The Markets January 10, 2018

Investor Type Sways Median Fee, Use of Active Management

Down from a high of 84% in 1996, twenty years later the majority of the assets owned by respondents, 69%, are still actively managed.

Reported by

Institutional investment management fee payment practices and trends are the subject of the Callan 2017 Investment Management Fee Survey.

The research reflects trends in 2016 fees assessed by 59 U.S. funds and trusts and 279 investment management organizations, the firm explains.

Want the latest retirement plan adviser news and insights? Sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters.

Overall the most frequently cited concern regarding fees is “whether or not active managers are providing the value-add to justify the fees.” Also important at a high level, Callan finds a 15% decrease in use of performance-based fees among investment managers since 2014. Even with greater concern voiced about the justification of active management fees, the majority of the assets owned by U.S. fund respondents, 69%, are actively managed. This is down from a high of 84% in 1996.

The median fee charged for investment management, according to Callan researchers, is 38 basis points. This figure does not tell the whole story, as the investor fund type seems to have a big impact on the fees paid. In fact, the data shows a median 36 bps fee for public funds, a 68 bps fee at the median for endowments and foundations, and a 37 bps median for corporate funds. The median investment management fees paid by endowments/foundations in 2016 was up 24% over 2014.

The research suggests median investment management fees vary quite widely by asset class, as well. For fixed income, it is 21 bps; for U.S. equity, 34 bps; for global equity, 45 bps; and for alternatives, it is 90 basis points. Managers seem to be urging more clients to allocate more to the alternatives category, as the increase in allocations to alternatives since 2014 has been significant. For public funds, investments in alternatives are up 17%; for corporate funds, 17%; and for endowments and foundations, 6%.

Highlighting a well-established industry fact, Callan says smaller funds paid a premium for investment management relative to other fund sizes: “Funds with less than $1 billion in assets paid 65% more than medium funds ($1 billion to $10 billion in assets) and 91% more than the largest funds (greater than $100 billion in assets).”

Digging into the data provided by asset managers, Callan researchers find managers’ allocation to bonuses as a percent of revenue in 2016 was 18%, down from 24% in 2014. The most dramatic change was seen in non-U.S. fixed income (down 19%), Callan reports, followed by hedge funds and global equity (down 13%, each). At the same time, the percentage of revenue allocated to cover the cost of operations increased dramatically, from 42% to 60%, on average. Manager profit margin as a percentage of revenue decreased from 34% in 2014 to 22% in 2016, on average.

The full report can be downloaded here.

Data & Research January 10, 2018

Debt Causing Financial Vulnerability for Pre-Retirees

Researchers suggest debt management should be a factor in retirement security policy.

Reported by

Researchers suggest that analysts and policymakers should explore ways to enhance debt management practices as they examine factors driving retirement security.

According to a National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) working paper, older persons today appear more likely to enter retirement in debt than in past decades. Researchers examined older individuals’ debt patterns using the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) and the National Financial Capability Study (NFCS). With the HRS, they compared cohorts of people on the verge of retirement (ages 56 to 61) as well as people slightly older (ages 62 to 66).

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANADVISERdash daily newsletter.

Total debt is measured in the HRS as the value of mortgages and other loans on the household’s primary residence, other mortgages, and other debt (including credit card debt, medical debt, etc.). The researchers found the percentage of people age 56 to 61 arriving at the verge of retirement with debt rose from 64% in the HRS baseline group to 71% among Early Boomers. Additionally, the value of debt held rose sharply over time.

While the median amount of debt in the baseline group was about $6,800, it more than quadrupled among War Babies and almost quintupled among Early Boomers (respectively, $31,200 and $32,700, all in 2015 dollars). In addition, debt distribution appears to have changed across cohorts. The top quartile of the debt distribution held around $51,000 in debt in the baseline group (75th percentile), while in the two cohorts surveyed more recently, this same quartile of the population held more than double ($106,000) and almost triple ($146,800) that amount. Additionally, the top 10 percent of the debt distribution (90th percentile) reported debt of over $272,000, more than double what had been seen for respondents in this same age range 18 years earlier.

The researchers point out that, depending on the interest rate charged on this debt, these families would be very likely to face sizeable monthly debt repayments and to carry debt well into retirement. As debt levels increase, borrowers’ ability to repay becomes progressively more sensitive to drops in income as well as increases in interest rates.

The analysis found that one factor driving this rise in debt across time is that cohorts surveyed more recently have taken on substantially more debt and face more financial insecurity as they near retirement, mostly due to having purchased more expensive homes with smaller down payments. The percentage of people ages 56 to 61 having mortgage debt has risen by eight percentage points, from 41% in the baseline group to 49% among Early Boomers. Moreover, mortgage debt amounts grew as well. For instance, looking at the third quartile (75th percentile) of the mortgage debt distribution in the whole sample (not conditional on having a mortgage), mortgage debt more than tripled among Early Boomers compared to the baseline group.

Other debt for persons on the verge of retirement also rose across cohorts, from 37% for the HRS baseline group, to 42% for the Early Boomers. “Our concern regarding these indebtedness trends is that older households’ debt and financial situation will deteriorate as short-term interest rates start to increase,” the researchers say.

Ratio of debts to assets

The analysis found it is not just the value of debt that has increased over time, but the proportion of debt to assets as well. For example, the median value of total debt over total assets was rather small for the HRS baseline cohort, i.e., only about 4%, but this ratio rose to 11% and 15% in the War Baby and Early Boomer cohorts. In addition, a sizable fraction of Early Boomers had ratios over 50% and some held debt worth as much as 90% of total assets.

One important decision after retirement is how to decumulate wealth, and the researchers note that recent cohorts will also need to manage and pay off their rising debt burdens in retirement. They point out this is made more difficult by the fact that older persons often move some of their assets to fixed income assets. In addition, if equity returns are lower in the future than they were in the past (as many predict), it will be important for current older cohorts to manage assets and liabilities wisely and pay off some of their higher-interest debt first. “Accordingly, it appears that cohorts entering retirement will need to ensure that their income and asset drawdowns suffice not only to cover their target consumption streams, but also to service their mortgage and other debt during retirement,” the working paper says.

Comparing the 56 to 61 and 62 to 66 age groups, the researchers find indebtedness decreases as people age. Factors reducing exposure to debt include having higher income, more education, and greater financial literacy. Factors associated with greater financial vulnerability include having had more children, being in poor health, and experiencing unexpected large income declines.

The paper may be downloaded from the American Economic Association website.

«