Case study vol control equities 1 page
1
Private & Confidential Case Study: Volatility Control Equities 19 August 2013 Case Study: Adopting a risk controlled approach to managing equity allocation Situation: • A c£3.5bn closed and mature pension scheme with weak sponsor covenant, facing a deficit of c£300m on a self sufficiency basis. • The Scheme relies primarily on returns from investment strategy to fund its deficit in the absence of significant sponsor contributions. • The Scheme is therefore highly path dependent and vulnerable to stress events which could throw it off course from its flight path. Task: • To reduce downside risk from equities while maintaining returns required for the Scheme’s path to full funding. • Redington recommended for the Scheme to adopt a risk controlled approach to managing its equity allocation. Under this approach, the Scheme’s equity exposure is dynamically managed to achieve a target volatility level. - For example as equity volatility rises, exposure to equities is reduced towards cash to keep the volatility at the target level - Historical analysis showed that, across equity markets and time periods, adopting this approach enables the Scheme to limit draw-downs and deliver equity-like returns with substantially lower volatility • A further advantage of managing equity against a target volatility is that it cheapens the cost of buying explicit downside protection via a “put option” . - For example, the cost to protect a global equity portfolio against a fall in value of more than 10% over a one-year period may cost between 3-4%, however, the same protection for a global, volatility controlled index costs less than 1%). Action: • Following Trustee Training and Board Approval, the Trustees moved the equity benchmark to a volatility controlled index with a target volatility of 10% and bought a put option at a strike of 90% on the index. 1 0.00% 0.50% 1.00% 1.50% 2.00% 2.50% 3.00% 3.50% 0% 5% Expected R eturn oversw aps (bps) VaR 95 (% ofnotionalexposure) Starting Point Stages Description Starting Point 100% allocation in equities Stage 1 100% allocation in volatility control equities Stage 2 Add a put option to the volatility control equities Stage 1 Stage 2 Risk-Return Illustration of Scheme’s Equity Portfolio As a result, the Scheme: o Manages its equity exposure in a risk controlled way through a target volatility of 10%. o Reduced its equity risk by two thirds i.e. from c30% to 10% of notional equity exposure. o Decreased downside risk by buying explicit protection at affordable levels while still maintaining its path to full funding. o Diversified its portfolio further between different risk factors such as credit, illiquidity, insurance risks by reducing relative equity risk. Result:
description
Transcript of Case study vol control equities 1 page
Private & Confidential Case Study: Volatility Control Equities 19 August 2013 1
Case Study: Adopting a risk controlled approach to managing equity allocation
Situation:
• A c£3.5bn closed and mature pension scheme with weak sponsor covenant, facing a deficit of c£300m on a self sufficiency basis.
• The Scheme relies primarily on returns from investment strategy to fund its deficit in the absence of significant sponsor contributions.
• The Scheme is therefore highly path dependent and vulnerable to stress events which could throw it off course from its flight path.
Task:
• To reduce downside risk from equities while maintaining returns required for the Scheme’s path to full funding.
• Redington recommended for the Scheme to adopt a risk controlled approach to managing its equity allocation. Under this approach, the Scheme’s equity exposure is dynamically managed to achieve a target volatility level.
- For example as equity volatility rises, exposure to equities is reduced towards cash to keep the volatility at the target level
- Historical analysis showed that, across equity markets and time periods, adopting this approach enables the Scheme to limit draw-downs and deliver equity-like returns with substantially lower volatility
• A further advantage of managing equity against a target volatility is that it cheapens the cost of buying explicit downside protection via a “put option” .
- For example, the cost to protect a global equity portfolio against a fall in value of more than 10% over a one-year period may cost between 3-4%, however, the same protection for a global, volatility controlled index costs less than 1%).
Action:
• Following Trustee Training and Board Approval, the Trustees moved the equity benchmark to a volatility controlled index with a target volatility of 10% and bought a put option at a strike of 90% on the index.
• Redington also advised on other key parameters of the structure including implementation vehicle, underlying index and management of currency hedging.
• The structure was executed by the Scheme’s LDI manager with oversight by Redington as a total return swap with an investment bank.
0.00%
0.50%
1.00%
1.50%
2.00%
2.50%
3.00%
3.50%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
Exp
ecte
d R
etu
rn o
ver
swap
s (b
ps)
VaR95 (% of notional exposure)
Starting Point
Stages Description
Starting Point
100% allocation in equities
Stage 1100% allocation in volatility control equities
Stage 2Add a put option to the volatility control equities
Stage 1
Stage 2
Risk-Return Illustration of Scheme’s Equity Portfolio
As a result, the Scheme:
o Manages its equity exposure in a risk controlled way through a target volatility of 10%.
o Reduced its equity risk by two thirds i.e. from c30% to 10% of notional equity exposure.
o Decreased downside risk by buying explicit protection at affordable levels while still maintaining its path to full funding.
o Diversified its portfolio further between different risk factors such as credit, illiquidity, insurance risks by reducing relative equity risk.
Result:
