.

Act now to create some certainty! You’ll appreciate the great night’s sleep that you’ll start to have.

04.04.24
by

Ryan ALM, Inc. Pension Monitor Q1’24

By: Russ Kamp, Managing Director, Ryan ALM, Inc.

We are pleased to share with you the Ryan ALM, Inc. Q1’24 pension monitor. This quarterly report compares different liability growth rates (based on a 12-year average duration) versus the asset growth rate for public, multiemployer, and corporate funds based on the P&I asset allocation survey of the top 1,000 plans which is updated annually.

With regard to Q1’24, Public pension funds (2.2%) underperformed Corporate Pension plans (3.7%) by 1.5% as ASC 715 discount rates showed a negative growth rate of -1.5% for Q1’24 while the discount rate using the average ROA (GASB accounting) would have appreciated by 1.8%. This outperformance by corporate pension plans was accomplished despite the much greater exposure to US fixed income within corporate pension plans (45.4%) versus both public (18.7%) and multiemployer (18.2%) and the far less exposure to US equities (12.6%) versus publics (21.9%) and multiemployer (22.2%).

Please don’t hesitate to reach out to us with any questions that you might have regarding this monitor.

04.03.24
by

What Are the Stats Telling Us?

By: Russ Kamp, Managing Director, Ryan ALM, Inc.

Mark Twain quoted Benjamin Disraeli in his 1907 autobiography, when he stated “Lies, damned lies, and statistics” as a phrase used to describe the persuasive power of statistics to support weak arguments. Folks who regularly read my posts know that I am a frequent user of statistics to support my arguments, whether they are strong or weak. As a young man, I would study the sports section box scores and the backs of my baseball cards for every possible stat. It is just who I am. I love #s!

The investment management industry is inundated with statistics. You can’t go a day without a meaningful insight being shared in reference to our industry, the economy, interest rates, politics, companies, commodities, etc. I try to absorb as many of these stats as possible. However, it is easy to fall prey to confirmation bias, which humans are prone. Putting a series of statistics together and building an investment case is never easy. That said, we at Ryan ALM, Inc. have been saying since the onset of higher rates that the US Federal Reserve would likely be forced to keep rates higher for longer, as inflation would remain stickier than originally forecast.

We also didn’t see a recession on the horizon due to an incredibly strong US labor market, which continues to witness near historic lows for unemployment. Despite the retiring of the Baby Boomer generation, the labor participation rate is up marginally during this period of higher rates, indicating that more folks are looking for employment opportunities at this time. They are being supported by the fact that job openings remain quite elevated relative to pre-Covid-19 levels at roughly 880k. When people work, they spend! Wage growth recently surprised to the upside. Will demand for goods and services follow? It usually does.

Furthermore, as we’ve disclosed on many occasions, financial conditions are NOT tight despite the rapid rise in US interest rates from the depths induced by the pandemic. Long-term US rates remain below the 50-year average, and in the case of the US 10-year Treasury note, the yield difference is roughly -2.1%. Does that give the Fed some room to possibly increase rates should inflation remain elusive?

In just the past week, we’ve had oil touch $85/barrel, the Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow model increase its forecast for Q1’24 growth from 2.3% to 2.8%, a Baltimore bridge collapse that will impact shipping and create additional expense and delays, housing that once again exceeded expectations, Fed (Powell) announcements that a recession wasn’t on the horizon, job growth (ADP) that was the highest in 8 months, manufacturing that stopped contracting for the first time since 2022 (17 months), and on and on and… Am I kidding myself that our case for higher for longer is the right call? Am I only using certain stats to “confirm” the Ryan ALM argument?

We don’t know. But here is the good news. Our investment strategy doesn’t care. As cash flow matching experts, we are agnostic as to the direction of rates. Yes, higher rates mean lower costs to defease those future benefit promises, so higher rates are good. However, once we match asset cashflows of interest and principal to the liability cash flows (benefit payments and expenses), the direction of rates becomes irrelevant, as future values are not interest rate sensitive. Building an investment case for cash flow matching was challenging when rates were at historic lows. It is much easier today, as one can invest in high quality investment-grade corporate bonds and get yields in the range of 5%-5.5%, which is a significant percent of the average return on asset assumption (ROA) with much less risk and volatility of investing in equities and other alternatives.

I don’t personally see a case for the Fed to cut rates in the near future. I think that it would be a huge mistake to once again ease monetary policy before the Fed’s objective has been achieved. I lived through the ’70s and witnessed first-hand the impact on the economy when the Fed took its collective foot off the brake. As a result, I entered this industry in 1981 when the 10-year Treasury yield was at 14.9%. The Fed can’t afford to repeat the sins of the past. I believe that they know that and as a result, they won’t act impulsively this time.

04.01.24
by

ARPA Update as of March 29, 2024

By: Russ Kamp, Managing Director, Ryan ALM, Inc.

Good morning, and welcome to a new month/quarter. Still feels like winter in the northeast! But there has been a thaw with regard to activity at the PBGC as they implement the ARPA legislation.

Happy to report that the Pension Plan of the Moving Picture Machine Operators Union Local 306 and the New England Teamsters Pension Plan both submitted applications seeking SFA. The Machine Operators, a priority group 5 member, is seeking $19.4 million for its 542 participants, while the NE Teamsters are hoping to capture more than $5.4 billion in SFA for just over 72k plan members. If the NE Teamsters are successful, they will have received the second largest grant to date only trailing the Central States Teamsters whopping $35.8 billion. To date, there have been 5 awards of greater than $1 billion. Currently, there are four plans seeking >$1 billion that are under review including the NE Teamsters.

In other news, the United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 152 Retail Meat Pension Plan, had its application approved for an SFA grant of $279.3 million which will support the benefits for 10,252 members. There were no applications denied or withdrawn during the previous week. In addition, there were no pension funds added to the waitlist that continues to have 86 potential applications waiting to submit an application from the initial 113 members.

The upcoming week will provide some insight into the continuing strength of the US labor market with the ADP and US employment releases as well as the weekly initial claims data. However, it doesn’t appear that market participants are waiting to see what those data sets reveal as US Treasury bonds and notes are seeing a big move up in yields today. This movement hurts total return focused fixed income products, but it provides those pension plans with more attractive yields for cash flow matching assignments. Higher yields mean lower cost to defease future benefit payments. Very nice!