City pension funds had almost $2 million invested with First Republic and Signature banks — losing it all when both banks failed this year.
The losses were contained in new data The Post obtained from the city Comptroller’s office under a Freedom of Information Law request.
Though a federal bailout rescued bank depositors, the city’s pension cash had been invested in bank stocks and bonds.
“The overall loss is negligible in the context of the daily market motions of our $240 billion pension funds,” said Chloe Chik, spokesperson for Comptroller Brad Lander.
All five city pensions funds were hit in the bank failures.
Finally, and most important, this month there is an election for one active, or contributing member seat on the STRS board—the outcome of which will be determined in early May. If the reform coalition candidate wins this seat, it’s likely control of the board will shift. Then the concerns of the state auditor and reform-minded members will be addressed regarding the need to restore transparency, lower investment fees paid to Wall Street, improve investment performance and move toward restoring benefits previously promised. If so, STRS Ohio’s participant-driven reforms may serve as a template for all of the nation’s public pensions. (On the other hand, if our request for public records is granted by the Ohio Supreme Court later this year—and court-ordered transparency ensues—there may be little need for board action because any mismanagement or wrongdoing will have been exposed to the public.)
But here’s the big picture: Since all public pensions in America have moved like a herd, pouring over $1 trillion into many of the same high-cost, high-risk secretive alternative investments, if any single state pension—such as Rhode Island, or Ohio STRS—restores full transparency and releases alternative investment information to the public revealing widespread industry abuses and violations of law, all participants in public pensions which have also invested in these funds, as well as taxpayers, will benefit. One obscure pension fund board vote in Ohio could ultimately force the transparency and accountability Wall Street has successfully resisted for decades.
Capital markets had a tough time in 2022, but public pension funds managed to increase their funded status, according to a report from the National Conference on Public Employee Retirement Systems
The funded ratio at public pension funds increased to 77.8% last year, compared with 74.7% in 2021, per a survey of almost 200 funds conducted by NCPERS, the largest trade association for public funds in the U.S. and Canada, in partnership with Cobalt Community Research.
The vast majority of survey respondents, 92%, represent defined benefit plans, 8% defined contribution plans, 10% combination plans and 5% cash balance plans. The total exceeds 100% because of multiple responses, according to NCPERS.
Public pension programs scored an average one-year return of around 11.4%. By contrast, the S&P 500 was down around 19% and the Bloomberg US Agg, which tracks bonds, was off 13% in 2022. Heavy concentration in real estate and private equity were the key to the funds’ outperformance, the report says.
The study’s findings highlight public pensions’ “resiliency in the face of volatile markets, rising interest rates, and disruption in the workforce during the COVID-19 pandemic,” said Hank Kim, NCPERS executive director and general counsel, in a statement. “It’s clear that public pensions remain dedicated to maximizing returns while managing risks in order to efficiently deliver retirement benefits to public servants all over the country.”
Higher contribution income helped. Investment returns were the largest component of the gains, accounting for slightly more than two-thirds of them, but the stronger average member and employer contributions also played a role. Each rose by one percentage point, to 9% and 24%, respectively.
Public pension plans lost a median 7.9% in the year ended June 30, according to Wilshire Trust Universe Comparison Service data released Tuesday, their worst annual performance since 2009 and a fresh sign of the chronic financial stress facing governments and retirement savers.
Much of the damage occurred in April, May and June, when global markets came under intense pressure driven by concerns about inflation, high stock valuations and a broad retreat from speculative investments including cryptocurrencies. Funds that manage the retirement savings of teachers, firefighters and police officers returned a median minus 8.9% for that three-month period, their worst quarterly performance since the early months of the global pandemic.
Public pension plans have mostly avoided direct investments into cryptocurrencies, and for good reason. Public pension benefits are constitutionally protected, meaning taxpayers are on the hook for paying for unfunded liabilities. If a highly volatile investment, such as crypto, were to go sour, the public pension fund—thus, taxpayers—would be on the hook to make up for the shortfall and pay for the retirement benefits promised to public workers. Even though there is a potential upside in generating significant returns by investing in cryptocurrency at the right times, the risks and market swings far outweigh the potential benefits for public pension systems.
But some U.S. public pension systems are already reporting minor financial losses related to FTX, including the Kansas Public Employee Retirement System, according to the Topeka Capital-Journal:
….
Similarly, “The Missouri State Employees’ Retirement System lost roughly $1 million because a private equity firm it invested in was invested in FTX, the embattled cryptocurrency exchange that filed for bankruptcy last week,” the Kansas City Star reported.
….
Overall, the story of FTX is a cautionary tale for all investors. When it comes to public pension systems, which have largely steered clear of making direct investments in crypto, pension funds should resist the growing pressures to seek higher returns and take on risks that could expose taxpayers to major financial losses and more public pension debt.
Funds adhering to environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) principles have been hit by unprecedented outflows in the market downturn, as investors prioritize capital preservation over goals such as tackling climate change.
ESG, a classification applied to fund assets currently worth an estimated $6.5 trillion, is being tested by a drop in market values fuelled by concerns that central banks hiking interest rates to fight rampant inflation will trigger an economic recession.
Investors souring on ESG funds could pose a challenge to governments seeking to enlist them in the fight against climate change. Policymakers at the COP27 climate talks in Egypt are trying this week to secure more financing from the private sector to help lower carbon emissions.
Data from research service Refinitiv Lipper shows that funds of equities, debt and other asset types dedicated to responsible investing posted net outflows globally of $108 billion this year to the end of September, the first time investors withdrew money from them over such a long period since Refinitiv started tracking them in late 2017.
One criticism of ESG investing is that, when it shows good returns, this might be because of temporary factors that have an outsize impact. Such superior returns are often driven by climate-news “shocks,” declared Robert Stambaugh, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, and two other academics, in a recent paper. The reference is apparently to a spell of severe drought or destructive hurricanes. The professors expressed uncertainty as to whether any future ESG outperformance can be assumed.
Of course, with climate-oriented investing now a partisan issue, a welter of claims and counter-claims has appeared. To pro-ESG folks, science is on their side, hence the opposition is just blowing smoke to confuse people.
Anti-ESG politicians appear to be convincing the public that a “false equivalence” exists between their stance and the sustainability advocates, contended Witold Henisz, director of Wharton’s ESG Initiative, in a recent article in the Knowledge Wharton periodical. He wrote that “ideological opposition [is] cynically seeking a wedge issue for upcoming political campaigns — and, so far, it appears to be working.”
Whatever the outcome of the current debate over ESG-related bans and the like, the climate change question is not going away. Says CalSTRS’s Ailman, “It will be with us for the next 50 years.”
This report finds that state and local government retirement systems on the whole successfully navigated the 2007 to 2009 Global Financial Crisis. Moreover, public retirement systems across the nation have adapted in the years since the recession by taking actions to ensure continued long-term resiliency.
Examining the Experiences of Public Pension Plans Since the Great Recession is authored by Tyler Bond, NIRS Research Manager, Dan Doonan, NIRS Executive Director, Todd Tauzer, Segal Vice President and Actuary, and Ronald Temple, Lazard Managing Director and Co-Head of Multi-Asset and Head of U.S. Equity.
The report finds:
The majority of public pension plans recovered their pre- recession asset levels within six years, while continuing to pay over a trillion dollars in benefits. In recent years, public plans have reported record-high asset levels.
Discount rates, or the assumed rate of return on investments, have broadly decreased from eight to seven percent for the median public pension plan, based on actuarial and financial forecasts of future market returns.
Generational mortality tables, possible today with more advanced financial modeling software, have been broadly adopted by nearly all large public plans and future longevity improvements are now incorporated into standard financial projections.
Many public plans have shortened amortization periods, or the period of time required to pay off an unfunded actuarial accrued liability, to align with evolving actuarial best practices. Tightening amortization periods, akin to paying off a mortgage more quickly, has had the effect of increasing short- term costs. In the long run, plans and stakeholders will benefit.
The intense focus on public plan investment programs since the Great Recession misses the more important structural changes that generally have had a larger impact on plan finances and the resources necessary for retirement security.
Plans have adjusted strategic asset allocations in response to market conditions. With less exposure to public equities and fixed income, plans increased exposure to real estate, private equity, and hedge funds.
Professionally managed public defined benefit plans rebalance investments during volatile times and avoid the behavioral drag observed in retail investment.
Author(s): Dan Doonan, Ron Temple, Todd Tauzer, Tyler Bond
The Teachers’ Retirement System of the State of Illinois has avoided a significant portfolio downswing despite the equity slowdown that has burdened asset managers with thus far in 2022. Through the second quarter, the fund has returned-1.17% net of fees, a favorable rate of return compared to other public pension systems across the country in fiscal year 2022.
At the end of FY 2022, the 40-year rate of return was 9.3%. This 40-year annualized return eclipses the system’s estimated long-term investment rate of 7%.
The net investment loss will not impact the plans’ ability to pay out benefits to its more than 434,000 members. In 2022, TRS will pay more than $7 billion in benefits to more than 128,000 members and their families.
Since the fiscal 2019 reporting period ended, an unprecedented $5 trillion in federal stimulus and other government interventions have buoyed financial markets and strengthened plan balance sheets.2 As a result, state plans earned returns of over 25% in fiscal 2021—a highwater mark not seen since the 1980s. Pew estimates that total unfunded liabilities dropped below $1 trillion by the end of fiscal 2021, which would push state plans to be more than 80% funded for the first time since 2008. (See Figure 1; for more detail, see also Appendix G.) The significant improvement in plans’ fiscal position is due in large part to dramatic increases in employer contributions to state pension funds in the past decade, which boosted assets by more than $200 billion. Since 2010, annual contributions to state pensions have increased by 8% annually, twice the rate of revenue growth. And for the 10 lowest-funded states, the yearly growth in employer contributions averaged 15% over this period. As a result, after decades of underfunding and market losses from risky investment strategies, for the first time this century states are expected to have collectively achieved positive amortization in 2020—meaning that payments into state pension funds were sufficient to pay for current benefits as well as reduce pension debt.
An increase in pension contributions of the size seen over the past decade signals a shift in budget priorities by state policymakers and a recognition that the costs of postponing obligations are untenable if left unaddressed. Although this has improved the outlook for state pension plans, it has also crowded out spending on other important programs and services and left states with less budgetary space to sustain future rises in pension payments.
The drop in global stock and bond values has shaved about $3 billion off the Pennsylvania State Employees’ Retirement System (SERS) during the second quarter, staff and consultants warned trustees in Thursday’s investment meeting.
The fund was worth $34.5 billion at midyear, down from $38 billion three months before, after counting an 8.5% investment loss for the quarter, along with payouts to 130,000 pensioners, and ongoing contributions from taxpayers and 100,000 state workers — lawmakers, judges, college staff, corrections officers, troopers, social workers — who hope to retire someday with pensions from the system.
The fund posted the decline as legislators have been weighing how to cope with pressure to boost pensions for more than 70,000 older state and public school retirees, whose last “cost of living allowance” increases took effect in 2004. Their pension checks, unchanged since that time, are losing pricing power after food, fuel, and other prices rose earlier this year at the fastest rate since the early 1980s.
The New York State Common Retirement Fund has reported a 9.51% investment return for fiscal year 2022, while the New York City Retirement System reported an annual preliminary loss of 8.65% among its five pension funds.
However, the fiscal year for the state’s pension ended March 31, while the city’s pension funds ended their fiscal year June 30, after a quarter during which global markets tumbled and the S&P 500 fell by more than 16%.
…..
The portfolio’s alternative investments buoyed the pension fund’s returns, which raised the portfolio’s asset value to $272.1 billion as of March 31. Private equity returned 37.57% for the year, while the fund’s real estate investments and real assets returned 27.4% and 16.12% respectively. The three asset classes account for nearly 24% of the portfolio’s total asset allocation. The pension fund recently reported that it had committed more than $3 billion in alternative investments during June alone.
The NYCRF had an asset allocation of 49.70% in publicly traded equities, 21.18% in cash, bonds and mortgages, 13.64% in private equity, 10.00% in real estate and real assets and 5.48% in credit, absolute return strategies and opportunistic alternatives. The fund’s long-term expected rate of return is 5.9%.
