External Managers Pushed Out by Danish Funds With $210 Billion
(Bloomberg) -- The biggest funds in one of the world’s best-run pension markets are growing increasingly skeptical toward external money managers.
PFA, Denmark’s biggest commercial pension fund with about $90 billion in assets, says it’s now simply too costly to routinely pay others to help manage investments, given the return environment. ATP, which oversees about $120 billion, makes a similar point.
“We’re happy to pay managers, if they deliver alpha,” Bo Foged, the acting chief executive officer of ATP, said in an interview, referring to market-beating returns. But returns are looking “more moderate” and therefore “costs come to mean more and more and more.”
“It becomes a bigger and bigger and bigger share, and external managers are relatively expensive, so you have to be really selective,” he said.
Some of the biggest asset managers inside the Nordic region are already feeling the changing tide. The head of wealth management at Nordea Bank Abp, Snorre Storset, said last week that institutional investors in Sweden and Denmark have started doing more in-house. That’s part of the reason why Nordea recently saw net outflows, he said.
Part of what’s driving the development is that pension funds can now get a better sense of what they’re paying for, after European lawmakers revised the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive to require more transparency.
Allan Polack, the CEO of PFA, says that finding ways to cut costs is key to his fund’s strategy. He’s avoiding external managers and instead using his own staff to step up direct investments, which now make up about 23 of the portfolio. He wants to take that stake all the way to 30 percent.
Doing it in-house simply “lowers investment costs,” Polack said in an interview. It also means “we don’t have to share the returns with so many other investors,” he said.
Both ATP and PFA lost money last year as markets soured in the final months of 2018, making their focus on costs all the more urgent.
To be sure, the two funds haven’t completely turned their backs on external managers. At PFA, Polack says private equity firms stand out as an area where he still thinks it can be worth looking beyond his own staff for investing help, particularly in areas in which the fund doesn’t have expertise.
They offer “fantastic fund structures,” he said. “They’re just very expensive. That’s an issue because we compete on price with our clients, so our investment cost is the heart of the cost structure that we have.”
At ATP, Foged says he intends to continue using private equity firms, while noting that they’re part of the reason his fund’s overall costs jumped last year. He says he’s keeping an eye on their charges.
“You have to be much more selective than we have been in the last years,” Foged said. “The price developments that you’ve seen with assets, you have to be much more selective and much more critical, and we’re doing that of course -- and convincing our managers that they should be.”
©2019 Bloomberg L.P.