Among the key prescriptions of the study:
- In DC plans, primarily in the US and the UK, employees bear all the financial risk and no guarantees are offered by the sponsor or by prudential regulation. However, the lack of guarantees and transparency could lead to a problem of trust – it is thus important that some guarantees are offered in DC funds and that their costs are clearly explained in order to avoid creating a biased risk/return illusion. These changes would help to avoid future disappointment amongst employees, who would reduce their participation in such retirement systems and potentially question their perception of their overall remuneration.
- Participants are first and foremost exposed to inflation risk and longevity risk, and DC funds need to adopt an asset-liability management strategy in the manner that defined-benefit (DB) funds do. Today, DC funds are under-diversified and they need to stop solely investing in equities and government bonds, thus observing the first principle of modern portfolio theory. Such a diversification of asset classes should allow them to invest in illiquid assets in order to benefit from their risk premium over the long term. The long-term choice also means that it is necessary to adopt professional risk management practices, because when the investment horizon, liabilities and eventual guarantees are taken into account, such (dynamic) risk management strategies need to be put in place.
- Regulators can also contribute to the adoption of professional management practices for pension funds. In their review of DC systems, regulators understood the dangers associated with transferring uncontrolled risks to fund participants and today, the first generations of Target Date Funds are rightly being called into question. The EU directive on pensions (the IORP directive) facilitates the adoption of professional financial management practices and economies of scale. In the UK, the new Pensions Act requires auto-enrolment of employees in pension plans, and introduces the government’s National Employment Savings Trust (NEST) – a professionally managed structure with controlled costs which will serve as a default option. This should raise awareness in the industry on pension fund management.
- The most significant developments to institutional pension systems in the short-term will likely be seen in DC funds. It is important to create DC funds that address the need for retirement savings and can then serve as default investment options in existing plans. In the UK, companies are now required to provide their employees with a retirement savings plan and many will need to have ready-made pension plans to hand. We should expect to see some consolidation of DB and hybrid funds in the market as economies of scale are possible, particularly where the industry is highly fragmented.
Commenting on the study, Noël Amenc, Director of EDHEC-Risk Institute, said, “It is clear that complete reliance on sponsor guarantees for traditional DB funds makes little sense in view of the prevailing economic context and demographic trends in Europe. With more hybrid pension schemes in Europe, and a shift towards DC funds in the United Kingdom and the United States, there is a requirement for improved governance, investment options and communication to employees.”
Erwan Boscher, Head of Pension Solution Management at AXA Investment Managers said, “At a time when governments, regulators and plan sponsors are preoccupied with finding the right balance between risks and uncertainties for employers and employees, the findings of the EDHEC survey are extremely timely. Although the recent years have seen an increased level of sophistication achieved by the pensions industry in asset-liability and risk management, this survey highlights the specific challenges that face hybrid and collective DC schemes as they evolve to meet the needs of employers and employees alike. We are confident that the EDHEC research will contribute to this important debate on pension provision and pave the way for more flexible solutions with an optimal level of risk sharing.”
A copy of the EDHEC-Risk Institute study can be found here:
EDHEC-Risk Publication Shifting Towards Hybrid Pension Systems: A European Perspective