FundFire – CalPERS’ Pull-Out Hurts Hedge Funds on Fees, Transparency

in-the-news

2014-09-24

By Chris Larson

California Public Employees’ Retirement System’s (CalPERS’) move to no longer invest in hedge funds, or in funds of hedge funds, is unlikely to spark a trend of investors fleeing the asset class, say experts, but they do expect continued pressure on hedge funds to lower their fees and be more transparent.

“It’s definitely the big topic of discussion” with investors and service providers, says Carl Lingenfelter, chief administration officer at Northern Trust’s hedge fund services division. “Still, the content and the questions people are asking are really just a continuation of the discussions that people been having around performance and fees and fund structures for quite some time,” he says.

The CalPERS decision is actually positive, says Damien Loveday, global head of hedge fund research at Towers Watson. “The first reaction may be ‘Oh, this is terrible news.’ But no, this is great,” he says. “This is right in line with everything we’ve been talking about for the last 10 years, about how investors need to be better aligned with their investment managers, particularly with respect to fees.”

Ted Eliopoulos, CIO at the $300 billion CalPERS, revealed the decision to pull out of hedge funds last week, saying that he and the board had decided hedge funds aren’t worth the “complexity, cost and the lack of ability to scale at CalPERS’ size.” He did not blame underperformance for the decision.

Experts say Eliopoulos brought up a good point: hedge funds can be quite challenging for investors, no matter how large or small. For instance, “The lack of transparency has been an issue for years,” says one wealth management investment official, who previously oversaw investments at a public pension fund and requested anonymity. “This is certainly improving, but it’s still a struggle.”

Other issues that trouble institutional investors about hedge funds include a lack of liquidity, the potential for fraud and, of course, fees, says Ron Oldenkamp, president of third-party marketer Genesis Marketing Group. “The 2-and-20 [fee] model is under a lot of pressure,” he says. “I think for hedge funds to really continue to prosper going forward, they need to address the fees and other issues.”

Whether the CalPERS decision inspires other pensions to pull out of hedge funds remains to be seen. “I don’t think there will be widespread cuts, but there will definitely be more thinking about alignment and governance, and some investors may decide to cut,” Loveday says.

“There will likely be some institutions that follow CalPERS’ move,” says David Frank, CEO and managing partner at Stonehaven, a third-party marketing firm. “But the attention caused by their move is likely to result in more discussion about how groups should allocate to hedge funds … not if they should be invested in hedge funds.”

Indeed, Northern Trusts’s Lingenfelter thinks institutions will continue to invest in hedge funds, though they will likely slow down the pace for the time being, or even put such investments on hold temporarily. “There will certainly be a pause in many investors’ discussions around their investments, or potential investments, in the hedge fund sector, particularly in the U.S. public fund space,” he says.

He’s optimistic in the longer term. “I think we will ultimately look back at this as a turning point in the maturity of the hedge fund sector as it becomes a truly institutional asset class, as people finally realize that it’s not a

one-size-fits-all investment and look instead at how hedge funds complement their other strategies and asset classes,” Lingenfelter says.

Hedge funds themselves do not seem excessively worried that public pensions will abandon the strategies en masse. A senior marketing executive at a multi-billion-dollar manager, who asked for anonymity, notes that while state and local pensions still receive some criticism from the public for investing in hedge funds at all, “the institutional marketplace will continue to be a target for hedge funds.”

The marketing executive says that, after discussions with peers in the wake of the CalPERS announcement, he sees no signs of panic among other large hedge funds. He adds that the pension’s $4 billion hedge fund portfolio, while large in absolute terms, is a small fraction of the overall $3 trillion hedge fund industry.

In fact, says marketer and media strategist Mark Macias of Macias PR, start-ups and smaller hedge funds could turn the CalPERS situation to their advantage, if they offer clients and prospects greater flexibility on fees and transparency. “I think the bigger managers should be a little worried,” he says. “It’s the start-ups, the hungry managers, who can change the fee structure,” which should allow them to attract more assets, assuming the performance numbers are there as well, he says.

The same goes for transparency. “I’m telling my clients they need to be very clear with transparency” regarding fees and investment processes, Macias says. “People don’t like hedge funds if they see them as a black hole.”

The CalPERS move should not have much long-term impact on high-net-worth and retail investors looking at hedge funds either, Lingenfelter says. “There will probably be a little more skepticism in the retail market, especially around fees,” he says. “But as funds are able to generate a track record of performance net of fees, we will continue to see retail and traditional wealth management … increase their alts exposure.”

Towers Watson will still pressure managers to lower fees and otherwise be better aligned with investors, says Loveday. For those that do so, there’s no cause for alarm, he says: “If you’re a good manager, with fees that are aligned with investors, you have nothing to worry about.”

SHARE THIS
About Stonehaven, LLC

Stonehaven is an industry leading global placement agent focused on hedge funds, private equity, real estate, venture capital, private placements, and long‐only strategies. Stonehaven’s platform serves as a nexus between select investment opportunities and the institutional investment community with a talented capital raising team and robust infrastructure. The Firm’s dynamic structure fosters an ever‐ evolving stable of distinctive managers to match the demand across the diverse investor community. Founded in 2001 by CEO David Frank, the Firm is entirely management owned, giving it complete independence to continue pursuing its entrepreneurial approach while maintaining the highest ethical and regulatory standards.

Jul 19, 2022

Stonehaven Adds Six Professionals to Team to Support Strong Momentum

read more
read more

Jul 12, 2022

Vy Theologidy Joins as Stonehaven’s Mandate Due Diligence & Operations Manager

read more
read more

Jun 25, 2022

Kayle Watson Joins as Stonehaven’s Director Of Business Development

read more
read more

Jun 24, 2022

Clint McGowan Joins as Stonehaven’s Director of Compliance

read more
read more

Jun 06, 2022

Daniel Hong Joins as Stonehaven’s Director Of Business Development

read more
read more

May 27, 2022

John Degen of Kayak Kapital LLC Joined Stonehaven’s Affiliate Platform

read more
read more

May 24, 2022

Edward Corrao Joins as Stonehaven’s Mandate Operations Counsel

read more
read more

May 20, 2022

Rishi Shukla Joins as Stonehaven’s Product Owner

read more
read more

Mar 15, 2022

James Magowan, Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Arboreal Capital joins Stonehaven’s Affiliate Platform.

read more
read more

Mar 15, 2022

Sean Lenz, Co-Founder and Managing Director of Arboreal Capital joins Stonehaven’s Affiliate Platform.

read more
read more
LATEST NEWS
  • Jul 19, 2022

    Stonehaven Adds Six Professionals to Team to Support Strong Momentum

    read more
  • Jul 12, 2022

    Vy Theologidy Joins as Stonehaven’s Mandate Due Diligence & Operations Manager

    read more
  • Jun 25, 2022

    Kayle Watson Joins as Stonehaven’s Director Of Business Development

    read more
SEE ALL NEWS